paging Brooks 'people', B17...

OK, I have been sifting through the search function on TE about Brooks. I'm thinking about trying one in my saddle hunt. Couple questions that don't jump off the page at me in the thread sifting...

The mens B17 is slightly narrower, and longer than the womens, the B17 S (s for short).

I believe it was BleeckerSt Girl who gave me the tip that the women's short version does not work so well for some ladies, even though it's suppose to be a ladies saddle. The shorter length is an issue? From what I read, this is due to less adjustability with sliding rails back and forth. OK, that makes sense if you need that option, more room.

Is there any other reason besides adjustment factors that the ladies short version is not (for lack of a better word, sorry:rolleyes:) as good as the mens version?

My last hesitation is that I read comments that a Brooks was "ok" as long as your riding position was more upright. In the drops, or more aero bikes, it was too much pressure on lady bits. My road bike seat and bars are about level. I ride both semi-aero on the hoods, and aero in the drops.

Good ole Brooks has been around for a long time on all sorts of bikes. Road race bikes included, and without cutouts. Maybe that part is simply preference?

Any advice between the two saddles? btw, my sitz bones are 140ish dead center on the Specialized butt-o-meter... I re-did my butt again:rolleyes: in the home kids Playdough and my dead center measurement is 130/140ish, outside marks are 180/190... I really had to squish down hard for my butt bones to show:o, thus some of the outside marks I would say are over-exaggerated.

Thanks!:)

I have a Brooks Finesse. My bars and saddle are about even. I ride entirely on the hoods or in the drops. I'm actually trying to spend more time in the drops, now that I am doing triathlons.

I have never had issues with genital pain in either position.

V.

Yes - there is another reason. You steer your bike with your legs (whether you realize it or not), and you may feel like you have less control on the women's version since there is not as much nose.

I've had some soft tissue pain - but it's usually an adjustment problem.

CA

One more reason- my Bagman saddlebag support clamps onto the back of the saddle rails, and I couldn't install it or use it with the short railed "S" B17. The regular non S saddle had plenty of rail length to spare. It had about 1 1/2" MORE in rail length- that's a big difference.

But the biggest reason was that I kept feeling my saddle was too far forward with the B17S -felt like it was centered directly over the seat post, and it felt like I could never get 'behind' my pedaling- kind of like I was riding a unicycle. :(

Hi Miranda,

I have a couple of B17S saddles and a B17.

You asked if there was any reason (besides saddle adjustment) that a B17 might be "better" than a B17S. Besides what CA_in_NC and BSG have said, I think it comes down to fit. The B17S is wider than the B17, and it might be too wide for you. It also has a different shape -- the wide to narrow "transition" is more pronounced on the B17S than on the B17. You may have seen on some threads that some people prefer T-shaped saddles vs. Pear-shaped saddles. In my opinion, the B17S is more T-shaped than the B17.

Basically, it's a matter of individual fit, which you won't know until you try it for a few miles. (Yah, that was really helpful, wasn't it?)

I've ridden my Brooks for many, many miles -- in the drops, on the hoods, on the tops -- it's all good! Personally, I think one of the ultimate tests for a saddle is how comfortable it is when riding an indoor trainer. You don't get any breaks by waiting at a stop light, and you don't do a lot of climbing while standing on the trainer. I did a lot of indoor training on my Brooks Team Pro S (basically the same as the B17S), and it was instrumental in keeping me comfortable so I could log a lot of miles on my trainer.

- Melissa

I tend to have a 40 degree torso angle on my bike with moustache bars, no problem on the girly-bits on the Brooks B67 on that bike.

My bike with drop bars, I spend half my time in the drops, no problem on that Brooks B67, either. (bars at same height as saddle) Dunno what my torso angle is on that one, certainly less than 40 degrees.

But then, I can also sit on a wooden chair in my undies with my elbows on my knees and not feel any girly-bit squooshing (the test for needing a cut-out). (or, if your saddle isn't wide enough or has too much padding, it's the comparison test for you needing a different saddle!)

If you know you need a cut-out, you might want to wait for the B-17 Imperial. (Brooks with cut-out, and no grumpy company owner like with An-Atomica) If you have wide sits and need a cut-out, hang tight for the B-68 Imperial. Check with Bill at Wallingford for release dates. www.wallbike.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CA_in_NC

Yes - there is another reason. You steer your bike with your legs (whether you realize it or not), and you may feel like you have less control on the women's version since there is not as much nose.

