Brooks Saddles

I would not trust it. We have a lot of old Brooks saddles in this house -- some came on old bikes, some we bought to put on old bikes -- and not one of them is safe or comfortable to ride. If a Brooks is treated well it can last a long time, but people don't sell old Brooks saddles that they are treating well, and once an old Brooks stops being cared for, they fall apart pretty quickly.

I had one that looked very much like that, except someone had dunked it in Neatsfoot oil so it was also slimy and gross right over the cracked leather, and on my second ride I was truly riding on the frame. It was miserable.

My husband had one that looked mostly fine, but it broke in the middle of a ride. It had been overtensioned and over-oiled, and the whole nose part of the leather just snapped off, leaving him to ride home standing up at 2 a.m. Kind of the wrong sort of Saturday night excitement!

have you greased that poor saddle? imho, i would do that and leave it on the bike. I don't know if you're actually planning on riding the bike, if you are, and
this saddle is too uncomfortable, i guess you had better replace it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DebW

I'm not joining the cult, but here are some pics of an old Brooks from a 1954 Raleigh three-speed that's sitting in my basement to be refurbished someday. ....Any thought on whether I should keep this with the refurbished bike or send it to the Brooks home in the sky?

---

The leather is shot. It's cracked all over the place, it's 52 years old, and besides- you can see the sitbone dents, meaning it formed decades ago to somebody ELSE'S butt shape! That would be like trying to wear someone else's decades-old dried up cracked leather shoes. I would keep it for "posteriority", and selling the old bike with its old saddle would be good to do, but if you plan on actually riding the bike after refurbishing it, I wouldn't want to ride on THAT saddle.

I might have to give up...

I am seriously lopsided on the bike and there are some noises my B67 makes that just aren't going away. I'm guessing that I'm putting a big twist into the saddle frame with every pedal stroke. (even the sit-bone dents are uneven)

Wrote to Bill at Wallingford, and he sent me an email back right away. Sounds like I've done all the right things, but with my riding style I might just need a different kind of seat frame. One that won't give as much under my lopsided butt.

So I'm looking at B17S and B72. Anyone able to compare either of those to a B67?

My measurements put me just able to maybe fit on a B17S (outside edges of the dents I put on the B67 is 145mm, paper trick puts me at 170-180mm, turtle trick is 155mm). That one doesn't need a seat sandwich and doesn't have any springs. It's 177mm wide, but only 245mm long.

The B72 has the same dimensions as the B67, but has double rails and less-flexible springs. I dunno if I wanna mess with any springs at all. Dunno if I wanna mess with a seat sandwich, either.

my B66 on my raleigh has a seat sandwich. It's no big deal really.. just doesn't fit the modern stuff I guess.


do you want to try my saddle saturday to see if mine is noisy for you too?

Thanks for the offer, I might do that!

My B67 is sooooo comfortable! I'd hate to give it up, but I might just need a sturdier frame.

Did Bill tell you that the B66/72 are sturdier than the B67? Because I have never heard that before ... the difference is really only how they fit on the seat post. We have all three. I ride a B67, although I use a different kind of seat sandwich on it because I am using it on an old-school seat post (Rivendell had it really cheap when I was looking for a new Brooks and I wanted the option of upgrading my seat post). My husband has a new B72for his Schwinn, and I think the B72 is an excellent saddle and if our streets were better I'd have bought one, but I am not sure if it is really any stronger than the B67. Less bouncy, yes, but it doesn't sound like that is your problem.

The saddle my husband broke was an older B72, and obviously we did not know it's history and it had been over-oiled, but it really looked fine and then, bam, the whole nose broke right off ... the leather and part of the metal frame.

What if instead of a B17S you got a Champion Flyer S? If too much of you is hanging off the frame of the saddle, that sounds like you need a narrower saddle? If you got that one you could still have the benefit of the springs. I am looking at the Champion Flyer/Champion Flyer S (not sure which one is right for my narrow butt) for my second commuter.

I need the width, cuz I've got fairly wide sit bones. I'm not in love with springs. My problem seems to be that I twist the frame when I pedal. (I have a goofy pelvis) Springs allow the frame to twist. Twisting is fine and comfy, but makes the frame ping and snap. Ping and snap make me crazy.

Bill's thinking was that the B17S might be too narrow, but wouldn't torque like the B67 because there aren't any springs.

