Brooks saddle

I totally agree that the B17 is easily more comfartable than any plastic shelled saddle and the smooth leather surface allows for easy shifting of one's riding position and absolutely allows for hard effort to be put in without any tendency to sweat in the nether regions.

This photograph is from about a fortnight ago with only one 17 mile journey made on a newly fitted B17. Now with over 200 miles on it, the saddle is more comfortable than my imagination could come up with a wish for!

ATB from George

The Brooks 17 is a lovely saddle. I had one many moons ago, but foolishly left it on a cycle I sold. I use a Specialized Romin these days and find it to be very comfortable indeed. The pressure is definitely off!

With the huge variety of modern saddles out there, I can see no reason other than nostalgia to ride a Brooks. They do look right on certain types of vintage bikes like George's, but the boat-anchor weight, the fact that they don't like the rain and the ludicrous cost all put me off Brooks in a major way.

I ride a hard-as-nails Selle SLR (have done for years) and I can't fault it. Light, cheap for its weight and comfy (for me). The SLR isn't for everyone; you just need to find the brand/model that suits your "shape". Most people ride saddles that are far too soft in my opinion.

I have got to agree, it is the shape not the padding that counts. Fizik Arione for me, plus a beaten up original Selle Italia Flite om my MTB. My brother has a Brooks but does not really ride enough miles a year to actually wear it 'in'. As a result it still hurts him every ride he makes. I don't get it!

Bruce

I have a bizarre objection to a lot of Fizik saddles. Why the hell do they have that point at the back? Unless you have a tail that needs support, no part of your anatomy actually touches it, ever. It is just a style device they seem to use to differentiate their products. Illogical engineering. They are well-regarded saddles, however. A lot of people swear by them, often citing the usable length of saddles as something they like, allowing subtle position changes (but still never sitting on that rearward extension). That sort of flexibility is certainly not available on my SLRs. I actually have a pointy-tailed Fizik on my tourer (came with the bike). It is very comfy and I like it a lot except for the pointy bit at the back. As I said, my objection is bizarre.

I have mixed views on Brooks. I have a B17 on a Surly LHT and find it quite difficult to find the sweet spot, but once found it is very comfortable. The leather is very scratch / scuff prone and despite tender care it seems to pick up a new mark every ride. I am not talking about a nice, worn patina just scuff marks. For a town bike, that is always laden with saddle bags for shopping or short trips to lakes it's a nuisance. The problem is that now that it is dialled in I am loathe to switch to another saddle. Then there is the fact that it is not really poor weather, never mind bad, resistant - but at least the rain cover works reasonably well and the regular use of Proofide seems to protect the under side.

On my steel frame road bike I have a Brooks Swallow and that has been equally difficult to dial in, but my weight helped break it in quickly. Comparing the Brooks with the Fizik Aliante on my carbon frame, I find the hardness of the Brooks aligned with a level of comfort makes it a much better platform for seated mashing. Or to put another way, the Fiziks tend to feel squishy. I try to do at least one 4-5 hour ride a week and switched out the Fizik on my steel frame for the Brooks because I appreciated the extra support on the hills when tired. I have tried Prologo, came with the carbon frame, and thought it might be better served in shaving my legs (if I bothered). I had bad experience with Selle years ago, but that was probably nothing to do with the saddle but rather a shorn bolt on the saddle post.

That said, I think us heftier fellows, with a somewhat broader beam, might not be the best to comment on saddles for whippets. For a ride under an hour I don't think the saddle makes that much difference and most seem OK even if they could have you finding a need to reach for little blue pills if ridden any longer.

Huwge

Pleasantly surprised to see that you have a Surly Long Haul Trucker. I've had mine for nearly three years now. Great bike in my book. It was recommended by the folks at Rivendell when my Atlantis went back for repair. The bars on mine are up higher than the saddle so I use a Brooks B-67 to great effect. In my limited experience the roads in Europe are of very much higher quality than in S. California. The B-67 takes the edge off of fiber optic and utility cuts and the rough road surfaces. No 5 hour rides for me but the seat nevertheless broke in quickly and rides well for my purposes. I do about 10 miles a night after work and on weekends.

Bruce and Winky, I will have to try a Fizik sometime but to this point have found modern saddles okay but not overall as good as a well broken in Brooks. However, I'm always open to trying something new if it is more comfortable.

Three and a bit hours on the Swallow today, having tinkered with rise and fore / aft - even better. Probably needs a slight upwards tilt to be perfect, but the weather was too nice to be tinkering (biergarten and tea houses aside  .