I've had some soft tissue pain - but it's usually an adjustment problem.

CA

---

That is a point that I never would have thought about from experience. I have never owned a longer saddle. My bike came with one, but lbs guy took it off and kept it:( putting on this shorter one I have now. My bike was a wsd but he said, "oh I think this looks like a man's saddle, try this...". He probably sold it for more $ or something. Not good after sale service at that lbs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CA_in_NC

Yes - there is another reason. You steer your bike with your legs (whether you realize it or not), and you may feel like you have less control on the women's version since there is not as much nose.

I've had some soft tissue pain - but it's usually an adjustment problem.

CA

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BleeckerSt_Girl

One more reason- my Bagman saddlebag support clamps onto the back of the saddle rails, and I couldn't install it or use it with the short railed "S" B17. The regular non S saddle had plenty of rail length to spare. It had about 1 1/2" MORE in rail length- that's a big difference.

But the biggest reason was that I kept feeling my saddle was too far forward with the B17S -felt like it was centered directly over the seat post, and it felt like I could never get 'behind' my pedaling- kind of like I was riding a unicycle. :(

---

Thx Ladies:). That's good info to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by melissam

It also has a different shape -- the wide to narrow "transition" is more pronounced on the B17S than on the B17. You may have seen on some threads that some people prefer T-shaped saddles vs. Pear-shaped saddles. In my opinion, the B17S is more T-shaped than the B17.

Basically, it's a matter of individual fit, which you won't know until you try it for a few miles. (Yah, that was really helpful, wasn't it?)

---

Actually, that was indeed very helpful:) . You're funny after my own heart:p. I have read much about T vs pear. I "thought" I knew what that meant, but was wondering again reading some other threads. I did look at them (well, many times now) on Wallbike and I can see what you mean. I'm kinda thinkig about ordering both to see side by side first hand. I will have to call Bill. Thx.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BleeckerSt_Girl

One more reason- my Bagman saddlebag support clamps onto the back of the saddle rails, and I couldn't install it or use it with the short railed "S" B17. The regular non S saddle had plenty of rail length to spare. It had about 1 1/2" MORE in rail length- that's a big difference.
(

---

But if you are using a smaller bag, that doesn't need extra support, you can use the bag loops to attach your bag.

V.

It's funny how individual these saddles are. I started with the B17S and couldn't get my Acorn Bag on it and have enough rail length to get the saddle where I wanted it, but it was comfortable. I then tried the B72 since everyone was indicating that the width was much better. I figured since I'd easily spit out two 10 lb babies my sitz bones must be a mile apart. Never even considered having them measured. The B72 felt like riding in a hammock. I had it on my Surly long enough to have dents, and my lbs guy pointed to them and said "Holy cow that saddle is wide, look where your dents are!". Sure enough, they were way away from the edges, closer to the center. So, I purchased a regular B17, and talk about the saddle disappearing beneath you! It is so comfortable. The perfect fit. I still can't believe I need a narrower saddle when I need wider jeans.:D

So, it doesn't matter if you are "hippy" or how you think your hips are, get them measured, or do it yourself. I've also found that the type of riding determines comfort also. The B72 is now on my mixte, I ride upright and it's fine, but I also don't do long rides on it, so it may be for sale soon. The Surly has the B17 and drop bars, so I lean over when I ride and the B17 is the most comfortable there.

I've ordered from Wallbike and they are terrific! I highly recommend ordering from them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnottedYet

I tend to have a 40 degree torso angle on my bike with moustache bars, no problem on the girly-bits on the Brooks B67 on that bike.

My bike with drop bars, I spend half my time in the drops, no problem on that Brooks B67, either. (bars at same height as saddle) Dunno what my torso angle is on that one, certainly less than 40 degrees.

But then, I can also sit on a wooden chair in my undies with my elbows on my knees and not feel any girly-bit squooshing (the test for needing a cut-out). (or, if your saddle isn't wide enough or has too much padding, it's the comparison test for you needing a different saddle!)

If you know you need a cut-out, you might want to wait for the B-17 Imperial. (Brooks with cut-out, and no grumpy company owner like with An-Atomica) If you have wide sits and need a cut-out, hang tight for the B-68 Imperial. Check with Bill at Wallingford for release dates. www.wallbike.com

---

Knott... Thank you for that about other companies (speaking of SA:(). His saddle may be wonderful, but I had issues before I ever rode it due the order arriving with a defect. I didn't use my order. It ended up being a return. My experience was negative (long story I wrote, and now think I'd better take it off). I think it's time to hire a marketing rep that deals well with the public would be my consumer tip:rolleyes:.

