Midsole cleat position

[freeflow]

Crikey, Iockdown must be getting to me.

Having read a couple of articles on the interweb regarding mid sole cleat position I'm wondering if anyone has any comment to make , whether good or bad.

I think I've got my head around the pros and cons and the principle pro for me (as an Audax rider) is that it would contribute greatly to alleviating the problems I have with achieving a sensible saddle setback (i.e. I would be able to bring my saddle forward to a more sensible midrail position rather than being right at the front of the saddle on a large setback seatpost).

[Ray]

I seem to remember this thread touched on something similar?

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=138899&p=1503771#p1503771

[Paulatic]

There’s more here viewtopic.php?t=135039&start=45
I’m not sure how you think your foot going forward is going to mean you’ll put your saddle forward. Your femur isn’t going to magically go shorter and neither will your balance point change. Will it?

[freeflow]

I'd be curious to understand why you think it wouldn't.

If I'm moving my cleat position 4cm towards my heel, then to maintain the same knee to pedal spindle relationship, that implies the saddle will need to move forward. The forward movement might not be as much as 4 cm but I can't envisage not moving the saddle forward.

[Paulatic]

I’m thinking if you take 60cm stick and hold it vertically then move the bottom of that stick 4 cms back. How far has the top of the stick moved?

Whilst knee to pedal is a reasonable guide I always fine tune that by what I call my balance point. I’m trying to imagine what happens to that if your foot is further forward. Without going out and trying it on my bike I’m thinking there won’t be any noticeable change because the spindle hasn’t moved.

[freeflow]

Ah, I see. You have got things the wrong way around. It's the cleat that moves backwards, which is equivalent to moving the foot forwards. Hence the thinking that the saddle ( and handlebar position) should move forward to match.

[Paulatic]

OK
Take the same stick and move the bottom forward 4cms how far does the top of the stick move?

Edit: I’ve just tried this sitting on a chair with a spirit level perpendicular beside the point on the knee where you’d hold your string. Then I moved my foot forward 4 cms. The point on the knee did move measured by the straight edge of the spirit level it moved around 5 mm. So yes you’re right but I’m still not sure you’re going to get the difference you were thinking of.
If I’m on a bike tomorrow I’m going to see if there is a change in balance point with the foot forward. It’s easy for me to do as I only use flats now.

[531colin]

Crikey, Iockdown must be getting to me.

Having read a couple of articles on the interweb regarding mid sole cleat position I'm wondering if anyone has any comment to make , whether good or bad.

I think I've got my head around the pros and cons and the principle pro for me (as an Audax rider) is that it would contribute greatly to alleviating the problems I have with achieving a sensible saddle setback (i.e. I would be able to bring my saddle forward to a more sensible midrail position rather than being right at the front of the saddle on a large setback seatpost).

why would you have a long layback seatpost then sit at the front of the saddle? or isn't that what you mean?

I haven't tried mid-foot cleat position, but a year or more ago I moved my cleats about 10mm back, and was surprised to find doing that loaded my quads. I then had to move my saddle back to re-distribute some load back to my hamstrings.
Read about "preferential fatigue" here...[urlhttps://neillsbikefit.com.au/?page_id=268][/url]

[Ray]

Read about "preferential fatigue" here...[urlhttps://neillsbikefit.com.au/?page_id=268][/url]

Very interesting - thanks.

Nitpicking alert: I think your parentheses are slipping - try https://neillsbikefit.com.au/?page_id=268

[igauk]

FWIW I moved my cleats as far back as they would go about 18 months ago, still not true 'midsole', but I did notice less stress on my calves (which are prone to cramping) and possibly less overall leg fatigue on longer audaxes. I didn't alter my saddle position. As ever though it isn't such n'th degree changes which is the limiting factor in my performance!

[pwa]

I moved my cleats back to bring my feet forward, allowing me to bring my whole body forward by the same amount, and I did that to get my bottom right on a saddle that I couldn't get far enough back. And it worked. I was just taking my position forward a little. My issue was that I had been sitting on the back edge of the saddle.

I am guessing that our problem is that you are sitting too far back on the saddle, near the back edge, not on the nose of the saddle as I think your original post seems to indicate.

One problem with this was that it raises the risk of toe touching wheel or mudguard.

Another potential problem is that it will alter the way your ankle works, possibly relating to Colin's issue with quads, though I was okay with that.

But the best long term solution for me was to get a frame with a seat tube angle that is not so steep and allows the saddle to go back far enough without changing cleat position. How many people really look at seat tube angle when they buy a frame? Very few frames get this right.

[freeflow]

why would you have a long layback seatpost then sit at the front of the saddle? or isn't that what you mean?

My saddles is set as far back as it will go on a long setback seatpost. I also have my spd cleats set as far back as they go. This is a consequence of a bike fitting I had about 5 years ago which proved very effective.

Based on the data I have from the bike fit my sit bones need to be 32+ cm behind the BB axis. In this position I can do the hands behind the back position quite easily.

[freeflow]

But the best long term solution for me was to get a frame with a seat tube angle that is not so steep and allows the saddle to go back far enough without changing cleat position. How many people really look at seat tube angle when they buy a frame? Very few frames get this right.

My frame was a custom Ti with a 71 degree seatpost angle for this very reason. Unfortunately that was stolen over a year ago. I am currently waiting for its replacement, which will also have a 71 degree seat tube. In the meantime I'm riding bikes with 73 degree seat tube angles and getting the saddle back far enough has been challenging.

[pwa]

But the best long term solution for me was to get a frame with a seat tube angle that is not so steep and allows the saddle to go back far enough without changing cleat position. How many people really look at seat tube angle when they buy a frame? Very few frames get this right.

My frame was a custom Ti with a 71 degree seatpost angle for this very reason. Unfortunately that was stolen over a year ago. I am currently waiting for its replacement, which will also have a 71 degree seat tube. In the meantime I'm riding bikes with 73 degree seat tube angles and getting the saddle back far enough has been challenging.

I think most of us have had that problem. What seatpost do you have?

[freeflow]

I'd finally settled on an ergotec futura seatpost with the rotating part horizontal (pointing backwards) and will use the same when the new frame arrives.

https://www.rosebikes.co.uk/ergotec-fut ... e=27%2C2mm

Prior to that I had a nice FSA carbon seatpost but that snapped due to damage caused by repeated seatpost slippage.

Of the two bikes I'm riding at the moment, one is fitted with a VK adaptor and the other with a Nitto S84 (which does not have anywhere near the claimed setback)

The Ergotec works very well but its very wide at the rotating joint at the top of the seatpost. This width means that you need quite a sharp rise at the front of the saddle rails. For example, I can get a Selle SMP Trk saddle in the right position, but not a Spa Nidd.