# Brooks saddles



## Travis Morud (Feb 16, 2009)

I am considering a new saddle for my Raleigh Supercourse. I'm wanting comfort over weight. Is the Brooks B17 the way to go or would it look out of place on a carbon fiber road bike?


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

Brooks sometimes look odd on modern bikes but if the Brooks is what your arse wants its worth it. I would never sacrifice comfort for style. 

There are other Brooks models that are more "sporty" but they may or may not be the right saddle for you.


----------



## Bocephus Jones II (Oct 7, 2004)

Travis Morud said:


> I am considering a new saddle for my Raleigh Supercourse. I'm wanting comfort over weight. Is the Brooks B17 the way to go or would it look out of place on a carbon fiber road bike?


I got a Brooks Swallow for my Colnago Master X a while back--mainly because I liked the look with the lugged steel. It is a pretty comfortable saddle, but I can't say it's any more comfortable than the Fizik Arione it replaced--and Brooks have really short rails so it can be a challenge to get the saddle back far enough without a large setback post (note...had to buy a new post also). A B17 will look funny on a "modern" bike IMO, but if it works better than other saddles, go for it.


----------



## Reynolds531 (Nov 8, 2002)

Travis Morud said:


> I am considering a new saddle for my Raleigh Supercourse. I'm wanting comfort over weight. Is the Brooks B17 the way to go or would it look out of place on a carbon fiber road bike?


I have 3 bikes with Brooks B17 saddles, but it seems illogical to put one on a carbon fiber bike. Weight is the only advantage of carbons fiber and you'll completely negate it with a 540 g saddle. So you end up paying a premium for a bike with all the disadvantges of CF but none of the advantages.

A B17 is designed for a more upright seating position than is typically used on a racing bike. If the handlbars are below the saddle a B17 might not be the best choice.

Finally, yes in my opinion it will look (and be) out of place.


----------



## lemond2001 (Nov 22, 2001)

Any Brooks should fit you just fine. They are widder than most road saddles now. Most saddle are so narrow 125 to 135 mm that many people are sitting between their sit bones and wonder why they get knee pain, hot spots on their feet, gunk goes numb, cant ride more than an hour, or their butt hurts.

If you are riding the super course then you need to look more at the Brooks Swift or Swallow. The B 17 is more for a up right sitting postion, say touring or mountain biking. Yes you can use it...but because its so wide you sometimes get the feeling that you need to push yourself back on the seat from time to time because of how it flairs out. The swift is going to be a little bit stiffer because it has more leather on the side compaired to the Swallow. Note:more leather on the side skirts make the saddle stiffer.

I have a B 17 and the Swift. I use the Swift on my Road Bike the B 17 for touring and mountain biking. The Swift and Swallow have long rails for adjustments, but if you get the B 17 you will probably need a different seatpost with more setback. I used to run Flite seats for my road bike but after going to the Swift i wouldnt go back.

Now the other thing with Brooks Saddles is that they are taller. Which means you will loose about 1/2 to 3/4 of an inch of seatpost. I was using a Thomson Setback seatpost but had to switch it out because the saddle pushed it down to the angle part.

Yes, the Brooks are heavier..and they will never win in the weight department. But you can still use it 30 years from now...unlike all the plastic saddle that will wear out in 2 or 3 years. 

hope that helps...


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

Brooks Swift saddle & Brooks bar tape on a Litespeed


----------



## laffeaux (Dec 12, 2001)

Try before you buy. I personally think that the B-17 is not particularly comfortable. It's too wide for me, and interferes with my pedal stroke. I have a Brooks Swift on a mountain bike and I like it much better - the narrow shape works better for me.


----------



## Crithater (Sep 27, 2005)

Reynolds531 said:


> I have 3 bikes with Brooks B17 saddles, but it seems illogical to put one on a carbon fiber bike. Weight is the only advantage of carbons fiber and you'll completely negate it with a 540 g saddle. So you end up paying a premium for a bike with all the disadvantges of CF but none of the advantages.
> 
> A B17 is designed for a more upright seating position than is typically used on a racing bike. If the handlbars are below the saddle a B17 might not be the best choice.
> 
> ...


