A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 7th 06, 11:22 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?

Why most seatposts are made with some setback?

Clearly the same rider's position could be achieved with slightly
less steep seat tube and no-setback seatpost. Looks like "straight"
posts are marginally lighter/stiffer, naturally because there is
no extra material and because there is less leverage applied when the
rider is positioned closer from the post axle.

I guess that in days of old when there were only plane pipe seatposts
the setback was there because there was no other seat clamping
mechanism (or was it?); but now is it dictated by anything else
than traditions in frame geometry, with steeper than needed seat tube?

Thanks!

Konstantin.

Ads
  #2  
Old April 7th 06, 12:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?

Konstantin Shemyak wrote:

Why most seatposts are made with some setback?


Clearly the same rider's position could be achieved with slightly
less steep seat tube and no-setback seatpost.


For one thing, most modern bikes have very tight clearance. Making the
seat tube angle slacker would require longer chainstays to keep the
rear tire from rubbing against the seat tube. That might not be a bad
thing, but it goes against modern fashion.

Secondly, since most seat posts have setback, frame makers assume that
when designing their frames. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I don't know, but as long as I can remember, most quality seat posts
have had some setback.

Art Harris

  #3  
Old April 7th 06, 12:40 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?


Art Harris wrote:


Secondly, since most seat posts have setback, frame makers assume that
when designing their frames. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I don't know, but as long as I can remember, most quality seat posts
have had some setback.


Indeed - "in-line" micro-adjust seatpins seem a fairly modern
phenomenon popularised by MTBs.

David Belcher

  #4  
Old April 7th 06, 01:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?

On 7 Apr 2006 04:34:55 -0700, "Art Harris" wrote:

Konstantin Shemyak wrote:

Why most seatposts are made with some setback?


Clearly the same rider's position could be achieved with slightly
less steep seat tube and no-setback seatpost.


For one thing, most modern bikes have very tight clearance. Making the
seat tube angle slacker would require longer chainstays to keep the
rear tire from rubbing against the seat tube. That might not be a bad
thing, but it goes against modern fashion.

Secondly, since most seat posts have setback, frame makers assume that
when designing their frames. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I don't know, but as long as I can remember, most quality seat posts
have had some setback.


I've never used a seatpost with a zero-offset clamp, but perhaps one
reason seatposts have some offset is that, at least with single-bolt
clamps, it's very easy to ge to the bolt?

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
  #5  
Old April 7th 06, 07:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?

In article
. com,
"Art Harris" wrote:

Konstantin Shemyak wrote:

Why most seatposts are made with some setback?


Clearly the same rider's position could be achieved with slightly
less steep seat tube and no-setback seatpost.


For one thing, most modern bikes have very tight clearance. Making the
seat tube angle slacker would require longer chainstays to keep the
rear tire from rubbing against the seat tube. That might not be a bad
thing, but it goes against modern fashion.

Secondly, since most seat posts have setback, frame makers assume that
when designing their frames. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I don't know, but as long as I can remember, most quality seat posts
have had some setback.


What is set-back, and what is not set-back? I understand
the classic seat post to have the front of the hold-down
clamp centered on the seat post tube itself.

--
Michael Press
  #6  
Old April 7th 06, 09:25 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?

Michael Press wrote:

What is set-back, and what is not set-back?


I understand
the classic seat post to have the front of the hold-down
clamp centered on the seat post tube itself.


Most classic road seat posts have the clamp set back from the
centerline of the post.

No set-back:
http://www.lhthomson.com/images/sp_elite.jpg

Set-back:
http://i8.ebayimg.com/03/i/06/b5/fe/13_1.JPG

Art Harris

  #7  
Old April 9th 06, 01:51 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Setback seatpost - why not smaller seat tube angle?

On 7 Apr 2006 04:34:55 -0700, "Art Harris" wrote:

Secondly, since most seat posts have setback, frame makers assume that
when designing their frames. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I don't know, but as long as I can remember, most quality seat posts
have had some setback.


Back before micro-adjust, when seatposts were plain pipes and saddles had
separate clamps, the relationship those clamps made between the top of the
seatpost and where it clamped the saddle rails involved a bit of setback
or setforward (if you wished, few people did), due to the natural geometry
of the clamp.

That's why modern seatposts have setback, 'cause they had to deal with
frames that already assumed that geometry.

That old clamp type was, as far as I know, already ubiquitous and standard
before WWII.


Jasper
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
if you wanted maximum braking, where would you sit? wle Techniques 133 November 18th 15 03:10 AM
FS: Landshark steel frame with carbon fork--56cm seat tube [email protected] Marketplace 0 August 9th 05 07:33 PM
Help With GT Aero Frame: Funky Seatpost! spincircles Racing 6 June 21st 05 05:26 PM
FS: NOS Colnagos and never ridden 50th Anniversary Schwinn Paramount Frank Marketplace 0 January 6th 05 07:45 AM
Pain from seat out thinuniking Unicycling 10 June 6th 04 02:57 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.