simonhill wrote:You could consider a sprung saddle.
I use a sprung Brooks on my touring bike. It big, heavy but like sitting in a comfy armchair. Just what I want when touring.
If anyone wants one, I've a part-broken-in black Brooks Flyer sat on my spares shelf (as well as a brown B66 - I'd need to double-check that, as I've not ridden it) which I could be persuaded to sell. I removed it because the springs creak and I disliked the noise.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
robing wrote:Thanks for that. I've never had a leather saddle before. Just called Spa and they said takes about 500 miles to break in a spa one, bit less for a Brooks. I normally wear padded shorts (2 pairs lol) and have had some prostate issues in the past so it's quite an important choice for me. Will have a ponder. Clearly if I go for leather will need to do a lot of miles on it before I go on a major tour.
I was lucky enough that my B17 felt great on the first ride. It's all in the hips
An important first step in choosing a saddle is to have some idea of how far apart your sitbones are. This can be a bit hit & miss measuring it yourself so try & get a good friend (or wife/husband etc) to help. Delving about in the fleshy part of your arris can be a personal thing.
Once you have ascertained this measurement then go for a saddle with a width which exceeds this. I find the SPA Esk a comfortable fit at a fairly wide 215mm. This is considerably wider than most saddles & I don't think I have a large backside, just wider sitbones. Very comfy saddle but hard as a rock, even after 7000 miles or so, it will never break in.
One problem with leather saddles with no cut-out is that as the sit bone dimples form, you sit slightly lower in the saddle and the ridge at the front becomes relatively higher as a consequence. So pressure on the corresponding front part of the anatomy increases. Not good if you have prostate issues.
My experience of leather saddles is restricted to Brooks. If you trawl through the various threads we've had about them, the main consistent theme is that they are inconsistent. Unlike those made from synthetic materials, you cannot simply decide which model you like and then buy more assuming they will be the same. The best evidence I can give of this is that when leather saddles were the norm, riders switched their favourite saddle from bike-to-bike. In some cases, that was a sign of no cash / cyclists' traditional "thriftiness" but it applied to the top riders too.
If you have a model of saddle which you know is ok for you, I'd say stick with it, especially if you have problems eg prostate. The right leather saddle is the nearest thing to heaven on a bike, but it can take a lot of experimenting and luck to achieve it.
thirdcrank wrote:My experience of leather saddles is restricted to Brooks. If you trawl through the various threads we've had about them, the main consistent theme is that they are inconsistent. Unlike those made from synthetic materials, you cannot simply decide which model you like and then buy more assuming they will be the same. The best evidence I can give of this is that when leather saddles were the norm, riders switched their favourite saddle from bike-to-bike. In some cases, that was a sign of no cash / cyclists' traditional "thriftiness" but it applied to the top riders too.
If you have a model of saddle which you know is ok for you, I'd say stick with it, especially if you have problems eg prostate. The right leather saddle is the nearest thing to heaven on a bike, but it can take a lot of experimenting and luck to achieve it.
Spot on...nearest thing I have found to heaven..Everything else I have ever tried rubs,pinches,hurts somewhere and is v painful after few long days.
I have Selle Bassano saddles on all my bikes, the LEJOG i took part in last summer was ridden on one ... £19.99 from Decathlon .... all have seen 5k+ in milage and are comfortable from day one ..... But as all posters have said .. it's a very personal thing ... I am 6' 3" .. 100kg, and have narrow sit bones and a small ass .... Cannot cope with Brookes B17's or the SPA version ... nothing to do with the saddle, just my physiology.
“Quiet, calm deliberation disentangles every knot.”
Be more Mike.
The road goes on forever.
pwa wrote:One problem with leather saddles with no cut-out is that as the sit bone dimples form, you sit slightly lower in the saddle and the ridge at the front becomes relatively higher as a consequence. So pressure on the corresponding front part of the anatomy increases. Not good if you have prostate issues.
After 10 years of saddle,never noticed,on the brooks b17 short,,there is lots of clearence between saddle and front anatomy
robing wrote:Thanks for that. I've never had a leather saddle before. Just called Spa and they said takes about 500 miles to break in a spa one, bit less for a Brooks. I normally wear padded shorts (2 pairs lol) and have had some prostate issues in the past so it's quite an important choice for me. Will have a ponder. Clearly if I go for leather will need to do a lot of miles on it before I go on a major tour.
For me,,wearing more and more layers just adds to the pressure.Im 55,,,cycled for days on end with b17 short and there is clear day light between man bits and saddle..
robing wrote:Thanks for that. I've never had a leather saddle before. Just called Spa and they said takes about 500 miles to break in a spa one, bit less for a Brooks. I normally wear padded shorts (2 pairs lol) and have had some prostate issues in the past so it's quite an important choice for me. Will have a ponder. Clearly if I go for leather will need to do a lot of miles on it before I go on a major tour.
For me,,wearing more and more layers just adds to the pressure.Im 55,,,cycled for days on end with b17 short and there is clear day light between man bits and saddle..Maybe because its the short version,/quote]
pwa wrote:One problem with leather saddles with no cut-out is that as the sit bone dimples form, you sit slightly lower in the saddle and the ridge at the front becomes relatively higher as a consequence. So pressure on the corresponding front part of the anatomy increases. Not good if you have prostate issues.
After 10 years of saddle,never noticed,on the brooks b17 short,,there is lots of clearence between saddle and front anatomy
What tilt do you have on your saddle? Nose up, down or level? I find I only feel stable on my leather saddle with them level. If I tilt the nose up I feel pressure at the front, and if I tilt the nose down at all I slide forward too much. So I tilt the nose down by 2 or 3mm to get rid of that pressure, but as the dimples develop the nose does not sink by the same amount...
landsurfer wrote:I have Selle Bassano saddles on all my bikes, the LEJOG i took part in last summer was ridden on one ... £19.99 from Decathlon .... all have seen 5k+ in milage and are comfortable from day one ..... But as all posters have said .. it's a very personal thing ... I am 6' 3" .. 100kg, and have narrow sit bones and a small ass .... Cannot cope with Brookes B17's or the SPA version ... nothing to do with the saddle, just my physiology.
I have a Decathlon near me but can't see that one. Several Selle Italia models listed at various prices starting from £25.
