My B17S doesnt seem wide to me at ALL! In fact, I wouldn't mind it being a bit wider! You see, I TOLD you I have a wide pelvis... :cool:
Printable View
My B17S doesnt seem wide to me at ALL! In fact, I wouldn't mind it being a bit wider! You see, I TOLD you I have a wide pelvis... :cool:
Lisa, you could be a good candidate for the B68. 210mm wide, lots of support and room to shift around during a long ride.
It's supposed to be coming out in the spring/early summer.
And how many mm wide is the B17S? Do you have it handy?
Lisa- why do you want your saddle wider? Does it not suport your sit bones? In my experience I like the narrowest saddle that STILL supports my sit bones, cuz otherwise I find that it is too narrow in the middle region and rubs my thighs, since it has to gradually move from being wide in back to narrow in front, and if its too wide in the middle I get thigh chafing. Obviously a saddle that is too narrow to support your sitbones is even more problematic, cuz then your pubic bone is supporting your weight (like on my butterfly, been there done that, not good). I am still really happy with my Brooks Finesse. In fact, I already bought a second one for my commuter and the second one was comfy right out of the box once I had already figured out how I like her set up (nose just a tad down, right fore-aft position). If you want more support in the rear you could try playing with moving it forward. I noticed on my brooks that regardless of where I put it fore-aft, my KOPS was the same, that is I would sit on it to center my knee over the axis of the pedal rotation, its just I would be sitting on a different part of the saddle depending on the fore-aft I had set up, so I experimented until it felt the best. I think that's less true of cushy saddles that you can't really slide around on. -e
Lisa - the B17S is 177mm wide.
My sit bones are about 180mm outer edge to outer edge, so I doubt a B17S would be as comfy for me as the B67. (I've got the wide version of sit bones)
The B66-67-68 have a very abrupt change from wide part to nose. I'm one of those folks whose hip angle makes their thighs chafe like mad on a "pear" shaped seat, so the "T" shape of the B67 is heavenly. No chafing.
The nose of the B67 is the same width as the nose of the B17 and it's relatives. Very narrow.
Trisket,Quote:
Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl
Thanks, that is some good information!
I am fine with my B17S as of now- it's pretty comfy for me. It's already got my sit bone dents in it and is broken in after 3 months of riding it. I do notice however that those dents are on the VERY EDGES of the seat area- they almost overlap the edges where the under frame runs, and I often feel as though my bones are on the very edges of the saddle from side to side. I wouldn't mind the saddle being just a tad wider so my weight wouldn't be partly on the saddle frame, but I'll stick with this one for now- it's pretty comfortable. Like Knotted, I have quite wide-apart sit bones. ;)
That was exactly what prompted my husband's comment when he saw the B17S: "Women don't need to steer?"Quote:
I use the long nose to help control the bike.
It will probably be okay for me on a townie, but if not I'll list it here in the For Sale section. (It was one of Wallingford's returned items, I bought it from them on eBay.)
Rode 10.4 miles today, and I never thought about the saddle at all. I haven't ridden that much since I got my Brooks so it isn't broken in, but it feels great, anyway. Other than sometimes shifting myself back to the very back of the seat occasionally to get more power or feel more comfortable, I just rode.
I went by the post office to pick up my mail -- I always take my bike in with me. When I was putting my mail in my bar bag, a guy walked by and said, "Nice bike -- great saddle!"
I thanked him. (I'd seen him mailing something in a bike box and he'd said it was a bike frame insured for thirteen-fifty. "Thirteen dollars and fifty cents," the clerk asked?" "Thirteen hundred and fifty dollars," he answered.)
I wondered if he worked for a LBS; shoulda asked.
That's exactly my experience with the Pro (I think it has the same measurements that the B17S does). I'm wearing away at the rivets. I wish they would make the B17 regular or the Pro just a tiny bit wider.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa S.H.
Hi. So I'm looking to buy a B-17 saddle for a new (old) bike for my girlfriend's birthday. I'm trying to decide between the standard and women's versions. I've read quite a few pages of entries here, but I was hoping for a little more guidance. My girlfriend's small with fairly narrow hips...is the B-17 preferable to avoid chafing...or, and I feel slightly awkward writing this :), but is the B-17S still preferable because it will ensure that even less pressure will be put on the...soft...bits (as I've seen them called here). I guess my question is: for a girl with narrow hips, will the B-17 provide sufficient width to avoid rubbing the...bits... :)
Thanks,
Brian
Width of hips has absolutely nothing to do with width of sit-bones.
Length of nose has more to do with how she likes to steer and control the bike, and nothing to do with soft tissues.
Basically, you are toast trying to buy her a saddle just as you would be toast trying to buy her a pair of shoes.
Tell her what you want to buy her, show her the threads about sit-bone measurement, ask her how she likes to control the bike, THEN buy her the saddle that meets her needs.
If you really want this to be a surprise, buy her a B68 (not the B68S, which is the "short" women's version) from www.wallbike.com with the 6 month return policy. Show her the birthday present, shriek "TA-DA!", collect the thanks, and THEN go through the whole measurement process. Send back the B68 if it's uncomfortable, and order what sounds best to HER.
Lots of information here on the B17 vs the B17S. Just checking my understanding that the only real difference between the two is that the B17 has less of a nose - so less "T" shape. I am currently debating which one will be my entry into the non-stock saddlery world.
So far I seem to like the WSD saddle on my Trek 7.6, but I am hesitant to base a purchase on that as the longest ride I've had on that bike to date is 12 miles... I am thinking however that might be a good reason to start with the B17. I will be calling Wallingford early next week :)
The B17 is a wide pear.
The B17S is the same pear shaped saddle with a shorter nose. The transition area (the one that chafes if you need a T shape or feels too abrupt if you need a pear) is the same.
There's a nice picture on the wallbike site that shows the saddles in comparison from a top view.
T or Pear refers to the transition from sit to nose, not length of nose.
If your measuring guy was accurate with 110mm for your center-to-center, then you will probably be happy with a B17. If you don't like it, you have 6 months to send it back to wallbike.com
Thanks - I am going to get re-measured at this other LBS just to be safe.Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
The B17S is basically shorter in length than the regular B17 If I remember correctly, the seat part is the same width.
I didnt find the two styles to be much different in terms of pressure on the 'girl parts', but I found the B17S to be annoying in that the shorter rails underneath didn't allow me to push the saddle back as far as I wanted to get feeling centered on my bike, weight wise.
I started with the B17S, then switched to the longer B17 which i could set back better. Then my hips were just too wide for it and I switched to the B68, which is perfect for me.
I'd suggest if she has narrow hips to get a regular (men's) B17. The nose is not any weird thing as to cause 'girl pressure'- it was no problem for me at all even on 60 mile rides.