So, which Brooks saddle sorta feels like B17 on your butt, but with a full range setback? (narrower is OK, preferred) It certainly isn't the Pro, there is a pronounced hump in the Pro, and the setback is terrible. Swallow? Cambium?

We must have similar butts. I'm really liking the B17N over the B17 and Pro for the same reasons. I'm not sure the B17N actually has better setback (it probably doesn't), but the narrowness means I'm not as unhappy that I can't move it back any further.

I am in the same boat as you here and hoping perhaps the answer is the C-17 cambium. Hoping to trade my new Pro for one soon. I know, not leather, but pretty cool look to them.

Will keep checking in to see what other opinions are.

B17 N with cutout seems nice as well, is that made? but probably doesn't offer extra setback. Velo Orange used to carry a seat post that offered extra setback for brooks type saddles as well, not sure if they still do?

Yes they do, also I have one if their house saddles that is similar to a B17, but has better set back, I forget the model number though...

A bit off topic.
My favorite saddle is the B17 Special, in fit and appearance. But I needed more setback with this particular bike and am very happy with this Rivet. Rails for days and slightly narrower feeling:

Rivet Pearl Saddle by djk762, on Flickr

Rivet Pearl Saddle by djk762, on Flickr

Specialized Expedition by djk762, on Flickr

The C17 and Swallow have about 10mm more set back than a B17.

My butt is fine with the Swallow, but it doesn't feel like a B17. It could work for you, or kill you.

VO Gran Cru post has gobs of set back, are sexy, and from what I've read the clamping and adjusting are excellent. Comes polished or black.

great to see this for many reasons. I just got myself an 84 expedition and was considering an update. yours is lovely. nice saddle, thanks for reference. one last question... what bars are those? shape looks very interesting.

V.O. Randos. And this bike really would not work for me without the long saddle rails or a different seat pin. Top tube is 54 cm instead of my comfortable 55/56.

-D

Brooks does make a B-17N Imperial (w/cutout). I have one on my Sekai and love it. It was comfortable right out of the box.

Highly recommend Brooks Cabmium C17 Carved...... Saddle made in heaven right out of the box.

The Pearl is a fine looking saddle. But, if it fits like the Anatomic..meaning a hammock sling, then it's a no go for me. Can you slide back and forth or does you weight lock you into one position?

Less than a .5 inch setback improvement, that's disappointing. Otherwise, I'd jump.

The Pearl is VERY sturdy. No hammock at all. Easy to slide for adjusting position, a bit narrower toward the nose than B17...so between a B17 and a Swift.

-D

Interesting concept - getting a saddle that compensates for a frame that doesn't quite fit.

That is, sadly, what this thread is all about. If you can't get your saddle far back enough, it's because your seat tube angle is too steep. But "modern" frames typically have steeper frame angles than were common when the Brooks saddle frame was designed (the standard B.17 frame has not changed in 75+ years). Therefore "modern" saddles (Selle Anatomica, etc) have longer rail that allow the rider to compensate for the "modern"ness of their frames. Unfortunately, the "modern" saddle rails, being longer, make the nose of the saddle wider; causing more thigh friction and other discomfort issues.

Another solution is a seat post with extra setback.

Another solution is a different diagnosis: it's not that your saddle is too far forward, but that your handlebar is too far back. Get a longer stem, shift more weight to the front wheel, eliminate your setback issues, and maybe even improve the ride of your bike.

The stem solution had crossed my mind as well.

Not as polished-looking as the Rivet Pearl above, but I've had good luck with the Gyes GS-06H Brown Leather Racing Bicycle Bike Saddle, comes with and without the cutout (and with copper rails/rivets if that's your thing). Mine has good setback (more than enough when compbined with my Velo Orange seatpost).

The frame does fit because of my component choice.

-D

The seat post is integral to the bike, so the solution needs to be in the saddle rails. Generally the bike fits, but I won't accept a saddle that pushes me forward of my optimal fit.

I don't understand. What kind of bike is this? It sounds like the bike is designed to fit the rider in a certain way and you want it to fit differently.

Stainless steel Bridgestone Kabuki. The seat post is a quill design, you are stuck with it. The bike fit until I put a Brooks on it. I have other saddles that would work, but I wondering what my options are with that B17 top contour.

Interesting feature...

[h=2]com·pen·sate[/h] (kŏm′pən-sāt′)v. com·pen·sat·ed, com·pen·sat·ing, com·pen·sates
v.tr.1. To offset; counterbalance.

I have had enough bikes to know what lengths we can go to in order to use something we like the idea of having. There's a couple I have hanging up now that I've done the same thing with. That Expedition is a very sharp-looking bike, and it looks like you keep it in top condition. That said, the geometry looks rather more like that of a racer than a tourer. That pretty much seems the reason behind the component choices.

Aha. Is the B17's width/positioning so bad that you can barely ride it, or does it only become annoying after a few miles? If the latter, I'm still thinking that a B17 Narrow might do the job (maybe you could try one from Wallingford Bikes), but otherwise it doesn't look like a Brooks will work here.

Consider a seat post with more setback if you want to like a B17..