[QUOTE=Biciclista;516237]Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronica
This one is actually the SLK. It's 145 mm - plenty wide for my sitbones and I don't hit the saddle with the inside of my thigh as as I pedal like I did with the Finesse.
Veronica
Printable View
[QUOTE=Biciclista;516237]Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronica
This one is actually the SLK. It's 145 mm - plenty wide for my sitbones and I don't hit the saddle with the inside of my thigh as as I pedal like I did with the Finesse.
Veronica
Veronica, you have a saddle that you love and it fits you. You should be overjoyed. I know you put thousands of miles on it. Enjoy.
Don't worry about those of us who are in unbearable pain on similar saddles.
BTW, you can see some great pear shaped saddles in that JPG I posted above.
That's what's so great about cycling, everybody is different. There's a perfect saddle out there for every butt ;) :p :rolleyes:
:D Making a butt print helps a lot with sizing, but I think shape is more about the motion of your legs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muirenn
Really, 3-D printing is very far advanced right now, and saddle shells would be a perfect application. I'm betting the day isn't far off when we'll be able to go to a bike shop, sit on a machine and pedal for a while, and have a custom saddle within a week.
I realized that people may be getting hung up on the language, since it is a matter of gradation, and after all, a pear has a sort of T-shape.
So how about thinking of it as T vs. wedge, like that Terry VLX or this Cobb?
http://www.cobbcycling.com/images/v-flow_dimensions.jpg
That would be very, very cool!Quote:
Originally Posted by OakLeaf
Glad I'm not the only one. I see pears in everything, even the Brooks in the first post. The only ones that don't look like pears to me (much) are things like this, and they look like spoons to me. Or am I just strange?
Nope...not strange at all. I think they look like spoons too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Owlie
I found it!!!
This is for Veronica, I found the picture I posted when we last had this conversation in Feb of 2007! Hooray! (I thought it was lost forever...)
Look closely at the two saddles. Both fit me. The one on the left has a cutout, a wide nose, a wide (pear or wedge, however you want to think of it) transition, and forward edges to the "cheeks" that curve as they go out, which further emphasize a gradual transition.
The one on the right has a narrow nose, a narrow abrupt transition, and even the forward edges of the "cheeks" are almost straight angled lines, further emphasizing an abrupt transition to the sit zone.
I know it's hard to get out of binary "black and white" thinking, but pear and T are gradations. One person's pear (in my case, the saddle on the left which chafed the ever lovin' heck out of me) is another person's T. (compare my Serfas Niva to the saddle Oakleaf posted. Can you see how my Serfas Niva is a T compared to that saddle?)
By the way, due to artifacts of the light and how I was standing when I took the picture, the clearest parts of the saddle images are to the left as you view them. (which would be the right sides of the saddles as you would sit on them.)
There is an imprint line along the edge of the top surface of the Brooks, and the skirt is visible under that. The saddle skirt is vertical, even though you can see it in the picture. The Niva doesn't have a distinct line along the edge of the top surface, but the contrast with the white wall isolates it nicely. The skirt of the Niva has confusing white racing strips on it, ignore them and just look at the other side of the saddle.
ETA: Awww, look, you can see my toesies in the bottom right corner! Aren't they cute? :)
Awwww :)
Re: saddles in pic in post #27
Even if the one on the left were as wide as the one on the right, I'm sure I'd chafe, because my bones would sink in rather than perch on top like they do on a Brooks.
Maybe I could fit my sit bones with pointe shoes like a butt ballerina!
:eek::D:D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by malkin