On the note about the Brooks Imperial...
I started reading the threads on BikeForums last night after getting my post response info here. The Brooks lady is on there with many people test riding it. I'm not done reading yet, but it was interesting. Andrea (Brooks rep) wrote it might be out to masses by year end where I left off. I will ask Bill at Wallbike this question too. I'll play on my wooden chairs and see what I think about the cut out. I have never used that test before. I appreciate your feedback:)!

I kinda wonder if that's why TE stopped carrying the An-Atomica saddles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnottedYet

I kinda wonder if that's why TE stopped carrying the An-Atomica saddles.

---

Knott... I really wondered the same thing. I was out of town without net access and upon return I saw Administrator Susan's post about the SA stock being sold on ebay. I started to post something about my experience in that thread, but thought maybe I'd better not.

One user on the BikeForums trying the Imperial is a current SA owner. I stopped at page 30 of 50 last night reading, but he has some comments comparing both the SA and Imperial.

I am going back to register there to be able to view some pics I could not see as a non-user. Some of the Imperial users were having issues with the wear of the cut out. Andrea posted that Brooks did not say the saddle was 100% perfect market ready, thus the reason for giving it out free for a trial and study (some folks did pay for a trial issue saddle to be in the test). The SA can have stretch issues as well I read.

To me, obviously any hyde is going to be more stable if it doesn't have a hole cut in the middle of. But, what's a happy medium I think is still being determined (where I stopped reading, anyways). I belived Andrea was putting a summary of the tests on the Brooks home page too. I did not look for it, yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miranda

On the note about the Brooks Imperial...
I started reading the threads on BikeForums last night after getting my post response info here. The Brooks lady is on there with many people test riding it. I'm not done reading yet, but it was interesting. Andrea (Brooks rep) wrote it might be out to masses by year end where I left off. I will ask Bill at Wallbike this question too. I'll play on my wooden chairs and see what I think about the cut out. I have never used that test before. I appreciate your feedback:)!

---

Andrea is actually a guy. I thought that also, until he explained that it is actually a man's name over there. He's from Italy??? I think???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica

But if you are using a smaller bag, that doesn't need extra support, you can use the bag loops to attach your bag.

V.

---

That's good to know. My bag now is just a wedge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica

But if you are using a smaller bag, that doesn't need extra support, you can use the bag loops to attach your bag.

V.

---

Very true!
I use Baggins Little Joe bags (fairly substantial in size) and tend to ride with a goodly amount of stuff in them I tried mounting them first just on the saddle loops and seatpost, but they sagged down to the back wheel too much, even with a bottom stiffener inserted. I didn't need a Bagman support when I only used a little VO Croissant bag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uforgot

I figured since I'd easily spit out two 10 lb babies my sitz bones must be a mile apart. Never even considered having them measured. The B72 felt like riding in a hammock. I had it on my Surly long enough to have dents, and my lbs guy pointed to them and said "Holy cow that saddle is wide, look where your dents are!". Sure enough, they were way away from the edges, closer to the center.


I've ordered from Wallbike and they are terrific! I highly recommend ordering from them.

---

Thx... that's really good to know:). I just bought my kids some oral hygeine rinse that shows the spots you missed while brushing with discoloration. Wouldn't it be GREAT if any saddle you sat on it made colored dents automatically where your sitz bones hit? ...like how the dents show in the Brooks wear.

I pushed out a couple of those 10 pound kids too. I did get measured at the shop, and in Playdough at home. When my own jeans are fitting from not scarfing down too much ice cream:o, I'm normally on the thin side # wise. I think this is what leads the lbs folks to steer me towards a narrow saddle. Wrong:rolleyes:... the bones have a mind of their own seperate from the fatty junk in the trunk (got some of that now).

That's more good feedback about Wallbike. After some of my recent experiences, I feel more appreciative of places like TE for their customer service.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uforgot

Andrea is actually a guy. I thought that also, until he explained that it is actually a man's name over there. He's from Italy??? I think???

---

OH! Thx for telling me that. I wouldn't want to give him an uninvited sex change:p. We have some Britt friends that moved away, but I have E contact with. It took a while for us to understand one another with some of their terms. I went to give my Britt lady friend a "jumper" she had asked to borrow once... my "jumper" was a short-all-dress. Her "jumper" she wanted was a sweater. Go figure:D.