Touring - A good saddle for wide hips (already tried the B-17)

Hey all, I have the B-17 and don't really like it. I'm not fat at all but I do have wide hips. Is there a Brooks out there that is especially good for this physique?


Thanks

p.s. I've readjusted my b-17 countless times and it's still not as comfy as I think a saddle can/should be.

The B33, and the B73 are the widest of the Brooks saddles. I have a B33 on my work bike, and can say it is also the most comfortable of the Brooks line I've ridden (B66, B67, B17 are the ones I have to compare).
In comparison to the B-17 the 33 and the 73 will be heavy, they are well sprung to say the least. If you are an upright rider, either would be worth looking over.

http://www.kinetics.org.uk/assets/images/B33.jpg
The B33
It has a different nose spring than the B73 and the triple, thread, rear, springs actually have more flex than the single springs of the B73

http://www.kinetics.org.uk/assets/images/B73.jpg
The B73

gqsmoothie,
What type of bike and riding style? On most of my upright bikes it is the B66/67 on my fixie I plan on using the Champion Flyer (sprung version of the B17) On my current "tour" bike I have a Wright which is similar to the B17 but very well broken in (almost to the point of needing replacement) When the time comes it will probably get the Champion Flyer too. I had one bike with a B72 on it, but didn't ride it enough to form an opinion. Perhaps the Conquest might be a better choice for you? I would get one from Wallbike (http://wallbike.com/) and give it a try.

Aaron:)

Hey all, I have the B-17 and don't really like it. I'm not fat at all but I do have wide hips. Is there a Brooks out there that is especially good for this physique?


Thanks

p.s. I've readjusted my b-17 countless times and it's still not as comfy as I think a saddle can/should be.


How about the women's models? Brooks make most of their saddles in a women's version, which is wider than its male counterpart.

It's not your hip width, it's your ischial width - those pointy sitbones down under. Get a B67 or the new unsprung B68 if you're afraid of a few ounces. Most humans seem to have an area about as big around as a quarter or a fifty-cent piece that surrounds the ischials as padding. The most comfortable fit will have those pads inside the steel frame that runs around the rear of the saddle. You can't form steel, just the leather.

This is a B67:
http://i18.tinypic.com/2rzxgeu.jpg

The B33 looks like it might work for me. It is 235mm wide rather than 170mm for the B17. Does having the springs require much or any maintenance or adjusting? Also, will the b33 attach to the seatpost the same way as the B17 does?


Thanks

The B33 looks like it might work for me. It is 235mm wide rather than 170mm for the B17. Does having the springs require much or any maintenance or adjusting? Also, will the b33 attach to the seatpost the same way as the B17 does?


Thanks

The mighty B33 is a 3-rail saddle that requires a 3-rail clamp. The clamp is available at ordering, I'm sure. There is no required maintenance of the springs, tho you may find a bit of sweaking is common, given the braided design. It is designed to mount to the old style tapered seat post like on the old 3-speeds and such. Unless you are VERY wide at the ischials, I would say that the 33 is a bit over the top for pleasure/recreational riding, tho I don't doubt it's comfort. It is a pure utility type made for work bikes and trikes like ice cream or hot dog vendors. Very cool saddles. Some people call them tractor seats.

Better to try a B67 at 210mm wide. That's over 1-1/2" wider than a 17. Being a 1-rail type, it will mount to any modern 'micro-adjust' seat post clamp without the need for any adapter, just like a 17. If your bike was purchased in the last fifteen years from a bike shop, it will likely be ready to go. If it's a Wal-Mart type, well, you might have the tapered post. You can use this saddle for an upright posture or a somewhat forward leaning one as well. I very much doubt that you are so far out of the physical norm for human anatomy that you can't be very happy with it.

Order it from Wallbike.com for a 6-month return policy. Good people there.

Just this morning I emailed wallbike about my B17 problems. My sit bones are wide enough that I contact the arc of rivets on both sides. It only happened once the saddle started to really break in. New, the saddle was great. I am considering the new B68, which is an unsprung 210 mm saddle.

I attached a photo of my saddle, showing where my indents are. FYI, I am 6'7" with a medium build and a 35-36" waist.

Just this morning I emailed wallbike about my B17 problems. My sit bones are wide enough that I contact the arc of rivets on both sides. It only happened once the saddle started to really break in. New, the saddle was great. I am considering the new B68, which is an unsprung 210 mm saddle.

I attached a photo of my saddle, showing where my indents are. FYI, I am 6'7" with a medium build and a 35-36" waist.

I see that. I'm almost there as well, but not quite. I can ride the 17 pretty much for an indefinite period of time. A smidge wider at the sitbones and I probably wouldn't be able to use one. In fact, I'm concerned that I may have the same fit problems as you do once it reaches it's maximum form. That happened on a B73, but I over conditioned that one and it slumped. My most comfortable saddle is the B67, which is the same as the 68, but sprung.

EDIT: Be aware that it's not just your ischials that need to fit inside the frame rail. Each bone has a fleshy padded area the size of a quarter, or larger, that surrounds it. All that has to be inside the frame or you'll be trying to break-in steel.

Just this morning I emailed wallbike about my B17 problems. My sit bones are wide enough that I contact the arc of rivets on both sides. It only happened once the saddle started to really break in. New, the saddle was great. I am considering the new B68, which is an unsprung 210 mm saddle.

I attached a photo of my saddle, showing where my indents are. FYI, I am 6'7" with a medium build and a 35-36" waist.


I had the same problem and they told me I was sitting on the saddle wrong. No I did not get a new one.

I had the same problem and they told me I was sitting on the saddle wrong. No I did not get a new one.

But how can we be sitting on it wrong? From my experience there is only one way to sit on a Brooks. If I move forward I contact the front support area, and that DEFINITELY is not good.

Going in a different direction, on my other road bike I have a Specialized Dolce, which is a woman's mountain bike saddle. It is wide, has a cut out, and is very comfortable for rides around the neighborhood. I haven't tested it on longer rides, but I'd say it does have potential.

i've had a B-68 since christmas, my pelvis is pretty wide.
at first i didn't think it was that much of an improvement over a B-17,
i swapped it between my winter bike (cross check) and mud bike (Trek 6500),
riding the winter bike about 3/4 of my 500 km winter distance. the b-68
was on the mud bike the most, recently moved it back to the now summerized
cross check- fiddled with the saddle height, tilt and fore/aft seat adjustment- got it
in a good spot, the seat is comfortable, think i like the B-68 better than B-17.
Perhaps the B-68 just needed a little breaking in.

i've had a B-68 since christmas, my pelvis is pretty wide.
at first i didn't think it was that much of an improvement over a B-17,
i swapped it between my winter bike (cross check) and mud bike (Trek 6500),
riding the winter bike about 3/4 of my 500 km winter distance. the b-68
was on the mud bike the most, recently moved it back to the now summerized
cross check- fiddled with the saddle height, tilt and fore/aft seat adjustment- got it
in a good spot, the seat is comfortable, think i like the B-68 better than B-17.
Perhaps the B-68 just needed a little breaking in.

I'll wager that the "fiddling" actually did the trick. I have found that my B67's have never really formed very much. The pic earlier in the thread is of my first 67 at about 1200 miles. It looks virtually unchanged now, at over 3000. I think it's because of the weight dispersal, which must be far better than my 17's. Those 67's - now also the 68's - are very comfortable, and are a good alternative for those who have wider sitbones.

IMO- "fiddling" is part of getting any new seat really comfortable,
thanks.