definitely has to do with the fact that it was designed 100 years ago and women had voluminous skirts...
Printable View
definitely has to do with the fact that it was designed 100 years ago and women had voluminous skirts...
The upside to using a Brooks 'S' saddle is that it forces you to sit on the widest part of the saddle rather than perch on the nose.
I prefer the Finesse for my long-distance bike. (It's on its third bike now.)
With my kind of short femurs (I'm long-torsoed/short-legged), I've never needed a ton of fore/aft adjustment room in my saddles. All of my saddles are placed right around the middle of their rails, so this has never been a big concern for me. I also don't do a ton of steering with my thighs (however, I shift my weight/use body lean a good bit), so having a longer nose to "grip" has never been a priority for me. Also, I ride almost exclusively in skorts, and they're a little less likely to catch on the shorter nose of the Finesse.
So, it's possible that I'm just the perfect confluence of factors for the shorter length Brooks saddles. My dad always did tell me I was perfect. Who knew he was talking about such a niche market for perfection, though? Hah! :rolleyes:
Yes, it really is a bit confusing. But if got everything right, there are not so many choices left for me:
Either the Team Pro S, if I don't have problems because it's too short - or one of the B17s (also depending on how wide the B17 and B17S actually are...). If both of them are too narrow then there is only the B68 left, but I'm not sure if I would like to have this one.
I often ride wearing skirts but didn't consider this as the possible reason behind the shorter womens saddles. But I guess it really could make things easier when wearing shorter skirts.
I'm not so sure if it would be ok for me to get a shorter saddle... I don't have much experience with different saddles or even saddle positions. I just screwed the Ruby onto my bike and tinkered with the position until it felt right and didn't think much about it since...
On my commuter there has always been a horrible squishy uncomfortable saddle and I have always been too lazy to change it (for the last... um 12 years ;)).
That's probably exactly what I will do. I still have some time to think it over :)
Ultraviolet, have you seen the new pink limited edition B 18 Brooks saddle? It is definitely a collectors item. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ultraviolet
And the downside of that for me was that I couldn't shove the B17S back enough to stop feeling I was holding myself up with my hands, my weight centered to far forward. So yes, the 'S' Brooks forced me to sit on the widest part of it- but with my sitbones literally perched on the back metal frame edge of the saddle. But this was not because it was a shorter saddle- but rather because the rails were so much shorter that the saddle can't be adjusted back much at all. When i got the B17 instead, I could shove it back a whole 'nother 1.5 inches, and I felt way more weight balanced. I don't perch on the saddle nose whether I'm on an "S" model or a 'regular' model- that would feel way too far forward for my center of gravity. I guess all our bodies are different.Quote:
Originally Posted by sundial
I wouldn't have a problem if they marketed the S model simply as a short saddle. But I do have a problem with it being promoted as 'the woman's version' of Brooks saddles. I suspect that not that many women actually do well with the S model because of the super-short rails and their resultant drastic limitation in fore-aft adjustment, and the flowing skirt factor is not really an issue for the average woman rider.
I didn't find the B17 to be any narrower than the B17S in the sitbone area.
(later I switched to the B68 because I realized my sitbones were even wider than i first thought. Pure bliss ever since. )
I always wondered why they figure men need a longer saddle nose, when in reality they have more 'stuff' up front that might have to 'duke it out' with a longer saddle nose! :confused: :eek: :D
I've thought that as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by BleeckerSt_Girl
Well I just took my first ride of the year and I did it on my new saddle - Brooks B17 imperial.
Yewouch! It was a bit painful in the perenial region but also sit bones. I rode 20mi. I think I'll be reading through this thread to see how long it took yall to adjust to the new saddle. I love the idea of the classic saddle on my steel bike, and I believe people find theirs to be comfortable. I probably should have started with B68 but figured I'd go with the flagship first and if it didn't work I could trade for the B68.