The B72 has the stiffer "springs" so might not torque as badly as the B67 does, and would be the same width as the B67 I have now. Just wouldn't twist as much because the springs wouldn't give as much and allow the frame to twist under me. Bill thought there was a chance the B72 might work better.

Bill did NOT recommend the B66.

I'm leaning toward the B17S, because I just don't want to deal with springs of any sort or with a seat sandwich.

KnottedYet,
I have the B17S and really love it. I did not want a spring, I had no reason why, I just did not. I was worried I made the wrong decision, but I went with my gut. It feels wonderful. I hope you are able to find one that you do not feel under you. :-)

KnottedYet,
I'm not sure what kind of bike you have your B62 Brooks on, but my bike savvy DH told me something interesting the other day. He said you really only need springs if you are riding an upright position bike a lot, because your weight goes all straight down your spine onto your butt as you ride and bump along.
With a road bike, he said that your weight is distributed over your seat, feet, your flexing back, and your hands, therefore springs are not really needed on road bikes. Made a lot of sense to me.
He put the Brooks with springs on his hybrid with albatross handlebars. I have the B17S (spring-less) on my Rambouillet road bike, and he's putting a spring-less Brooks on his Rambouillet (when he gets it around Thanksgiving).

Hey KY

If its not raining I will have Ms Golighly with the Finesse and you're welcome to try it. I will bring Fred if it is wet with his, sigh, Fly.

Q

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quillfred

If its not raining I will have Ms Golighly with the Finesse and you're welcome to try it. I will bring Fred if it is wet with his, sigh, Fly.

Q

---

This message would sound pretty funny if it was not on a biking forum. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lisa S.H.

This message would sound pretty funny if it was not on a biking forum. :D

---

hee hee! That's for sure!

Knotted, I think this is your saddle. The new B68: same top as the B67 et al, but NO SPRINGS. That sounds like exactly what you need!

b68? hmm, that's new isn't it!

Yeah, and it sounds like they won't have it until the spring. But it might be exactly what Knotted needs to solve her problem.

well, it was waiting on the porch for me when i got home today from work!

that is one beautiful, sexy saddle! i'm in love!

i put it on the bike and took it for a very short spin. can anyone say "comfortable right out of the box"???????????????????????????????????

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

anyways, it's great! i had no mashing of girly bits, no pressure on girly bits, no pain, just sitting on my sit bones! damn, it's so nice to be able to ride and not think about the saddle and how uncomfortable it is!

i'll upload some photos to photobucket, as i tried to attach images to my message and it went poof! message gone.

i'm one happy camper. i didn't think that a leather saddle would look nice on my all carbon trek pilot, but damn, it looks good now that it's on there!!!!

karen.

Karen,
You got the B17S, right? That's my saddle too! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xeney

Knotted, I think this is your saddle. The new B68: same top as the B67 et al, but NO SPRINGS. That sounds like exactly what you need!

---

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

THAT'S IT! THAT'S WHAT I WANT! OH MY GAWD! IT'S PERFECT!!!!!

AAAAAAAAAHHH! why didn't Bill tell me about this?

AAAAAAAAAAH!!!! YES! YES! YESSSSSSSSS!

yes, i now have a b17s and i love it!

trying pics again:

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f7...sSaddle001.jpg

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f7...sSaddle002.jpg

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f7...sSaddle003.jpg

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f7...sSaddle007.jpg

Hey, you posted those photos on another forum yesterday, didn't you? I was showing them to my husband to convince him that a Brooks would not look stupid on his carbon fiber bike, because it looks so pretty on yours! But then he sat on the Team Pro I was trying to give him, and he said something to the effect of, "Hey, this Kool-Aid tastes funny," and he is not putting a Brooks on a road bike any time soon. Heh.

In happier news, I adjusted the Team Pro on my bike yesterday, getting it more cleanly level, and then rode for an hour on the trainer. It is a very hard saddle but when it's level I am not riding the rivets, so to speak. I had no pain at all, and I wasn't wearing bike shorts. No pain this morning, either. Can't say that for my Butterfly after an hour on the trainer.

I'm going to try it on the road this weekend. If it doesn't work out I will give up then while I can still sell it on eBay as a nearly-new saddle, because then I can use the money to buy a women's version. Is honey going to look dumb on Celeste? I saw a picture of one over on bikeforums.net and I thought it looked great, but my husband thinks it is going to look dumb on a black seat post. He may be right.

My next Brooks is going to be this one, though, because I just bought a new/old beater mixte for a second around-town bike. I need springs for pot holes but I will have a less upright position on the new bike than I do on my grocery-getter.

