Yet another Saddle Thread :P

So I wasn't sure where to put this. There are many topics on saddles and I hate to be redundant, so my apologies if this doesn't completely warrant a new thread. :)

So once again, another person experiencing saddle hell. So I bought a Specialized Ruby 143 (fully returnable) and I took it for a 2 hour ride. Definitely better than my previous saddle, but that isn't hard to do. I don't even know how to describe which bones were hurting on the Ruby though. I guess the ones that are right where your underline would be. Maybe that pain would go away? The guy at the shop also measured me at 120. I tried the paper towel method yesterday and got 130. So hmm.. I mean I'm sure his method was more accurate, but it just seems like a big difference.

Here are my questions...

Do you think the pain I got with the Ruby was due to the shape?

I was looking at the Sella Italia SLR and the SLK. The SLR is 155 though. So a big over kill for me? The SLK is a 145 so that would probably be okay. Do you think the shapes of either of these are the same as the Ruby and thus I'd run into the same problem?

I was also checking out the San Marco's, but I'm not sure which ones are women specific.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bathedinshadow

I don't even know how to describe which bones were hurting on the Ruby though. I guess the ones that are right where your underline would be..

---

What is an underline?
Use specific anatomical terms please. Don't be shy. We all have them.

Woops... I meant underwear line. Not shy! :)

To be more specific it's the "inferior pubic ramus." There's a diagram here...
http://home.comcast.net/~wnor/pelvis.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bathedinshadow

Woops... I meant underwear line. Not shy! :)

To be more specific it's the "inferior pubic ramus." There's a diagram here...
http://home.comcast.net/~wnor/pelvis.htm

---

Umm... I think you're looking at that picture backwards? Are you talking about pain at your butt underwear line, or at your hoo-hah?

If it's chafing at your butt panty-line, the saddle transition from "sit" to nose is probably too gradual.

If it's pressure at your butt on the sit-bones, that's where you want it. (does it feel like you would after sitting on those metal benches at the football stadium?) Keep the saddle a while and see how it goes.

If it really is pain on the pubic rami, up front by your hoo-hah, then the saddle is either too narrow at your sit bones (but you measured, and it sounds ok) or the nose may be tilted up too high, or again it may be too pear shaped and you are shifting forward to clear your hips as you ride, thereby sitting on the narrower front portion of the saddle and weightbearing on the pubic rami instead of the ischial tuberosities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnottedYet

Umm... I think you're looking at that picture backwards? Are you talking about pain at your butt underwear line, or at your hoo-hah?

---

Hoo-hah, aka 'Twinkie'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnottedYet

Umm... I think you're looking at that picture backwards? Are you talking about pain at your butt underwear line, or at your hoo-hah?

If it's chafing at your butt panty-line, the saddle transition from "sit" to nose is probably too gradual.

If it's pressure at your butt on the sit-bones, that's where you want it. (does it feel like you would after sitting on those metal benches at the football stadium?) Keep the saddle a while and see how it goes.

If it really is pain on the pubic rami, up front by your hoo-hah, then the saddle is either too narrow at your sit bones (but you measured, and it sounds ok) or the nose may be tilted up too high, or again it may be too pear shaped and you are shifting forward to clear your hips as you ride, thereby sitting on the narrower front portion of the saddle and weightbearing on the pubic rami instead of the ischial tuberosities.

---

I think I'm looking at the picture right. Scroll down to like the 3rd picture where it shows it from the side. Then I think you'll see better what I'm talking about.

I feel like what I "want" is a more T shape. I just don't know if that would solve the issue. When I first sat on the seat and left my house, I immediately went down a big hill. The first thing I noticed was that I just slid forward. It feels like the wide portion of the seat, is too long and digging into the bones along my inner thigh. Which is an improvement over the previous seat where I was actually sitting directly on everything that matters. 2 hours of that, and truly, going to the bathroom is not an enjoyable experience. I also wonder if the pain with the Ruby might be from chafing from the shorts. I'm a fairly small person and the width between my inner thighs, across my pubic bone, is relatively small. They padding of every pair of shorts I've tried on, soft of folds down my legs if that makes sense.

It sounds like your shorts are too big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bathedinshadow

I think I'm looking at the picture right. Scroll down to like the 3rd picture where it shows it from the side. Then I think you'll see better what I'm talking about.

---

I'm pretty good at pelvic anatomy. I was confused because you talked about underwear line, which makes me think of the back side of the pelvis, not the front.

Ok, so you aren't feeling any pain at the panty line, you are feeling pain up near your vulva.

