Cycling UK Forum

robc02 wrote:................
I don't consciously use KOPS - but I bet I'm not far off it. Many people find it a good starting point (I did, many years ago) and then make adjustments to suit their own style and preferences.

I did it the other way round....I was barely aware of KOPS until I joined this forum, I just set the saddle where it felt right, and where clubmates said I looked right. When I got my plumbline on the job, guess where I'm sitting.....
KOPS isn't a magic bullet, and I'm certain it won't suit some folk, but until somebody comes up with something better......

Hi,
I rode a brooks swallow back on my viking in the seventies, Very comfortable, but distances were short.
I by chance fitted a selle royal gel saddle to my MTB, the very same for sale in ALDI for £9.99.
I dont ride anything else for touring or MTB, the downside is that they have limited life but the pro is that once fitted it is already broken in.
At £9.99 each I can afford several in stock.
I got rid of my brooks b17 std as it has too much acre-ridge of leather which rubbed thighs, probably ok up to 100 miles.

531colin wrote:

Valbrona wrote:I have never met anyone requiring the use of an inline seatpost on a touring-style frame ... exceptions being those on frames that are too large for them, ie. the wrong size. Hint, hint, hint.

And never use KOPS. They were using KOPS to set up racing bikes in the 1950s. Never listen to whoever has told you to use KOPS in the setting up of a touring-syle bike like a SLHT.

Remedial action: Ditch the inline post for one with a good amount of laybeck. Move saddle back. Raise bars and/or maybe shorten stem.

And why do so many people think that Brooks are comfortable? Saddle design has moved on over the five decades since Brooks were all the rage, and nowadays there is gel, EVA padding, and elastomers to make cyclists comfy.

Never listen to anybody who tells you to ignore a tried and tested way of setting up your bike then doesn't suggest anything better to take its place.

I'll second that Colin. I've used KOPS to set up my bikes and found that everything (numb nuts aside) feels pretty right.

I appreciate I haven't put a photo of my SLHT on (I'm a bit of a technophobe) but it's a 62cm frame and the steerer is uncut so that saddle and bars are at the same level. I've tried (and binned) plaggy saddles in the past. If they suit you that's fine but they made my backside feel like it had been rogered by an elephant

I'll try playing around with the angle of the saddle and the other tips. Thanks to all who replied, much appreciated

I think KOPS has its place as a 'simple starting point' for performance orientated cyclists new to road riding. Your new members at a road racing club type of thing.

But how much use KOPS is for your average recreational or touring cyclist, I don't know. And this is particularly the case in hilly areas or when loaded panniers force in-the-saddle climbing. Surely KOPS can put the saddle too far forward for your average mere mortal?

Every shop should have a goniometer. See the Holmes method: http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... ght-14608/

yakdiver wrote:One like this will help

Have to admit that i suffered from the same problem for a couple of years, and it was only when i changed my saddle to the one in yakdiver's post did things start to become better.. if i knew what i know now i would not have left it so long to find a solution.. its one of those things that no man should ignore (unless of course, they're thinking of becoming a monk).

Valbrona wrote:.......... how much use KOPS is for your average recreational or touring cyclist, I don't know. ....... in hilly areas or when loaded panniers force in-the-saddle climbing. Surely KOPS can put the saddle too far forward for your average mere mortal?...............

I can test that one by putting a long layback post in a frame with a 71 deg seat tube angle in order to get significantly further back than KOPS.....but then I have to use your derided obsolete leather saddles, because I simply can't sit on these modern sweaty things constructed from plastic.

With the industry going for steeper and steeper angles all the time, you're probably right!

The OP might like to consider cutting a slot in the top of his B17 and lacing the sides, like the Brooks Imperial. There are articles on how to best do the modification, which I can't find just now.

Valbrona wrote: ...And why do so many people think that Brooks are comfortable? Saddle design has moved on over the five decades since Brooks were all the rage, and nowadays there is gel, EVA padding, and elastomers to make cyclists comfy.

There are many, many different modern saddles and there are many many different (modern..?) backsides, too. Chances are that there is a modern saddle that might suit any given backside shape/riding position.

But.... how many of the blessed things would you need to go through to find it, exactly?