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

Reynolds531 said:


> I have 3 bikes with Brooks B17 saddles, but it seems illogical to put one on a carbon fiber bike. Weight is the only advantage of carbons fiber and you'll completely negate it with a 540 g saddle. So you end up paying a premium for a bike with all the disadvantges of CF but none of the advantages.
> 
> A B17 is designed for a more upright seating position than is typically used on a racing bike. If the handlbars are below the saddle a B17 might not be the best choice.
> 
> Finally, yes in my opinion it will look (and be) out of place.


To me, it's like ordering a large Big Mac meal and a Diet Coke. Yes, it may seem funny, but it's saving you the calories that a regular Coke would have (and the sugar, if you're Type II like me). Putting a Brooks on a carbon bike makes the bike weigh the same as an aluminum bike, but if the end result is more comfortable, who has the right to say it's "wrong"? The end result is lighter than an Aluminum bike with a Brooks...


----------



## vkalia (Jun 3, 2009)

300gm of additional saddle weight really doesnt negate "all the advantages" of carbon, IMO.

V.


----------



## Bocephus Jones II (Oct 7, 2004)

lemond2001 said:


> Swift and Swallow have long rails for adjustments, but if you get the B 17 you will probably need a different seatpost with more setback. I used to run Flite seats for my road bike but after going to the Swift i wouldnt go back.


But still not as long as something like the Arione...I can get 2-3cm further back on my Arione than with the Swallow.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

PlatyPius said:


> To me, it's like ordering a large Big Mac meal and a Diet Coke. Yes, it may seem funny, but it's saving you the calories that a regular Coke would have (and the sugar, if you're Type II like me). Putting a Brooks on a carbon bike makes the bike weigh the same as an aluminum bike, but if the end result is more comfortable, who has the right to say it's "wrong"? The end result is lighter than an Aluminum bike with a Brooks...


I am in real trouble. I have all steel bikes and they all have a Brooks saddle on them. :eek6:


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

I have 3 bikes with B17-N on them, including an all carbon....I would not change any of them


----------



## walter2007 (Nov 22, 2007)

Reynolds531 said:


> Weight is the only advantage of carbons fiber and you'll completely negate it with a 540 g saddle.



You're kidding right.


----------



## George M (Sep 25, 2008)

I agree with everything that's been said. I have a Brooks Swift on my Specialized Roubaix all carbon bike and I have a Fizik Aliante on my Look and I have to say they are both pretty comfortable. I have a B17 on my touring setup and just for the heck of it I flipped the Aliante over and set it on top of the B17. It's almost identical minus the rivets. Then I put them beside each other and the curve is almost the same as well. Anyhow I like them both.


----------



## Travis Morud (Feb 16, 2009)

Thanks for all of the info everyone. Appreciate it.


----------



## Reynolds531 (Nov 8, 2002)

walter2007 said:


> You're kidding right.


 Not at all. With computer aided design and advanced manufacturing techniques a steel frame could be designed and engineered to have virtually the same performance and ride qualities as any CF frame, except for the weight. The only benefit CF brings to the rider is lower weight. It also may be less expensive to build and bring more profit to the bike companies.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

A from Il said:


> I am in real trouble. I have all steel bikes and they all have a Brooks saddle on them. :eek6:


My two Brooks are also on steel bikes. The Rawland, and my 1998 Marin roadie.

Hell.

*3* Brooks. I keep forgetting about the vintage B72 on my cruiser.


----------



## Reynolds531 (Nov 8, 2002)

Crithater said:


> How can something be out of place if it comfortable and gets you out on the bike more or lets you ride longer.


Aesthetically, Mudflaps are out of place on a Lamborghini, a thong is out of place on grandma's ass, and a Brooks B-17 is out of place on a carbon fiber racing bike.



