I did read all of the posts. If you had, you'd understand the writer was not talking about ritual, not even in jest. I would call your attempt at something, I won't call it humor, just plain hyperbolic cr$p. He didn't say anything about what everyone must do, or anything about membership in the cult, and didn't even resort to soaking it until it just took too dang long, and that's only to one out of 5 of HIS saddles. Plus that's just what one person did, and you generalize it to a whole group of sincere cyclists.

Indeed, because that "upgrade" service is not simply a cut out, they also laminate another layer of leather under the Brooks' leather. They use one of two different thicknesses of leather, depending upon the weight of the rider.

Exactly. Some find the Brooks perfect for them right away and swear they never change and even claim that the break-in is a myth. Some hate them right away and never come back.

For a third group they take a while to fulfill their full potential but are worth it. This doesn't really mean they are bad during break-in... which some folks want to assume, it seems.

You response is a bit what I experience. And it is pretty much what conclusion September’s Bicycling Magazine made. In fact your saddle choice is the same as the author came up with. My Strike Glider weighs in at 260 grams and is considered a heavy saddle. Like you my doctor suggested I consider a saddle with a cut out. He isn’t a cyclist but he is a runner and one of his nurses is a Tri-athlete. But I digress. My observations are pretty much the same as your any I am the type that questions why

MM: The upgrade is really worth paying the 50 bucks. There is the fact that they add the laminate as Mr. Bombadil states, but also MCM has a patent on the shape of the slot (yes they actually patented the slot - go figure - try googling Patent 7,341,308). Plus you don't have to worry about how handy you are (I don't think that a dremel would be the best tool for the job anyway - likely to tear and burn the leather).

I've said it in other threads on this subject: for me, the B-17 was like trying to ride on a baseball bat. I tried a B-17N Imperial which was an improvement but not as comfortable as my original Selle Anatomica. So I sent the B-17 to get the surgery, and added the laces when I got it back:



I don't remember exactly how long the turn around was, but less than two weeks from my post office to getting it back.

I've ridden it almost 750 miles including a metric, and an imperial century and several shorter rides in the 40 - 50 mile range.

I accept everything you say except having to work with a product after I buy it to make it acceptable. Not that is isn’t true but it isn’t necessary and is almost contradictory to what we in these forums tell new cyclists about fit and other equipment. If a helmet doesn’t fit we say get one that does before you walk out of the store. Who in here would suggest getting cycling shoes that are uncomfortable in hopes they will get better? The place where we disagree is on having to break in your saddle. There may have been a time when it was necessary because we didn’t have so many choices but today it is the manufacturer’s responsibility to provide a product right out of the box that meets the expectations of the consumer. There are simply too many other saddle manufacturers out there to have to correct the product after purchase. It is here we simply disagree and I respect you right to do so. It also flies in the face of the try before you by mantra so many of us tell people about. That is all I was saying.

If you are personally offended by my flippant reply and feel defensive for a perceived slight of “all” riders of Brooks saddles I apologize.

I accept that this is true for you, but we have a philosophical difference.

I can't believe nobody has suggested he sell all his uprights and buy a recumbent!!!!!




I had a used hybrid for tooling around town that had an older all leather saddle. I noticed it was a bit more comfy than others I'd tried.
Baseball glvoes need breaking in and we put stuff on the leather of those. Apparently Brooks has directions and an "ointment" that let's the saddle break in to our individual body form. Some like them, some don't.

Depends on the riding position of the bike its on. I have 3 road type bikes and one hybrid. The 3 road bikes run the gamut from a true classic 77 Schwinn Volare with pretty tight geometry and a Schwinn Continental and a 2006 Raleigh Cadent which is a more relaxed geometry frame. I have B-17's on all but the hybrid which is equipped with a WTB something or other. I like the WTB but when I ride that bike I feel like I'm stuck to the saddle. Not in a bad way but just different than the Brooks equipped bikes. I have my bikes set up with a more upright riding position because of various neck and back issues. This position is where the B-17 seems to feel the best. All 3 have been pretty comfy from the get go but the one I ride the most on the Volare is the best of the lots cause its getting conformed to my butt. I never had any more numbness or real discomfort issues with the Brooks than I did with any other saddle but they sure did feel hard the first few rides. Hey they aren't for everybody and thats why we have so many differrent saddles to choose from. Can't we all agree on that?

Are you saying bike fit should never have to be adjusted after purchase? Or after removal from the box? Philosophically, what's the difference?

