Which Brooks Saddle?

Quoted message said:

Its 28 inch wheels an a AB hub. The only non working
thing is the lighting and thats due to the front wheel generator. I'm
thinking just using front and rear Planet Bike flashing lights.White

up

Quoted message said:

front red rear.

But that Dynohub is so cool! Not very powerful, perhaps, but still
cool.

What's wrong with it? They're normally very reliable. Bulbs are
available, you know.

- Frank Krygowski

http://www.brooksengland.com/docs/catalogue_05_en.pdf

....the Brooks '05 catalog.

Apparently, there's a "New Swallow" in production.

I'm looking at a Brooks myself having not found an entirely comfortable seat
in the several I've tried.

I'm a bit confused at the variety, counting no fewer than *twenty-one*
models to choose from.
I see at least seven are designed for women leaving fourteen.

Do sprung models really add that much cushioning on rough surfaces?

I'm planning on touring, not racing, will be raising my straight handlebars
which are now about level with the seat. I may also switch to more swept
bars.

Input appreciated. 🙂

Chris

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

Quoted message said:

Probably the professional. I used a professional and a Swift for 3-4
years and have since gone back to my old Swallows that I grew up with.
They just feel right.

Tom

I didn't see any info on that either... 8{

It's only been the discussions here that have filled me in to the importance
of saddle width and length.
Until now, I've been shooting in the dark on saddle purchases...

I'm about to go spend some quality time with a piece of styrofoam and tape
measure but it would be helpful to know the measurements for each model of
Brooks.

Anyone?

"(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

http://www.brooksengland.com/docs/catalogue_05_en.pdf

...the Brooks '05 catalog.

Apparently, there's a "New Swallow" in production.

Did I miss a critical page, or has Brooks joined the ranks of those who
don't
believe their users need to know how wide a saddle is?
--
PeteCresswell

B-17 standard will do just fine. Check out www.mtbr.com. Brooks B17 has
the highest user reviews.

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

http://www.brooksengland.com/docs/catalogue_05_en.pdf

...the Brooks '05 catalog.

Apparently, there's a "New Swallow" in production.

Did I miss a critical page, or has Brooks joined the ranks of those who don't
believe their users need to know how wide a saddle is?
--
PeteCresswell

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

Anyone?

http://www.wallbike.com/

--
PeteCresswell (who wishes they'd complement the B-17N with a B-17W)

C.J.Patten said:

I'm about to go spend some quality time with a piece of styrofoam and tape
measure but it would be helpful to know the measurements for each model of
Brooks.

Quoted message said:

Anyone?

www.permaco.com - has all saddle dimensions

they are the former USA distributor of brooks saddles.

- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA

Quoting C.J.Patten <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I'm looking at a Brooks myself having not found an entirely comfortable seat
in the several I've tried.
I'm a bit confused at the variety, counting no fewer than *twenty-one*
models to choose from.
I see at least seven are designed for women leaving fourteen.

Some differences are only whether they fit traditional or micro-adjust
seatposts (frex B66/B67) or in terms of colour, eliminating a few.

Quoted message said:

Do sprung models really add that much cushioning on rough surfaces?

We have found a B67 very effective for the stoker position of a tandem
(the stoker cannot see bumps coming, so gets hit harder) for just this
reason.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?
Today is Second Monday, Presuary.

OK - so your sit-bones are 127mm apart Pete?

Permaco (thank you for the link Don 🙂 shows the B17 at 170mm wide (total
width of course)
You're suggesting something in the 180mm width would likely suit you better?

According to www.permaco.com, the "Team S" Brooks is 177mm. Thought of
giving it a try?

The B33 is 235mm wide and the B90-3 a whooping 248mm. See what I mean about
too many options?

😉

Chris

"(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

I'm about to go spend some quality time with a piece of styrofoam and tape
measure

For what it's worth, my sit bones are spaced 5" center-to-center and the
Brooks
B-17 works for me - albeit just barely. I really could use an extra
half-inch.
--
PeteCresswell

C.J.Patten said:

http://www.brooksengland.com/docs/catalogue_05_en.pdf

...the Brooks '05 catalog.