Clay - you should check out some of the back roads where I ride. Some of the ones in Wales have grass growing so high in the middle they do a good job of cleaning the underside of the car. I have to say that in Bavaria we are spoiled, but where I live I still have to contend with some nasty sections with cobble stones. Then you need big fat tires, never mind the saddle!

I agree with Gert-Jan, the Brooks is a fine saddle.

That said, most of my bikes are equipped with the Specialized BG Pro Ti saddle. It's my most comfortable saddle.

Dave

Nigel 66,

Don't forget a tub of Proofide and a spanner for the nut at the front to keep the tension.

Dave,

Great to see you back in the saddle. ()

Chris

Thanks Chris! I couldn't stay away for long. The layout of this forum will hopefully get better, and isn't the end of the world. What really makes this forum great is the quality of the members. It's a very decent, civilized place to post, and I'm thankful for it.

Dave

Two Carlton Kermesse 23 inch cycles. Gert Jan's on the left with a modern saddle and mine with the old Brooks B 17 - fiited after the crash. Yes of course the Brooks looks great on a classic steel framed English cycle. It would considering that the B 17 first went into Brooks' catalogue in 1890, and 121 years later is still the best racing saddle that has ever been made. Just like the ESL 57 or the NAP 250, one has to ask the question about why the competitors have not yet ecclipsed it. Certainly beaten on weight by a few ounces, but certainly not for finding a comfortable repose for the downhill, or for ironing out the thumps of less than perfect road- surfaces. And no betty swollocks. Though the ESL 57 has bitten the dust the 250 - like the B 17 - still survives and without state intervention to preserve dynosaurs! Mine now has over three hundred miles on it after only three weeks ...

It rained quite enough too prove the impervious nature of the natural leather shell. Half an hour later it was completely dry, and looking grand, and my ass was dry throughout!

Strangely the additional weight of the seven speed indexed gears on Gert Jan's Carlton [with modern wheels and hubs] actually makes his cycle [in spite of his lighter saddle] just a little heavier than my example. Though one must consider his ultra-light mudguards in the equation ...

Sometimes there are dynosaurs which are kept alive by periodic upgrades to the engineering like the LP 12, but the B 17 has survived in original form probably longer than any other single cycle component. One does not need to gloss that. If the saddle did not work, it would be history. No current carbon fibre cycle part will live as long as the B 17 either as a component or as a design ... The cost was £59 for the new item, so rather less expensive than many modern confections ...

Steel and leather rule, even today. In my fiftieth year I have to say that my backside needs respect. The first photo shows how Victorian cycle engineering still meets the needs in still un-equalled form, and the second shows the two veteran Carltons.

ATB from George

Sorry George, my experience differs from yours. I've loved the Brooks saddle for years, even had one on my 'mustang' bike in the '60s when my 'banana seat' broke. I loved the San Marco Concor after that, but the latest generation of saddles like my Specialized (made in Italy) is the most comfortable.

Same goes for steel. I have owned so many cromoly frames over the years, Jackson Racing, Basso, Proctor, Pinarello, Zullo, De Rosa, Cramerotti, and a Marinoni at present. All were either SLX or Reynolds 531. Great material, but none of them touches my Litespeed Titanium, with Hetchins' style curved rear stays. Fast, comfortable, and a feel from the road like nothing else. Plus the ti is virtually indestructible, doesn't rust, and doesn't have to be painted.

Dave

Dear Dave,

Steel is not a perfect material in some ways, such as corrosion, and hardly being the lightest either ...

But it has some very nice points. Comfort and a nice combination of strength and elasticicity. Ease of repair. Also it is fantastic value. So much quality for a small amount of money, especially now the fashion has moved onto novel materials for cycle frames. As ever it is horses for courses, but the quality steel cycle frame still finds an appreciative audience, despite the age of it as a concept.

As for the Brooks, as Winki suggests above. It is not for everyone, and the only part of his post against the Brooks that actually falls as a an argument is where he starts using emotitive negative languages such as describing the weight of the old saddle design as being heavy similar to an anchor, and commenting on leather's inability to stand wet! Of course one would be ill-advised to leave a cycle [with or without a leather saddle] standing out in the rain all night! The reality is that the standard steel framed B 17 is marginally heavier by an ounce or two compared to the Selle Sam Marco Concour, which was the previous saddle on the Carlton - destroyed in the crash. As for cost, the SSMC is somewhat more expensive.

