who knows, just give me 230 clams and maybe some more for a new pair of good bike shorts and I'll let you know at some point.....

I put ~5000km on my C17 in 2016 and it's smoothed out a bit from new but it didn't wear through either pair of shorts I was using last year. I did a 400km brevet and a few 300km rides on them, including one in a good rain. It's a fine saddle for my bum.

FWIW, I've been using Fizik Vitesse saddles on all of my bikes for a while. It is shaped like the C17 or a broken-in B17 and about the same width as the C17. I was using B17s on my main bikes when I picked up my first Vitesse in a trade. I liked it so much that I've since put them on all of my bikes. The Vitesse weighs considerably less than a C17 or B17. I have bought most of my Vitesse saddles on eBay for much less than $30. I've bought at least a couple of them for less than $10 and the most I've paid is about $35. The saddles I've bought have ranged from take-offs that were essentially new to used ones with light wear. Mine are all the titanium rail version, which weighs about 250 grams.

I've been tempted to buy a C17 just to try it out, but can't get past the price. I think it would fit me because the shape and size is similar to my Vitesse saddles as well as my broken-in B17. I saw a C17 for sale on the local Craigslist once for $60 and immediately emailed the seller telling him I would take it, but somebody beat me to it.

BROOKS ENGLAND LTD. | ROAD+&+MTB | CAMBIUM+C13

Looks like they have a narrow racing model with carbon fiber rails, weight 259g and 275mm X 135mm.

For comparison, the C17 is 415g and 283mm X 162mm.

I wonder if they will come out with more models in the years ahead made from materials other than steel and leather?

I ride a C17 in jeans and non-bike-shorts and it is super comfortable for me. I'm the kind who doesn't like super-hammocky "broken in" b17s, and finds them comfortable out of the box, but I ruined my last B17 in torrential rain in Portland. From what I read the C17 is designed to mimic the feel of the B17, but I was skeptical because it's significantly more curved across the top. I tried one with the cutout and was immediately sold. I need a slight nose up on my B17, I set up my C17 with what looks like the exact same angle and it feels just as good.

Sorry to revive an old thread, but a recent discussion about rain covers made me reconsider the C-17. Anything new under the sun (i.e. long-term evaluation)? Opinions WRT carved vs plain?

I've only used the regular, bought it exactly for the rain considerations. It's ok for me, but not as comfy as B17, and I'd like to try a cutout one to have more "flex".

Mine is not on a bike presently, if you ever come to Montreal, I'd be happy to lend it to you for a while to actually try out.
Get in touch if the opportunity comes up.

I've ridden the std C17, C17s with the cutout, B17s, and B17 Imperial(cutout B17).

The C17..no go for me. I've tried lots of adjusting on 25-50 mile rides..just can't get it comfortable.

C17 with a cutout..much better than the std C17. Again..lots of adjusting on 25-50 mile rides. Not bad-ish, but not a keeper for me. On any given day it can be pretty darn good..I just never know when that day will be. Couldn't live with it day after day.

B17 much better than the C17 cutout..much better. I can get comfortable on a B17. I have a B17 Flyer on my touring bike.

B17 Imperial..better than the B17. I have several B17 Imperials. If I had just one Brooks to ride..it would be a B17 Imperial. I did 40 miles a couple days ago on a newly rebuilt/refurbished/repainted CX bike with a used/like new B17 Imperial on it. Must have got it tweaked in just right..super comfortable ride.

I really wanted the C17 cutout to work as it's (can be) comfortable and weather-proof, mostly. But it's not to be.

My GF rode a C15 cutout for a year. Liked it alot. Then I got her a B17-narrow..she liked that better. Now she has a B17-narrow Imperial on one of her bikes..she's liking that even better. We're headed out on a tour in a month..she's still deciding whether the B17-narrow or the narrow Imperial will be making the trip. One of them for sure.

All of our Brooks leather saddles (6 or 7 of them on various bikes) are in various stages of being "broken in" ..some new-ish and some with many miles on them. They are all comfortable. Those with more miles are more comfortable.

