soft versus hard saddle

Quoted message said:

I have read, and have been told, that on long rides, a hard narrow saddle is more comfortable than
a soft narrow saddle (like one with gel). I am trying to understand why.

Your weight needs to be supported by your "sit bones." Soft saddles spread your weight over a larger
area including regions that are best left alone.

The padding in shorts is rather substantial for a piece of clothing but when compared to a gel
saddle it is rather hard.

jon

regardless of how wide your ass is the pelvis and sit bones that support you on a bicycle saddle
will be similarly spaced when compared to the skinny dude selling you the saddle in the shop

wide ass = more time on bike NOT wide ass = wider saddle

every time that soft squishy saddle compresses and rebounds you're not only wasting energy, but
setting yourself up for some nasty chaffing and if you're really unlucky some blisters.

would you expect to have happy feet after riding in shoes two sizes too big? neither will a poorly
fitted saddle leave you comfortable after a long ride.

"Spacey Spade" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

I have read, and have been told, that on long rides, a hard narrow saddle is more comfortable than a
soft narrow saddle (like one with gel). I am trying to understand why.

Is it better to have more padding in the shorts?

A LBS told me that a very important thing was finding the shape of the saddle that fits you. I was
surprised to learn she rode a men's narrow (and it was as narrow as they get) saddle on 100+ mile
rides because the shape was right for her.

Nicholas & Domino said:

regardless of how wide your ass is the pelvis and sit bones that support you on a bicycle saddle
will be similarly spaced when compared to the skinny dude selling you the saddle in the shop

wide ass = more time on bike NOT wide ass = wider saddle

It was a dudette, and though they have a relatively wider pelvis, perhaps their sit bones have
similar spacing if they are also shorter height.

Quoted message said:

every time that soft squishy saddle compresses and rebounds you're not only wasting energy, but
setting yourself up for some nasty chaffing and if you're really unlucky some blisters.

would you expect to have happy feet after riding in shoes two sizes too big? neither will a poorly
fitted saddle leave you comfortable after a long ride.

How about running with shoes that have no padding? Last I checked, running shoes have a lot of
padding. Also, the sole is contoured to put weight on areas of the foot that normally were not meant
to hold weight (like the arch). How are our "stand" bones different from our "sit" bones?

Spacey

In article <[email hidden]>, Spacey Spade

Quoted message said:

I have read, and have been told, that on long rides, a hard narrow saddle is more comfortable than
a soft narrow saddle (like one with gel). I am trying to understand why.

The comment about the "sit bones" is right on. A hard saddle keeps the pressure off of the
perineium.

Quoted message said:

Is it better to have more padding in the shorts?

The padding in the shorts has to be right for you, as does the saddle.

Quoted message said:

A LBS told me that a very important thing was finding the shape of the saddle that fits you. I was
surprised to learn she rode a men's narrow (and it was as narrow as they get) saddle on 100+ mile
rides because the shape was right for her.

It is unusual but I've heard of it before. My oldest daughter, who is a rather skinny thing (does
ballet) could not stand a narrow men's saddle. I'm still using that saddle and love it.

It's all about some very personal parts of you, but generally a soft saddle only feels nice for a
short trip, like the around the block ride many take to decide if they like the bicycle they are
test riding.

There are a few that swear by soft gel saddles, but I think most swear AT them.

Tom Gibb <[email hidden]

"Spacey Spade" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Nicholas & Domino said:

regardless of how wide your ass is the pelvis and sit bones that support

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on a bicycle saddle will be similarly spaced when compared to the skinny dude selling you the
saddle in the shop

wide ass = more time on bike NOT wide ass = wider saddle

It was a dudette, and though they have a relatively wider pelvis, perhaps their sit bones have
similar spacing if they are also shorter height.

Quoted message said:

every time that soft squishy saddle compresses and rebounds you're not

only

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

wasting energy, but setting yourself up for some nasty chaffing and if you're really unlucky some
blisters.

would you expect to have happy feet after riding in shoes two sizes too

big?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

neither will a poorly fitted saddle leave you comfortable after a long

ride.

Quoted message said:

How about running with shoes that have no padding? Last I checked,

running

Quoted message said:

shoes have a lot of padding. Also, the sole is contoured to put weight on areas of the foot that
normally were not meant to hold weight (like the arch). How are our "stand" bones different from
our "sit" bones?

I really hope you're kidding with that question. Do you really think your ass undergoes a thousand
pounds or more of force with each pedal stroke? Give me a break.

--
Robin Hubert <[email hidden]

Spacey Spade said:

Nicholas & Domino said:

every time that soft squishy saddle compresses and rebounds you're not only wasting energy, but
setting yourself up for some nasty chaffing and if you're really unlucky some blisters.

would you expect to have happy feet after riding in shoes two sizes too big? neither will a poorly
fitted saddle leave you comfortable after a long ride.

How about running with shoes that have no padding? Last I checked, running shoes have a lot of
padding. Also, the sole is contoured to put weight on areas of the foot that normally were not
meant to hold weight (like the arch). How are our "stand" bones different from our "sit" bones?

