Brooks saddles are useless
 

... in my experience. Shiny new team pro, couldn't use it because the rails were too short. Girlfriend got a b17, couldn't use it because the rails were too short. As much as 1" or more shorter than other saddles.

Why didn't anyone mention this glaringly huge issue when I was looking into brooks saddles? As far as I can tell a significant portion of riders need more setback to be fit properly than a brooks can provide, even with a setback post.

Look at pictures of peoples' bikes, everyone that knows what they're doing seems to have the rear wings of the saddle hanging down somewhere +/- over the rear brake caliper.

Is it just me?

It's called a setback seatpost.

I dare you to post this in the commuting forum.

No problems here.

A standard saddle might have an extra 1/2" of usable rails, that really shouldn't render the saddle completely inoperable.

It's called reading, but since that's too difficult here is a picture.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a2...ss/setback.jpg

As you can see, slammed all the way back, the brooks comes ~1" short which is pretty drastic when it comes to actually fitting on your bike. Same story for my girlfriend's bike.

It depends, I guess, but when you feel like there's too much weight on your hands and that you are constantly falling forward, it means the saddle needs to go back. Pretty frustrating when you are super excited for your new brooks saddle and it simply cannot go far enough back!

google is difficult:

http://www.pedalconsumption.com/file..._seatpost.html

Perfect, all you need is another expensive, heavy custom part! problem solved.

Funny story. On the day of your birth, Brooks hired a guy to track your every movement just on the off chance that someday you were going to buy a B17. And he just happened to be on vacation the day you went shopping.

He's actually pretty bummed out, so you may want to send him a card or something.

This thread is on the rivet.

Lol...

These kids will never get that one.

no offense to brooks but putting one of those on a lightweight road bike is the equivalent of showing up at the trackmeet in doc martens. if you must have a brooks seat, velo orange make a set back seat post with an extra long set back distance to compensate for the brooks' short rails.

Obviously completely useless to you now, so I'll take both off your hands for nothing. I will pay postage, or I'll drop by and pick up when I am in North America next month.

Take the pressure off your hands by tilting the nose of the saddle up slightly more than you have in the picture.

Oh, and if there is a problem with reading, it seems to lie with you. There are many many posts on BFs about Brooks and rails.

yeah, just use the VO grandcru setback seatpost.
really good two bolt rocker clamp that's similar to thomson.

I too find the brooks rails to be way too short to allow any meaningful adjustments. It's always too far forward or not far back enough.

either that, or get a frame with reasonable seat tube angles, like 72deg.

Ridiculous looking seat post for a vintage bike, expensive, does not appear to be any more set back than a normal setback post.

I tried to ride on the rivet but I fell over the front of my bike ;)

Yeah I decided the whole thing was too much effort. The fizik saddle I replaced the team pro with is every bit as comfortable and much lighter. Also don't need a new seatpost.

That would be perfect for my girlfriend's bike except that her bike doesn't use a 27.2 seatpost.

Unless you like to ride a lot.

It's 250mm. You didn't like Paul's, which looks more "appropriate" for a vintage bike so I gave you an option. There's an $85 dollar aluminum version, too.

25mm? What is standard for a setback post? I wonder what the setback on my current one is...

EDIT: turns out my cinelli is 20mm. I dunno if another 5-6 would even be enough :(

EDIT2: Looks like the b17's rails are near enough to 1" shorter than that of a fizik arione :(

I think most are in the 175-200mm range. 250 is pretty long. Of course, there's also this one that someone else mentioned.

I've since moved on to lighter things, but my girlfriend is sad to get rid of her brooks and could use that VO one for sure... if only her bike took a 27.2 post :( It's even reasonably priced.

It means you need to tilt the nose of the saddle up. Have you not read that along the way? Most Brooks users have the nose of their saddles tilted up ... anywhere from a little bit to a lot. Go look at the Brooks saddles in the Your Century Bicycles thread in the Long Distance forum.

I could not disagree more. No matter how many saddles I try I always have to come back to Brooks for the comfort. I can ride anything for 20 miles or so but since I ride a lot longer Brooks is king in my book. Oh and yes I do have one mounted on my 2011 Trek Madone 5.9. It's the reason my bike weighs over 17 lbs and I could care less.

Like the OP though I too am finding the rails too short. Funny thing is that even though I'm riding on the very back (riding the rivet) of my Brooks Swift it is still more comfortable for me than any other saddle I've tried. Last weekend I spent over 240 miles on my bike trying different saddles. The only comfortable miles I had were the last 100 or so when I put the Brooks back on.

I am getting ready to try a Velo Orange saddle since the longer rails allow for more aft positioning.

OP, I can solve too much weight on my hands issues with the saddle angle. For me fore and aft adjustments are to get positioned right in relation to the bottom bracket. This position is the most critical for me as I have to be in the right position to avoid aggravating my bad knees.