Brooks Saddles

[murielalex]

Update: I've had my B17 for about 400 miles, and after a couple very minor adjustments, I can say I love it. The longest ride I've done is 40 miles, so I can't yet say it's perfect, but I found it comfortable from the get-go, and moreso now. It's just starting to get the indents where my sit bones rest. I'm looking forward to finding out if it gets even more comfy.

[ny biker]

Just thought you alls would find this interesting -- a cyclist I know just had both seat rails of his B17 break during a ride. He posted this to our club listserve:

"I got it back in 2000, used it for a couple of years on my
tandem, then put it on the Kogswell when I started commuting on it in
2006. It had around 17,000 - 18,000 miles on it.

It's not the first time I've had a seat rail break, but it is the first
time I've had two fail at once."

This man has a bunch of bikes, and I'm pretty sure they all have Brooks saddles. He rides a lot. I mean really a lot.

[trickycoolj]

I'm a little stunned that I just dropped this much cash on a saddle, but it's a small price for happy lady bits and preventing any long term damage right?? Pulled the trigger on a B17 Imperial from WallBike after some advice from Bill via email today. My sit bones measure 135 center and 180 outside in an upright position and 170 outside leaning forward. I was torn between the B68 and B17 Imperial but he suggested that I try the B17 with my riding position and goal of training for the 2013 STP. The guarantee should make it nice and easy to exchange for the B68 if I do need the extra width after all, though the Imperial is not in stock at the moment so I'm crossing my fingers that the B17 Imperial will be a winner! I recall maybe in the 2 hour blur it took to read this thread some folks went from cut out seats to the non-cut out Brooks' just fine so I won't worry about the B68 Imperial not being in stock... yet.

Now... is it here yet??

[tulip]

The jury's still out on my B17. I've only been on a few rides, and after some adjustments, I found it pretty comfy. But I'm not totally there, yet. I need to ride it more. It's wider than my Butterfly, but there's no cutout. I tilted it up ever so slightly as suggested on these forums, and that was a big mistake. Serious no-fun. It is much better now that it's level.

One thing I noticed is that I cannot position the saddle as far back as my Butterfly because the rails are wider. That means that the Brooks is about a 1/2-inch further forward than my Butterfly was. I'm not sure that this matters, but it might.

I'm also not sure yet about the lack of a cut-out. My longest ride on the Brooks so far is only 30 miles, and half of that was with the tortuous tilt-up, which made the entire ride a bit iffy. I'll report back after another longer ride this weekend. During the week I mainly ride my city bike, which still has a Butterfly on it.

[LovelyGirl]

I'm a little stunned that I just dropped this much cash on a saddle, but it's a small price for happy lady bits and preventing any long term damage right?? Pulled the trigger on a B17 Imperial from WallBike after some advice from Bill via email today. My sit bones measure 135 center and 180 outside in an upright position and 170 outside leaning forward. I was torn between the B68 and B17 Imperial but he suggested that I try the B17 with my riding position and goal of training for the 2013 STP. The guarantee should make it nice and easy to exchange for the B68 if I do need the extra width after all, though the Imperial is not in stock at the moment so I'm crossing my fingers that the B17 Imperial will be a winner! I recall maybe in the 2 hour blur it took to read this thread some folks went from cut out seats to the non-cut out Brooks' just fine so I won't worry about the B68 Imperial not being in stock... yet.

Now... is it here yet??

I have almost your same measurements and was torn between those same two saddles. Bill at Wallbike says he doesn't use sit bone measurements and usually recommends the B17 if you have seat level with or above the bars. I ordered mine in mandarin orange and slapped it on the Trek 7.6 FX I own. I have 7 miles on it, so way too soon to see the sit bone indents, but I discovered a way to cheat a bit. I reached under the saddle while pedaling and can feel my sit bones pushing through the leather. It seems they are very, very close to the cantle, possibly a teeny bit on top of it, but I have no idea if it will be problematic. I went ahead and ordered the B68 today so I can see and compare. I just cannot rest until I can know I'm getting the right saddle after spending this much money.

At any rate, one thing I just cannot make sense of is that this B17 is supposed to be Brooks' flagship model, and articles all over the Internet say most people should be able to use it. That said, I have read posts from many ladies here on this forum who have found it too narrow. I wonder if other people out there are just riding with sit bones on the cantle and never knowing/caring about it? Is it possible that it doesn't matter if one sits on the cantle? Not trying to be controversial, just can't seem to find a definitive answer...

[Blueberry]

I'm about to give up on my B68. Ordered it because I started experiencing tailbone pain (after many happy years on Terry Butterfly saddles) after an extended period of trainer riding (did a hefty challenge last winter). I can ride a B17, but end up with some soft tissue pain randomly and my sit bone indents are close to the metal frame (which, for me, is a no go because sitting on the metal frame is not comfortable). However, the B68 is "slung" differently. When it's level (front to back - with a level confirming the position), I get major soft tissue pain AND I'm still sliding forward and killing my hands. I don't have this issue on the B17 - level is a sweet spot. I can't tip the nose up more (to stop the sliding) because it's already jamming in where it ought not.

In the mean time, tailbone pain has gone away. This is probably due to the fact that I've been a major slacker and have not been riding due to hot weather. I also did a few minutes on the exercise bike at the gym, and noticed that that saddle might have been the culprit in the first place (didn't think of it because I didn't do it often).

I'm back to "normal" saddles and proper trainer form (no sitting up and rotating the pelvis!). We'll hope I stay OK, as the B68 is not the solution for me.

**If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know. Otherwise, I'm sending it back in the next few days.**

[BodhiTree]

Level the nose of the B-68. Not level front-to-back.

The cantle plate (rear) of the B-68 will sit slightly higher than the nose when set up. When your weight loads the "sit" area of the B-68, it will sag more than the B-17. Therefore it must start off relatively higher than the cantle of the B-17 to end up level when you are on it.

[Blueberry]

Level the nose of the B-68. Not level front-to-back.

The cantle plate (rear) of the B-68 will sit slightly higher than the nose when set up. When your weight loads the "sit" area of the B-68, it will sag more than the B-17. Therefore it must start off relatively higher than the cantle of the B-17 to end up level when you are on it.

That's how I had it set up when I started. I couldn't move my legs in more than 1 circle without sliding off the saddle if I took my hands off the bars. It was causing major numb hand issues in just a few minutes. I wonder if my position on my bikes is too low for the B68? Saddle and bars are pretty close to level.