Seat Other For Sale

|| Terms & Conditions IDENTIFICATION OF BRISTOL SEAT Bristol SEAT is an authorized retailer of SEAT products in the UK. Company registration no 6268511 whose registered office is at 99 -101 Feeder Road, Bristol, BS2 0UB. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS This web site is published by BRISTOL SEAT and is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights in existence at any time throughout the world. All web site design, text, graphics, the typographical arrangement thereof, and all other material on this web site is copyright of BRISTOL SEAT or their service and technology providers.Permission is hereby granted to electronically copy and to print in hard copy portions of this web site for the sole purpose of using this as an information resource for BRISTOL SEAT products. Any other use of materials on this web site, including reproduction for purposes other than the above, modification, distribution or republication without the prior written permission of BRISTOL SEAT is prohibited.The trademarks, logos and service marks shown on this web site, unless otherwise specified, are the trademarks of BRISTOL SEAT. No rights are granted to use any of them in any manner whatsoever. Any infringement of BRISTOL SEAT's rights will result in appropriate legal action being taken against you. PRIVACY STATEMENT BRISTOL SEAT recognises the importance of protecting your privacy. Please be assured that we follow a strict policy of not selling or trading any personal or sensitive information about our customers or prospective customers to any company, organisation or person outside of BRISTOL SEAT, our associated companies and agencies. We may collect technical data about the type of Internet browser and computer operating system that you use. This information does not identify you as an individual and is used only for tracking of site use.We might also place a "cookie" on your hard drive that will help us to identify you when you return to the site and allow us to tailor content to your personal preferences. If you do not wish to use "cookies" you may disable this option in your Internet browser settings. "Cookies" can be removed from your computer. BRISTOL SEAT have taken steps to ensure that all the product information and pricing ("product specification") featured on this website is accurate and up-to-date. However, the product specifications contained on this web site are for information purposes only, as our products are continually updated and BRISTOL SEAT reserves the right to change the product specifications at any time without notice. Therefore all product specifications should be confirmed with BRISTOL SEAT or an authorised SEAT Dealer. If you require any specific feature you must consult BRISTOL SEAT or an authorised SEAT Dealer who are regularly updated with any changes in product specification. Images and photographs on this site are for general guidance only. They do not necessarily illustrate the UK specifications of the cars or any other products. Please note - some images may show left-hand drive models, not available in the UK. DISCLAIMER AND LIABILITY: ALL EXPRESS WARRANTIES, RESPRESENTATIONS, CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND OR OTHER TERMS IMPLIED BY STATUTE OR COMMON LAW WITH RESPECT TO THIS WEB SITE OR THE INFORMATION, CONTENT, MATERIALS OR PRODUCTS INCLUDED ON THIS WEB SITE ARE HEREBY EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW.b) BRISTOL SEAT SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES FOR ANY DIRECT OR INDIRECT, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL LOSS OR DAMAGE (WHETHER FOR PROFIT OR LOSS OR OTHERWISE) COSTS, CLAIMS, EXPENSES OR OTHER CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION WHATSOEVER, WHETHER CAUSED BY THE ACTS, OMISSIONS OR THE NEGLIGENCE OF BRISTOL SEAT, ITS EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS, WHICH ARISE OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OF THIS WEB SITE OR THE INFORMATION, CONTENT MATERIALS OR PRODUCTS INCLUDED ON THIS WEB SITE, EXCEPT IN RESPECT OF DEATH OR PERSONAL INJURY CAUSED BY BRISTOL SEAT's IT'S EMPLOYEES' OR IT'S AGENTS' PROVEN NEGLIGENCE.c) BRISTOL SEAT DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY FOR ACCESS TO OR MATERIAL ON, ANY WEB SITE THAT IS LINKED FROM OR TO THIS WEB SITE. Misuse Statement: BRISTOL SEAT reserves the right to prevent your usage of this site if you misuse the contents contained within this website in any manner. BRISTOL SEAT is the final arbiter as to what shall constitute misuse and its decision will be final. Governing Law: This website is for use by persons located and resident within the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, the Channel Isles and the Isle of Man. Accordingly, these terms and conditions shall be subject to English law and the parties to any dispute or action hereby submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts. If any provision of these Terms and Conditions is determined to be unenforceable or invalid, such provision shall be severed and the remaining provisions shall be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by Governing Law. Bristol SEAT Ltd., 99 - 101 Feeder Road, Bristol, BS2 0UB || Seat belt legislation From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Seat belt legislation requires the fitting of seat belts to motor vehicles and/or the wearing of seat belts by motor vehicle occupants. The first jurisdiction to introduce such requirements was the Australian state of Victoria, which experienced approximately a 40% decrease in road deaths and injuries by 1974. Other jurisdictions have followed Victoria's lead, with the result that most western countries have some seat belt legislation. Contents 1 History 2 Effects 3 Current position 3.1 United States 3.2 United Kingdom 3.3 Developing countries 4 Opposition 4.1 Risk compensation and other theories 4.2 Individual liberty 4.3 Side-effects of seat belts 5 See also 6 Notes 7 References and further reading 8 External links [edit] History The legal requirement to fit seat belts began in the Australian states of Victoria and South Australia in 1964, with the compulsory fitting of seat belt anchorages at front outboard positions in new cars.