Brooks Saddles

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

The upside to using a Brooks 'S' saddle is that it forces you to sit on the widest part of the saddle rather than perch on the nose.

And the downside of that for me was that I couldn't shove the B17S back enough to stop feeling I was holding myself up with my hands, my weight centered to far forward. So yes, the 'S' Brooks forced me to sit on the widest part of it- but with my sitbones literally perched on the back metal frame edge of the saddle. But this was not because it was a shorter saddle- but rather because the rails were so much shorter that the saddle can't be adjusted back much at all. When i got the B17 instead, I could shove it back a whole 'nother 1.5 inches, and I felt way more weight balanced. I don't perch on the saddle nose whether I'm on an "S" model or a 'regular' model- that would feel way too far forward for my center of gravity. I guess all our bodies are different.

I wouldn't have a problem if they marketed the S model simply as a short saddle. But I do have a problem with it being promoted as 'the woman's version' of Brooks saddles. I suspect that not that many women actually do well with the S model because of the super-short rails and their resultant drastic limitation in fore-aft adjustment, and the flowing skirt factor is not really an issue for the average woman rider.
I didn't find the B17 to be any narrower than the B17S in the sitbone area.
(later I switched to the B68 because I realized my sitbones were even wider than i first thought. Pure bliss ever since. )

I always wondered why they figure men need a longer saddle nose, when in reality they have more 'stuff' up front that might have to 'duke it out' with a longer saddle nose!

[sundial]

I always wondered why they figure men need a longer saddle nose, when in reality they have more 'stuff' up front that might have to 'duke it out' with a longer saddle nose!

I've thought that as well.

[warneral]

Well I just took my first ride of the year and I did it on my new saddle - Brooks B17 imperial.

Yewouch! It was a bit painful in the perenial region but also sit bones. I rode 20mi. I think I'll be reading through this thread to see how long it took yall to adjust to the new saddle. I love the idea of the classic saddle on my steel bike, and I believe people find theirs to be comfortable. I probably should have started with B68 but figured I'd go with the flagship first and if it didn't work I could trade for the B68.

I'm wondering how much (if any) the cutout helps given my experience today! I have a planet bike ARS gel saddle which has honestly given me no issues but I was seduced by the looks and raves of the brooks!

[Kitsune06]

I've thought that as well.

I think I read on the Wallingford site that the 'S' is for Skirts, as women who ride in skirts might have a difficult time with the longer nose. It's marketed for women as we're more likely to ride in skirts BUT in theory, if a guy is going to ride wearing a utilikilt on a regular basis, then the saddle might be ideal for him as well.

On a different-ish subject, I'm wondering with the sitbone measurements are (on average) for ladies 100% comfortable with their B-17. I'm at about 140 and I'm not sure if I'm a little bit on the side rails or what? My soft tissues are generally quite happy w/ the B17 unless I slip and do a little 'forward crush' but nobody's ever happy with those, so moot point.

[Kerry1976]

So, I have a B17 Imperial on my roadie that I love. However, thinking of not keeping my roadie. I just have more fun on my Trek Pure Lowstep and it really works better as a no-brainter-fun-relaxed addition to my running. BUT - I remember that me and the stock Bontrager saddle didn't get along so well.

Would a B17 work at all on the Pure? Or, should I just go for a B67 (or B68) or something?

Just trying to get some ideas.

[KnottedYet]

So, I have a B17 Imperial on my roadie that I love. However, thinking of not keeping my roadie. I just have more fun on my Trek Pure Lowstep and it really works better as a no-brainter-fun-relaxed addition to my running. BUT - I remember that me and the stock Bontrager saddle didn't get along so well.

Would a B17 work at all on the Pure? Or, should I just go for a B67 (or B68) or something?

Just trying to get some ideas.

Try it. Just switch your B17 to the Pure and give it a try!

[Kerry1976]

Try it. Just switch your B17 to the Pure and give it a try!

Thanks, plan to do it regardless, just didn't know if anyone on here had tried it yet.

[Kitsune06]

Figured this might be the thread to say it on- I've been wondering about my B17 and came to the conclusion that it just wasn't fitting right... I think I was in denial about my sitbones.

For some reason I thought 'the' measurement was center to center, but then I found the formulas further down in this and other threads and went 'huh'.

I'm pretty close to 170-175 measuring the outsides of my ischial tuberosities. So... I guess I'm in the big pelvis club, which makes it easy to have an hourglass figure and hard to find a saddle? I've already sold my B17. Moving on to either the B67, B68 or B68 imperial.

Not really sure which yet, wondering on others' opinions. I'd had a selle-anatomica and really kind of hated it. It felt like my 'parts' were crammed in the hole rather than suspended over it due to the hammocky nature of the saddle. I see some have had similar experiences with the imperial cutout... I guess I'm wondering if that experience is more with those who don't wear padded cycling shorts (as I don't intend to unless we're going +10-20 mi). The 'cutout test' was a little inconclusive. It didn't hurt, per se but I wouldn't want to sit like that for hours, or moving. I was ok w/o the cutout on my B17 but always had a little friction. (Sorry for the TMI, but this is saddle talk).

I know Wallingford has that 6mo return policy, but I guess I just really want to get it right the first time. Any advice?

[warneral]

And the downside of that for me was that I couldn't shove the B17S back enough to stop feeling I was holding myself up with my hands, my weight centered to far forward. So yes, the 'S' Brooks forced me to sit on the widest part of it- but with my sitbones literally perched on the back metal frame edge of the saddle. But this was not because it was a shorter saddle- but rather because the rails were so much shorter that the saddle can't be adjusted back much at all. When i got the B17 instead, I could shove it back a whole 'nother 1.5 inches, and I felt way more weight balanced. I don't perch on the saddle nose whether I'm on an "S" model or a 'regular' model- that would feel way too far forward for my center of gravity. I guess all our bodies are different.

I wouldn't have a problem if they marketed the S model simply as a short saddle. But I do have a problem with it being promoted as 'the woman's version' of Brooks saddles. I suspect that not that many women actually do well with the S model because of the super-short rails and their resultant drastic limitation in fore-aft adjustment, and the flowing skirt factor is not really an issue for the average woman rider.
I didn't find the B17 to be any narrower than the B17S in the sitbone area.
(later I switched to the B68 because I realized my sitbones were even wider than i first thought. Pure bliss ever since. )

I always wondered why they figure men need a longer saddle nose, when in reality they have more 'stuff' up front that might have to 'duke it out' with a longer saddle nose!

My bike fitter said women have long femurs which explains why we need to set the saddle back - so why we would want shorter rails is beyond me! I KNEW the s versions wouldn't work for me.

[Biciclista]

the shorter saddle for women was so that ample skirts would not get caught on the saddle.
why they are still selling that model is beyond me.
Now as to you and the B17. I never got comfortable on it either - I went right back to my B67 (at the time). If it's hurting your perenial area (I think that's spelled wrong, BTW) the saddle is either not adjusted correctly or it's too small.

[warneral]

Mimi I'm just coming back to this post but you are totally right and I've been asking myself the same question LOL. I bought it for my b-day present b/c I drool over them when I see them on other bikes in the city. Also b/c so many people seem to love them and they last forever.

I think that Lisa's post is encouraging. I probably would have the same sitbone pain after any saddle in the spring. These ARE my first 50mi of the year outdoors I think I'll give it a little more time. Seeing that I got it from wallbike, I thought it was worth a try.