what about them that makes them comfortable?

First it molds itself to fit you, second a firm saddle allows the blood to flow better to your Butt. A soft saddle cuts blood flow to more areas.

One nice feature is that they can breath a bit, i.e. soak up a bit of moisture and then allow it to evaporate elsewhere, e.g. the other side.

Certainly the surface is a bit like a trampoline, it is locally hard but it does have a bit of bounce overall. The local hardness means you can sit on your sit bones without sinking in and spreading the pressure to soft tissue. The bit of bounce means the road shock won't like burst a spinal disk or anything.

Then too the surface is pretty slippery so it tends not to chafe.

No doubt there are other saddles with the same qualities or that accomplish the goals by whatever other means. And surely whether your sit bones carry your weight on the saddle depends a lot on geometry, on your body and your bike and how they fit together. The saddle has to be the right shape and position to work properly. Any saddle takes some fussing about to get the tilt right etc.

For many riders, including myself and my spouse, they are anything but comfortable. I tossed mine the moment decent alternatives came on the market in the late '70s and have never looked back.

+1

I rode a Brooks Pro for 30 years. I would take the Brooks off during the wet season (Oregon is wet!) and put a rain resistant saddle on my bike for winter riding. One winter I purchased a new high quality winter saddle, It was so much more comfortable than the Brooks, the Brooks never went back on the bike.

This Brooks was well broken in, and it was OK; but for me, there were other saddles that worked better. This saddle has a lot of miles on it.

The basic Brooks is convex, so are the basic body parts that will contact them, the result is that the contact areas upset into soft spots and the surrounding leather remains stiff and supportive.

The main cause of discomfort is not managing the upset process effectively, or riding a clapped out saddle. There may be body types that are not comfortable on a Brooks, but I don't know if that is the case or not, or just some people don't know how to ride them.

I don't personally find them super comfortable for the first half of the day, many saddles are that, the Brooks just rides better all day long, for me.

They are firm, so they allow you to sit on your sitbones rather than the softbits.
They become customised to your butt.
They are wide enough for me, without being too wide.
When broken in, they curve up in the back.
There is some breathability.

I have Brooks on all my bicycles, and find them very comfortable. I can ride long distances ... I can ride for days ... and no discomfort.

Most of my Brooks are the men's standard B17s, but Rowan put a women's B17 onto my new-to-me mountain bike, and near the end of the ride, he asked me how the saddle was. I hadn't even noticed it. And that's a sign of a comfortable saddle.

Most of it has been said. Thr key is that they deform to your shape. I'm not perfectly symmetrical, my pelvis is fractionally twisted. As a result my left sitbone takes a a little more weight than my right. The Brooks compensate for this - over time, the indentation on the left becomes a couple of millimetres deeper than that on the right, and my weight is diatributed evenly. I have one bike with a synthetic saddle on it, a Fizik Aliante that works pretty well, but nothing suits me quite as well as the Brooks.

For me the answer is that they aren't. I know they have a loyal following and that a lot of riders love them, but they just don't work out well for me. I'd rule one out based on comfort alone, but their weight would probably be enough for me to rule them out if I hadn't already ruled them out.

I have owned only one B17 and it was the only saddle that I actually grew to hate. I have successfully used a lot of saddles and generally found that I am fine with the saddles that came with my bikes even for high mileage multi-month touring. I'd happily do another Trans America length tour on any of them.

For me the B-17 was just OK right out of the box, nothing special, but OK. By the time it had really broken in I found it decidedly uncomfortable. I find the Prologo Kappa and some of the WTB saddles especially comfortable, but truth be told I am not that picky about saddles. The Brooks was the only one I have used that I wouldn't take on a long tour.

Note: These comments do not include some saddles that I used in the 50's and 60's. Some of those were awful. They also do not include a couple terrible "comfort" saddles that I briefly rode on rental bikes.

To be fair... When I say that the I grew to hate my Brooks, I admit that it probably was pretty "clapped out" at that point. The thing is that it was clapped out after what was probably only a single wet 10,000 mile or so year.

If it had stayed closer to what it was like when new, I'd say it was acceptably comfortable. Also, to be fair, I'll admit it may have stayed that way a lot longer if I had taken more care to keep it dry. I still wouldn't choose it though since it is a bit more than twice as heavy and a bit more than twice as expensive than something like the Prologo Kappa EVO which I found more comfortable and I don't need to give a second thought to getting the Kappa wet.

By way of paraphrasing what other have said:

It firmly supports your sit-bones by conforming itself to individual differences.

My experience too. Mine was a real a$$ hatchet. The Selle Italia saddle I successfully replaced it with is one that other riders have told me they can't stand (or sit, rather). My conclusion is that I have a weird butt, so don't pay attention to what I say. I wish everyone good luck in finding the one that works for him or her.

J' think?

Berthoud
Lepper
Persons
Selle Anatomica
Selle Monte Grappa
Tops


Gyes
Cardiff, made by Gyes
Rivet, manufactured by Gyes to their specifications
Velo Orange, made by Gyes


Dia Compe
Papillionaire
Torelli
Zimbale

(I suspect the Torelli, Dia Compe, Spa, Papillionaire and Zimbale saddles are also made by Gyes.)