[1] In 1965 cars built in Europe were required to be fitted with front seat belts.[2] This was followed in 1967, by the requirement in the United Kingdom to fit three-point belts in the front outboard positions, and by the requirement in South Australia to fit belts (two- or three-point) to the front outboard positions, in all new cars.[1] The use of seat belts by vehicle occupants was made compulsory in Victoria, Australia, in 1970, followed by the rest of Australia and some other countries during the 1970s and 1980s. The subsequent dramatic decline in road deaths, equivalent to thousands of lives saved in Australia alone, is generally attributed to seat belt laws and subsequent road safety campaigns.[3] Successive UK Governments proposed, but failed to deliver, seat belt legislation throughout the 1970s.[4] In one such attempt in 1979 similar claims for potential lives and injuries saved were advanced. William Rodgers, then Secretary of State for Transport in the Callaghan Labour Government (1976–1979), stated that: "On the best available evidence of accidents in this country - evidence which has not been seriously contested - compulsion could save up to 1000 lives and 10,000 injuries a year."[5] This section gives an overview of when seat belt legislation was first introduced in different countries. This includes both regional and national legislation. Country Compulsory wearing Compulsory fitting Source Cars Bus passengers Cars Buses Driver Front passengers Rear passengers Australia 1970 [1] Belgium 1973 (outside cities), 1975 (post-1967 cars), 1979 (all) 1990 2003 1978 2003 [2] Canada 1976             The European Union 1993       [3] France 1973 (outside cities), 1975 (cities at night), 1979 (all) 1990 2003 1979, 1982 (back seat)   [4] [5] Germany 1976 1984 1999 1970, 1979 (back seat) 1999 de:Gurtpflicht Hungary 1976   1993       [6] Hong Kong 1983 1983 1996   1996 (back seat)   [7] Ireland 1979   1992         Japan     2008   1969   [8] Malaysia 1979 2009       [9] Netherlands 1976 1992   1975 (front) 1990 (rear) New Zealand 1972 1972 (15 years and over), 1979 (8 years and over) 1989♣   1972 (vehicles registered after 1965), 1975 (after 1955)   [10] Singapore 1973 1973 1993 2008 1973     Spain 1975             Sweden 1975 1986 1969 (front) 1970 (rear) 2004 [11] [12] United Kingdom 1983 1991 RoSPA United States 1984 1946 Frt. Lap 1963, Frt shldr & rear Lap 1968 [13] ♣ - definitely introduced by this date, possibly earlier [edit] Effects Lives saved by seat belts and airbags Studies by road safety authorities conclude that seat belt legislation has reduced the number of casualties in road accidents. Experiments using both crash test dummies and human cadavers also indicated that wearing seat belts should lead to reduced risk of death and injury in car crashes. Studies of accident outcomes suggest that fatality rates among car occupants are reduced by between 30 and 50 per cent if seat belts are worn. The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that death risks for a driver wearing a lap-shoulder seat belt are reducing by 48 per cent. The same study indicated that in 2007, an estimated 15 147 lives were saved by seat belts in the United States and that, if seat belt use were increased to 100 per cent an additional 5024 lives would have been saved.[www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/811206.pdf] An earlier statistical analysis by the NHTSA claimed that seat belts save over 10,000 lives every year in the US. The FARS further writes:[6] "Research on the effectiveness of child safety seats has found them to reduce fatal injury by 71% for infants less than 1 year old and by 54% for toddlers 1-4 years old in cars. [...] Among passenger vehicle occupants over 4 years old, safety belts saved an estimated 11,889 lives in 2000." In Victoria, Australia the use of seat belts became compulsory in 1970. By 1974 decreases of 37% in deaths and 41% in injuries, including a decrease of 27% in spinal injuries, were observed, compared with extrapolations based on pre-law trends. The Victorian legislation coincided with the oil-crises of the early 1970s, a time when traffic injuries and deaths fell in most industrialised countries. Adams claimed that Victoria's injury trends were above the average for all industrialised countries. By 2009, despite large increases in population and the number of vehicles, road deaths in Victoria had fallen below 300, less than a third of the 1970 level, the lowest since records were kept, and far below the per capita rate in jurisdictions such as the United States. This reduction was generally attributed to aggressive road safety campaigns beginning with the seat belt laws.[7][8] These claims were disputed by Professor John Adams of University College London.[9] His conclusion was that in the 18 countries surveyed, accounting for approximately 80% of the world's motoring, those countries with seat belt laws had fared no better, and in some cases (e.g. Sweden, Ireland and New Zealand) significantly worse than those without. [edit] Current position The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (September 2010) [edit] United States Main article: Seat belt legislation in the United States New York State passed the first seat belt law in the US in 1984 under the leadership of John D. States, an orthopedic surgeon who dedicated his career to improving automotive safety.[10] In the USA, seatbelt legislation varies by state. Depending on which state you are in, not wearing a seatbelt in the front seat is either a primary offense or a secondary offense, with the exception of New Hampshire, which does not have a law requiring people over age 18 to wear a seat belt. In the front seat, the driver and each passenger must wear a seat belt, one person per belt. Though in states such as New York, New Hampshire, Michigan, etc. (See article State Seat Belt Laws), seat belts in the rear seats are not mandatory for people over the age of 18, though it is extremely advised. The driver and front-seat passengers aged 16 or older can be fined up to $50 each for failure to buckle up. A primary offense means that a police officer can pull you over for the seatbelt law violation alone, and secondary offense that you can be punished for a seatbelt law violation only if you are already pulled over for another reason. By January 2007 25 states and the District of Columbia had primary seatbelt laws, 24 secondary seatbelt laws, and New Hampshire had no laws.