Printable View
Has anyone seen this saddle live and in person yet? Selle Italia has a ladies SLR saddle that looks sporty and racy with a 155mm width and a HUGE cutout. I can't find a direct link, but go to http://www.selleitalia.com/eng/index.html and then go to Products--Road--SLR--SLR Lady Gel Flow.
Here: I pilfered a screen capture:
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...008_114745.jpg
It's totally different from their other ladies' saddles... I'm really intrigued, but can't find it for sale *anywhere*.
Bummer...only 155mm wide.
If it any consolation, I decided I really wanted to try the Topeak Allay, but was queasy about using Cross Lake (an Amazon retailer that sells fishing gear and bicycle saddles....yes, I'm paranoid and yes, others have had luck, but sometimes I just can't trust). Anyway, I set my LBS on it. Their initial response was "No problem"; right now they're running out of sales reps to try. If they succeed, they'll definitely have earned the markup.
From what I'm seeing (and maybe it is just wishful thinking), there seems to be a concerted effort in the saddle industry to try to understand and make a better saddle. There is a lot of innovation and concepts are being expanded--the next couple of years could prove interesting. Or maybe, I'm just looking hard for a new saddle and so I'm just noticing it.
Wow, that would be awesome if only the T-shape was more pronounced, if it narrowed down "faster"... but in its current state it wouldn't be comfortable for me. 155 would be too wide, too. But I like the wide cutout, and it doesn't look bad at all!!
I'm thinking this saddle might be just right for me. DH rides the men's SLR gel flow and it seems like a good compromise between too much padding and none. Also 155mm happens to be the ideal width for me. I've been using the Terry Butterfly. I don't have any real problems with it, but it just feels so darn bulky, and I think I'd do well with something a little less spongy.
Oh yeah, and it also comes in black apparently.
I'll put it in my que :rolleyes:
Me, too! Many more T-shape options are what I am waiting to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grog
I bought a $50 Falcon X from the Terry site this week. Just got it today and put it on the bike. We'll see.
I did get the Allay through Cross Lake and had no problem at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorn
Man, sometimes I wish I could design saddles. Or maybe just advise a saddle designer.
I've been doing crazy amounts of research on the physiological effects of saddle use, and I'm ready to tear my hair out over how UNstandardized the studies are! (generally)
All these nice pedantic conclusions in these nice scientific papers, but did anyone (ANYONE!?!?!) actually *measure* the sit bones of the women in the studies? (in the few that even had women in the study) Did they check that the saddle top shape (pear vs T) matched the hip joint angles of the rider? Did they actually determine if the saddle *fit* before they did pressure and friction studies?
<Knot gnashes her teeth and invites the gentle reader to make their own assumptions on that score>
The director of our pelvic rehab program has been very nice about letting me throw my weight around when contacting bike companies for saddle info. And she's been very tolerant about me running to her and ranting about bike saddles. I love my job...
BTW: I found it very interesting that the "best" saddle (least compressive to soft tissues) in one study was an unpadded leather saddle that was wide enough to completely support the ishial tuberosities. The researchers were surprised by that, and even said in their paper that their results were surprising. Of course, this was a study designed by men, carried out by men, and the subjects were men. They could've saved a #$%-load of money and just asked a bunch of WOMEN about compressive saddles! We knew that part already... sheesh. (I, of course, rather smugly assume the "wide unpadded leather saddle" they tested was a Brooks B17.)
Not to thread-jack (OK, to thread-jack), but, Knot, what about aero? I think the reason several of us drooled on this saddle was because of the generous cutout.
When riding in a touring style, the Brooks makes perfect sense. Support on the IshTub's with a little give. But, drop aero and you are now supporting with 3 points of contact--the IshTub's and the ?pubis? (sorry, anatomy was long ago). At that point, it just doesn't seem that the Brooks will "get out of the way". And, a couple of posts have indicated just this. Wouldn't this imply a different saddle requirement? Or, am I incorrect in the 3 points of contact?
I'm not Brooks-bashing, just saddle manufacturer-bashing. Not all women are touring and not all women ride aero just as all women aren't put together exactly the same. Check the responses to this thread--several of us liked the looks of the saddle, but then we played The Three Bears--too wide, too narrow, oh, just right.
But, I'm just a rider who today is cranky because she has a big chafing spot from her non-T-shaped saddle, but which she rides not because it is right, but because it is currently the lesser of all evils.
I'm happy with mine on the Pilot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starfish
I slapped the Raleigh seat on the mixte last night. I know it's not adjusted correctly but still doesn't feel good. May just go with another Falcon X.
They still have some $50 ones at the Terry site.Quote:
Originally Posted by zencentury
I spoke to a rep (Nick Gibson) from www.pronetcycling.com at the Tour of Calif. who had this saddle there on display, and he said it would be available sometime in April 08. It looked very promising (for my preferences) with not too much padding and a nice, flat profile. They also have a Diva model that is more performance (comfort) oriented.