Clearly the Brooks is a viable and comfortable saddle for some people. Think of it like this. More people buy Hifi from makers other than Naim than Naim itself, but that does not make Naim the wrong choice for the minority!

ATB fvrom George 

I hear you George. Of course when it rained, I had to keep my Concor saddle covered in plastic because it would get soaked. Of course my Specialized saddles are all leather. I love the shape of the Pro Ti saddle so much, I bought at least 9 or 10 of 'em, half price, for about $100 each (retail for $200 in 2001).  So that I have one for each of my road bikes, spares for crashes, 2 for my indoor spinning bikes, and a couple for when I'm on holidays and I rent. And I sold bikes for 15 years, so for the bulk of my customers, the ergonomically correct newer designs were more comfortable and an easier sell. It was hard trying to sell the Brooks saddles to my customers.

Steel...well, it is a good price, no question, and I agree it's easy to repair. But once I got on ti, there was no going back. In terms of comfort, my Marinoni with Italian steel is the least comfortable of all my bikes. My two carbon bikes and the ti especially are way more comfortable on rides for longer than an hour. The Marinoni is beautiful, handmade in Montreal by an Italian gent.

I think that the Brooks saddles are classic, but in my opinion, eclipsed by modern designs, especially for men in regards to nerve damage etc. Steel is just not the most comfortable ride, at least for me, but is still a classic material in many ways.

Dave

Dear Dave,

No doubt you have seen the "Carlton Club" thread. Tell me that those two old steel cysles were so uncomfortable that they had somehow distressed the riders!

One day I'll have to take someone up on the offer to ride a Carbon bike, so long as I can fix my North Road Bar to it! I simply cannot handle modern drop bars. Makes the saddle issue seem like a minor consideration in comparison!

ATB from George

Hi George. Not saying 'those riders' would be so uncomfortable and would be distressed. But they would be more comfortable! For me, the cool thing I first noticed when I jumped on a ti frame was the incredible 'buzz' from the tarmac. The feeling from the road when you ride one is uncanny. You'll crave it, and won't want to ride steel again. Hard to describe until you've felt it.

As far as drop bars, well, I haven't used the drops for years. Used to use Cinelli '66' with the Eddy Merckx deep drop. I stay on the brake hoods, and I prefer the nice fat, flat surface of the Campy carbon levers. Comfortable for hours, with a short throw Cinelli bar and relatively short stem with a bit of rise.

My carbon frames are nice, efficient, comfortable, but not with the lively feel of ti. I only got the carbon 'cause as a bike employee working for a Trek dealer, it was the best material available to me at the time, and affordable (got them at cost).

Dave

I know this is a well worn groove on bike fora but although each material has intrinsic qualities it also depends very much how the bike is built with specific tubesets/profile and design etc how it will ride.

I had a very 'tight' and quite buzzy Ti bike, I own a carbon bike that is fantastically 'alive' but comfy and i have a steel bike with very good ride quality but a different feel. I prefer my steel framed bike to the Ti bike I owned, and to others I tried (and it is not loose and woolly either). My carbon bike is just in another league.

Of course that is before you factor in wheels and tires, seatpost etc etc....

Bruce

Brooks B17 is 540g (according to website). My SLR runs about 135g. That's nearly a pound difference.

You don't have to leave your bike outside for your leather saddle to get saturated. Just ride in the rain. A modern saddle (A Concur is no longer "modern" in my view) is absolutely indifferent to the rain.

Buy a Brooks if you like the look of them, and if you find them comfortable, but don't pretend that they they offer any functional advantage at all over a modern saddle (provided it fits you).

Drop bars have been around a good long while. Not sure I'd call the concept "modern". There has however, been a recent trend to more compact shapes with lesser drop and reach.

Dear Winky,

I would guess we all define things differently. Modern for me means post 1945, whether it is music or cycles, or visual art, or indeed any number of things! I can see no fracture as great as the Second World War had on every thing we know today. Perhaps the Great War was as significant for those who well remeber the 1920s and 30s, but really most of our modern technolgy was undewrstood by 1945, even if was developed over a long priod since in many cases.

ATB from George

Bruce, thank you for your post. It made me do some critical self examination last night, because my first impulse was to want to post here and say you're wrong, and I initially felt this need to be right, because I've been working in the bike industry so long, because of ego, etc, etc.

