Ideas on how to increase saddle height

[Sid the Sloth]

Just now, bleedToWin said:

I'd love to get my hands on 185mm cranks as I'm tall and carry a lot of that length in my legs. I have the chest clearance when my forearms are parallel, and I have a silly high natural cadence* so could really see benefits...

Yeah, but it seems like a lot of guys are looking to shorter = better for cranks. That being said I am on 175mm and I am 177cm on road and I am pretty happy. I have not done much research though. 

[dewaldsss]

16 minutes ago, Sid the Sloth said:

On a serious not, 7mm is really not that much... I wonder if you could get that by running a different saddle. In a bicycle industry with about 60 different bottom bracket standards and another millions seatpost styles, I find it tough to believe saddle to rail height is standardized... The ISM TT saddles are quite tall and could work, I found it super duper comfy. 

Try this one, I can even measure mine if you'd like

Will give plenty of extra height

https://fabric.cc/products/saddles/scoop-ultimate-flat/

[Eldron]

5 minutes ago, Sid the Sloth said:

Yeah, but it seems like a lot of guys are looking to shorter = better for cranks. That being said I am on 175mm and I am 177cm on road and I am pretty happy. I have not done much research though. 

Shorter is better according to Dr. Jim Martin. Love his work.

According to his research there was very little difference in efficiency between 140mm and 200mm cranks. People are going shorter to open the hips (especially on Tri/TT bikes) and reduce acute angles on knees.

Longer gains you nothing (according to most of the research I've seen).

 

 

[andreas17777]

Thank you for everyone's advice, I think the best option would be a different saddle with a higher height combined with 175mm cranks. Hopefully this will give me 5+ mm which should sort out my issue.

[andreas17777]

37 minutes ago, Sid the Sloth said:

There's a pair of 177.5 Sram red cranks knocking about on here but that is quite long... Haha

would be a crime to mix sram with campy.

[andreas17777]

27 minutes ago, JA-Q001 said:

What seat and pedals are you using?

You can win 5mm by using speedplay pedals.

Some seats have a low Saddle to rail height, lke selle italia.

Others are higher, like fizik, but only the normally padded ones. the differ up to 10 mm between something like a SI SLR and Fizik Areone.

i'm currently using power pedals, so would not want to change.

[RobertWhitehead]

Broomstick inside the seat post 

[Eldron]

1 hour ago, andreas17777 said:

Yes, thought about trying to get a carbon specialist to make the post longer, i'm 181 cm and 87 inseam. On trek's website it said 58 or a 60.

Double check that you do have the taller seat mast..... Trek say the max rail height with the tall mast on a 58 is 785mm - throw in another 35/40mm for the seat and you should be at 820mm no worries - that is plenty high enough for an 870mm inseam.

 

[guidodg]

get Speedplay pedals...lowest stack height of any pedal out there...

[Jewbacca]

1 hour ago, NickGM said:

Is that not going to be a bit tricky with the aero seatpost?

Not really. 

A matching seatpost will be matching. So the easiest thing to do would be to cut the 2nd seatpost in 3 bits. 

60mm for the insert, the prescribed length extension and the top/clamp.

Line the 60mm 'insert' with 1 layer of masking tape, then mix up epoxy. Cut 4 pieces of carbon, 2 on the cross and 2 on the weave. 

Paint the epoxy onto the inside of the piece. Lay up the carbon fibre alternating weave/cross and keep adding epoxy to wet through.

Once layed up and wet through, cut an old tube, tie a knot in either end and stick one end through the layed up carbon/seatpost.

Inflate so that it pushes against the inside of the layed up carbon, pushing the epoxy through and out the weave.

Let it set, remove, cut out the sleeve you just made, mark it at 3cm and epoxy it in place in the extension.

Let it set.

Then epoxy it into the actual seatpost, clean and insert into bike to set. That way the frame will square it up.

All in all it's a couple of hours work, super easy and really fun.

It will be more than strong enough

BOOM!!!!

Edited February 22, 2022 by Jewbacca

[bleedToWin]

1 hour ago, Eldron said:

Shorter is better according to Dr. Jim Martin. Love his work.

According to his research there was very little difference in efficiency between 140mm and 200mm cranks. People are going shorter to open the hips (especially on Tri/TT bikes) and reduce acute angles on knees.

Longer gains you nothing (according to most of the research I've seen).

 

1 hour ago, Sid the Sloth said:

Yeah, but it seems like a lot of guys are looking to shorter = better for cranks. That being said I am on 175mm and I am 177cm on road and I am pretty happy. I have not done much research though. 

 

Shorter is very often better yes, but I appear to have the space and hip mobility that indicates 175mm is either perfect or perhaps too short. I PRd Franschhoek Pass on Saturday with a freely selected cadence of 97. Before you ask, yes that is lower than my preferred flat road rolling cadence.

>Longer gains you nothing.
It gains you more torque, if and only if you tick each and every other box.

Here's Neill Stanbury talking about this. First why shorter is often better, then ~5min in about tall blokes like me.
 

 

Edited February 22, 2022 by bleedToWin

[andreas17777]

1 hour ago, Eldron said:

Double check that you do have the taller seat mast..... Trek say the max rail height with the tall mast on a 58 is 785mm - throw in another 35/40mm for the seat and you should be at 820mm no worries - that is plenty high enough for an 870mm inseam.

 

Would you go for a shorter crank then? as I see and read that it fixes hip swaying from mobility issues.

[Stretched@Birth]

Might give you the 7mm you need...

 

[Eldron]

30 minutes ago, bleedToWin said:

 

 

Shorter is very often better yes, but I appear to have the space and hip mobility that indicates 175mm is either perfect or perhaps too short. I PRd Franschhoek Pass on Saturday with a freely selected cadence of 97. Before you ask, yes that is lower than my preferred flat road rolling cadence.

>Longer gains you nothing.
It gains you more torque, if and only if you tick each and every other box.

Here's Neill Stanbury talking about this. First why shorter is often better, then ~5min in about tall blokes like me.
 

 

Torque is not the right factor in determining power - pedal speed is the key.

The good news is that the science says that between 120mm and 220mm the effect of crank length is negligible so you can use whatever cranks you feel most comfortable on without  affecting your performance. If your inseam is over 950mm then impingement is not going to be a problem at all so roll those 175/180mm cranks with nary a care in the world 🙂

[Eldron]

26 minutes ago, andreas17777 said:

Would you go for a shorter crank then? as I see and read that it fixes hip swaying from mobility issues.

I only recommend shorter cranks for my customer under around 160cm (and then only if they are having hip or knee issues).

As above it is only really to reduce hip impingement and/or knee pain from acute knee angles at top dead centre of pedal stroke.

[bleedToWin]

5 minutes ago, Eldron said:

Torque is not the right factor in determining power - pedal speed is the key.

Since I'm often sitting at or above 110 RPM I'm very likely running into mechanical inefficiencies. "Any crank length is good so long as..." <-- I'm running into one of the things typically listed here as an exception. Super high cadence. For the same pedal speed I can likely comfortably turn 185mm cranks at high 90s RPM and the increased Torque would in my particular case result in increased power.

It's all moot though, as you can hardly source 175mm cranks currently, let alone 185mm...