Originally Posted by rpenmanparker

You make some good points regarding full leather saddles, and I would say that those who can ride full leather saddles and don't mind the weight penalty have a highly desirable solution for their own use. We must never forget, however, that the notion of having to painfully break in a leather saddle dates from a time when no other high quality option existed. I, for one, am not interested in enduring any level of discomfort to break in a leather saddle for many years use, when I can buy a saddle off the shelf that is perfectly comfortable today and weighs only half as much. So what if I have to replace it in a few years. I pay less than $100 each for my favorite saddles, the Terry Falcon Ys. Replacing them is no burden, especially compared to the price of a new Brooks.

The nylon shell of a modern saddle is not likely to be compromised by the cutout. Except for breaking aluminum rails in the days before that frivolous error was abandoned, I have never worn out a saddle with regard to its shell or construction, cutout or otherwise. For me it has always been the cover that gives out or at least gets ratty enough to disqualify further use.

I also disagree with your assertion that the cutout surround has to be soft and flexible. I find no such relationship to pinch avoidance. It is all about shape, not flexibility. On my Terry saddles at least, the area around the cutout is just as firm as the rest of the saddle, and I find that quite firm indeed.

What I find so interesting is that a number of folks don't seem willing to believe the testimony of satisfied users. Why do you wish to detract from cutout saddles in general when so many folks find them completely satisfactory, often superior. The numbers of cutout saddles sold are very significant, perhaps (don't know, just guessing) equal to or more than conventional saddles. What do you think? Is that not so?

Robert