Ideale - out of business, sometimes available on ebay or at cycle jumbles

My feeling is that if other saddles work for you (I have Terry saddles on all my bikes and love them), why put yourself through the Brooks break-in period, and why worry about your saddle if you have to leave the bike out in the rain. Yes, there are those who love their Brooks straight out of the box, but there are other people who only love them after 100, 500 or 1,000 miles, so why wait.

So maybe I would love a Brooks if I had the patience to try one, but I have not found the need to do so.

People have found them better for 100+ years, than what preceded it, a Piece of Wood.

I am about to take the gamble on a B67. I need its width (205mm per mfr.) due to my near-beach cruiser upright position I use on my LHT, needed due to wrist issues. I've got forward lean, but very little. I currently use a Terry Liberator Y Gel men's saddle, and at 173mm wide (per mfr.) it just does not give the right support for the upright position. Great saddle, wrong ergonomics on my bike.

Any experiences with the B67 for upright riding? It is one of the suggested models for upright seating at the Brooks website.

As you can see from the posts above, Brooks is a 'you love it or hate it' saddle. Here are the stories about Brooks from my house:

I have a B-17 on my commuter/long-haul bike, just got it this summer. At first I was not impressed, but by the time I put it away for the winter, I could see my seat-bones making an impact (literally) and then I was impressed. It likely took 500 miles for me to see the difference. I have typically used the original saddle that came with any bike I have (exception is my new Surly Pugsley, hated that right out of the gate).

Lisa bought a new Civia Twin Cities and really wanted to deck it out in classic gear (wicker baskets, brass bell, leather saddle). She picked up a Brooks women's saddle (forget the exact one); I mounted the Brooks on Friday night and Saturday she took a 40 mile ride on that saddle. She was super happy right out of the gate! And she has had serious issues with saddles in the past. She honestly wants a Brooks saddle for her other bikes (3 of them).

Brooks is a bit like any name brand, you are paying extra for the name. But they also have a very strong history.

It can take a very long time to break in a B17. At least that's been my experience. I've put over 1000 miles on mine and it's still not as comfortable as I'm hoping it will be someday.

they cost less Before they were Marketed By The Italian Company that took Brooks Over , and Trend Mongered .

Of course what wasn't Cheaper 20 & 30 years ago.


AFAIK the only Color they were made in is the one Doug shows .. all the other additional ones were due to the Ownership change.

The people (me included) that find them to be comfortable usually have one that is the right size and shape.

But, not all Brooks fit all butts. After hearing a lot of hype about how a B17 is the right saddle for touring, I bought one. And after a few hundred miles replaced it because I did not like it.

The Brooks Conquest fits me much better than the B17, I have Conquests on four different bikes. The Conquest is very similar in shape and size to the Brooks Pro, but with springs.

Tip the nose up just slightly.

I have a B-17 on my touring bike and it's comfortable enough that I have no reason to change it. I have another saddle on my road bike that is not a Brooks and again I have no reason to change it. There are a few really good saddles available. Brooks B-17 is one of them.

As an aside. I have read about having to break in a Brooks B-17 often. My saddle was as comfortable as sitting on air from the first ride. A couple of minor adjustments to the angle was the only thing I did. I did try that same saddle on my road bike and that didn't work out at all. It was very painful. I'm thinking bike geometry has a lot to do with the comfort of any saddle.

That's certainly true. I have a B17 on my flat-barred tourer, which was comfortable from the start and has only improved over the next 6000 miles. But I wouldn't think of putting it on a road bike. A Brooks Swift with Ti rails is the answer for that - for me.

The fact is, what works, works. Brooks saddles suit me. Fizik are pretty good for me. Specialized saddles cut me to ribbons. Everyone's different.

Looking around the room: a Vetta, a Turbo, whatever came stock on a Felt TK2 track bike in 2011, whatever came stock on the aluminum Motobecane Le Champion in 2005, a San Marco M, a San Marco C (had to get up and look at those; I had no idea what was on those bikes), a leather-covered unpadded plastic Unicanitor (stock on Peugeot's Campy-equipped track bike in 1968, evidently), and something out of the local bike shop's $5.00 takeoff saddle bucket.

Had a Brooks Professional for a couple of years in the early '70s; traded it for a Cool Gear "The Seat." Wish I had either of those still, but that's mostly nostalgia talking. The Brooks was fine, and so are all the others.

I have a Brooks flyer that is extremely comfortable, I frequently do 40+ mile rides on it without padded shorts and have no pain at all afterward. I gifted myself a Cambium C17 for Christmas and rode it a couple of times and don't find it to be anywhere near as comfortable as the flyer, I'm hoping that changes, but as attractive as the all weather aspect is I regret the purchase. I also have a Selle Anatomica that I find to be quite uncomfortable, at least when compared to the flyer. I keep thinking I'll CL the Selle but never get around to it.