Great! Now start Proofhiding it a few times while you break it in. (No goopy oils!)
I hope it works for you- remember to give it a little time.

yeah, i posted them also on bikeforums.net on their "show us your brooks photos".

i totally forgot to order some proofide when i ordered the saddle :( i was thinking of going to a saddle shop/western store and seeing what they had as far as something with similar ingredients.

anyway, i just love it! i thought it wouldn't look good on my bike, but, hey, i think it looks really sweet!

thanks for all the advice/help and suggestions!

karen.

Okay, I have lost my mind, because I just bought my third Brooks. I bought one of Wallingford's used models off of ebay, a B17S. (Sorry if one of you was the person I outbid in the final seconds!) I just bought a new old road bike for around-town use (going to convert it to single-speed with moustache bars), and I wanted either a B17 or a Champion Flyer for it, and now if the Team Pro doesn't work out on my Bianchi I have a backup.

Sit bones are killing me recently.

Brook saddles the one that helps the most with that?

People don't understand why a plain "hard" leather saddle might be more comfortable to sit for hours on than a cushy foam saddle.
Here's the only way I can try to describe why:
If you were to take a couple of balls of dense foam rubber about the size of large eggs, and place them exactly under each sit bone, and then sit on those foam eggs on a chair for an hour, you would be in agony. If you removed those foam eggs and just sat on a smooth wooden chair whose seat was carved to the same shape as your butt, you would be perfectly comfortable sitting for an hour.

well put, Lisa

But if you are expecting that wooden chair to feel good after riding on it for 8 hours, you're fooling yourself.
You'll feel better on the brooks than the other saddle, but the wear and tear of 8 hours of riding, you WILL feel that.

and then again, when it's broken in, it will be EVEN BETTER...

i do love my brooks (plural)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mimitabby

i do love my brooks (plural)

---

Brookses? :D

Question for those of you who chose the B17S over the Team Pro S: why?

I have a friend who got a Team Pro S several years ago when I guess it looked as if Brooks was going out of business. But she never put it on her bike and now has offered it to me, at a severely reduced price, of course. So I said I'd give it a spin. Put it on my touring/everything else bike (get my Bianchi tomorrow!!!:eek:!!!), and then it started raining, so haven't had a chance to really try it out yet. But it seems that I can't jam it back far enough. So I checked out dimensions on the Wallingford site, looking for maybe a longer women's saddle, but they all look the same, lengthwise.

So, again, does the B17S offer any advantages over the Team Pro S, like, for example, maybe, length? Thanks!

I think the B17s is just wider and less expensive, not longer. Wallingford has them listed as the same length.

You might try a men's version, but I reached the conclusion that I just could not possibly get a Brooks saddle mounted far enough back on my bike, even with a seatpost with lots of offset. I did some googling and found that this is a pretty common problem. This is actually what prompted me to realize how badly my bike fits -- we put a men's Team Pro on my road bike, and I loved everything about the saddle except that I was literally climbing off the back of it trying to get into proper position. I am going to be able to make the bike fit okay, but not with a Brooks saddle. Major bummer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mimitabby

well put, Lisa

But if you are expecting that wooden chair to feel good after riding on it for 8 hours, you're fooling yourself.
You'll feel better on the brooks than the other saddle, but the wear and tear of 8 hours of riding, you WILL feel that.

---

Not true - my butt starts hurting at 15 hours in the saddle. ;)

V.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xeney

I think the B17s is just wider and less expensive, not longer. Wallingford has them listed as the same length.

You might try a men's version, but I reached the conclusion that I just could not possibly get a Brooks saddle mounted far enough back on my bike, even with a seatpost with lots of offset. I did some googling and found that this is a pretty common problem. This is actually what prompted me to realize how badly my bike fits -- we put a men's Team Pro on my road bike, and I loved everything about the saddle except that I was literally climbing off the back of it trying to get into proper position. I am going to be able to make the bike fit okay, but not with a Brooks saddle. Major bummer.