[11] Georgia presently exempts pickup trucks from its seat belt law. [edit] United Kingdom In the UK, seat belts must be worn at all times if they are fitted to a vehicle. Passengers may be exempt from wearing a seat belt on medical grounds only. Since September 18, 2006, children travelling in the UK must also use an appropriate child seat in addition to the standard seat belt.[12] [edit] Developing countries This section requires expansion. In many developing countries, pedestrians, cyclists, rickshaw operators and moped users represent the majority of road users. In the state of Gujarat in India, seat belts have been made compulsory in six major cities, Ahmedabad, Bhavnagar, Jamnagar, Rajkot, Surat and Vadodara. In Malaysia, there are four stages pertaining to the legislation of safety belt laws. The first stage was implemented in 1979, making the wearing of seat belts compulsory for the driver and front seat passenger. On January 1, 2009, the second stage mandated the wearing of rear seat belts. Passenger vehicles registered prior to January 1, 1995 and those weighing more than 3.5 tons are exempted from this rule. The third and fourth stages, which will deal with baby and child seats and the number of passengers in a vehicle, have not taken effect.[13] [edit] Opposition A number of groups and individuals are opposed to seat belt legislation. The most common grounds for opposition are: The view that laws requiring the wearing of seat belts are an infringement of individual liberty Claims that official estimates of the number of lives saved by seat belts are overstated or fail to take into account additional risks for other road users [edit] Risk compensation and other theories The most common basis for disputing estimates of the benefits of seat belts is risk compensation and risk homeostasis advanced by researchers John Adams and Gerald Wilde. The idea of this theory is that, if the risk of death or injury from a car crash is reduced by the wearing of seat belts, drivers will respond by reducing the precautions they take against crashes. Along with many others Adams accepts the hypothesis that wearing seatbelts improves a vehicle occupant’s chances of surviving a crash.[14] In order to explain the disparity between the agreed improvement in crash survival and the observed results, Adams and Wilde argue that protecting someone from the consequences of risky behaviour may tend to encourage greater risk taking. Wilde states "... to compel a person to use protection from the consequences of hazardous driving, as seat belt laws do, is to encourage hazardous driving. A fine for non-compliance will encourage seat belt use, but the fact that the law fails to increase people's desire to be safe encourages compensatory behaviour." [15] Studies and experiments have been carried out to examine the risk compensation theory. In one experiment subjects were asked to drive go-karts around a track under various conditions. It was found that subjects who started driving belted did not drive any slower when subsequently unbelted, but those who started driving unbelted did drive consistently faster when subsequently belted.[16] A study of habitual non-seatbelt wearers driving in freeway conditions found evidence that they had adapted to seatbelt use by adopting higher driving speeds and closer following distances[17] In another study, taxi drivers who were habitual non-wearers were timed over a route with passengers who did, and others who did not, insist on the driver wearing a belt. They completed the route faster when belted.[18] In addition to Risk Compensation, Adams has suggested other mechanisms that may lead to inaccurate or unsupportable predictions of positive benefits from seatbelt legislation. Case-control studies based on voluntary use of safety aids can attribute to the aid benefits that actually come from the risk-averse nature of those likely to use them voluntarily (confounding), particularly early adopters. Fatality rates are subject to considerable stochastic noise and comparison of single years or short periods can be misleading. [edit] Individual liberty Occasional opponents have objected to the laws on libertarian principles.[19] Some do so on the grounds that seat belt laws infringe on their civil liberties. They argue[where?] that not wearing seat belts is a victimless crime as the only person harmed is the one making that decision for himself about his own life. They also argue that since deaths are caused by seatbelts in some kinds of accidents that the government has no right to legislate an activity (buckling up) that may cause a person's death in the hopes it will maybe save others. Opponents quote Benjamin Franklin who said "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".[19][verification needed][20][21][verification needed] The counterpoint to the libertarian view toward seatbelt laws is that mandatory usage not only reduces injuries and deaths but also reduces the economic cost to society. A University of Wisconsin study demonstrated that car accident victims who had not worn seatbelts cost the hospital (and the state in the case of the uninsured) on average 25% more.