Seatposts, layback, and a daft idea

[Brucey]

I have owned, used, fitted and/or adjusted several hundred different seatposts and I have owned, used fitted and/or adjusted several hundred different saddles too.

I choose to contribute to this forum in the hope that people might be able to make a better educated choice about their equipment, its selection and its maintenance. There is plenty of incomplete and/or misleading information out there already, to which this;

Thompsons seatpost offered me the amount of layback I needed which is more than the Velo Orange layback seatpost....

arguably adds nicely.

I've used Thomson seatposts, but as I've already said (and shown I hope) the 'layback' name on that model is a misnomer in my view -although it is appropriate in relation to other Thomson seat posts I suppose.

The Velo Orange post I looked at, fitted and adjusted, and it is fine; although you might have to use a file on it to fit some saddles, it is by no means alone in that. I think there are lots of other seat posts which offer as much or more usable layback, and are more widely available. I presently have neither post on any of my bikes.

We are presently blessed with more available choice, measurements and information about bike bits than ever before. Lets not spoil it, eh...

cheers

[CJ]

Well said Brucey.

Recently seeking a post with generous layback at a keen price I bought a Truvativ Hussefelt for £21.99 from Chain Reaction.

Chain Reaction still have it for that price, but their description is misleading. This post comes in two versions and it is the single bolt version, as shown, that provides 20mm of lay-back. (The two-bolt version is in-line, i.e. has zero lay-back.)

I think this post should go well with a Brooks saddle, where the horizontal rails can cause a problem on some modern posts, which assume saddle rails slope up to the front. Result: your Brooks goes more or less nose-up, but never horizontal. The reason I think you'll NOT have this problem, with a Brooks on this post, is I almost have the opposite problem with the modern sloping-rail saddle I've fitted; the post is at the other limit of its adjustment to avoid this saddle being nose-down.

To explain this better I could really do with some of Brucey's yellow lines and a load more Google images...

[pliptrot]

I choose to contribute to this forum in the hope that people might be able to make a better educated choice about their equipment, its selection and its maintenance.

Which is much appreciated. Please don't let the odd sniffy response dissuade you from this. now, if you are looking for the next project, how about a compendium of hubs in the same way you did the excellent piece on SPD pedals......

[horizon]

I choose to contribute to this forum in the hope that people might be able to make a better educated choice about their equipment, its selection and its maintenance.

Which is much appreciated. Please don't let the odd sniffy response dissuade you from this.

+1

[reohn2]

I choose to contribute to this forum in the hope that people might be able to make a better educated choice about their equipment, its selection and its maintenance.

Which is much appreciated. Please don't let the odd sniffy response dissuade you from this.

+1
Thompson cranked s/post (of which I have experience) has very little layback.The old Easton EA50 design shown in an earlier post has more and depending on the seatpost angle and saddle tilt has more layback than the hockeystick post that its taped to in the same photo.
Thorn's own layback S/post has the same l/back as the EA50
The Zoom s/post (pictured in one of Brucey's posts) has the most layback I ever seen but the serrations are course and so fine tuning of saddle tilt is troublesome though the OP maybe lucky.
All in my own experience of course.

[CJ]

A Thompson post is not good with Brooks, due to the horizontal rails problem I mentioned above.

Not that I have ever owned a Thompson post myself, but I was on a tour this year where someone had this combination. In an attempt (failed) to get their Brooks saddle horizontal (rather than pointedly nose-up) they had tightened the front bolt very very tight and left the rear bolt so loose it fell out somewhere. This absence went unnoticed so long as bodyweight pressed down, until parking the bike, like you do, by lifting the back of the saddle - which came away in their hand!

Fortunately I was carrying an M6 bolt, which though short, was long enough to substitute for the fully tightened front bolt, which replaced the missing rear one. Having examined this generally unsatisfactory combination, the only way to make a Brooks fit a Thompson post would seem to require a little surgery - with a file - to the latter.

[horizon]

I'm 6' 2.5" and don't have my Brooke's saddles fully back on any of my bikes, and never had. ???

Quite. And it could well be that for most people, most bikes and saddles are OK. But for many they are not. Having a useful device such as the VK adaptor (or a different type of seat post) seems to me a simple solution. The problem is that if one hasn't experienced the problem, one doesn't understand that it exists - hence the blank looks in bike shops.

[Jezrant]

I have owned, used, fitted and/or adjusted several hundred different seatposts and I have owned, used fitted and/or adjusted several hundred different saddles too.

I choose to contribute to this forum in the hope that people might be able to make a better educated choice about their equipment, its selection and its maintenance. There is plenty of incomplete and/or misleading information out there already, to which this;

Thompsons seatpost offered me the amount of layback I needed which is more than the Velo Orange layback seatpost....

arguably adds nicely.

