So I went through EROfitting and testing, received a retul report of my new fit, and have happily been riding along for a few years. Recently, I had to replace my Cobb saddle, but I learned only after I had removed the old saddle that the newer models have different rails heights and a different shell height. So, I proceeded to install, by estimating , pretty closely, the position of the former saddle to the new saddle. All felt fine.
Then I packed the bike and unpacked for travel.
A few days later, the seat clamp broke. So, I had to replace that. Again, I estimated, pretty closely, the position of the former saddle as I shuffled the saddle setup around with the replacement clamp.
Then I had to disassemble and reassemble the bike for travel. Another estimate.
So I'm concerned that with these minor rebuilds and estimates, that I'm inching away from the fit that I had and loved. With the seat being moved so many times, it just feels different. Even after making a best effort and starting from scratch, and using the Retul saddle height and saddle nose-to-bar measurements, things just don't feel right. (I haven't touched the bars, but using the drop numbers in the report, and the saddle-to-armrest measures, it seems that the new saddle position is even further off, so I suspect the bar measurements might have been flaky from the beginning).
Anyhow... If I were to just push the retul report I have under the nose of another Retul builder, and directed them to set up the saddle exactly as it is described in the report, should I expect a perfect replication of my original position? Off a few mms? Off by cm? As I look at some of the reference points in the report, and tried to do the rebuild myself, it seems like there could be a lot of room for error, interpretation, or variation from Fitter to fitter .... For example, the "middle of the saddle" point used in the saddle height is pretty vague ... As is the "top of the armrests" used in drop (does that mean the top of the highest point of the armrest, or does it mean the highest point of the armrest that the rider actually places his/her arm/elbow when riding."
Appreciate hearing thoughts on this.
Then I packed the bike and unpacked for travel.
A few days later, the seat clamp broke. So, I had to replace that. Again, I estimated, pretty closely, the position of the former saddle as I shuffled the saddle setup around with the replacement clamp.
Then I had to disassemble and reassemble the bike for travel. Another estimate.
So I'm concerned that with these minor rebuilds and estimates, that I'm inching away from the fit that I had and loved. With the seat being moved so many times, it just feels different. Even after making a best effort and starting from scratch, and using the Retul saddle height and saddle nose-to-bar measurements, things just don't feel right. (I haven't touched the bars, but using the drop numbers in the report, and the saddle-to-armrest measures, it seems that the new saddle position is even further off, so I suspect the bar measurements might have been flaky from the beginning).
Anyhow... If I were to just push the retul report I have under the nose of another Retul builder, and directed them to set up the saddle exactly as it is described in the report, should I expect a perfect replication of my original position? Off a few mms? Off by cm? As I look at some of the reference points in the report, and tried to do the rebuild myself, it seems like there could be a lot of room for error, interpretation, or variation from Fitter to fitter .... For example, the "middle of the saddle" point used in the saddle height is pretty vague ... As is the "top of the armrests" used in drop (does that mean the top of the highest point of the armrest, or does it mean the highest point of the armrest that the rider actually places his/her arm/elbow when riding."
Appreciate hearing thoughts on this.