Running shoes typically have shock absorbing material, but that is not the same as squishy padding.
You'll also note that many running shoes (especially those meant for a lot of long distance
training) have a lot of "motion control" features, including stiff heel cups, board lasting, and
stiff arch supports. These shoes attempt to hold the foot in a semi-rigid, stable position. The
shock absorbing material is then added in the midsole area, between the motion control elements and
the outsole.

Unlike a running shoe, soft squishy saddles place their padding directly against the rider's butt,
so the flexing of the saddle is directly against the rider, potentially loading parts of the nether
regions the rider might not want carrying the load, and also potentially chafing (also in places the
rider might not want chafed).

As others have said, the best bet is to find a saddle that fits your particular anatomy best, and
with only a modicum of padding.

Mark McMaster [email hidden]

Spacey Spade said:

I have read, and have been told, that on long rides, a hard narrow saddle is more comfortable than
a soft narrow saddle (like one with gel). I am trying to understand why.

Is it better to have more padding in the shorts?

A LBS told me that a very important thing was finding the shape of the saddle that fits you. I was
surprised to learn she rode a men's narrow (and it was as narrow as they get) saddle on 100+ mile
rides because the shape was right for her.

Thanks for all the replies. Everyone has made me think, but I don't want overwhelm with
thank-you posts.

I have a very soft saddle that I love for my criterium-style riding where I am constantly on and off
the saddle. I tried a hard saddle for this (flite) and I end up hurting for a couple of days.

I have used the soft saddle for 50-70 mile straight line type rides, which towards the end starts to
become uncomfortable (though I am fine the next *leisure* day). Due to your replies, I will
experiment with hard saddles in the future for these longer rides.

Spacey

Spacey Spade said:

I have read, and have been told, that on long rides, a hard narrow saddle is more comfortable than
a soft narrow saddle (like one with gel). I am trying to understand why.

The biggest problem is pressure on places that do not respond well to pressure. The "sit bones" --
actually part of the pelvis -- are located on either side of the approximate area you would expect a
saddle to contact you. That is what you are supposed to sit on. The flesh between saddle and bone
definitely becomes tougher with time, so there is a breaking-in period.

Between the sit bones are a whole lot of parts that do not like pressure, such as veins and arteries
feeding blood to/from nearby organs.

Now, a hard saddle presses up against that flesh around the sit bones. Takes a while, but will
become comfortable. The parts in between are not in contact, which is good. A soft saddle squishes
gel or foam or whatever from around the sit bones to the soft stuff in between. That is why a soft
saddle is not as good.

One thing that seems to work for me is a softish saddle with a cut-out in the middle; that keeps the
foam from pressing where it should not be.

Quoted message said:

Is it better to have more padding in the shorts?

Not really. Some, yes, but too much or too squishy, such as gel, has the same problem as a
soft saddle.

Quoted message said:

A LBS told me that a very important thing was finding the shape of the saddle that fits you. I was
surprised to learn she rode a men's narrow (and it was as narrow as they get) saddle on 100+ mile
rides because the shape was right for her.

It all depends on the shape of the pelvis. Most women have wider spacing between the sit bones than
most men, but there is a lot of overlap there. I know men who ride "women's" saddles.

You have to experiment. You have to find a shop that will let you experiment.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster. --Greg LeMond _`\(,_ | (_)/ (_) |

neither hard nor soft will work if it's not the right SHAPE lot's of luck - just keep experimenting
until you get it right - you've got the rest of your life right?

Nick

"Spacey Spade" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

url='news:'news:/url... Spacey Spade said:

I have read, and have been told, that on long rides, a hard narrow saddle is more comfortable than
a soft narrow saddle (like one with gel). I am trying to understand why.

Is it better to have more padding in the shorts?

A LBS told me that a very important thing was finding the shape of the saddle that fits you. I was
surprised to learn she rode a men's narrow (and it was as narrow as they get) saddle on 100+ mile
rides because the shape was right for her.

Thanks for all the replies. Everyone has made me think, but I don't want overwhelm with
thank-you posts.

I have a very soft saddle that I love for my criterium-style riding where I am constantly on and off
the saddle. I tried a hard saddle for this (flite) and I end up hurting for a couple of days.

I have used the soft saddle for 50-70 mile straight line type rides, which towards the end starts to
become uncomfortable (though I am fine the next *leisure* day). Due to your replies, I will
experiment with hard saddles in the future for these longer rides.

Spacey

RE/

Quoted message said:

Unlike a running shoe, soft squishy saddles place their padding directly against the rider's butt,
so the flexing of the saddle is directly against the rider, potentially loading parts of the nether
regions the rider might not want

I think I've just experienced an epiphany for the wide-of-ichial-tuberosities.

Get something like WTB's "comfort" saddle, strip off all the jell stuff, and glue on the
shock-absorbing material from an old set of running shoes.

Gotta try it....
-----------------------
PeteCresswell