Cycling UK Forum

pete75 wrote:Brooks saddles are more expensively finished than the Spa ones so will cost a bit more though whether or not the whole price difference is justifiable is debatable but presumably Brooks employees in Birmingham will be more richly rewarded those in Taiwan who make the Spa.

I'm not sure that this is true.

The Nidd for example has leather which has been waterproofed to some extent unlike the B17. The Nidd has also a waterproof membrane attached to the underside presumably for those who ride without mudguards. The leather used in the Nidd is very much thicker than the Brooks and has holes in the wings which can be used to tension the wings by means of a cord while the B17 has not. The saddle rails on the Nidd are longer and the toe-piece has a more practical Allen-headed bolt rather than the strangely sized nut used on the Brooks.

I haven't looked at the more expensive models but if these are similarly finished to the Nidd then they represent good value.

While I've used Brooks saddles for close on forty years when comparing the B17 to the Nidd I do see the Nidd as the superior product.

The Brooks has the feel of something that hasn't been developed for decades - such a pity.
The leather of my broken B17 suited me better though - more give in it - if the Nidd's rivet holes weren't in different places, I would be tempted to fit it in place of the Nidd's ..

Early days yet though - I'm certainly having no problems over short distances ...

Oh yes, and it was a surprise having to move the saddle forward a little bit on the clamp of my layback seatpost.

Brooks are lucky - that Spa don't bring out a Special Copper version.

georgew wrote:the toe-piece has a more practical Allen-headed bolt rather than the strangely sized nut used on the Brooks.

If Brooks have a strangely sized nut then so do the Spa saddles - the spanner supplied with my Nidd fits Brooks as well. Brooks don't need the Allen head because the bolt is locked into the toe piece so will not turn when adjusting tension with the nut.

The Brooks bolt may be locked but you can't turn the nut with a regular spanner - there's not enough space - so you need their special spanner. Mine won't fit my Spa saddle, but the Spa spanner will loosely fit my Brooks. So maybe the Brooks nut is an odd size - maybe an Imperial legacy?

With the Spa the Allen bolt is a standard size, I think mostly the tension will keep the nut from rotating but if not you do need the Spa spanner, so yes the Spa does need 2 tools instead of 1. They're both supplied.

My Spa Nidd is a matt finish unlike the polished surface of the Brooks, and after 600km it got a sort of mottled surface (cut out by me):

Great picture! Interesting modification. Not one i'd do for myself though

MockCyclist wrote:The Brooks bolt may be locked but you can't turn the nut with a regular spanner - there's not enough space - so you need their special spanner. Mine won't fit my Spa saddle, but the Spa spanner will loosely fit my Brooks. So maybe the Brooks nut is an odd size - maybe an Imperial legacy?

the spanner size on most Brooks saddles is 0.525" (13.34mm) i.e. the 1/4 Whit/ 5/16" BSF size, for the simple reason that the screw thread is indeed 5/16" BSF I think. A 14mm spanner will be a loose (bad) fit on such a nut.

At one time this spanner size was required for several commonplace bicycle fittings.

cheers

Must admit that until I got a spanner with my Spa saddle I'd always used snipe nosed pliers for adjusting Brooks tensioner nuts.

I have found my home made spanner works on any saddle so far.

5/16" BSF nuts are usually made a gnats' under so measure 13.2mm or so. A rather poorly made but nominally 13.0mm spanner may also measure 13.2mm....

The 'proper' Brooks spanner is quite short; this may mean that it discourages overtightening somewhat.

cheers

I haven't paid attention so i'd guess it doesn't fit exactly on any of them, but it does what I need from it.

My nidds been on approx 150-200 miles now on my rough stuff tourer and its just starting to give and a few wrinkles are appearing. It's never been uncomfy just a little hard and the last twenty miles I didn't even notice it... Chuffed with mine cheap and good is rare these days

WrightsW5 wrote:I'd choose a Nidd anyway but it's a reminder of how much better it is: chrome metalwork, longer rails, skived sides and waterproof underside. Shame the rear badge doesn't look better though.

My actual most wanted non-vintage saddle would be a Spa Wharfe in honey colour.

OK, but is it more "comfortable"? That would be my main criterion.

It's a case of try it and see with any saddle though. E.g. so many people love the Team Pro and some people own several - but I can't cope with them. For me I know the B17 is good but many people are left in agony by them.

WrightsW5 wrote:It's a case of try it and see with any saddle though. E.g. so many people love the Team Pro and some people own several - but I can't cope with them. For me I know the B17 is good but many people are left in agony by them.

I haven't tried a Nidd as I'm very happy with B17. I even have a new one just in case I need it!