Apparently, there's a "New Swallow" in production.

I'm looking at a Brooks myself having not found an entirely comfortable seat
in the several I've tried.

I'm a bit confused at the variety, counting no fewer than *twenty-one*
models to choose from.
I see at least seven are designed for women leaving fourteen.

Do sprung models really add that much cushioning on rough surfaces?

I'm planning on touring, not racing, w

The springs were put there nearly 80 years ago, or more, to provide
cushioning on rough surfaces.

Yes, they are quite helpful to reduce the sharp shocks of rough surfaces.

And, you might want to look into the saddle posts that have built in
shock absorbers as well.

Finally, if you can, ride behind someone using a Brooks sprung saddle
and or a shock absorbing seat post.

Try to compare it to the seat action of someone riding a dual suspension
bike........

You don't need to take my word for anything, you can go see it with your
own eyes, and possibly even borrow such a bike for a brief trial.

Jim

Hey, thanks for that David.

I have a seat post with little ridges that keep the seat from tilting
back/forward when a single bolt is tightened - not sure if that constitutes
micro adjust.

As I mentioned in another message, I have full suspension but it's short
travel elastomer. Perhaps this would be enought though... I'm not on
particularly rought roads and have no complaints so far.

Cheers,
Chris

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Some differences are only whether they fit traditional or micro-adjust
seatposts (frex B66/B67) or in terms of colour, eliminating a few.

Quoted message said:

Do sprung models really add that much cushioning on rough surfaces?

We have found a B67 very effective for the stoker position of a tandem
(the stoker cannot see bumps coming, so gets hit harder) for just this
reason.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?
Today is Second Monday, Presuary.

I actually have a full suspension bike - though it's not "long travel"...
it's an elastomer front and rear (1 inch travel perhaps - a 2003 KHS
Westwood 20" wheel folding bike).

I'm not feeling bumps very much so I don't know that I'd need any more
cushioning but I wouldn't be against it.

One reason I'm shy of the sprung Brooks: I just bought a dual bottle cage
that attaches to my saddle rails and it doesn't look like there's a way to
attach it to the sprung Brooks. See:
http://www.ncf.ca/~af895/bike/big/KHS_oblique.jpg

"jbuch" <jbuch@CUT_HERE.revealed.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The springs were put there nearly 80 years ago, or more, to provide
cushioning on rough surfaces.

Yes, they are quite helpful to reduce the sharp shocks of rough surfaces.

And, you might want to look into the saddle posts that have built in shock
absorbers as well.

Finally, if you can, ride behind someone using a Brooks sprung saddle and
or a shock absorbing seat post.

Try to compare it to the seat action of someone riding a dual suspension
bike........

You don't need to take my word for anything, you can go see it with your
own eyes, and possibly even borrow such a bike for a brief trial.

Jim

Quoting C.J.Patten <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I have a seat post with little ridges that keep the seat from tilting
back/forward when a single bolt is tightened - not sure if that constitutes
micro adjust.

Not all "micro adjust" seatposts are. The difference is between the top of
the seatpost being bare, just a necked-down 2 inches or so, with a clamp
that attaches to both post and saddle rails - or a mechanism, part of the
seatpost, that clamps the saddle rails. The latter is nominally
micro-adjust. The significance is that it can clamp only one pair of
rails, whereas the older heavy-duty Brooks designs have multiple rails and
a clamp for the old style of seatpost design to fit those rails.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?
Today is Second Monday, Presuary.

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

I'm about to go spend some quality time with a piece of styrofoam and tape
measure

For what it's worth, my sit bones are spaced 5" center-to-center and the Brooks
B-17 works for me - albeit just barely. I really could use an extra half-inch.
--
PeteCresswell

"(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

No. Different shapes suite different riding styles - based mainly on
tilt of
the pelvis. Long vs short. Bent over, as in road racing through bolt
upright
as in a utility bike.

OK, I can see that. (eg: the "Selle Italia" style saddles such as the Brooks
Swallow with very shallow sides, long slender design... obviously for riding
tucked into drops or aerobars)

I'll slowly figure out the Brooks line but I find the learning curve "odd"
if not steep...

