Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   General Cycling Discussion (https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/)
-   -   I'm a little put out with Selle Anatomica (https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/1129413-im-little-put-out-selle-anatomica.html)

WNCGoater 11-30-17 02:28 PM

I'm a little put out with Selle Anatomica
 
Bought one in September and fell in love. Fits and feels great. Now I'm getting emails with special offers etc. Just the past couple weeks they came out with the "H" model for heavier riders with thicker leather. Interested, being a 200 pound rider.
I'm sort of in the market for another saddle for the new Marin Touring bike I just bought.

And so today I get an email with more end of month specials and they have their standard X-Series as listed for riders under 190 pounds and the H-Series for riders over 190 pounds.

Wait... what?

I went to their website and sure enough, the X-Series is now for riders weighing "between 120 and 190 pounds" and the new H-Series is for riders weighing "between 180 and 250 pounds".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I read previously on their site the X-series was rated for riders up to 240-ish pounds, or for some reason I was under that impression? Anyone got any insight on this?
I vacillate between 195-200 so I'm no lightweight, and I considered that when I ordered this saddle back in September. No way would I have ordered something rated for 190 pounds tops that was clearly labeled as such.

Regardless, this has the effect of souring my enthusiasm for the Selle Anatomica and believe I will order a Brooks, which is available at a cheaper price anyway.
B-17 or B-17 Imperial?

prathmann 11-30-17 03:20 PM

I doubt that there's any clear dividing line where a given saddle will quickly fail for anyone who is over 200 lbs. but will last for a satisfactory time for anyone who is under 160 lbs. Cyclists vary considerably in their riding style in terms of how they handle bumps in the road and also how smooth their pedaling is that will affect how much stress they put on a saddle and other parts of the bike.

I could certainly see a company rating their saddle as being suitable for anyone up to 240 lbs. but then changing their recommendation if they have a new model that they feel is superior for those toward the upper end of that range. That doesn't suddenly make the original model unsuitable for those from 190 - 240 lbs. but just indicates that given the new choice of a model with thicker leather they now feel it would be better for those riders.

Since you have their X model I'd think your decision on a second saddle would be determined primarily based on your personal evaluation of that saddle. Is it comfortable and appear to have the right amount of give? If yes, then why change what works but if you think a little firmer leather would be better then go with the H model. OTOH, if you don't like the comfort based on aspects of its shape (width, length, contour) then consider options from other manufacturers such as Brooks.

Doctor Morbius 11-30-17 03:21 PM

Is this an elaborate ruse to get people to respond with their cares and concerns and then several posts down you say something like ... "Yep, Selle saddles made my butt hurt!" Or something to that affect. :eek: :D

pvillemasher 11-30-17 03:38 PM


Originally Posted by prathmann (Post 20024332)
I could certainly see a company rating their saddle as being suitable for anyone up to 240 lbs. but then changing their recommendation if they have a new model that they feel is superior for those toward the upper end of that range. That doesn't suddenly make the original model unsuitable for those from 190 - 240 lbs. but just indicates that given the new choice of a model with thicker leather they now feel it would be better for those riders.

That's what I take away from it

shelbyfv 11-30-17 03:41 PM

Your saddle is still the same one you bought. It won't suddenly fail just because they changed the specs for the new ones. If you need to buy another, get the one that is currently specified for your weight.

Juggy_Gales 11-30-17 03:45 PM


Originally Posted by WNCGoater (Post 20024182)
Bought one in September and fell in love. Fits and feels great. Now I'm getting emails with special offers etc. Just the past couple weeks they came out with the "H" model for heavier riders with thicker leather. Interested, being a 200 pound rider.
I'm sort of in the market for another saddle for the new Marin Touring bike I just bought.

And so today I get an email with more end of month specials and they have their standard X-Series as listed for riders under 190 pounds and the H-Series for riders over 190 pounds.

Wait... what?

I went to their website and sure enough, the X-Series is now for riders weighing "between 120 and 190 pounds" and the new H-Series is for riders weighing "between 180 and 250 pounds".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I read previously on their site the X-series was rated for riders up to 240-ish pounds, or for some reason I was under that impression? Anyone got any insight on this?
I vacillate between 195-200 so I'm no lightweight, and I considered that when I ordered this saddle back in September. No way would I have ordered something rated for 190 pounds tops that was clearly labeled as such.

Regardless, this has the effect of souring my enthusiasm for the Selle Anatomica and believe I will order a Brooks, which is available at a cheaper price anyway.
B-17 or B-17 Imperial?


I would need a seat for someone Much Fatter lol.. I am passed 300.. I have the Selle Avenue for now which is def more comfy than my stock saddle though limiting with some movement.. Once I drop weight I may shop for that leather style saddle.. I hear they wear well and last a very long time.

WNCGoater 11-30-17 03:53 PM


Originally Posted by prathmann (Post 20024332)
I doubt that there's any clear dividing line where a given saddle will quickly fail for anyone who is over 200 lbs. but will last for a satisfactory time for anyone who is under 160 lbs. Cyclists vary considerably in their riding style in terms of how they handle bumps in the road and also how smooth their pedaling is that will affect how much stress they put on a saddle and other parts of the bike.

I could certainly see a company rating their saddle as being suitable for anyone up to 240 lbs. but then changing their recommendation if they have a new model that they feel is superior for those toward the upper end of that range. That doesn't suddenly make the original model unsuitable for those from 190 - 240 lbs. but just indicates that given the new choice of a model with thicker leather they now feel it would be better for those riders.

Since you have their X model I'd think your decision on a second saddle would be determined primarily based on your personal evaluation of that saddle. Is it comfortable and appear to have the right amount of give? If yes, then why change what works but if you think a little firmer leather would be better then go with the H model. OTOH, if you don't like the comfort based on aspects of its shape (width, length, contour) then consider options from other manufacturers such as Brooks.


Originally Posted by shelbyfv (Post 20024383)
Your saddle is still the same one you bought. It won't suddenly fail just because they changed the specs for the new ones. If you need to buy another, get the one that is currently specified for your weight.


Both reasonable and down to earth responses, thank you. I realize I'm perhaps a bit over reacting but on the other hand, this doesn't exactly build my confidence in the longevity of their saddle based on my weight, or in a long, long relationship between my butt and it that I was hoping for. So I guess we'll see how well it bears up under what they now consider a "borderline" weight limit.

WNCGoater 11-30-17 03:54 PM


Originally Posted by Doctor Morbius (Post 20024333)
Is this an elaborate ruse to get people to respond with their cares and concerns and then several posts down you say something like ... "Yep, Selle saddles made my butt hurt!" Or something to that affect. :eek: :D

:foo:

bike_galpal 11-30-17 05:30 PM

does it actually say "weight limit"? from what i've been reading there is a lot of difference just in what's comfortable for different sized riders. maybe you're missing their point.

WNCGoater 11-30-17 06:10 PM


Originally Posted by bike_galpal (Post 20024590)
does it actually say "weight limit"? from what i've been reading there is a lot of difference just in what's comfortable for different sized riders. maybe you're missing their point.

Copy & Paste from their website:

X-Series
Designed for cyclists who ride more than 100 miles per week or weigh between 120 and 200 pounds*
Weight Limit: 200 pounds

H-Series
Designed for cyclists who ride more than 100 miles per week or weigh between 180 and 250 pounds*
Weight Limit: 250 pounds


My concern is, whether they have discovered after some time that their popular X series of saddles will NOT hold up long term for a cyclist over 200 pounds, in spite of their previous claims, and in response to negative customer feed back they are now putting a weight limit and introducing a saddle with heavier and stiffer leather. After I bought mine I posted in the 50 plus subforum about how pleased I was with it and several people piped in that it had a history of stretching beyond further adjustment for larger riders or saddle rails breaking or bending.

Perhaps I'm reading more into this but I can't see that this bodes well for those of us who bought a saddle previous to this "new" change.

Ogsarg 11-30-17 06:26 PM

My guess is that since they came up with the model H there is some overlap in weight ratings between the two and they felt that in general it would work better for a 200 pound person than the X and not that the X was no longer going to work for someone of that weight.

I guess you could contact them and ask if they actually changed the X in some way but I'm guessing they didn't and if you like it, buy another one. I don't see any nefarious activity here.

pdoege 11-30-17 06:33 PM

In my experience a Selle will only last a season or two for a heavy rider. You'll need to replace the leather and probably should order the thicker leather at that time.

jbell_64 11-30-17 07:07 PM

I believe they were getting complaints about the rails bending under heavy use on the x did the new series also has heavier steel rails and thicker leather.

martianone 11-30-17 07:32 PM

I went to their website and sure enough, the X-Series is now for riders weighing "between 120 and 190 pounds" and the new H-Series is for riders weighing "between 180 and 250 pounds".

Regardless, this has the effect of souring my enthusiasm for the Selle Anatomica and believe I will order a Brooks, which is available at a cheaper price anyway.
B-17 or B-17 Imperial?[/QUOTE]

So I've used a SA on my commuter for half a dozen years, my mASS is just over 200 lb. Have probably 20000 km on the bike, including a couple week long tours. The SA has been fine, some stretch, the tension screw takes care of that. Also have a bike with a regular B-17 and a bike with an Imperial. Both the Brooks are comfortable in their application, both have stretched some, also adjusted with tension screw. Both Brooks are a couple years older than the SA, they have less saddle time than the SA. All of them took a little time to find their place. B-17 and SA are more similar, with handle bars optimally level with or slightly above saddle. The Imperial works better with handle bar level to saddle or slightly lower. SA probably settled in the quickest, B-17 took a while to break in, Imperial took the longest and most tweaking to get it just right.

WNCGoater 11-30-17 07:46 PM


Originally Posted by martianone (Post 20024813)
I went to their website and sure enough, the X-Series is now for riders weighing "between 120 and 190 pounds" and the new H-Series is for riders weighing "between 180 and 250 pounds".

Regardless, this has the effect of souring my enthusiasm for the Selle Anatomica and believe I will order a Brooks, which is available at a cheaper price anyway.
B-17 or B-17 Imperial?

So I've used a SA on my commuter for half a dozen years, my mASS is just over 200 lb. Have probably 20000 km on the bike, including a couple week long tours. The SA has been fine, some stretch, the tension screw takes care of that. Also have a bike with a regular B-17 and a bike with an Imperial. Both the Brooks are comfortable in their application, both have stretched some, also adjusted with tension screw. Both Brooks are a couple years older than the SA, they have less saddle time than the SA. All of them took a little time to find their place. B-17 and SA are more similar, with handle bars optimally level with or slightly above saddle. The Imperial works better with handle bar level to saddle or slightly lower. SA probably settled in the quickest, B-17 took a while to break in, Imperial took the longest and most tweaking to get it just right.[/QUOTE]

(Don't know why it quoted like that^)

Thanks, this is very helpful (And your SA experience very encouraging) Are the Brooks saddle rails shorter than the SA's? Seems I read the fore/aft adjustment isn't as extensive because of shorter rails. I'm not against the SA, in fact, as I stated I love it. I just don't want to be having to buy another saddle in a couple years if a Brooks will last a decade. Seems there are a lot of stories about longevity, or lack of it, on the SA. I cannot recall anyone talking about a Brooks that stretched out prematurely or had broken or bent rails.
Obviously, your experience with the SA is what my expectations were, and what I hope for.

Ghazmh 11-30-17 07:56 PM

My Anatomica X lasted about 2 years until I threw it in the trash and replaced it with a B17, which is what I should have bought initially. The leather stretched until it couldn't stretch no more.

martianone 11-30-17 07:59 PM


Originally Posted by WNCGoater (Post 20024839)
So I've used a SA on my commuter for half a dozen years, my mASS is just over 200 lb. Have probably 20000 km on the bike, including a couple week long tours. The SA has been fine, some stretch, the tension screw takes care of that. Also have a bike with a regular B-17 and a bike with an Imperial. Both the Brooks are comfortable in their application, both have stretched some, also adjusted with tension screw. Both Brooks are a couple years older than the SA, they have less saddle time than the SA. All of them took a little time to find their place. B-17 and SA are more similar, with handle bars optimally level with or slightly above saddle. The Imperial works better with handle bar level to saddle or slightly lower. SA probably settled in the quickest, B-17 took a while to break in, Imperial took the longest and most tweaking to get it just right.

(Don't know why it quoted like that^)

Thanks, this is very helpful (And your SA experience very encouraging) Are the Brooks saddle rails shorter than the SA's? Seems I read the fore/aft adjustment isn't as extensive because of shorter rails. I'm not against the SA, in fact, as I stated I love it. I just don't want to be having to buy another saddle in a couple years if a Brooks will last a decade. Seems there are a lot of stories about longevity, or lack of it, on the SA. I cannot recall anyone talking about a Brooks that stretched out prematurely or had broken or bent rails.
Obviously, your experience with the SA is what my expectations were, and what I hope for.[/QUOTE]

There is more adjustment with SA.
I've seen Brooks with bent or broken rails, don't know if their damage was due to accident or use. Brooks sells replacement parts.

chaadster 11-30-17 08:02 PM

Do we know the old model X is the same as the new model X? I mean, if they intro'd a new model (the H), couldn't they have also changed the spec on the X as well?

In any case, the OP should just call them with his questions rather than get all peeved about things, IMO.

WNCGoater 11-30-17 08:11 PM


Originally Posted by Ghazmh (Post 20024863)
My Anatomica X lasted about 2 years until I threw it in the trash and replaced it with a B17, which is what I should have bought initially. The leather stretched until it couldn't stretch no more.

How heavy are you? Did you get it wet or ride it wet? Just wondering because I hear this in these forums from time to time and yet also hear testimonies like martianone's above^. Seems there is a lot of either love it or hate it surrounding the SA. I love mine, I just don't want to end up hating it and this new development from SA doesn't give me warm fuzzy feelings. In the end, it is what it is, and I have what I have. This will end up good, or not. Not much I can do about it really.

But you are absolutely satisfied with the B-17 and its durability?

DrIsotope 11-30-17 08:17 PM

Anybody running out of adjustment on their Titanico X doesn't know how to ride light, and should stick to a leather brick like a Brooks. Mine has 9,300 miles on it, and I've used 5 threads on the tension bolt.

Doug64 11-30-17 09:21 PM

[QUOTE]WNCGoater;20024839]So I've used a SA on my commuter for half a dozen years, my mASS is just over 200 lb. Have probably 20000 km on the bike, including a couple week long tours. The SA has been fine, some stretch, the tension screw takes care of that. Also have a bike with a regular B-17 and a bike with an Imperial. Both the Brooks are comfortable in their application, both have stretched some, also adjusted with tension screw. Both Brooks are a couple years older than the SA, they have less saddle time than the SA. All of them took a little time to find their place. B-17 and SA are more similar, with handle bars optimally level with or slightly above saddle. The Imperial works better with handle bar level to saddle or slightly lower. SA probably settled in the quickest, B-17 took a while to break in, Imperial took the longest and most tweaking to get it just right.


(Don't know why it quoted like that^)

Thanks, this is very helpful (And your SA experience very encouraging) Are the Brooks saddle rails shorter than the SA's? Seems I read the fore/aft adjustment isn't as extensive because of shorter rails. I'm not against the SA, in fact, as I stated I love it. I just don't want to be having to buy another saddle in a couple years if a Brooks will last a decade. Seems there are a lot of stories about longevity, or lack of it, on the SA. I cannot recall anyone talking about a Brooks that stretched out prematurely or had broken or bent rails.
Obviously, your experience with the SA is what my expectations were, and what I hope for.
The Brooks B17 has very little fore and aft adjustment due to the short rails. I had to buy a new seatpost with more setback to get the fit dialed in. I also have a SA, but have not mounted it on a bike yet. The rails are longer, allowing for more adjustment options.

Machka 11-30-17 09:25 PM


Originally Posted by WNCGoater (Post 20024182)
I went to their website and sure enough, the X-Series is now for riders weighing "between 120 and 190 pounds" and the new H-Series is for riders weighing "between 180 and 250 pounds".

I vacillate between 195-200 so I'm no lightweight

B-17 or B-17 Imperial?

The simple answer is ... lose 20 lbs.

And get a B17.

ricrunner 12-01-17 01:12 AM

Well, you guy's and gal's have come along about a subject at the right time for me. I am considering either a Brooks with springs or an Selle Anatomica X1. The Selle one will be an international order for me (OZ). So the likes and dislikes, the long term viability of a saddle is what I need to hear. Thanks Guys!

martianone 12-01-17 02:25 AM


Originally Posted by WNCGoater (Post 20024182)
Bought one in September and fell in love. Fits and feels great. Now I'm getting emails with special offers etc. Just the past couple weeks they came out with the "H" model for heavier riders with thicker leather. Interested, being a 200 pound rider.
I'm sort of in the market for another saddle for the new Marin Touring bike I just bought.

And so today I get an email with more end of month specials and they have their standard X-Series as listed for riders under 190 pounds and the H-Series for riders over 190 pounds.

Wait... what?

I went to their website and sure enough, the X-Series is now for riders weighing "between 120 and 190 pounds" and the new H-Series is for riders weighing "between 180 and 250 pounds".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I read previously on their site the X-series was rated for riders up to 240-ish pounds, or for some reason I was under that impression? Anyone got any insight on this?
I vacillate between 195-200 so I'm no lightweight, and I considered that when I ordered this saddle back in September. No way would I have ordered something rated for 190 pounds tops that was clearly labeled as such.

Regardless, this has the effect of souring my enthusiasm for the Selle Anatomica and believe I will order a Brooks, which is available at a cheaper price anyway.
B-17 or B-17 Imperial?

Dear WNC....
I started riding in 1960. Since then, I've been very fortunate in that my bum has polished a few saddles. Especially various "leather tension" saddles. I previously posted about my good experience with the SA saddle, also about the B-17 and Imperial.
Five upright bikes in my stable at this time, each with a leather saddle.
Including, the steel frame commuter with SA. A Bike Friday NWT with B-17. Townie beach bike with a Brooks B-68. Specialized Fuse mtn bike with the Imperial. And a full custom steel road bike (touring geometry) with a Gilles Berthard Aravis. All the saddles are comfortable in their application. I can and have ridden each for hours in a day, sometimes for days at a time. No posterior problems here, perhaps it is because some claim I'm a hard ..SS.?
What I didn't indicate, which is my favorite and most comfortable.....the GB Aravis. Compared to SA and Brooks, GB is a better saddle.

Ghazmh 12-01-17 05:07 AM


Originally Posted by WNCGoater (Post 20024894)
How heavy are you? Did you get it wet or ride it wet? Just wondering because I hear this in these forums from time to time and yet also hear testimonies like martianone's above^. Seems there is a lot of either love it or hate it surrounding the SA. I love mine, I just don't want to end up hating it and this new development from SA doesn't give me warm fuzzy feelings. In the end, it is what it is, and I have what I have. This will end up good, or not. Not much I can do about it really.

But you are absolutely satisfied with the B-17 and its durability?

Was 220lbs when I first mounted it on my touring bike. I was 185 lbs when I tossed it. No significant or prolonged wet weather use. I covered it with a waterproof stuff sack at night when camping out (rain or not). For me I bought it because I wanted to be different, go against the grain and not buy a B17 like everyone else. My experience with the SA taught me that there is a good reason the B17 is so popular. I do absolutely love it, enough so that I bought a second for my hybrid as well.

Enjoy it until you can't. That's what I did. It wasn't uncomfortable, but it didn't last long enough for me to justify the cost.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:49 PM.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.