Review: Brooks B68 Imperial

Brooks B-68 Imperial Review
I must start with a brief history of my adult cycling career. Almost 30 years ago my husband bought me a 3 speed bike for $15.00 at a yard sale which had only 2 working gears.
I didn't mind the gears, nor the fact that I could not straddle the top tube, but I did mind the slab-saddle on it, so I went to the bike shop where I found a nice Brooks B66 for about $10.00 in their used saddle drawer.
I rode that bike for 2 years before replacing it with a bike that fit me but I kept the Brooks saddle.
It was very difficult to put that old saddle on my next bike because of the old fashioned parts it had, but my husband did it anyway because he knew that was the only way that he was going to get me to ride.
Then Brooks came out with the B67 which ended up being on my first road bike. It was a nice saddle, it broke in easily and carried me to Portland on the Seattle to Portland double century ride. I never had any problems with the pain that people talked about when they went on long rides. But then I joined a bike club, where I got teased for having that big saddle on my bike, so I dutifully tried some saddles that were recommended to me, the only one I remember now is the Terry Butterfly, which just seemed like a torture device to me. I went right back to my B67 and by that time, I noticed that other people were starting to buy Brooks saddles too.
Meanwhile, Brooks came out with the B68, which is a nice looking saddle, they took the springs away and made the whole thing lighter, but it was the same basic saddle that I already had so I just kept riding my B67, which I now had installed on both the tandem and my custom steel bike; I put the old B66 my older Raleigh Mixte 10 speed.
Now I am close to 60 years of age. Being an older woman, I began to have issues with the parts of me that meet the saddle, so even with my well broken in Brooks, I have found that I do have to be careful or I can come out of a ride pretty sore, be it a short or a long ride, there’s no rhyme nor reason for the extreme discomfort that can occur.
Enter the Brooks B-68 Imperial: using the carriage of the B-68, they carved a pound off the B-67 saddle. Then they carved a channel down the middle of the saddle, which is a feature of almost all saddles today. So you get the Brooks luxury coupled with the “central cut out” – a winning combination. Last summer, I got one for my new folding bike to replace the ridiculous thing that came with it… and the Brooks was perfect. I liked it so much that I put one on my Davidson steel bike and happy days, my issues disappeared! It is beautiful and there was absolutely no break-in period. If you continue to have issues with saddles, this is a nice little saddle to try, it is classy, tough and you can sit on it all day!
http://www.brooksengland.com/en/Shop...d=B68+Imperial

Mimi, that's a good in depth review, and it's nice to hear your 'Brooks history'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muirenn

The reason I'm writing to both sales and manufacturing is that I've long wanted a Brooks, but I need a saddle with a 180 mm width to avoid sitting on the cantle plates. The sizes of the various models jump from 177 to 205 or 210. And a lot of the saddles at 177 have short rails, which I don't want. I am effectively in between your sizes, and feel the larger models would cause other problems for me.
If a saddle with long rails and a cut-out were available, I would buy it.

---

Sheila, I'm finding your question a little confusing. Can you clarify please?

What makes you suspect the B17 Imperial has short rails?
Usually the Brooks "S"/women's models are the ones with short rails.
It sounds to me like you feel the B17 might be too narrow for your sitbones- a too-narrow saddle would definitely cause a problem for you. But then you say "I feel the larger models would cause other problems for me."- can you specify what problems do you feel would be caused by a saddle that was wide enough for your sitbones?

I understand better now. So you are looking for something in a width between the B17 and the B68?
Stay away from the 'S' models if you have trouble feeling too far forward- they are all 'short' and have short rails (which for some reason Brooks thinks is ideal as a womens' saddle, but many of us riders disagree). I think that if you have a smaller bike then it's even more important to have long rails so your saddle doesn't wind up bumping into the handlebars! :cool:
I had a B17S(short rails), which I could not adjust back far enough. Changed to the B17 (long rails) which i was able to move further back, rode that for a year and liked, but found my sitbones were really a little too wide for it and were partially riding on the saddle frame. So then I changed to the B68 on both my bikes and have been happy ever since. I keep them shoved all the way back and wouldn't even mind yet another 1/2" back if it were possible. :)

Im thinking about purchasing a Brooks saddle. I used to own a B17 Narrow but sold it because I felt the rivets on the rear of the saddle, as I tend to ride towards the back. I like a long nose to my saddles so I don't feel the sides at all.

I'm considering the B68 or B17 Imperial. For owners of either of these two saddles, can you please give me your thoughts on the requirements that I'm looking for: long nose and narrow sides yet at least 5.5 inches width at the back of the saddle. I'm not quite sure how to address the rivet issue, though. Maybe a B68 would be so wide that it would provide a nice platform so that I wouldn't feel the need to ride towards the back.

A Brooks dealer is not too close to me but once I hear thoughts from other Brooks' owners then I'll make the trek to try them out.

Thanks.

I don't know the answer to your specific questions, but Wallingford Bicycles in New Orleans has an amazing return policy, and they're easy to mail order from. You have 6 months to try, and you can return within that time for a full (less shipping) refund.

well, obviously, I tried the B17 and it didn't work for me. The B68 gave me the support I needed. good luck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmehrzad

I'm considering the B68 or B17 Imperial. For owners of either of these two saddles, can you please give me your thoughts on the requirements that I'm looking for: long nose and narrow sides yet at least 5.5 inches width at the back of the saddle. I'm not quite sure how to address the rivet issue, though. Maybe a B68 would be so wide that it would provide a nice platform so that I wouldn't feel the need to ride towards the back.


Thanks.

---

The B68 is 210mm wide. The B17 is 170mm wide.

5 1/2 inches is close enough to 145mm for my math.

Subtract 20mm from the width of each saddle to account for the metal frame where the rivets are. You don't want to sit there.

That gives us B68 190mm and B17 150mm

145mm is rather close to 150mm, shifting just slightly (making a turn, easing your position, moving into the drops) could land you on the metal frame and rivets.

Add to that your observation that the acreage of saddles tends to make you want to scoot back to find a wide enough spot.

The B68 Imperial might be your best choice for a first try.

As Blueberry said, you really can't go wrong ordering from Wallingford Bicycle Parts with their 6 month free trial on saddles. http://www.wallbike.com/

I just ordered both the B17 and the B68 a week ago from Wallingford. I was torn over the really sporty, smooth look in mandarin orange of the B17 vs. the rugged-textured honey of the B68 ( yes, somehow Bill still has the Honey color of the B68 even thought they aren't currently being made).

I started out with the B17 because I liked it better. I decided to disregard the sit bone measurements for now because Bill and Brent both said they really don't use those anymore. The B17 is the flagship model and has worked for so many people over so many years, and given my seat was level with the bars, I had a good chance of making this saddle work.

My sit bones were a bit sore, but I didn't feel like the saddle was too narrow or anything else. I did have to play lots with the angle and I'm not sure I ever did get it right. I got too excited to try the B68.

I have the B68 on the bike right now and really like that saddle. Comfortable out of the box. Feels roomy for the rear end. I biked to church with my family this morning and I don't even notice the saddle for once. Wile I love the aesthetics of the B17, this B68 is likely my winner.

Also noteworthy, I thought I would need an imperial, but so far, no issues. Everything just feels so well supported that even my soft tissue is happy.

I hope that my experience helps you choose! When in doubt, order both saddles!

Thanks to everyone for their input. Good idea about ordering both saddles from Wallingford, LovelyGirl, I just may try that.

I've never measured my sit bone width. Is there any particular way to do it from home?

Thanks for the information recall. I'll give that a try.