Re: [CR] Sloan's 1.09 measurement

(Example: History:Ted Ernst)

In-Reply-To: <e1d6a5d00906161925q63b1bc6ev2f9ad8b371571ab8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <963906.91456.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:38:57 -0400
From: "Ken Freeman" <kenfreeman096@gmail.com>
To: mitch harris <mitch.harris531@gmail.com>
Cc: Hon Lee <lejosun@sbcglobal.net>, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR] Sloan's 1.09 measurement


For some reason, when I tried the Kolin and Eddie B methods a few years back, the saddle seemed way too low.

Ken Freeman Ann Arbor, MI USA

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:25 PM, mitch harris <mitch.harris531@gmail.com>wrote:
> In the 70s this 1.09 x inseam recommendation seemed too high to a lot
> the older guys (assuming you were using max. pubic height and not just
> a levis inseam measure), and you could get a lecture from your coach
> if you showed upt with a high saddle position like this. Eventually it
> became standard, but as late as the 1989 I got a lecture about a
> too-high saddle from my older coach when I was using this formula.
> Sloane's 1.09 formula resulted in pretty much the same saddle height
> as Hinault's formula using .889 to get the distance from the bb center
> using 170mm cranks. Lemond's instructional book in the mid 80s
> recommended about the same formula as Hinault's book.
>
> The other popular non-formula method involved looking for a little
> knee bend at the bottom of the stroke. Using the method from the
> Custom Bicycle Book" by Michael Kolin and Denise de la Rosa, among
> cyclists there was still disagreement over when you put your heel on
> the pedal whether you looked for a bent or straight knee. The latter
> straight-knee-heel-on-pedal method yeilded a little higher saddle more
> like the Sloane/Hinault/Lemond formula, but, like the formula, failed
> to take foot size into consideration.
>
> Last year I went pre-Sloane by lowering my saddle a full inch less
> than the formula method recommends, and have been very happy with the
> 60s style saddle height.
>
> Mitch Harris
> Little Rock Canyon, Utah USA
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Hon Lee<lejosun@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Sloan's recommended setting for seat top to pedal top at lowest point of
> a pedalling stroke at 1.09 times one's inseam was indeed akin to gospel in
> the early '70's when I was a mech in northern California. Sloan based this
> calculation on proper ankling technique and supported this sum using a study
> that measured energy output for various adjustments of this seat-pedal
> distance for a fixed crank length. The 1.09 adjustment had the highest
> energy output. As John Strizek pointed out, there are a number of other
> variables, such as the bb height, that will significantly affect the bike's
> "fit." At 5-4 with boring proportions, my favorite rides were a 52 cm.
> Mondia Special off the rack cyclocross and a 54 cm. Cinelli GC from Spence
> Wolfe set up with that 1.09 configuration, both 1971.
> >
> > Hon Lee
> > Stockton, California where being number 1 on Forbes.com misery index is
> dynastic
> > USA