Leah, Why is it you believe you need more setback in the first place ? Compared to the Betty you had with it's 72 degree seat tube angle, the Clems are a more shallow 71.5, which equates to the same saddle and post capable of setting further back by about 6.5mm. As I've already expressed, if it's forward reach you want going backwards is going in the wrong direction. A longer stem and/or less swept back bars are called for. It seems most riders here asking for more setback ride wayback swept bars. Well that's the issue, that they are too far back, not the setback of the saddle. Get the saddle in an optimal place first, then deal with the reach.
>From my experience, being too far back of the pedals and too upright doesn't allow for the most efficient use of leg/core strength. It becomes rather a viscious and futile cycle of trying to compensate for something that can't be compensated for. Been there and done it, in all futility. With the saddle in an optimal position and a forward lean, all of that simply isn't. A sure sign of being too far back in the saddle is when climbing. If I'm too far back, I either HAVE to stand to maintain any sort of momentum, or sit and grind in futility where no low gear seems low enough because I'm too far back. Maintaining a fluid spin is impossible. Standing does what ? Places me over the BB, in the optimal "power band". Gee, maybe I ought to been seated further forward to begin with ! ((( laughing ))) In moving saddle forward to an optimal place, hark ..... I find myself able to effectively and efficiently stay seated on climbs, always "on top" of the pedals, even if really steep, and it's marvelous ! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9330dab5-89ef-4d20-b9e8-241c563dbd1dn%40googlegroups.com.