[22] [edit] Side-effects of seat belts Critics have pointed to fatalities and injuries caused by wearing seat-belts. Chest injury may cause cardiac arrest, lung bruises are amongst the most common causes of death by seat-belts especially for people of weak heart such as the elderly who can also suffer a heart attack and not be able to free from the seatbelt in order to get to help. In neck injury cases, the deceleration from a high-speed impact can cause a seat-belt wearer's head to continue forward suddenly while the body is restrained, potentially causing paralyzing injuries. A study of such injuries notes "Seatbelts save lives. However, they may cause injury to adjacent structures and when they malfunction can cause injury to the abdominal viscera, bony skeleton and vascular structures. The motor industry has attempted to reduce these injuries by modification of vehicle design and safety equipment."[23] [edit] See also Car accident Click It or Ticket Clunk Click Every Trip Road safety [edit] Notes ^ a b "A Potted Seat Belt History". Drivers Technology. http://www.driverstechnology.co.uk/seatbelts.htm.  ^ "Seat Belts: History". Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. April 2005. http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/info/seatbelt_history.pdf. Retrieved 5 October 2010.  ^ Helena Webb (15 August 2006). "Loose belts lose lives". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. http://www.abc.net.au/wa/stories/s1715790.htm.  ^ "RoSPA History - How Belting Up Became Law". RoSPA. http://www.rospa.org.uk/history/beltingup.htm.  ^ "RoSPA History - How Belting Up Became Law" (PDF). john adams. http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/Seat%20belts%20for%20significance.pdf.  ^ "?". fars.nhtsa.dot.gov. http://www.fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/new_tips.cfm?stateid=0&year=2001&tipscat=Restraint%20Systems. [dead link] ^ "Victoria's road toll at record low". theage.com.au. 27 December 2009. http://www.theage.com.au/national/victorias-road-toll-at-record-low-20091226-lfqp.html. Retrieved 21 November 2010.  ^ Lucas, Clay (9 July 2010). "How low can we go?". theage.com.au. http://www.theage.com.au/national/how-low-can-we-go-20090709-depn.html.  ^ John Adams (1982) (PDF). The Efficacy of Seat Belt Legislation. The Society of Automotive Engineers. http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/SAE%20seatbelts.pdf.  ^ Click it or ticket ^ "Most Wanted". National Transportation Safety Board. http://www.ntsb.gov/recs/mostwanted/highway_occupant_protection.htm.  ^ "Wearing a seat belt and exemptions". Directgiv. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/AdviceOnKeepingYourVehicle/DG_4022064.  ^ "All must belt up in MPVs". The Star. 29 December 2008. http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/12/29/nation/2906049&sec=nation.  ^ John Adams (2006). "The Failure of Seat Belt Legislation". John Adams. http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/failure%20of%20seatbelt%20legislation.pdf.  (primary source) ^ Wilde GJS (1994). Target Risk. Toronto: PDE Publications. http://psyc.queensu.ca/target/.  ^ Streff FM, Geller ES (August 1988). "An experimental test of risk compensation: between-subject versus within-subject analyses". Accident Analysis and Prevention 20 (4): 277–87.  ^ Janssen W (April 1994). "Seat belt wearing and driving behaviour: An instrumented-vehicle study". Accident Analysis and Prevention 26 (2): 249–2.  ^ Wilde GJS (1994). Target Risk (1st ed.). ISBN 0-9699124-0-4. http://psyc.queensu.ca/target/chapter08.html#8.2.  ^ a b Jeff Jacoby (August 25, 1994). "Unbuckling the Voters" (Op-Ed). Boston Globe. http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/boston/access/62006166.html?dids=62006166:62006166&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Aug+25%2C+1994&author=Jeff+Jacoby%2C+Globe+Staff&pub=Boston+Globe+(pre-1997+Fulltext)&desc=Unbuckling+the+voters&pqatl=google.  ^ "Seatbelt Laws Offend Notions of Freedom" (Editorial). Greensboro News and Record. June 28, 2003. p. A10.  ^ "Seat-belt stops". Minneapolis Star Tribune. February 9, 2001.  (primary source) ^ Marion Ceraso; Keri Frisch; Stephen Hargarten; Timothy Corden (September 2006). "Primary Enforcement of Seatbelt Laws: A Means for Decreasing Injuries, Deaths and Crash-Related Costs in Wisconsin?" (PDF). University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. http://uwphi.pophealth.wisc.edu/publications/issueBriefs/issueBriefv07n01.pdf.  ^ Smith, J. E. (2005). Injuries caused by seatbelt - Trauma. tra.sagepub.com. pp. Vol. 7, No. 4, 211–215. http://tra.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/4/211. Retrieved 21 November 2010.  [edit] References and further reading John Adams (1995). Risk. Routledge.  Wilde G.S. Target Risk PDE Publications, 1994 The Isles report "Seat belt savings: Implications of European Statistics", UK DoT, 1981, Sourced from Death on the Streets, Cars and the Mythology of Road Safety by Robert Davis, Leading Edge Press, North Yorkshire UK, 1992 and "Report questions whether seat belts save lives" by M. Hamer, New Scientist, 7 February 1985 p7 Evaluation of Automobile Safety Regulations: The case of Compulsory Seat Belt Legislation in Australia. by J.A.C. Coneybeare, Policy Sciences 12:27-39, 1980 Compulsory Seat Belt Use: Further Inferences, by P. Hurst Accident Analysis and Prevention., Vol 11: 27-33, 1979 Wilde G. S. Risk Homeostasis and Traffic Accidents Propositions, Deductions and Discussion of Dissension in Recent Reactions, Ergonomics 1988 Vol, 31, 4:439 Methodological Issues in Testing the Hypothesis of Risk Compensation by Brian Dulisse, Accident Analysis and Prevention Vol. 25 (5): 285-292, 1997 RS 255 The initial impact of seat belt legislation in Ireland by R. Hearne, An Foras Forbatha, Dublin, 1981 The efficacy of seat belt legislation: A comparative study of road accident fatality statistics from 18 countries, by J. Adams. Department of Geography University College, London 1981 Casualty Reductions, Whose Problem? By F. West-Oram, Traffic Engineering and Control, September 1990 The Puzzle of Seat Belts Explained, Press Release of the Annual Conference of the British Psychological Society, April 1999 Reconsidering the effects of seat belt Laws and Their Enforcement Status by T.S. Dee Accident Analysis and Prevention., Vol 30(1): 1-10, 1998 [edit] External links Links to sites/studies that endorse seat belts: U.S. Department of Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration(NHTSA): Occupant