I'm wondering how much (if any) the cutout helps given my experience today! I have a planet bike ARS gel saddle which has honestly given me no issues but I was seduced by the looks and raves of the brooks!
My bike fitter said women have long femurs which explains why we need to set the saddle back - so why we would want shorter rails is beyond me! I KNEW the s versions wouldn't work for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by BleeckerSt_Girl
the shorter saddle for women was so that ample skirts would not get caught on the saddle.
why they are still selling that model is beyond me.
Now as to you and the B17. I never got comfortable on it either - I went right back to my B67 (at the time). If it's hurting your perenial area (I think that's spelled wrong, BTW) the saddle is either not adjusted correctly or it's too small.
I think I read on the Wallingford site that the 'S' is for Skirts, as women who ride in skirts might have a difficult time with the longer nose. It's marketed for women as we're more likely to ride in skirts BUT in theory, if a guy is going to ride wearing a utilikilt on a regular basis, then the saddle might be ideal for him as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by sundial
On a different-ish subject, I'm wondering with the sitbone measurements are (on average) for ladies 100% comfortable with their B-17. I'm at about 140 and I'm not sure if I'm a little bit on the side rails or what? My soft tissues are generally quite happy w/ the B17 unless I slip and do a little 'forward crush' but nobody's ever happy with those, so moot point.
So, I have a B17 Imperial on my roadie that I love. However, thinking of not keeping my roadie. I just have more fun on my Trek Pure Lowstep and it really works better as a no-brainter-fun-relaxed addition to my running. BUT - I remember that me and the stock Bontrager saddle didn't get along so well.
Would a B17 work at all on the Pure? Or, should I just go for a B67 (or B68) or something?
Just trying to get some ideas.
Try it. Just switch your B17 to the Pure and give it a try!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerry1976
Thanks, plan to do it regardless, just didn't know if anyone on here had tried it yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
Figured this might be the thread to say it on- I've been wondering about my B17 and came to the conclusion that it just wasn't fitting right... I think I was in denial about my sitbones.
For some reason I thought 'the' measurement was center to center, but then I found the formulas further down in this and other threads and went 'huh'.
I'm pretty close to 170-175 measuring the outsides of my ischial tuberosities. :eek: So... I guess I'm in the big pelvis club, which makes it easy to have an hourglass figure and hard to find a saddle? I've already sold my B17. Moving on to either the B67, B68 or B68 imperial.
Not really sure which yet, wondering on others' opinions. I'd had a selle-anatomica and really kind of hated it. It felt like my 'parts' were crammed in the hole rather than suspended over it due to the hammocky nature of the saddle. I see some have had similar experiences with the imperial cutout... I guess I'm wondering if that experience is more with those who don't wear padded cycling shorts (as I don't intend to unless we're going +10-20 mi). The 'cutout test' was a little inconclusive. It didn't hurt, per se but I wouldn't want to sit like that for hours, or moving. I was ok w/o the cutout on my B17 but always had a little friction. (Sorry for the TMI, but this is saddle talk).
I know Wallingford has that 6mo return policy, but I guess I just really want to get it right the first time. Any advice?
I'm in the same boat. In the last few days I've rode 50mi on my new b17. I was hoping ride 2 would be better. Lowering the nose to be level definitely helped the perenial pain but the sitbone pain is still there. I have similar measurements to you as far as I can tell (i've sat on playdough so many times but get confused about the results LOL). I'm this close to going back to the saddle which has honestly never give me problems! But I'm also considering trying b68
Warneral, i have to ask, why get a Brooks when you're happy with your saddle?
there's an old tenet, "if it isn't broke, don't fix it" that applies here.
If you have the money to burn, fine, I went down the same road as you (people told me I needed to replace my brooks with a "road bike saddle" and so i tried several before I went back to my beloved Brooks)
and you just end up with extra saddles. At least with these, you will be able to sell them.
I think soft tissue pain or numbing on short rides is the kiss of death for any saddle.