Crithater said:


> I would love to see Armstrong or the Schlecks ride a Brooks saddle on a stage of the ToF just to watch the copycats.


Yea, like they're going to put a 560 g Brook B-17 on their bikes and race up the col du Tormulet. Not even for $5 million each.


----------



## Reynolds531 (Nov 8, 2002)

Travis Morud said:


> Thanks for all of the info everyone. Appreciate it.


 yea, but are you putting your butt on the Brooks, or not?

even after all I said, I still would try it if I were you.


----------



## Bocephus Jones II (Oct 7, 2004)

Reynolds531 said:


> Aesthetically, Mudflaps are out of place on a Lamborghini, a thong is out of place on grandma's ass, and a Brooks B-17 is out of place on a carbon fiber racing bike.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, like they're going to put a 560 g Brook B-17 on their bikes and race up the col du Tormulet. Not even for $5 million each.


Hey...some grandmas might be hot enough to pull it off.

//if he rocks the B-17 on the CF bike he should also put one of those sheepskin covers over it. Might as well go all the way.


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

Gee, I have a B17 on my TREK Carbon and IMO it looks great, and feels even better.
I don't care about the extra weight, but I love the extra comfort.


----------



## jd3 (Oct 8, 2004)

I can't believe no one has mentioned Sella Selle An-Atomica yet. These saddles a re quickly becoming popular in our club. Many on carbon bikes. It looks a little slicker than a Brooks. I had a guy tell me today " I did a century and never thought about my butt". I do love mine on my CF bike.
http://www.selleanatomica.com/dollar buyer.htm


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

fact is I am a firm believer in function over form, I can saddle up and ride my carbon, Brooks equipped bike for 5 hours without dismounting.....same and my steel and aluminum. I have never been able to do that with any other saddle. And I like the way they look, since they are my bikes, that is the ONLY person that matters. I don't really give a rats a$$ whether anyone else likes the way my bike looks.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

Touch0Gray said:


> fact is I am a firm believer in function over form, I can saddle up and ride my carbon, Brooks equipped bike for 5 hours without dismounting.....same and my steel and aluminum. I have never been able to do that with any other saddle. And I like the way they look, since they are my bikes, that is the ONLY person that matters. *I don't really give a rats a$$ whether anyone else likes the way my bike looks.*


You will be taken in for re-education. We build bikes for the aesthetic pleasure of others.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

PlatyPius said:


> You will be taken in for re-education. We build bikes for the aesthetic pleasure of others.


What's this *WE*....I don't have a bike shop!....I know how running a service business works....the customer is always right (until they leave)


----------



## walter2007 (Nov 22, 2007)

Reynolds531 said:


> Not at all. With computer aided design and advanced manufacturing techniques a steel frame could be designed and engineered to have virtually the same performance and ride qualities as any CF frame, except for the weight. The only benefit CF brings to the rider is lower weight. It also may be less expensive to build and bring more profit to the bike companies.



While weight is one of the major advantages of carbon fiber over metal there are more. Just to list a few. . . .

Carbon fiber has a better fatigue life than steel, titanium, or aluminum (it does explode though).

The resins typically used to bond the fibers offer extremely better vibration damping also.

Carbon fiber has a major advantage when it comes to rust and oxidation.

Carbon fiber has unlimited design applications, such as aerodynamic tubes and strengthening /stiffness where needed. 

I’m not arguing which material is best for bike building just simply stating that weight is not the ONLY advantage.

As far as 540g brooks COMPLETELY NEGATING is concerned by the time you take the difference in weight from a brooks to your saddle of choice a good bowel movement would negate your math.


----------



## handsomerob (Oct 5, 2005)

George M said:


> I agree with everything that's been said. I have a Brooks Swift on my Specialized Roubaix all carbon bike and I have a Fizik Aliante on my Look and I have to say they are both pretty comfortable. I have a B17 on my touring setup and just for the heck of it I flipped the Aliante over and set it on top of the B17. It's almost identical minus the rivets. Then I put them beside each other and the curve is almost the same as well. Anyhow I like them both.