If you are weightbearing on the pubic rami, between the thighs and on either side of your soft tissues, then it is probably a pear-shape problem and you are shifting forward to clear the saddle, or there is just too much pear even if you don't need to shift, or the nose is too high. Both your measurments and the LBS measurements seem to indicate the saddle is wide enough at the sits, so I'd be looking at tilt and transition as the culprits on the saddle.

But, boy howdy, I think Zen might have it. If you are having that much trouble with shorts, no saddle is gonna feel right! Try riding in plain ol' running shorts or regular summer shorts. If you have less trouble in a chamois-less pair of shorts, you might just be someone who shouldn't wear chamois. (There are several of us here on TE, with a variety of chamois-less brands we can recommend)

Everyone else has had good suggestions. Just a couple of things to add -

Chamois is supposed to line your inner thighs as well as your seating area. If it didn't, you'd have seams where your thighs meet your perineal area, and everyone would have the trouble you're having.

Has "every pair of shorts you've tried on" had a very bulky chamois? Even though it seems most women are more comfortable in minimal chamois, for some reason few LBS stock them. You might try to find shorts with thin chamois - spinning shorts and triathlon shorts tend to also have very short legs, which aren't for everyone, but also very thin chamois. There are a few true "road" shorts out there with thin chamois, including my faves, Castelli Provocante (kinda short for my taste), Castelli Vizio Due, and Etxe Ondo Very Short (which are not very short ;)).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OakLeaf

There are a few true "road" shorts out there with thin chamois, including my faves, Castelli Provocante (kinda short for my taste), Castelli Vizio Due, and Etxe Ondo Very Short (which are not very short ;)).

---

The Exte Onde shorts look interesting. I wonder if they will come out with a knicker or a tight with that chamois.

I tend to ride in my tri gear now. But all my shorts are kind of low waisted and most of cycling tops don't come down far enough.


Veronica

I thought the Ruby was T shaped. I also had issues when I first got mine. My fitter told me to give it a chance, you'll love it. He also told me not try long rides on it.

I did have to change shorts, the best are my Assos but I had some 08 Shebeest century shorts which work well. My Shebeest SSS shorts do not work because they have a liner on the sides rather than padding.

I found out last week that too much air in my tires will kill me on my saddle. I usually put in a 100 psi but my LBS pumped my tires much higher. My whole body ached that day.

Who put the saddle on you or the shop? I bought the mtn bike version and a shop put it on my mtn bike but did not check me out on it. I was not happy with the saddle. I ended up taking the bike to my fitter who aligned the saddle properly and also raised my handlebars. Big difference.

Last week I bought a new pair of shoes that were 1 size smaller. We did not adjust the saddle to compensate, my first ride I was really uncomfortable, we raised the saddle about the width of a nickel and it was perfect again.

I'm small too, not sure what my measurement is but my saddle is 130.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnottedYet

I'm pretty good at pelvic anatomy. I was confused because you talked about underwear line, which makes me think of the back side of the pelvis, not the front.

Ok, so you aren't feeling any pain at the panty line, you are feeling pain up near your vulva.

---

Well I was using the "panty line" description before I had the request to be more technical. haha. And I don't know how your underwear fit, but my panty line wraps all the way around my leg. ;) But I can see the confusion. But no, not quite near my vulva... father back, just not quite where I should be feeling it. I did tilt my seat down as you suggested, which helped a little. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OakLeaf

Has "every pair of shorts you've tried on" had a very bulky chamois? Even though it seems most women are more comfortable in minimal chamois, for some reason few LBS stock them. You might try to find shorts with thin chamois - spinning shorts and triathlon shorts tend to also have very short legs, which aren't for everyone, but also very thin chamois.

---

I had a horrible time finding shorts that fit me properly actually. And I tried on some shorts that had varying levels of bulk. I only wear them for the padding, so if I can get away with no padding, I'll just wear some of my thin hiking shorts. Hopefully I can figure something out as I'm planning a big ride in a bit, and I think I might want some padding for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathi

I thought the Ruby was T shaped. I also had issues when I first got mine. My fitter told me to give it a chance, you'll love it. He also told me not try long rides on it.

---

Yeah I'm not sure. I kind of thought so too.

Would the rest of you consider it a T shape? Which brings me back to part of my original question. Would you consider the Sella Italia SLR and the SLK more or less of a T shape than the Ruby? As well, the SLR is only a 155, which I find weird since that would rule out a lot of sales to a lot of women no?

And also, Is the "San Marco SKN Racing" geared toward women? The depression looks wider in the pictures, but they don't seem to have "women's" section on their site.


Thanks for all the input everybody.