On the other hand (cheek?), sitbone pain with a new saddle, especially a hard Brooks, to me is good sign! First, it means your weight is being supported in the right area. Second, sitbone pain 'usually' fades and disappears over about a dozen rides. When I got my first Brooks, my sitbones were in excrutiating pain the first couple rides- I felt like I could hardly sit at all for several days. I was going to give it up, but my DH said that was normal and it would go away. What do you know, he was right! Over about 10 more rides it faded and then my saddle experience was bliss. :p Now my butt is always at least semi- broken in, so every Spring I only need about 3 or 4 'break in rides' to get over any sitbones soreness for the year.
To me, sitbone pain after riding just means the saddle is fitting well and more time on it will make it perfect.
Soft tissue pain and numbness will not fade away on a saddle, but will likely get worse.
Okay. As mentioned elsewhere, I am having a problem finding a comfortable saddle for my road bike because my weight is more on the rami than on the ischial tuberosities. Every saddle I've tried has been wide enough to support my sit bones (~120 mm center to center, ~135-140mm outside to outside) but still leaves me with the feeling that the rami are bruised.
I don't think my posture is all that aggressive -- I don't ride in the drops and my saddle is about the same height as the handlebars. But still, most of the weight is not on the ITs.
So, will a Brooks solve this problem?
Thanks very much for your input.
It could but it doesn't answer the question as to WHY you're putting your weight on your rami instead of on your ischial tuberosities. I guess an experiment would be to 'tuck tail', consciously tucking your pelvis and sitting on your ITs... seeing what that does to the rest of your posture. If your stem is too long/handlebars too far forward, you could be compensating by rocking your pelvis forward to reach. There should be a gentle kyphoid curve to your back when you're in proper position, and you should (theoretically, anyway) be using your core to keep yourself in that relaxed-elbows, kyphoid-curved, pelvis-tucked position.
Brooks could encourage you to sit on your ITs if only because if you tipped the saddle up and it didn't have a cutout, and you tried to rest your weight forward, you'd be singing soprano in adult language.
The up-on-rami seated position is generally for those who have absolutely no recourse because their handlebars are SO much lower than their saddle, like on this bike:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3063/...f8884bf7d6.jpg
I hope that helps.
The posture you describe is very uncomfortable for me.
I keep my back flat and lean forward from my hips. This is more comfortable for my back, neck and shoulders.
Mimi I'm just coming back to this post but you are totally right and I've been asking myself the same question LOL. I bought it for my b-day present b/c I drool over them when I see them on other bikes in the city. Also b/c so many people seem to love them and they last forever.
I think that Lisa's post is encouraging. I probably would have the same sitbone pain after any saddle in the spring. These ARE my first 50mi of the year outdoors :) I think I'll give it a little more time. Seeing that I got it from wallbike, I thought it was worth a try.
I got a new bike so that I would *not* have to do that. And my trainer recommends against it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muirenn
Anyway it looks like a Brooks would not help me. Thanks.
OMG Kit that photo of that bike is too ludicrous! Looks incredibly uncomfortable, not to mention dorky! (hope I'm not insulting anyone) Looks like some should be riding a unicycle and pedaling it with their hands, standing on their head. lol!
As others have described, tuck in your tummy, tip your tailbone down so that your weight shifts onto sitbones instead of pubic bone. Some riders get lazy and let their back sag like a swayback horse and then put all their weight on their hands to hold them up. Get your weight distributed more back on your butt and your feet, it will strengthen your core.
Try to envision that you are 'walking' on your bike instead of rolling along like you are rolling dough with a rolling pin in your hands. That mental shift helps me when i catch myself getting lazy onto my hands.
I went out on a short 12 miler today and didn't feel the saddle - though the riding pants I was wearing were too slippery. I think I have just been having an adjustment period with spring time + new saddle but time will tell!
in that case it really sounds like your new bike may be too big for you? I hope not. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by ny biker
No, the new bike is not too big. I am working with my bike fitter. He is adamant that I do not want to curve my back in the way you guys are describing.