I very much like my B-17 Standard and my Aliante. Personally, I really can't imagine sacrificing arse comfort for aesthetics. If you get to mile 50 and you find yourself thinking about discomfort in your tender areas... then you need to find another saddle. Although if that saddle is a new Brooks, you really need to give it around 500 miles of saddle time to start finding a sweet spot for your sit bones.

Discomfort is usually a sign something isn't working. If you find that you have sore shoulders or numb hands, you are not balanced on the bike and among other remedies you can give your saddle a little more nose up (on a B-17, it may even surprise you how much nose up) If you can't find a happy place for your sit bones, you need to re-evaluate your saddle width. 

If your goal is to have a nice bike ride, then ride what is comfortable. If your primary goal is to have the lightest bike on the block, then let comfort be damned and make all your decisions based on how many grams you can shave. Let your priority make your decision.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

jd3 said:


> I had a guy tell me today " I did a century and never thought about my butt".


as it should be........I never think about my tail when I ride...ever. I don't care what kind of saddle a person uses...all I know is that MINE has to be comfortable!


----------



## Serotta 63 (Nov 2, 2009)

Got a Steel , a Titanium, and a Carbon bike-- all have a B-17..

The only reason I bought a carbon bike was to offset the weight of the Brooks.


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

I have been on a B17 for a year and it is very comfy, but a little wide for aggressive training.
Just switched to a Team Pro Chrome and I love it.


----------



## saddle tramp (Feb 22, 2006)

I've been searcing for a saddle all my life. At 50 I finally tried a B17 and like it a ton. I tried a B17 narrow and gave it away. 

I have a sprung B67 which ended up on my Schwinn Airdyne basement spinner. Low and behold the tension bolt/pin snapped in half the other day after work. Probably 10K+ miles on it off the stationary and bike combined. I'm 160lbs so it's not the weight that broke it.

Are these tension bolts replaceable?


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

saddle tramp said:


> I've been searcing for a saddle all my life. At 50 I finally tried a B17 and like it a ton. I tried a B17 narrow and gave it away.
> 
> I have a sprung B67 which ended up on my Schwinn Airdyne basement spinner. Low and behold the tension bolt/pin snapped in half the other day after work. Probably 10K+ miles on it off the stationary and bike combined. I'm 160lbs so it's not the weight that broke it.
> 
> Are these tension bolts replaceable?


yest they are....and available

http://www.wallbike.com/brooks/partsandaccessories.html


----------



## saddle tramp (Feb 22, 2006)

sweet & tanx.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

no prob......


----------



## George M (Sep 25, 2008)

Touch0Gray said:


> yest they are....and available
> 
> http://www.wallbike.com/brooks/partsandaccessories.html



Same thing happened to me and it's a bear trying to get the other one in. Save the nose piece the new or old one may break. When it happened to me, the only thing I could get from Wallingford was the bolt. Good luck.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

you may need to take the front rivets out and replace as well I am not sure. I have COMPLETELY disassembled an old Ideal saddle (same construction) to chop and rebuild)
I have never had to take my Brooks apart


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

Personal taste.....
I personally think Brooks look cool on an older type bike but I personally do't think it would look good on a modern bike BUT who cares?? If you like the way it feels run it
Personally I don't find Brooks saddles comfortable and I sold the one I had..


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

BikeFixer said:


> Personal taste.....
> I personally think Brooks look cool on an older type bike but I personally do't think it would look good on a modern bike BUT who cares?? If you like the way it feels run it
> Personally I don't find Brooks saddles comfortable and I sold the one I had..



It's all about the BOTTOM line.................................


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

Touch0Gray said:


> It's all about the BOTTOM line.................................


Bahda-boom.


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

got any idea how long i waited to use that on a saddle thread?


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

Touch0Gray said:


> got any idea how long i waited to use that on a saddle thread?


42 years?


----------



## Touch0Gray (May 29, 2003)

well....I was riding on brooks then.....


----------