:) thanks for the offer. I'll have to think about it. I currently have 2 Selle Anatomica -- comfortable for long rides, but with a tendency to stretch when wet, one being close to maximum stretch.

So.... I'll probably try a carved C17, and/or the more recent C17 inspired Anatomica (variable tension looks like a good idea...)

The C17 w/cutout is more comfortable for me than the B17 w/cutout. Go figure... you ask 10 people, and you get at least 10 different opinions!

I have bought two C-17 saddles. First one felt stiffer than most others I have seen, so when that did not work out, bought a second one that had the weatherproof top, that one felt like it had the same stiffness of many of the others I have seen. But that was too stiff for me too.

Loaned the weatherproof one to a friend hoping he would buy it from me, he tested it and declined. The first one I got is now on my utility bike for grocery shopping and errands, it works for that since that bike never goes more than five or six miles in a day. The weatherproof one is in storage.

We have all read that some people like the leather Brooks B-17 out of the box, but many of us (including me) need to break the leather ones in for several hundred miles. I am guessing that the people that think the hard leather ones when new out of the box are the same people that would like the C series of saddles because they do not "break in".

I am sticking with leather. For me the B-17 (or Flyer) is too wide, I use a Conquest or Pro, the Conquest is essentially a sprung Pro.

That said, I have seen a lot of Cambium saddles (not sure if C-17 or a different model) on randonneuring bikes. And those are ridden for brevets of 200 km to 1200 km. And those riders that I asked if they liked those saddles were very happy with them. So, some people clearly like them.

And throughout all this, there is the VERY significant factor of different padded bike shorts on riding comfort.
Until I got some fancy assed bike shorts, I didn't think the difference would be that much, but it does.
So my C17 with very good quality padded shorts that FIT ME well (another factor too, individual body shape that one brand of shorts may favor) works pretty good on my "faster" bike, ie harder riding, and sometimes standing sprints--which means LESS weight on seat over a ride.
The leather ones still get my nod over long "touring power output" rides, and day after day rides, for accumulative butt comfort.

The Selle R2 certainly looks inviting. I'd definitely give one a spin..but it seems Selle saddles are designed for a 130mm sit bone width..that lets me out. Unfortunate..the rubber-option could be a really nice all-weather saddle.

Maybe I should try something more like that. I have some bike underwear, padded underwear that I often wore with conventional gym shorts when I used the exercise bike at the gym. That underwear with padded bike shorts might do it.

The hard C-17 that does not give much, the flesh between my sit bones (or Sitz Bones) gets VERY sore in short order on a C-17. More padding might fix that?

Tourist, who knows. I can only go from my own keester experience, but my feeling is that you'd have to be hammering more to take weight off your tukus.
I took the c17 off my bike last year to have more comfortable long rides with the b17 I had kicking around, but who the heck knows for you.
Fancy assed bike shorts ain't cheap too, so it seems that in the end, we all take a monetary risk when trying out new stuff.
I was lucky when I got my first nicer padded shorts, and then stuck with getting the same ones (newer model actually) just because "if it ain't broke....."

I would try it first on a 20 mile ride, not a 200k. (I did a 200k brevet this past Saturday on a Conquest.)

The last time I used the waterproof C-17, first few miles were not too bad but at about 15 it was unpleasant. Doable for 20 miles.

Wow, congrats on the 200kms

I would have considered a cotton/rubber Brooks, but there's no models with springs -- Flyer, Conquest, B67, etc.

I have a C17 on my tourer and a C15 Carved on my gravel bike. I like them both a lot. I would go carved in the C17 if doing it over. I have considered cutting it, but that seems risky.

So how long until the Brooks leather aren't slippery anymore? The firmness doesn't bother me, but the feeling I'm going off the back or the front at any given moment is making me rethink my choice.

, Give it time for the sit bones divets to form, seems to me that's when it is better.
But for me, this feeling wasn't really an issue, from my recollection anyway

When I felt that, I moved the nose of the saddle up or down to solve that.