Protection PDF Seat Belt Wearing in Scotland: A Second Study of Compliance UK Department for Transport: THINK! Road Safety Prevention Institute: Seatbelts: Current Issues Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 85, pp. 828-843, 2003 Links to sites/studies skeptical/critical of seat belt legislation + Seatbelt Laws Why You Should be worried Stick It to Click It or Ticket (SITCIOT) The Coalition for Seatbelt Choice Do Seat Belt Laws Work? Seat Belt Laws: A Clumsy Perspective by Professor John Adams pdf-format Review of Seatbelt Effectiveness Link to article on the Hawaii Seatbelt law v • d • e Traffic law and safety Rules of the road All-way stop · Australian Road Rules · Boulevard rule · Green Cross Code · Highway Code · Move over law · New Zealand Road Code · Overtaking · Right- and left-hand traffic · Right-of-way · Right turn on red · Road rules in Hong Kong · Rules of the Road (Ireland) · School bus traffic stop laws · Traffic code · Vienna Convention on Road Traffic Enforcement Breathalyzer · Highway patrol · Parking enforcement · Red light camera · Road traffic control · Traffic court · Traffic enforcement camera · Traffic guard · Traffic stop · Traffic ticket · Warning Speed limit Advisory speed limit · National Maximum Speed Law · School zone · Speed limit enforcement · Speed limits by country · Speed limits by country Moving violations Driving under the influence (by country: Canada · United Kingdom · United States) · Mobile phones and driving · Reckless driving · Street racing · Tailgating · Texting while driving · Vehicular homicide · Wrong-way driving Driver licensing Commercial driver's license · European driving licence · Graduated driver licensing · Graduated licensing · Inter-American Driving Permit · International Driving Permit · Learner's permit · Point system · Driving licences by country · List of countries by minimum driving age Traffic violations reciprocity Commercial Driver's License Information System · Driver License Agreement · Driver License Compact · Non-Resident Violator Compact Parking Alternate-side parking · Decriminalised parking enforcement · Disabled parking permit · Double parking · Parking chair · Parking violation · Wheel clamp Car safety Seat belt laws · Click It or Ticket Road safety Drivers' working hours (Europe) · Epilepsy and driving · Hours of service (USA) · Old age and driving · Sleep deprived driving || || Technique: How To Get Your Seat Height Right - BikeRadar Skip menu Main content Sub content Home News Bikes & Gear Racing Routes & Riding Fitness Forum Video Road News Bikes & Gear Racing Routes & Riding Fitness Forum Video Mountain Biking News Bikes & Gear Racing Routes & Riding Fitness Forum Video Commuting News Bikes & Gear Routes & Riding Fitness Forum Video Beginners & Family News Bikes & Gear Routes & Riding Fitness Forum Video Search Magazines Classified Directory You are here: Home fitness Technique: … right Feature Tue 11 Mar 2008, 1:00 pm UTC Do you like this? Share Buzz Tweet Technique: How to get your seat height right By Nick Morgan The Heel method (BikeRadar)View Thumbnail Gallery Setting the correct seat height would seem to be such a fundamental part of cycling that you would have thought the boffins had agreed long ago on the best method. But you’d be wrong.One thing all the experts agree on however is that if you get the height wrong, the effects can be catastrophic. A brand new study suggests that setting the height too low can decrease time to exhaustion by as much as 12 per cent. Consequently cyclists with limited time on their hands might actually get more out of a shorter session by lowering their seats to a sub-optimal level so as to make it harder.It’s an interesting theory, but even knowing how to get it wrong presupposes that you know how to get it right, and many don’t. Read on to find out exactly how to do it.1 The Heel methodThis is the one every bike shop owner or gym assistant will tell you whenever you clamber onto the saddle. You place the heel of your shoe on the pedal and set the saddle height so your leg is straight at the bottom of the pedal cycle with the pelvis remaining in a horizontal position. Despite this commonly heard method, there is virtually no scientific evidence to support it and it often leads to the saddle height being adjusted too low. Professor Will Pelever of Mississippi University for Women has written several papers comparing methods for finding the best seat height and says, “The main problem is that this method does not take into account individual variations in femur, tibia and foot length.” 2 The 109% methodA more robust method was developed by Hamley & Thomas in a 1967 paper. They experimented with different saddle heights and found that the ideal was achieved when the saddle was positioned at 109% of your inseam length when measuring from the pedal axle to the top of the seat height. Your inseam measurement is basically the length from your crotch to the floor. To calculate this, face a wall and put a thick-ish book between your legs as if it were a saddle. Ensuring that you are standing straight with your heels on the floor, mark a line along the top of the book edge touching the wall. The distance from the floor to the height of the mark is your inseam measurement. It’s best to measure it several times and take an average. This has proved an extremely popular method and is recommended by many top-level coaches. Yet a recent study by Professor Pelever found that it was inferior to the Holmes method (see below) both in terms of power output and economy.3 The LeMond methodThis is a popular variation on the 109% method and pioneered by the three time Tour de France winner Greg LeMond.Also using inseam length as a guide, this formula calculates 88.3% of your inseam length and uses it to measure the distance from the centre of the bottom bracket to the top of the seat height.Interestingly, Pelever has shown that this often produces a different seat height from the 109% method and although it seems to work for many people, it may not be ideal for someone with particularly long femur bones. 