another brooks question: your brooks type and your handlebar height/type

[_kim_]

ok, i will try that sitting on hands/having someone else measure when i stand up thing. that "add 2 cm" (to your outside sit bone measurement) guideline is very helpful.

and i agree, that is a good explanation of chafing--and it reminds me of one other question i had (hopefully my last or nearly my last for now!), that of the S brooks saddles vs. the men's. after i learned that the "S" design was mainly to accommodate skirts, i began to seriously doubt its usefulness to me as, well, i rarely wear skirts (or skorts). plus, wouldn't the S saddles be a little more pear shaped/have a more gradual transition from seat to nose, thus increasing the risk of chafing?

[Biciclista]

and I now have a brooks imperial saddle. it has a cut out and I absolutely love it (B68)
There is NO WAY i am ever trying another kind of saddle ever again.

oh and I have a roadbike with curved down handlebars (not what you see in my avatar)

[sundial]

after i learned that the "S" design was mainly to accommodate skirts, i began to seriously doubt its usefulness to me as, well, i rarely wear skirts (or skorts). plus, wouldn't the S saddles be a little more pear shaped/have a more gradual transition from seat to nose, thus increasing the risk of chafing?

Well, yes and no. Some riders prefer the longer nose saddle for better control on the bike. I prefer the shorter nose saddle and I feel in control of my bike and I have ample wiggle room. I have the shorter nose saddle on bikes that I sit more upright and I don't experience the chaffing. But on a road bike I went with the longer nose saddle because of the chaffing issue of a pear shaped women's saddle. Also, the women's Brooks saddles have shorter rails and you will probably need a setback seatpost to get your saddle adjusted to the right fore/aft position.

For a comparison of saddles, take a look at this.