---

That's really too bad, Xeney--for you and me both. I had a sneaking suspicion that this was going to be the case--that I couldn't get the Brooks far enough back for my legs to be in the right position. But as usual, I thought, "Oh, it's just me--surely there's some way to make this work." And I may try looking for a seatpost with more offset. But I have my doubts. Oh well, back to saddle-shopping.:mad:

I had this same problem, but found the Alpha Q Pro Carbon seatpost has a lot of setback and works well with my Brooks Finesse. BTW, my selcolf seatpost has even more setback, but I couldn't get the saddle angle correct on it so I don't recommend it. I am going to evaluate a kalloy uno aluminum post on my commuter soon, and I'll let you know how it looks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mimitabby

well put, Lisa

But if you are expecting that wooden chair to feel good after riding on it for 8 hours, you're fooling yourself.
You'll feel better on the brooks than the other saddle, but the wear and tear of 8 hours of riding, you WILL feel that.

---

True, but riding on a leather Brooks is probably closer to riding on horseback on a good leather saddle than to riding on a wooden chair! (picturing a wooden chair tied on top of a horse now....)
Yes, I'm sure most people would feel some discomfort after sitting on ANYTHING for 8 hours! :eek:

I went 52 miles on my Brooks B67 this weekend. Even though the noise bugged me, my butt didn't.

If I wasn't so worried that my torquing the frame so hard when I pedal was gonna bust it, I'd just put up with the noise. The comfort is amazing. The thought of breaking in a B68 (no springs) is less than stellar, but worth it to have this comfort without the torquing frame.

I bought some real grease, we'll see if that works better than the T-9 at controlling the noise. I'm giving it another month before I give up.

Man, this is such a comfy saddle!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl

I had this same problem, but found the Alpha Q Pro Carbon seatpost has a lot of setback and works well with my Brooks Finesse. BTW, my selcolf seatpost has even more setback, but I couldn't get the saddle angle correct on it so I don't recommend it. I am going to evaluate a kalloy uno aluminum post on my commuter soon, and I'll let you know how it looks.

---

Thanks for the tip, TG--I'll check it out. I really wanna love the Brooks.

My Waterford has a seatpost on it with an "RT" or "TR" (in a shield shape)logo, and my Brooks ends up way forward on it compared to my Kona's seatpost. Lots of wiggle room. I also like that the tilt is managed by where on a curve you place the seat. Very elegant.

I admire simple engineering.

Very happy with my 2 new Brooks saddles. :-D

Saddle #1: B.67S for my Trek 7100 Hybrid. I got the bike (used) a couple of months ago after my first ride in 6 years on my old Viscount road bike was so uncomfortable. The saddle it came with was comfortable for around the block, but was too narrow and I didn't like the rotational play in the suspension seatpost. The Brooks was comfortable from the outset. I've had to adjust the seat height a couple of times as it's broken in, and I think I may need to tighten the saddle screw a hair. My poor butt had been sore for two weeks following that initial 10-11 mile ride on the Viscount, but I was able to ride 14 miles (and later 15 miles, and 22 miles) on the Trek with the Brooks with no pain at all to speak of.

I've got one spot on the left where the edge of my underwear rides up and makes a lump (it does that annoyingly even off the bike, if I just wear snug-ish jeans), but as soon as I get off the bike, that discomfort disappears.

Saddle #2: B.17S to replace the 29-year-old Avocet Racing W-II on my 29-year-old Viscount Gran Sport. Wow, what a difference. I don't know if it's really just the saddle, or if it's also partly the fact that now I've done some riding with the other bike so I'm a little bit stronger, plus my first ride was significantly slower - hence less weight on the pedals and more on the butt for that first ride. The b.17S is a good bit harder out of the box than the b.67S, and slipperier (the b.67S has a texture to it), but one dose of Proofide solved the slipperiness, and either the Proofide or the previous two 2-mile rides or my slightly improved condition or simply the length of the ride meant that on my real test ride yesterday (12 miles), it wasn't too hard at all. It felt great!

Rebeccah

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rebeccah

Very happy with my 2 new Brooks saddles. :-D

Saddle #1: B.67S for my Trek 7100 Hybrid.

I've got one spot on the left where the edge of my underwear rides up and makes a lump (it does that annoyingly even off the bike, if I just wear snug-ish jeans), but as soon as I get off the bike, that discomfort disappears.


Rebeccah

---

Hey Rebeccah, ditch the underwear! get some good bike shorts and no underwear. those seams are harder than your skin.
glad you like your brooks!

Decided to stick with my B67, even though it still snaps and pings. It's perfectly breaking in. The noise is just the price I have to pay for supreme comfort.

And I suppose if the springs and frame didn't torque under my lopsided hip, it wouldn't be so comfy. A solid frame might be quieter, but less compliant.

Plus the B67 looks so cool on Flossie! (it looked cool on the Kona, too)