4 The Holmes method This was originally developed to reduce over-use injuries in cycling and takes a different approach entirely from the other three. It uses a device called a goniometer for measuring the angle of the knee joint at the bottom of the pedal stroke. Holmes recommends an angle of between 25 and 35 degrees and closer to 25 for those with a history of patella tendonitis.This may all sound a bit technical and if so it’s probably best to go with one of the two inseam methods, but you can pick up a goniometer for around £20 from medical suppliers.Pelever’s research has shown that setting your seat height based on a knee angle of 25 degrees outperforms all other methods (including an angle of 35 degrees). “Using a goniometer and a 25 degree angle is definitely the method I’d recommend,” he says.Don’t rely on simply feeling comfortable either. “If you’ve been pedalling at a much lower saddle height than is optimal, it may feel awkward in the beginning,” says Pelever. “However, as your body adapts (usually in two to three weeks) the new position will not only feel comfortable, but will improve performance in the long run.”Of course, if you still feel uncomfortable after a few weeks then you will need to make changes. It’s best to use the 25 degree knee angle as a starting place. Have someone watch from behind to ensure that your hips do not rock back and forth across the saddle due to over extension at the bottom of the stroke. If that is the case then the angle may need to be adjusted upwards slightly for comfort.“When I finish fitting someone on their bike, their knee angle is usually somewhere between 25 and 30 degrees, but much closer to 25 on most all occasions,” says Pelever. You can follow BikeRadar on Twitter at twitter.com/bikeradar and on Facebook at facebook.com/BikeRadar. Back to top Email to a friend Do you like this? Share Buzz Tweet User Comments There are 18 comments on this post Showing 1 - 18 of 18 comments Geoff_SS Posted Tue 11 Mar, 2:24 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate How does the Lemond method allow for different crank lengths? Or what crank length does it assume?Similarly, none of the methods (except perhaps the Holmes) takes into account shoe sole thickness which can vary quite a bit. I know if I chose to go shopping at lunchtime (clips and straps era) my saddle always felt too low because my work shoes had a slightly thicker sole than my cycling shoes. I doubt if the difference was much more than 3 mm (if that) so it goes to show what tiny differences can be perceived, whether they affect performance is another matter.Geoff tarquin_foxglove Posted Thu 24 Apr, 2:44 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate Has anyone tried the LeMond Method?I've changed my saddle height (from 'natural' to LeMond) and it dropped down by 4 cm.I now feel as though I'm too low and it feels wrong.When I was measuring from the centre of the bottom bracket to the top of the seat height, I measured it directly ie along the seat tube, is that correct? PowerFiTTE Posted Thu 20 Nov, 3:32 am UTC Flag as inappropriate I applaud Nick's article on saddle height, as it does highlight a very important element in bike fitting. However, I must disagree with his conclusions. While taking measurements has long since been shown to be less than ideal, setting leg angles in an incomplete manner such as Nick suggests is not ideal for most cyclists as well. Why? It doesn't take into account the cyclist's overall anatomy and biomechanics. Two cyclists of the same height and overall physical dimensions can have very different cycling motions.For proper fit, including saddle height, aa top cycling technicial mus also be able to assess the athlete's range of motion and flexibility. Often times soft tissue work or even anatomical adjustment is necessary to optimize range of motion. Without this as a starting point, there is jeopardy of injury. After this starting point, measuring for leg angle is appropriate, but must be done using the proper anatomical 'landmarks' to properly measure the angle from the hip throiugh the knee joint to the ankle. Using these landmarks, the proper leg angle is normally in the 36-40 degree range, not 25 degrees. Our company, John Howard Performance Sports (www.johnhowardsports.com) specializes in using proper biomechanics to guide our bike fits. We are able to achieve power increases in the 10%-25% range while increasing rider comfort and reducing the risk of injury. We document all of our results. Our clients include professional cyclists and triathletes as well as serious recreational cyclists and everything in between.Our body is the motor; if the motor is malfunctioning, the car won't run properly. Sadoldsamurai Posted Sat 21 Feb, 5:54 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate The correct hieght issue is also linked to the how far back should the seat be, I have noticed that sprinting/reaching and maintaining a high pedal/cadance rate seems to be easiest when my seat is pushed forward on the rails, and the seat tube angle therefore at it's steepest, but I get most power when I have the seat pushed back on the rails, and thereby reduce the seat tube angle.