Need help re: saddle measurements...

Using a variety of recommended, yet informal, sit(z) bones measurement methods, it seems my sit(z) bones are 7'-7.5' apart, aka 177mm. After a cursory glimpse of Brooks saddle options, it seems they offer either a 170 mm option or a 210 mm option. I'm guessing the 210 mm option is my better choice. But would this be too wide? Do any of you recommend other saddles to consider?

Guess you need more info...I am test riding a Jamis Coda tomorrow, a bike I love from afar, but haven't yet ridden. Hope to dial the fit in but realize a stock saddle will probably not work...

A related question...I guess this bike would be classified as a performance hybrid. I ride on mostly flat paved roads, and would like to ride slightly farther than 25 miles on the weekend. I am more concerned about comfort than speed. Should I opt for a seat with springs or not?

210....The Brooks have a metal frame around the edges, effectively making the sitting width about 10-20mm narrower than the max width of the saddle.

Now, as for the springs? There are women here who swear by them. I put my big old B68 on my road bike so no springs for me, but if I were buying for my hybrid, I think the springs would not only be nice, but look pretty cool. But, that is just opinion.

Get the 210 saddle.

If i was riding flat but rough streets with potholes, cobblestones, i would choose springs. Springs do make for a smoother ride.
Downside of springs- the Brooks with springs are quite a bit heavier than the Brooks with no springs. Also, some people have had very annoying problems with their saddle springs creaking and making noise.

I don't have springs on my Brooks, never felt a need for them. Some people love their springs. :)