The point is that a Brooks leather saddle becomes the same shape as the posterior that pummels it (or possibly the other way round... ? ). No other saddle type does that in the same way.

If you took a poll of people who gave a leather saddle a proper go ( a couple of thousand miles or so) then I'd expect you to find that about 3/4 of them liked it very much, and of the remainder, in about half of the cases the origin of the discomfort might really be related to clothing or something, not the saddle per se. I doubt you would find so many happy users with any other single saddle type.

If you look at the various 'novel' modern saddle designs they are all variations on things that were tried (and abandoned/rejected in many cases) tens of years ago at least. Only the materials are different, and they are not that much different TBH.

BTW I ride both types, and for comfort, I prefer leather saddles on the whole. However I do find them less suitable for bikes that get ridden in the wet a lot, get muddy a lot, or that live out of doors. I've had several brooks saddles fail because of damp/mould etc. and I've badly stretched them by riding them whilst wet, too.

cheers

Hi,

Brucey wrote:BTW I ride both types, and for comfort, I prefer leather saddles on the whole. However I do find them less suitable for bikes that get ridden in the wet a lot, get muddy a lot, or that live out of doors. I've had several brooks saddles fail because of damp/mould etc. and I've badly stretched them by riding them whilst wet, too.
cheers

Gone are the days when I needed Three plastic bags and elastic bands, one for the saddle and two for your feet
And it worked.

Brucey wrote:The point is that a Brooks leather saddle becomes the same shape as the posterior that pummels it (or possibly the other way round... ? ). No other saddle type does that in the same way.

My Dad told me the same thing when I got my first bike in 1966!! He even paid the extra to get the bike upgraded with a Brooks saddle. He may have been right about shape, but he was oh so wrong about comfort. I always found it uncomfortable, even after it was worn in after a few years. Since then I carried on trying different saddles without success. I've had pain and numbness after anything more than a couple of hours in the saddle ever since.

Don't neglect this as I did. Things got so bad that I had to go to the doctor and eventually I was diagnosed with pudendal nerve entrapment around 2006. I had to have about 5/6 years off the bike (and some Alexander Technique lessons, but that's a different story) before I tried cycling again. This time I only tried saddles with holes in, like the one pictured further up this thread. I've found the ladies models with holes in most comfortable. These ensure that the ONLY pressure is on the sit bones. I can't tolerate any pressure at all in the middle.

Ive recently switched to a B17. I've got it set up where I felt was a comfortable position (which turned out to be KOPS) and flat, and ridden it now for about 80 miles. With my old saddle, I got numb gentlemen parts, I no longer get these. I now get a painful backside which I did not previously. I'm hoping that goes as the saddle wears in!

Never complain about a saddle until you've ridden a Raleigh Chopper from one end of the country to the other.

Hi,

Mick F wrote:Never complain about a saddle until you've ridden a Raleigh Chopper from one end of the country to the other.

Only a complete Knumpty would do that Do you get a badge ?
Anyone ever tried TT'ing on one

I rode that beast for 1,500miles in total, and I never got used to that saddle.

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
I rode a brooks swallow back on my viking in the seventies, Very comfortable, but distances were short.
I by chance fitted a selle royal gel saddle to my MTB, the very same for sale in ALDI for £9.99.
I dont ride anything else for touring or MTB, the downside is that they have limited life but the pro is that once fitted it is already broken in.
At £9.99 each I can afford several in stock.
I got rid of my brooks b17 std as it has too much acre-ridge of leather which rubbed thighs, probably ok up to 100 miles.

I have one of the Aldi saddles on my on/off road bike which I commute with and ride off road trails, it is very good for the money but the cover is just starting to split after about four years fairly light use. I recently bought a spare as well, which must mean something. I find I have good comfort with it off road for several hours, but only around an hour on road.

OTOH on my road/Audax bike I get all day comfort with my trusty Brooks B17 Narrow. I had a similar experience with a standard B17 to yours, so I would suggest you try one of the narrower Brooks variants, such as B17 Narrow or Swallow, or possibly SPA Wharfe http://www.spacycles.co.uk/products.php ... 0s204p2668 if you ever want to try a leather saddle again.