(Fortunately when it gets so steep this encourages the front to come up I get out of the saddle which pushed the forks down again)...Given that you can now get turbo trainers which also have power output measure meters is it worth finding a gym with one of these and working out your own personal optimum pedal power seat position both hieght and rail/seat tube angle, or is there also an issue about what set up you have trained on is always going to come out best on a short term test? cycledocabe Posted Fri 27 Feb, 9:13 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate Beware!Height is only ONE of many variables:- saddle tilt fore/aft relation to the Bottom-bracket (in turn dependant on the Seat-tube angle and seat-post lay-back) reach and height of handlebars rider's suppleness purpose;- an evening 10 or a sportif; flat raods or steep ups and downs. From personal suffering I do know that even minute variations can have profound effects an comfort, performance and handling. Why was Eddy Merks so pernickety and fiddling constantly with his saddle? I strongly advise against the 109% rule. Too high! The reaseach was performed for short duration track events and only measured efficiency. Sitting too high "pulls" you over the domed narrow fore-part of the saddle. The weight is then borne by the perineum and not the ischial tuberosities - and it hurts. The goniometer method is best but still needs trial and improvement and attention to the other variables I above listed. Remember that once you get going you may not keep that ever-so-ideal postion. Carry the tools with you. The consequences of some of the changes can be counter-intuitive. All the best. blablablacksheep Posted Tue 24 Mar, 12:56 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate the 109% is way way to high im 6 foot and with this method i more like 8 foot high, it very wrong for sure.also they said messure from "pedal axle to the top of the seat height. " this doesnt mean messure from bottom bracket /crank where gears are,i messured from the pedal axle to the top of the seat height for the lemond method and found it only slightly higher than when i bought bike so probally the best out of the three for normal use.the angle one is far to complex and doing a DIY job is just oing to mess up your body unless professtional does it Blonde Posted Sun 3 May, 5:28 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate Yes 100% or Le Mond way are too high for me. I am female and have long thighs. As a beginner about 6 years ago, the B/F set up my saddle far to high with the result that I had undercarridge pain on the saddle as well as such sore glute on one side where I was ricking on the saddle that i cold not lie in bed at night on that side. The goniometer is by far eh best way, but must also take into account rider flexibility in the hamstrings as well as preferred foot tilt when pedalling - I naturally point my feet down slightly no mater how high the saddle is positioned. BTW I gradually made adjustments over the years to come to the right position which was more or less spot on the same as the height I was given two years ago by Cycle Fit in London. They just take the weeks or months of adjustment out of it and get it right for you straight away. chobbs Posted Mon 4 May, 10:35 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate I have had 3 different kinds of fits....the knee angle, measuring bone lengths, and Retul. Retul makes the most sense, since it is dynamic. Measuring inseam overall does not make sense, since femur, tibia and foot length matter. Also, saddle setback has to enter into the equation (probably first), since it influence effective saddle height. mrwibble Posted Fri 8 May, 8:48 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate www.competitivecyclist.com/try the fit calculator Tashkent Terror Posted Wed 20 May, 5:43 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate I think the front/aft possision of the saddle is the best place to start. you need to get the weight distrebution right in order to be stable on the bike. Forget all the rules/guidelines you hear about. The right saddleheight is when you kan reach the bottom of the pedalstroke with power and control with both legs. The last part is important because both legs are seldom exactly the same lenght, or you may be tighter in the hamstrings on one side shortening the lenghth that the leg can reach without overextending. There are many structural issues that impact your saddle height. Some can be resolved with shims and wedges but many are best adressed with stretching and core strengthening.The right saddleheight is something you need to work on. In my experience no formula or guideline will give the right heigh, there are to many variables,but it will get you in the right ballpark.Cyclingnews.com has a great form & fitness Q&A where you can find lots of information on all kinds of bike fit issues. http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/ Richard-Dublin Posted Sun 24 May, 6:58 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate The LeMond Method? Surely measuring to the centre of the bottom bracket must assume a particular crank length? TheScouser on an Italian Posted Fri 5 Jun, 1:44 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate Hi to you all.This is my maiden submission to the site,so I will avoid the missiles as and when!!!.I have retuned(Freudian Slip) returned to cycling after a longish period of abscense mainly caused by the need for total left knee replacement.However,to the point of my submission.There appears to be a lot more technological theorizing than ever there was in the old days;when you selected your rocket climbed aboard and got on with it.As with all aspects of life subjectivity is the fist consideration in your cycle tool kit.In my case a METRIC ALLEN KEY selection in my CAPE ROLL.(YES I am an OLD SOD!!!!!!!!!!1945 vintage,I was one of those that borrowed and never returned MIVVI,PENDLETONS TWICER and all of the other excellent wraps for the cape straped to the underside of my BLACK BROOKES SWALLOW.I am 4'10&1/2",23&1/2 inside leg and have had total left knee replacement.,the problem of mechanical knee and short limbs overcome by 140mm crank arms.Now there is a worthwhile puzzle for optimum positioning/gearing on my Italian Stallion.Adjustments on the road(to comfort)are easy with modern kit(ALLEN KEYS,wonderfull!!!.As much as I waxed lyrical over my Swallow the best bit of modern kit(just added) is my Selle Italia Gel Saddle(in BLUE LEATHER to match in with the bike).I intend to give a try with the one with the pressure relief channel.As so rightly pointed out THE PERINIUM in Pain is not pleasant.Happy and COMFORTABLE RIDING to you all. TheScouser on an Italian Posted Thu 23 Jul, 10:37 am UTC Flag as inappropriate Hi,I am very surprised to find no input to this topic since my bit!!!.I would love to know what the experts would devise for me; compared to what I actually do have.Well here we go.I am 4' 10&1/2,with a 23&1/2 inside leg.Replacement Left Knee surgery has meant the need to ride with 140mm crank arms to achieve full rotation,(prior to this I did not have a problem).I have found throughout my life, to date, that short stature causes the need for a lot of trade offs.Everything about riding cycles is about the individual and being comfortable,physical & mental to enable stress free use of the bike.There are enough W*nke*s out there to bring it on anyway. mcguiness Posted Sat 15 Aug, 3:18 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate also bear in mind if you had a seat with suspension bear in mind that sag when you sit on it, and this theory doesnt show what sizes of cranks they were using or the thickness of the pedal so really you need to look at the proper scientific paper and mind out what works best for you jehannum5 Posted Wed 7 Apr, 3:48 am UTC Flag as inappropriate The goniometer method seems foolproof to me.... it takes into account all other variables eg. if your saddle is set way back, if you have short femurs, if you pedal toe down, if you have 170mm cranks, if your flexibility is good/poor it makes no difference if you set your height by the physiological limiting factor which is knee extensibility. An example of this would be someone with extreme variability (short femurs & poor flexibility) if their setup was established from knee extension to 25 degrees at their desired setback than what is there to go wrong? Saddle height is a function of knee extension: ergo base saddle height on optimal knee extension. The only question is whether any research has been done to establish whether flexion of the knee of 25 degrees is the 'optimal' figure... xc_revisited Posted Sat 17 Apr, 9:55 pm UTC Flag as inappropriate I dont want to take anything away from those who have devoted alot of time to their research on this subject but i would suggest just going with what feels comfortable. Out on the trail i can have the saddle at many different heights depending on the terrain im faced with and it really doesn't take that long to stop, flip the quick release, make the necessary adjustments and get back underway - if you dont happen to get it quite right on the first try. SteveR_100Milers Posted Sun 18 Apr, 8:05 am UTC Flag as inappropriate I had a bike fit using a goniometer set at 31 degrees for my body shape. Saddle offset was the first parameter to be set (mine was 85mm), then set the saddle height, then handlebar height / stem length to balance my torso. The difference on all bikes is noticeable, greater comfort, no longer does my ITB hurt for a couple of days after a hard ride, and I'm riding faster. Roadscrape Posted Sun 25 Jul, 3:14 am UTC Flag as inappropriate I work in a large shop. We use the goniometer as the basis for everything else. With the bike set up on a trainer, we can approximate ideal positions as a baseline. Thus, we have a place to start. What really counts is what the rider feels in a dynamic situation. Watching the rider on the bike outdoors as they adjust to accelerating and braking, cornering on broad sweeps and tight curves, and uphill/downhill, allows for minor adjustments to be made. Sometimes the difference is minor, sometimes the resulting difference is major (especially in the case of physical limitations at various places on the body). The vast majority of riders are more concerned with comfort than speed, but not too surprisingly, when they are comfortable they are also faster! And of course, they will ride more often! 1 Post comment: You need to login or register to post comments. Username Password Please confirm you are a person by entering the words in the box below: Comment Related Links Buyer's Guide to Saddles Most Viewed Most Commented Training: Exercises you can do off the bikeThe best do-anywhere moves to improve your riding Nutrition: Super soupsFitness: Step up to your riding weightTraining: Monitoring your recoveryHealth: How to deal with common cycling ailmentsTechnique: Be bad, ride better! Health: Air pollution, the invisible threatWhy cycling in traffic can be dangerous for your health Nutrition: Got enough on your plate?Training: Exercises you can do off the bikeNutrition: Super soupsHealth: The truth about ice bathsNutrition: Protein improves your post-ride recovery ForumUpdated: Sun Dec 12, 2010 9:08 pmJoin in Giro gloves sizing?holiday!!BHF London to South Coast 2010/2011 (75 miles off road)Its Not About The BikeBored? want to play a game?For Sale:Garmin Edge 705 HR + GB Topo DVDcarbon road forks 1"Training after accidentwhat's worse than ice?.....Powertap wheel - Wiggle or specialist? Routes & RidingUpload Route Bens Follybikebiga trilha diaria campo grandecruzalex Swieto Cykliczne 2011Naprzelaj Temple to Knightsbridgeglenmaclarty 2700 ft, 30 miler River Hills, Toroamcnair Wokingham - Hurley returnmercer32 Dec 12, 2010alexsins Ronda Montejaque loopamdalton Also on BikeRadar RacingVideo: Gee Atherton vs motorbike at Fort WilliamWhat's fastest down the hill...FitnessNutrition: Super soupsThree easy, nutritious recipes...NewsNew Dura-Ace Di2 satellite shifter for sprintersEasier gear changes while...MagazinesSubscribe to MBUK and get a Specialized Multi-tool worth £30!Your last chance to Get a... You are here: Home fitness Technique: How to get your seat height right Home Road Mountain Biking Commuting Beginners & Family Search News Road News Mountain Biking News Commuting News Beginners & Family News BikeRadar Blog Magazines Cycling Plus ProCycling Mountain Biking UK What Mountain Bike Gear and Reviews Road Bikes Mountain Bikes Time Trial / Triathlon Bikes Hybrid Bikes Urban Bikes Kids' Bikes Races Tour de France Workshops & Buyers Guides Workshop: How to clean and lube your bike Workshop: Emergency bike repairs Workshop: Mechanics' Tips Buyers guide to: Commuting in the dark Buyers guide to: UK tax free bike schemes Buyers guide to: Kids' Bikes BikeRadar Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy About us Advertising Jobs Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885 CyclingNews TechRadar T3 MusicRadar Digital Future