Position change and q-ring setting

I’ve been riding q-rings for the last five years. During that time I have done several tests on different settings and always come back to #4. This winter I switched to compact, 155mm cranks (from 172.5mm) and thus raised my saddle 17.5 mm (that’s the only position change I made). This change has, of course, opened my hip and knee angles. I’m on a P3, and I don’t know how the seat tube angle has been affected by this change.

If the knee/hip angle at the start of the ‘power stroke’ is constant with regard to position, then I would think that I need to move the q-rings back, perhaps to position #2, because I am now reaching that knee/hip angle earlier in the pedal stroke. This makes sense to me, but it kind of flies in the face of the conventional Q-ring wisdom of “#4 #4 #4!!!”. I don’t know what other factors may influence the ‘power stroke’.

Has anyone else thought about this? Any ideas before I just start moving rings around willy-nilly?

Thanks,
-Colin

Theoretically, you want to adjust for seat tube angle when making changes to seat height. In which case, the q-ring position will stay the same.

Only raising your seat will make you slacker and more stetched out.

what’s your effective STA and what was it that lead you to 4 and not 5 when tinkering
.

I don’t want make your head spin, but a few more things to consider about q ring adjustment:

  • small ring and big ring no. settings are not equivalent: the #3 position on the little ring is not equivalent to the #3 position on the big ring.
  • Cassette size and chainring size (really the chain angle leaving the crank) also have a significant effect on q ring setting.

what’s your effective STA and what was it that lead you to 4 and not 5 when tinkering

Not sure about my STA. I thought the P3 was a bike with constant STA regardless of saddle height?

There was no single thing that landed me on the #4 setting. Several times I got the itch to tinker, so I would do several rides (on familiar courses) on different settings, and also on round rings. I always made my way back to #4.

-C

effective STA
.

effective STA

Okay, I’ll show my ignorance. I don’t know, and I don’t know how to measure it.

I’ve run into something similar on my bike, also with a vertical seat post.
Although a time trial bike, and Rotor recommending that the ring be run in position 4, I’m both faster and more comfortable in position three.
A saddle change and some completely new fit settings to try, moved me around quite a bit on the bike. I too was expecting to re-index the rings, but adjusting in the direction which I thought was logical turned out to be a step backwards.
I’m still faster over 10 and 25 miles, as well as more comfortable in position 3. I wonder to a degree if much of it is acclimation to the index position.
Whatever it is… I too find that the index position doesn’t seem to move, even when I reset my position on the bike…

broomstick (or other straight thingy)

BB to the point where you effectively sit. If it’s 80+ I’d stick it in 5 and get used to it there. The steeper you ride the higher the number on the q-ring for you to be in the FAT spot of the pedal stroke in the right spot on the rings.

broomstick (or other straight thingy)

BB to the point where you effectively sit. If it’s 80+ I’d stick it in 5 and get used to it there. The steeper you ride the higher the number on the q-ring for you to be in the FAT spot of the pedal stroke in the right spot on the rings.

Ah, excellent, thanks for the info.

Will I see you in Oliver in 3.5 weeks?

http://trimarkyv.blogspot.com/2011/04/comeback-interrupted.html

:frowning:
.

http://trimarkyv.blogspot.com/2011/04/comeback-interrupted.html

:frowning:

Very sorry to read that. Hope you get back on your feet soon.