Ross D Wilkinson1, Rodger Kram2. 1. Locomotion Laboratory, Department of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, 1725 Pleasant Street, Clare Small 114, Boulder, CO, 80309-0354, USA. ross.wilkinson@colorado.edu. 2. Locomotion Laboratory, Department of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, 1725 Pleasant Street, Clare Small 114, Boulder, CO, 80309-0354, USA.
Abstract
Riding uphill presents a challenge to competitive and recreational cyclists. Based on only limited evidence, some scientists have reported that tilting the saddle nose down improves uphill-cycling efficiency by as much as 6%. PURPOSE: here, we investigated if simply tilting the saddle nose down increases efficiency during uphill cycling, which would presumably improve performance. METHODS: nineteen healthy, recreational cyclists performed multiple 5 min trials of seated cycling at ~ 3 W kg-1 on a large, custom-built treadmill inclined to 8° under two saddle-tilt angle conditions: parallel to the riding surface and 8° nose down. We measured subjects' rates of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production using an expired-gas analysis system and then calculated their average metabolic power during the last two min of each 5 min trial. RESULTS: we found that, compared to the parallel-saddle condition, tilting the saddle nose down by 8° improved gross efficiency from 0.205 to 0.208-an average increase of 1.4% ± 0.2%, t = 5.9, p < 0.001, CI95% [0.9 to 1.9], dz = 1.3. CONCLUSION: our findings are relevant to competitive and recreational cyclists and present an opportunity for innovating new devices and saddle designs that enhance uphill-cycling efficiency. The effect of saddle tilt on other slopes and the mechanism behind the efficiency improvement remain to be investigated.
Riding uphill presents a challenge to competitive and recreational cyclists. Based on only limited evidence, some scientists have reported that tilting the saddle nose down improves uphill-cycling efficiency by as much as 6%. PURPOSE: here, we investigated if simply tilting the saddle nose down increases efficiency during uphill cycling, which would presumably improve performance. METHODS: nineteen healthy, recreational cyclists performed multiple 5 min trials of seated cycling at ~ 3 W kg-1 on a large, custom-built treadmill inclined to 8° under two saddle-tilt angle conditions: parallel to the riding surface and 8° nose down. We measured subjects' rates of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production using an expired-gas analysis system and then calculated their average metabolic power during the last two min of each 5 min trial. RESULTS: we found that, compared to the parallel-saddle condition, tilting the saddle nose down by 8° improved gross efficiency from 0.205 to 0.208-an average increase of 1.4% ± 0.2%, t = 5.9, p < 0.001, CI95% [0.9 to 1.9], dz = 1.3. CONCLUSION: our findings are relevant to competitive and recreational cyclists and present an opportunity for innovating new devices and saddle designs that enhance uphill-cycling efficiency. The effect of saddle tilt on other slopes and the mechanism behind the efficiency improvement remain to be investigated.