Yay! Thanks suz... I guess I'll look for it in April. I really think this saddle might be the one. I'll have to ride like a speed demon from now until then to justify a new saddle purchase to DH.
I couldn't find any studies that *really* looked at women in aero. The studies I'm gnashing my teeth over drive me crazy because they don't take that stuff into consideration!Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorn
The study with what I (smug in my limited knowlege of leather saddles) assume involved a Brooks was done on MEN and didn't deal with cut-outs or aero. The study didn't even specify the position the men were taking on the saddles... see how poorly this stuff is being done?
(please note, I was talking about what the RESEARCH STUDY found, which was better penile blood flow on a "unpadded leather saddle."
Any woman could have told them that too much padding cuts down blood flow, and too narrow cuts down blood flow. And I was being grumpy at other studies I'm finding, which are designed very poorly when they involve women and saddle shape and fit.)
I didn't criticize the saddle that started this thread at all. I was raging about POORLY DESIGNED RESEARCH STUDIES that involve women, or don't even take into account women's experiences.
You are saddle-manufacturer bashing, I was saddle-researcher bashing.
Edit: I'm talking about peer-reviewed and published in a scientific journal type studies here, not in-house research.
Edit again: According to Trek, cutouts make no difference in comfort or performance, which is why their new "Inform" performance saddle line has no cut outs in either the men's or women's. That is in-house research, and you can bet I want to get ahold of that, and I want a saddle to play with. I know cut-outs make a difference to a lot of TE'ers, so where did Trek get the info that made them decide to nix cut-outs? How was the study designed? Was it standardized for pelvic and saddle parameters? How about soft tissue bulk? And were the studies done on women, or just on men?
^ The Treks use dual density padding and a "channel" rather than a cutout to account for soft tissue. They are going to offer some pretty nice women's sizes- I think in the 170mm+ range- without adding a ton of extra bulk like a typical wide (except for Brooks) women's saddle.
I am waiting for my LBS to get one in so I can try it when the Selle San Marco that I'm getting in the mail today doesn't work (yeah, I've lost all hope).
I did hear that the delay in release for the women's line of Informs was because the initial design got horrible reviews from testers.
What? Trek420? Oh, that must make for interseting dinner conversation...oh, wait, that's Trek Bicycles. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
But seriously, Knot, I hope you did not read any negative towards you, your research, or your explanations. This is a topic near and dear to my heart...ok, tush. These boards have a wealth of information on the topic (thanks to wonderful people like you), but like all good information, it leaves me wanting more, more, more! Every time you post good information, I end up with more questions.
Some day when you perform the definitve study (using, of course TE as your research victim pool :rolleyes: ), I want to read it, even if I won't understand 1/2 of it.
I have to admit that I do periodically go out to the Wallingford site and look longingly at Brooks saddles for the shape and the width, but then I keep riding my SMP for the cutout--being able to pee after a ride is more important to me than "pantyline" chafing. Yes, I should try the Brooks, but, memories of riding the non-cutout saddle stay with me and bias my initial opinion.
Of course, I want the perfect saddle. But, I know that what works for me will not work for the next woman. And, if we want that woman to ride, be it sitting up on a commuter or a hybrid, tilted for road, or aero for the triathlon, she needs the saddle for her. It sure would be nice if saddle manufacturers would stand up and notice that we aren't all built the same and don't ride the same. Sigh...I dream of a perfect world.
Thanks for your continued information and, of course, your research into the research. You're teaching us all.
I think we should use our power to get some real research done! Or find someone who will design saddles based on our experiences!
Was it Mimi who suggested we start our own saddle company?
The Trek rep I talked to said the women's Inform was going up to a size 160mm. I'd certainly like to see more than two women's sizes (150mm and 160mm) if they are going to aim at a wide range of women. (hey, the men's Inform comes in THREE sizes.... uh-oh, do I sound bitter and hostile?:rolleyes:)
Hee hee, I've got a little evil giggle that the first design testers gave the women's Inform poor reviews. Just cuz the pelvic rehab goddess at my clinic was aghast at the info I came back with about the Inform. She'll be happy to hear she might've been right. ;)
On another thread someone chastised us (politely, of course--this is TE) for complaining and not doing. Perhaps, at a minimum, it is time to start a TE letter writing compaigns to the saddle manufacturers.
Point them out to the board's "research", which, I suspect rivals theirs and covers a heck of broader spectrum of the population. I mean, we have a wealth of women who not only can tell you where the ischial tuberiosities are, but why they care and how far apart theirs are. They can tell you what they look for in a saddle and they can even tell you what they don't look for, but what they know works for other women and what is just a plain stupid feature.
Hmmmm....and, perhaps, we should suggest they come *here* to recruit for saddle trials. This is an opinionated board!