So, thanks but no thanks.
I always tell my folks that if we experiment and do something that seems to work, but that later in the real world causes them pain or distress - I want them to come back PDQ! If it hurts, it obviously is the wrong thing and I want to make it right.
Get ahold of your fitter and tell him about your problem. He knows from his training that with the bars even with your saddle and you up on the flats there is no way you should be on the rami, and he can help you figure out what is up.
But you have to let him know that something has gone wrong with your position! Don't be shy! Everyone who has had bike fit training knows pelvic anatomy and the dangers of improper placement, and they don't have any problem talking about pelvic pains and personal bits and other embarrassing stuff. (I get to talk about incontinence and sexual problems from pelvis/saddle interactions with nearly every other fit, it's just another day at the office...)
Trust me, he'd rather know something was wrong, and he won't be upset nor think it's criticism. Often things can look very different during a fit session than they do out in the real world. People shift around, postures change, it can be very different. It's all good data!
I am very shy about discussing such things with men, but my fitter made it very easy to discuss all of this when I was going through my saddle fit problems last summer. He knew how to refer to various bits of my anatomy in a way that wouldn't embarrass me - he was quite professional about it all. I am just mentioning this as the experience of someone who has had significant issues in this department. He can't help you unless he knows.
ny I can relate - I need to keep the top of my back straight or I get all kinds of neck pain and upper shoulder pain. It isn't natural for me to do that. My fitter said not to suck in my gut but I find if I do suck it in and pull my lower body more perpendicular to the ground I'm getting the sit bones where they need to be and having a straighter upper back. He also said to work on my forward flexibility as that yoga pose appears to help. I need to definitely work on that as my small mileage this spring has me with the stiffness in the neck and shoulders again!
I went into detail about the location of the pain I'm getting from my current saddle as well as some other saddles I've tried. I bent my finger with my knuckle pointing down and said -- if this is the ischial tuberosity, this part here is where it hurts.
He checked some things, moved the saddle a few times, I commented on how each move felt, and he wound up lowering it. If that doesn't help, I'll go back for more adjustments, and if needed we'll talk about other saddles to try.
Thanks
Butt update: (P.S. I loved typing that.) My B-17 sits happily on my LHT. After a year and a half I'm finally wearing indentions in the leather that tell me I do "fit". I finally got that the B-17 likes to be tilted upwards slightly and not level at all for me. If you look at it on my Surly you might think I get gouged, but I can't even feel it. Sometimes when I ride I check to see if the nose is still there. LOL.
So glad to hear the saddle works well for you! I'm about to put a new B67 on my Trek Pure. It is right by the bike, but I've been sick and too lazy to actually turn the few bolts it would take to install.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muirenn
Yup , i'm the same- my Brooks are just right when the nose is tilted ever so slightly UP, not level. My husband's are the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by moderncyclista
Go figure- everyone says the nose has to be perfectly level....but when we do that we are uncomfortable and keep sliding forward- ick!
DO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU! :p
my b68 tips up a little too. I never would have thought that'd be as comfortable as it is.
Yeah, it's such a funny thing, isn't it? Go figure!
but ain't it great that we're comfy! :D
Sure is, Lisa. :D
Rode the Kona 29er for a really long rails-to-trails ride a couple of weeks ago and decided it has to have a B67! I don't ever want to be in that kind of pain again. I'm going to save the MTB saddle on its own seatpost for times when we decide to do aggressive downhill riding, but this bike is usually used for long trail rides. The Brooks on my commuter is perfect, and my position is similar on the 29er. I rarely wear bike shorts on the Brooks and I never have any pain, no matter how long the ride. I had sitbone pain for the first few rides a couple of years ago when I first got it. Then the pain went away and never came back. I ride year-round so I don't have those "break in" rides at the beginning of the season.
Deb
It's amazing how comfie the Brooks saddle is--even on a mtb. Say goodbye to those hot spots and sores from inferior saddles. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhillsbiker