You think the only reason we dont see them in the Tour is because Brooks doesnt sponsor anyone to use one?

Ok now that one looks good! The B-17 on a bike looks like a joke.

too heavy for racing...

One thing I never hear mentioned when people are talking about Brooks.

They are absolutely amazing at absorbing bumps, even hard hits! As hard as that thing is, with no springs, you would never imagine that.

And, they get better with every ride.

Never having had one before this black one (my bike is black,) I'm sold - but the next one will be honey, to be more visible. As it does please my eye. Maybe, because the damned hard thing is so damned comfortable!

p.s. I ride mine 42+ miles, every day, 7 days a week! That's non-stop, never getting out of the saddle, because of a physical condition. I always do it in less than 3 hours, all the time. And, it really does get better every day.

agreed, this is a moronic thread topic.

Depends on the application...

Comfort isn't the main requirement for pro cyclists......a better question would be how many retired pros use a Brooks....

That bike's not for REAL riding.

What is "real" riding?

Whatever deathhare does.

Id say when you're riding 2200 miles in 23 days, comfort is a VERY high priority.
You think not?
Maybe in Latvia people have asses of leather.

Why don't you just spare us the foreplay and enlighten us on your summer spent as a professional cyclist in which you won three stages of the tour and gained a wealth of firsthand knowledge about touring on the world stage.

I for one would be delighted to hear all about it

I think he was being sarcastic.

I know right!!! A REAL riding bike has PEDALS!!!

I used a B17 standard on my trip around Lake Superior this June. ~70 miles a day for 24 days. My arse was happy.

WTF are you talking about?
In case you dont have a TV or care anything about cycling other than fashionable parts, you dont have to be very smart to realize that people in the tour dont ride Brooks saddles.
That doesnt mean the saddles are junk but it means something.
You figure it out.

Im not saying they are garbage. They are VERY comfy.
But they're doubly priced for their value, hideous no matter how much you cut on them or drill holes in them and theyre ****ing heavy. < Thats why I dont like them.
The fact that theyre the Deep V of saddles doesnt help either.

People on the tour don't ride fixed gear. That doesn't mean much but it means something. Figure it out.

i am a 'real rider' and i use a brooks (albeit not on my road bike - they're just too heavy)

deathhare, go take a look at the rigs in the touring forum. these are the people for whom comfort is the biggest priority (and weight is the smallest). tons of bikes there have brooks saddles.

people should just ride what they like and what is comfortable to their behind...brooks are good to me

I think Ive said 3 times already that Brooks saddles are VERY comfortable.
What else do you want me to say about that?

Good point.
They used to ride fixed gear bikes on the Tour too but they dont anymore.
They probably used to ride Brooks-like saddles too but yeah, not anymore either.
Like fixed gear bikes, the saddles are illogical for that sort of riding.

Well I don't know if brooks is THAT good but I ain't gonna say sht about it 'til I've tried. Got one recently from a friend (B-17 aged) and after years of light narrow racing saddles I'm looking forward to trying out something that might be more accommodating to the butt. Why not give it a shot? If it doesn't work out I pass it down the line and move on.

Plus it's got little loop dealies for a saddle bag!

this thread feels empty to me...

i think they're beautiful.
(shameless bike pics coming!)

Then you'd be wrong. Comfort comes after performance, just speak to a pro or former pro about it....