Brooks Saddles

[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]

I'm in the same boat. In the last few days I've rode 50mi on my new b17. I was hoping ride 2 would be better. Lowering the nose to be level definitely helped the perenial pain but the sitbone pain is still there. I have similar measurements to you as far as I can tell (i've sat on playdough so many times but get confused about the results LOL). I'm this close to going back to the saddle which has honestly never give me problems! But I'm also considering trying b68

[Biciclista]

Warneral, i have to ask, why get a Brooks when you're happy with your saddle?
there's an old tenet, "if it isn't broke, don't fix it" that applies here.
If you have the money to burn, fine, I went down the same road as you (people told me I needed to replace my brooks with a "road bike saddle" and so i tried several before I went back to my beloved Brooks)
and you just end up with extra saddles. At least with these, you will be able to sell them.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

I think soft tissue pain or numbing on short rides is the kiss of death for any saddle.
On the other hand (cheek?), sitbone pain with a new saddle, especially a hard Brooks, to me is good sign! First, it means your weight is being supported in the right area. Second, sitbone pain 'usually' fades and disappears over about a dozen rides. When I got my first Brooks, my sitbones were in excrutiating pain the first couple rides- I felt like I could hardly sit at all for several days. I was going to give it up, but my DH said that was normal and it would go away. What do you know, he was right! Over about 10 more rides it faded and then my saddle experience was bliss. Now my butt is always at least semi- broken in, so every Spring I only need about 3 or 4 'break in rides' to get over any sitbones soreness for the year.
To me, sitbone pain after riding just means the saddle is fitting well and more time on it will make it perfect.
Soft tissue pain and numbness will not fade away on a saddle, but will likely get worse.

[ny biker]

Okay. As mentioned elsewhere, I am having a problem finding a comfortable saddle for my road bike because my weight is more on the rami than on the ischial tuberosities. Every saddle I've tried has been wide enough to support my sit bones (~120 mm center to center, ~135-140mm outside to outside) but still leaves me with the feeling that the rami are bruised.

I don't think my posture is all that aggressive -- I don't ride in the drops and my saddle is about the same height as the handlebars. But still, most of the weight is not on the ITs.

So, will a Brooks solve this problem?

Thanks very much for your input.

[Kitsune06]

It could but it doesn't answer the question as to WHY you're putting your weight on your rami instead of on your ischial tuberosities. I guess an experiment would be to 'tuck tail', consciously tucking your pelvis and sitting on your ITs... seeing what that does to the rest of your posture. If your stem is too long/handlebars too far forward, you could be compensating by rocking your pelvis forward to reach. There should be a gentle kyphoid curve to your back when you're in proper position, and you should (theoretically, anyway) be using your core to keep yourself in that relaxed-elbows, kyphoid-curved, pelvis-tucked position.

Brooks could encourage you to sit on your ITs if only because if you tipped the saddle up and it didn't have a cutout, and you tried to rest your weight forward, you'd be singing soprano in adult language.

The up-on-rami seated position is generally for those who have absolutely no recourse because their handlebars are SO much lower than their saddle, like on this bike:


I hope that helps.