Quoted message said:

BTW does anybody but me have a reaction to http://www.permaco.com?
The heirachical categorization seems kind of bizarre. What in the world
is
mutually-exclusive about "ATB", "Heavy-Duty", "PreSoftened", "Race" and
"Tour/Trekk" (sic)?

You bet Pete! I found Permaco to be one of the ODDEST structured e-stores
I've ever been to.
Seems like they were trying to reinvent the wheel with how they categorize
the Brooks saddles. Made no sense to me...

Having said that, I may deal with them when ordering a saddle but I'll go
and learn what's what elsewhere. 🙂

Thanks for the input - most helpful.

Chris

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

According to www.permaco.com, the "Team S" Brooks is 177mm. Thought of
giving it a try?

Noticed that awhile ago at the Wallingford site, but the fly in the ointment is
that it's sprung. Actually, I could probably use the whole nine-yards of the
B-66 if the offered an unsprung model. I rode the B-72 (same footprint) for
years. Problem is that they break after just a few months of MTB usage.

Quoted message said:

The B33 is 235mm wide and the B90-3 a whooping 248mm. See what I mean about
too many options?

No. Different shapes suite different riding styles - based mainly on tilt of
the pelvis. Long vs short. Bent over, as in road racing through bolt upright
as in a utility bike.

Width, OTOH, is a function of sitbone spacing *and* posture. Your sitbones
come together a little as they go forward - so if you ride bent way over, you
don't need as wide a saddle.

For my money, most saddles sb offered in a range of widths with about 10mm
between each width.

My guess why they arent:

1) Anthometrics? (is there really such a word?) Maybe 98% of the population's
sit bones fit on a 3.75" target.

2) Market Ignorance? Probably a vicious cycle here. Few people are concious
of this body dimension and nobody except, recently, Specialized seems willing to
tell them about it.

3) Chickenfeed? My guess is that nobody' gonna get rich marketing saddles that
fit everybody - in spite of what people pay for semi-custom fittings in ski
boots.

4) Closely-held? Brooks looks to me like a family enterprise. The guy with
the grit is long dead and his descendents are sort of coasting on what he
created. Not a hotbed of innovation.

BTW does anybody but me have a reaction to http://www.permaco.com?
The heirachical categorization seems kind of bizarre. What in the world is
mutually-exclusive about "ATB", "Heavy-Duty", "PreSoftened", "Race" and
"Tour/Trekk" (sic)?
--
PeteCresswell

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

Do sprung models really add that much cushioning on rough surfaces?

Yes, the diff is huge - although not enough, IMHO, for off-road where a sus post
is more appropriate. Off-road, the sprung saddles bottom out too readily -
not that you should be sitting on it when the bump comes....but occasionally
there are suprises.

I've got as tender a butt as anybody and found the B-72 to be a good compromise.
It gives enough sus effect for road, but doesn't compromise control by wiggling
around
--
PeteCresswell

"

Quoted message said:

...> Do sprung models really add that much cushioning on rough
surfaces?...............Yes I think they help especially if your riding
position is quite upright.

I'm planning on touring, not racing, will be raising my straight
handlebars which are now about level with the seat. I may also switch to
more swept
bars....................................................................................................................Try
the B66 shape, it works well for me in an upright position

Input appreciated. 🙂

Chris

Quoted message said:

Per C.J.Patten:

Quoted message said:

http://www.brooksengland.com/docs/catalogue_05_en.pdf
...the Brooks '05 catalog.
Apparently, there's a "New Swallow" in production.

(PeteCresswell) said:

Did I miss a critical page, or has Brooks joined the ranks of those who don't
believe their users need to know how wide a saddle is?

Yes that is odd. The width is on the price list but not
under the pictures.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Quoted message said:

"(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

For what it's worth, my sit bones are spaced 5" center-to-center and the
Brooks
B-17 works for me - albeit just barely. I really could use an extra
half-inch.

C.J.Patten wrote:
-snip-

Quoted message said:

According to www.permaco.com, the "Team S" Brooks is

177mm. Thought of

Quoted message said:

giving it a try?

-snip-

The Professional S is intended as a women's saddle and as
such is both wider at the back and shorter overall.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971