I've used Thomson seatposts, but as I've already said (and shown I hope) the 'layback' name on that model is a misnomer in my view -although it is appropriate in relation to other Thomson seat posts I suppose.

The Velo Orange post I looked at, fitted and adjusted, and it is fine; although you might have to use a file on it to fit some saddles, it is by no means alone in that. I think there are lots of other seat posts which offer as much or more usable layback, and are more widely available. I presently have neither post on any of my bikes.

We are presently blessed with more available choice, measurements and information about bike bits than ever before. Lets not spoil it, eh...

cheers

In an earlier thread on the same subject, I had recommended the SJS Zoom post and was promptly shot down by a couple of people who claimed, presumably just from looking at a photo, that it didn't have any more layback than a Kalloy. Rather amusing to now see those same people recommending it here. However, I wouldn't actually recommend it anymore because upon closer examination of the one I bought, the tubing thickness and outer diameter are inconsistent.

[Brucey]

Incidentally I noticed CR also has a Bianchi branded kalloy SP-353 post on sale at present. It doesn't have a super-layback (although it has a fair amount); it is however dirt cheap. Six quid. No pic on CR but I think it should look like this;



IIRC this pattern of seat pin has a serrated mating surface, both sides of which can be dressed/restored using a file in the event of damage or a poor fit; this makes it a step above many other one-bolt serrated seat posts.

BTW many seat pins with curved adjusting surfaces have a setback that varies with saddle rail angle/tilt/frame angle.

The Hussfelt one that CJ found (good find!) has an increased layback with flatter saddle rails, whereas the 'hockey stick' post is curved the other way and thus has a reduced layback under similar circumstances.

I have often found that a little filing at the front on the saddle rail channels can garner another few mm of layback. IIRC some seat pins (e.g. old campagnolo NR and GS ones for example) had oval clamps at the front, presumably for this exact reason.

cheers

[breakwellmz]

Hi.

Who are CR please Brucey?

[Brucey]

sorry, Chain Reaction.

cheers

[Jezrant]

When I was experimenting with different seatposts and found that I could get an additional 20mm layback with the Zoom in comparison with modern Campagnolo seatposts (an Athena and a Centaur), it was interesting to find that after a certain point, the additional layback began to have a negative effect on my pedal power. Too much layback seemed to sap the power. In my case, I found through trial and error that the optimal amount of layback was a good 10mm less than the maximum amount that the Zoom offered. I also wondered what effect the shift in the body's centre of gravity over the bike (using a correspondingly shorter stem) has on the handling of a road bike.

[reohn2]

Too much layback seemed to sap the power. In my case, I found through trial and error that the optimal amount of layback was a good 10mm less than the maximum amount that the Zoom offered. I also wondered what effect the shift in the body's centre of gravity over the bike (using a correspondingly shorter stem) has on the handling of a road bike.

Layback or to be more precise how much the saddle is behind the BB,is directly connected to thigh length ie;the longer the thigh the further back the saddle needs to be.
The optimum is related to thigh length which can vary enormously even in people of the same height.
You may recall an earlier thread on this subject when you recommended IIRC, people buy a bespoke/tailor/custom made frame if they wanted more layback.
As others' pointed out at the time,me included, a 72degree standard seatube angle (instead of the universal 73degree standard of the bicycle industry )would satsisfy 99.9999999999999% of saddle position problems with a moderate layback seatpost and as 99.999999999% never complain about not being able to get a saddle far enough forward there isn't any need for a 73degree seatube angle!

In an earlier thread on the same subject, I had recommended the SJS Zoom post and was promptly shot down by a couple of people who claimed, presumably just from looking at a photo, that it didn't have any more layback than a Kalloy. Rather amusing to now see those same people recommending it here. However, I wouldn't actually recommend it anymore because upon closer examination of the one I bought, the tubing thickness and outer diameter are inconsistent.

I have an SJS Zoom and would recommend it with the reservation that it has very course serrations in its mating quadrant therefore isn't a true micro adjust(not that it claims to be) as mentioned in my post above.


BTW I can't recall ever "shooting" you down but as the opportunity has arisen,you've TBF(Tried But Failed)to "shoot" a few people down Brucey and Colin531 spring to mind who are two of the most genuinely helpful people on here and who's only "crime" is to try and help others' with their cycling related problems,which is more than can be said for yourself.

[Jezrant]

Reohn2, that's really out of order. I also think Brucey and Colin can speak for themselves, but I have no recollection of ever disagreeing with Brucey on anything. As others have implied, he has brought a level of rigour, objectivity and diplomacy to the forum that at times seems to be sadly missing.

[reohn2]

Reohn2, that's really out of order. I also think Brucey and Colin can speak for themselves, but I have no recollection of ever disagreeing with Brucey on anything. As others have implied, he has brought a level of rigour, objectivity and diplomacy to the forum that at times seems to be sadly missing.

Then I stand corrrected