I just ordered one of these from beyondbikes.
They sent me an e-mail today saying they were delayed a bit. I expect they'll be in stock in April.
http://www.beyondbikes.com/bb/SearchResult.asp
Thanks! So glad you found it listed somewhere... Wow, $156! That is definitely going to take some convincing with DH... :(
Here's the full link: http://www.beyondbikes.com/bb/ItemMa...1&MatrixType=1
Tell your shop to call Todson for the Allay saddles
800-213-4561.
They are the distributor of them as of now...
There looks to be 5 different models btw..
Thanks much! I sent him email.Quote:
Originally Posted by Running Mommy
No problem... I saw an ad for them recently in our trade magazine, so I pulled it out to see who was distributing them. I've never heard of Todson?? But hey- I'm a newbie to the biz...:D
I think the 156.00 is a mistake. The main page says 117. on sale. Plug in Diva and see.
Ah... We are looking at two different saddles. The Diva and the SLR Lady are different. Slightly different shape, different weight...
Here are the two links:
Diva: http://www.beyondbikes.com/bb/ItemMa...2&MatrixType=1
SLR Lady: http://www.beyondbikes.com/bb/ItemMa...1&MatrixType=1
You are Right Rij73. Now I'm really confused. I went to Selle's web site and they say the
SLKis called the Diva. But the picture at Beyond doesn't show Diva printed on the front. The dimensions are different too. The web site says the SLK is 145 wide. Hmmm. Maybe I'll call Beyond and see if they know.
Thanks for the links.
It looks like they have two versions of the SLK Lady Gel flow- the standard "winged" one and the Diva. Which, to be confusing, are not both listed under the SLK category :confused:
The SLR Lady Gelflow is listed under SLR saddles.
Off topic:
I wish they made an all-carbon saddle in something over 131mm wide. Like 155.. .with a little bit of a channel... and a narrow nose... I'd be all over that :D
>After achieving unexplored results in the anatomic study of ladies saddles<
WTH? They achieved results without exploring them? They studied the anatomy of saddles, but not of ladies? :confused::rolleyes::D Knot, I see what you're so annoyed about!
I wonder if TE will carry this saddle? I'm thinking about swapping out the Specialized saddle (Jett ???) on my Seven.....
Yeah, I had a WTF moment with that line as well...Quote:
Originally Posted by OakLeaf
They said they might, but that because of the weak dollar right now they have to be very selective about the European products they carry...Quote:
Originally Posted by Velobambina
I just visited with the owner of my LBS and she said that she talked to the head sales guy from Selle Italia and asked if they'd heard of any of the research saying that a channel could be better for women than a cutout (personally, I haven't heard it, but I haven't really looked, either). She said that the guy got really defensive and proclaimed that large cutout saddles were their best sellers, so they didn't plan on changing! She tried to get the point across that she wasn't talking about what sells best, rather what may actually work better, but he wouldn't really listen at that point :rolleyes:
The research on Trek's end about cut-outs making no difference was in-house. Which is a bummer, cuz it's proprietary and I can't get at it. I know the names of the researchers, but can't get the goods. Pooey. (I think one of the researchers was doing it as part of his PhD thesis, and I'm trying to do an end-run by contacting his university to get a copy of the thesis... we'll see how that goes.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrea
Wonder if I could get me and my sits-bones hired by Trek to work in their women's saddle division. (hey, I met a few big wigs at the seminar in San Fran, dontcha think they want cute lil' me working for them? Just don't let 'em know I'm really a cantankerous rabble-rouser! ;))
Yes! That would be great... Then all of us TE'ers would have someone working for us on the inside. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
ETA: I think university libraries always keep a copy of every thesis written at the school. You could probably get it via inter-library loan especially if you have any kind of academic affiliation.
Um, I might be able to find this since (I think) the work was done at UW. I'm out of town this week on spring break but if you want I can ask around...Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
Yes, please! I don't have my info here at home, but it was done at UWis in the bioengineering (?) department. It was a student project funded by Trek. I'm hoping it was part of a thesis so I can at least get the thesis. If it was in a thesis, it should be in the library and open info.
I have the faculty advisor's name and the two student's names, but that stuff is at work. I'll PM it. One of the students was James Potter, and he's on a published paper about pelvic motion during pedalling. I got that fine, but can't find the student project where they looked at weightbearing.
(interesting thing is that the paper on pelvic motion concludes that women have greater anterior pelvic tilt than men when pedalling - which would lead one to conclude that women NEED a cutout, since they're on the anterior structures more. But I also wonder if they set the women up according to their unique anatomy and flexibility on the test bike, or just by the numbers. Done by the numbers, a woman would be on the bike with a virtual "too long" top-tube, which would force her into anterior pelvic tilt. I am too skeptical.)
Well, I think the history of medical and sports research, regarding outcomes for women, indicates that a certain amount of skepticism is in order. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet