Suggestions for a new saddle?
03-05-20, 07:23 PM
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 552
Bikes: 1985 Cannondale SR500, 1990 Cannondale ST600, 1993 Cannondale M700
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked 278 Times
in
108 Posts
I'd be careful about the WTB or Terry saddles, as they often add unnecessary padding.
For me and my butt, the trick(s) are flat sit bone area (that means flat in the cross-wise direction, not cupped and not arched), flat sit bone area fore-and-aft, and firm (either with no padding or minimal padding). Also, there's narrow, but I can tolerate a bit of width if the rest is correct. A Brooks B-17 or equivalent is about as wide as I like to go. I like the older B17N.
After riding for now nearly 50 years, my butt is pretty well conditioned to ride on anything. That is, as long as the saddle is properly positioned, and pitched to flat on the sit area. I don't require special padding or any such thing in my shorts or tights, mostly a bit of moisture wicking and some airflow. Tri-shorts are a nice compromise.
The OP might like the Brooks. The modern production ones have flimsy (pretty thin) leather that breaks in quickly. I don't prefer them (modern ones) for that reason alone. Of course, the OP didn't share the bike type or saddle to handlebar drop, which would've been helpful...
For me and my butt, the trick(s) are flat sit bone area (that means flat in the cross-wise direction, not cupped and not arched), flat sit bone area fore-and-aft, and firm (either with no padding or minimal padding). Also, there's narrow, but I can tolerate a bit of width if the rest is correct. A Brooks B-17 or equivalent is about as wide as I like to go. I like the older B17N.
After riding for now nearly 50 years, my butt is pretty well conditioned to ride on anything. That is, as long as the saddle is properly positioned, and pitched to flat on the sit area. I don't require special padding or any such thing in my shorts or tights, mostly a bit of moisture wicking and some airflow. Tri-shorts are a nice compromise.
The OP might like the Brooks. The modern production ones have flimsy (pretty thin) leather that breaks in quickly. I don't prefer them (modern ones) for that reason alone. Of course, the OP didn't share the bike type or saddle to handlebar drop, which would've been helpful...
03-05-20, 11:12 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,249
Bikes: 1964 Legnano Roma Olympiade, 1973 Raleigh Super Course, 1978 Raleigh Super Course, 1978 Peugeot PR10, 2002 Specialized Allez, 2007 Specialized Roubaix, 2013 Culprit Croz Blade
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 818 Times
in
421 Posts
I've been a Brooks B17 fan for over 50 years. I also have a couple of Pros that I like too. As a more modern, weatherproof alternative, I recently bought a Cambium C17 for a modern Roubaix, and like it very much. Break in? Never noticed it. A good saddle, set up right, will just disappear under you, and I hardly ever think about it while riding. The B17 and C17s both do that for me. The Cambium replaced a gel cushioned Specialized Avatar that I was never really happy with. I especially like the Brooks "back porch", the flattish area at the rear. On a long climb, it feels good to slide back a little, and stretch. I move around a lot on the saddle, and the Brooks gives me a couple of options. Hard to explain, but nice to experience.
1960ish Brooks Professional, front, newer B17, rear, both comfortable to me.
My new Cambium C17, very happy after only a couple of months.
The new C17. Padding is over rated.
1960ish Brooks Professional, front, newer B17, rear, both comfortable to me.
My new Cambium C17, very happy after only a couple of months.
The new C17. Padding is over rated.
Last edited by Slightspeed; 03-05-20 at 11:18 PM.