Have you never had a saddle adjustment improve comfort?

Ok, Brook's wont work for me, but in their behalf I have to say that I do liken them to breaking in a good pair of leather shoes. Sometimes you tolerate some discomfort and in the end have the most comfortable pair of shoes you've ever owned. Sometimes they just keep on hurting

Let me be clear, I have said I can accept adjustments. Many saddles need adjustments to have a correct position for that saddle. If that were all someone was talking about there would be no difference. If the saddle was reasonably comfortable in the first place and it simply needed tweaking we still have no philosophical difference. If however someone indicates the problem is the rider has to break in the equipment before they will receive the expected results then there is a difference. A bike adjustment doesn’t involve breaking in it involves adjusting. We tell people to try before they buy and to not accept the sales man telling them that the bike fits and they will get used to it. We might even suggest getting a professional fit before you pick a frame. As BD said here we have a philosophical difference. I consider the very idea that I might buy a saddle and determine it wasn’t comfortable right out of the box and the sales man tells me I just have to break it in as pure sales speak. I totally believe in the try before you buy idea and if I have a Brooks, SMP or Specialized mounted on my bike and ride it for the weekend and it isn’t comfortable I will be returning it the next day.

If it is comfortable however I can accept that it could get more comfortable after a while. But we have no reason to accept the discomfort some have expressed as part of the break in period of some leather saddles. If it is a simple adjustment that is one thing. If it has to be, “broken in” that is something else. Can you imagine someone selling you a pair of Bike shoes that hurt your feet and when you complained they said, they take a while to break in? That is doubly true if there are other shoes that don’t hurt your feet.

I am not attacking Brooks I am saying they are simply another saddle that doesn’t work for everyone. And no amount of special treatment will change that for people that don’t have a Brooks bottom.

Some of the finer things in life will be forever lost to those who demand instant gratification.

Hey! I'm a Brooks lover and I agree completely.

Mine have all felt OK out-of-the-box and then improved significantly during the first 100 miles of use.

If that wasn't my experience I'd definitely be looking for something else before I resorted to any of the extreme measures that I've seen advocated.

While this is absolutely true (as well as being something that my mother drummed into me from infancy through grad school), I am firmly of the belief that a saddle shouldn't cause pain and discomfort for 500 or 1000 miles before it becomes bearable. Put me in the "Life is too short to tolerate a painful saddle" camp. This hobby is supposed to be fun, and I don't find crotch pain and numbness to be fun.

What extreme measures are those RG? The neatsfoot oil bath? The ride in the rain? The SA surgery?

I went for a Brooks B-17 as well, after trying different positions, my comfort zone ended up being with the nose slightly up, and turned slightly to the right. The B-17 is still on the hard side, and I can really feel my sit bones, but being slicker than ice, the friction rubbing in the groin area is far less.

Anybody that is not experiencing dream-like comfort whilst riding on a B-17 is not doing it right.

Oh sure, laugh it off. doesn't that seem to be the level of discourse though? they work for me, and if they don't for you BFD, get a saddle that does makes a lot more sense to me.

I totally agree and I made that clear in an earlier post. I would not put up with real pain and discomfort, but I have no aversion to working with something to bring out the best in it.

Congrats to all the posters in this thread who managed the trick of being testy but not foul.

As I have previously posted, I am one of the few that has put a Brooks on a Madone. The weight didn't bother me and I have always (since the 70s) loved the look, although this is the first I have owned. I bought the B17N because I wanted something with a more roadie feel than the B17. It wasn't heaven out of the box, but it also wasn't hell. I proofided it, leveled it and began riding various lengths between 20 and 50. The first three hundred miles it felt pretty decent and seemed to be getting better each ride with a little tweaking of the height to try to match the height of the bontrager it replaced (which incidentally I like). I vividly recall one moment a couple of weeks ago about 30 miles in where I thought I had it made; it felt great.

Then, this past Sunday about halfway through a 40 mile ride, nirvana didn't strike; it turned awful and I had to stand up constantly just to make it back home. On a hunch, I pulled the level out and sure enough, the nose had slid down quite a bit. I tweaked the nose up a bit past level and am looking to get out tonight. I also put some Rawlings glovinator (lanolin) on it to try to speed the process after reading Sheldon Brown's site. This project has taken on a bit more importance as I am riding a century on the 5th.

I am cautiously optimistic.

Did Selle Anatomica put the lace holes in the saddle? I was just wondering why there are that many holes and why such a large diameter ?

Thanks,
Steve