I remembered that one of my best friends, who races locally, swears by his Colnago carbon frame. And then it hit me. As a human being, and as one who worked in the industry, I wanted to think I had it all pegged. So with humility, I must say, horses for courses. There are so many new bikes I have yet to ride, and so many that I will never experience. My LiteSpeed 'Ultimate' is my favorite ride, but it may not be the best out there, and may not be the best material, and everyone experiences things in their own way. So for me, ti 'rules', for you it may be carbon, for George, steel.

By the way, what brands do you own?

Sincerely,

Dave

There are so many variables in material choices for bikes I think it is impossible to genaralise, except at the bottom end of the market.

A lot of aluminium road frames got the reputation of being "harsh" by being made out of fairly thick walled oversize tubes. 

Like that old wives tale of steel race frames going "soft" after a few years. Just  a cyclist justification, to self or SWMBO, for a new frame really.

I've got steel, carbon and aluminium bikes, they fulfil different roles so not directly comparable, but each has it positives and negatives.

A funny one was a friend of mine that had a custom steel road frame built. Full 853, which was unusual for a road frame as Reynolds didn't do 853 road stays, so MTB ones were used. You might think it was overbuilt, but the rider was over 21st, about 300lbs / 140kgs. It arrived at the bike shop at the same time as a new Airborne Zeppelin titanium race frame for another customer (same height, half the weight) The crazy thing was the steel frame was lighter than the ti one!!

Funny old game,

John

Dave

Thanks for your post.

I ride a custom fit carbon Parlee Z1. Magical ride, almost silky and fluid yet utterly connected. I'd love you to ride it and feel what a carbon bike can be like!

This replaced a Colnago CT2 Ti (6ALV note). Clearly designed for stiffness rather than perhaps 'typical' Ti comfort. Sadly not stiff enough to resist a disagreement with a drystone wall. Nice bike (and fast) but not approaching the Parlee 'feel'. I've also ridden Enigma and Van Nicholas Ti on loan from mates; each nice without being special perhaps. My first decent road frame was a Cannondale CAAD aluminium. Oh boy was that a stinger!

My winter bike is a custom Burls steel, a mix of Columbus tubing for a fairly light ride with some sacrifice of stiffness. Direct comparisons with the Parlee are possible as occasionally I swap the same wheelset onto it and the feel is clearly quite different, more elastic and springy somehow. It is a nice thing for long days in poor weather. getting back on the Parlee in the spring is like swapping a Volvo for a Porsche though!

A key component for me in ride comfort has also been good fit. My two current bikes are built around a custom fit session and that has resulted in two bikes on which I feel very well balanced and naturally comfy.

Going down the custom route with Parlee also made me realise how materials can be tuned to riders; they basically say they can set up a carbon frame in all sorts of ways with trade-offs between stiffness and comfort, factoring in rider weight, the roads that are ridden and riding preferences. I'm quite light and do lots of hilly rides (and poor roads) so my frame was designed to be quite light and with moderate rear end compliance but with good front-end and BB stiffness for climbing out of the saddle efficiently and descending assuredly.  If I was a flat road gear-masher they'd have set it up quite differently. I don't believe this is manufacturing bul***t, at least not from the amount of detail they wanted me to give them about where and how I rode, my current bikes and what I liked/disliked about them as well as physical information.

Interestingly I recently had a go on a borrowed hardtail Ti MTB and loved that direct but slightly cushioned feel on the trails. I'm used to full sus but would seriously consider the Ti route if I changed that bike, not least because I don't ride anything too burly that often now.

Bruce

Pic of my Parlee on page one in this thread

https://forums.naimaudio.com/di...417#1566878604237417

Good points John.

I remember my first mountain bike, couldn't stand the harshness (first fat tube Cannondale). So I test rode a Fat Chance, made of True Temper seamed chrome moly, and the ride was exhilarating. I traded the Cannondale in, and bought the Fat Chance. Then my best friend wanted my Fat Chance, and bought it, and I bought his handmade road bike, Reynolds 531 with Campy Super Record. Good chrome moly felt like the most exotic material to me, for years, until I fell in love with my LiteSpeed.

My LiteSpeed is unusual in that it has a 6/4 aero-bladed downtube, radially-curved seat stays, and a curved seat tube to tuck the rear wheel in. It's probably been eclipsed by much newer technology, but it's a keeper. I'm 5' 7", its a 53 cm X 54 cm, and the geometry suits me to a tee, I can throw it into corners with almost reckless abandon and feel totally confident.

Frames are complex, and the variations in materials, geometry, tube diameters etc. leads to an infinity of ride sensations.

Dave