# to spring or not to spring? - question for Brooks lovers



## bolandjd (Sep 12, 2008)

Hello all. I'm new to this forum and I have a question about Brooks saddles. I want to get either a B17 or a Flyer for my Surly. I'm a clydesdale at 260 lbs. I commute on the bike daily and like to do dayrides and fitness rides. I don't do multi-day tours. I don't ride particularly hard when commuting, but I do like to get on the gas when riding recreationally or working out. I think I want a Flyer for the added shock absorbion, but will that saddle have me pogoing all over the place when I start spinning hard? Is my weight too much for those springs? Or does the "hammock effect" of the standard B17 combined with my steel frame make springs overkill anyway? Any advice from those who know?


----------



## treebound (Oct 16, 2003)

How is your Surly set up? And how much can you afford?

I'd suggest going with the standard B17 if it fits your sitbone width and give it a chance to get broken in. If it doesn't work out then go with the springs. Or go with a suspension seatpost. Or wait for the new Brooks offering this fall with the cutout and go with that one. Or wait for additional posts to see what others recommend.


----------



## averen (Jan 1, 2008)

I have a B17 Special that I use for exactly the uses you mentioned. It's my commuter/tourer bike (also steel)...but it also sees some group ride action too. I ride pretty hard on my commute home. I have not used any of their sprung saddles and personally I don't really see the need. I'm a clyde as well at 230lbs.

The sprung saddles are generally wider and made for a more upright riding position. Brooks saddles are very nice but they're not right for all conditions/everyone. On commuters they can actually be somewhat of a pain especially if you ride rain or shine. The saddle can handle some moisture but you don't want to get caught out in a good rain without some sort of cover on it. I generally carry a plastic bag with me so that if it starts raining I can slip it on. Plastic saddles don't have this problem...which is really the only better thing about plastic over leather...oh, and price  

Jared


----------



## bolandjd (Sep 12, 2008)

treebound said:


> How is your Surly set up? And how much can you afford?
> 
> I'd suggest going with the standard B17 if it fits your sitbone width and give it a chance to get broken in. If it doesn't work out then go with the springs. Or go with a suspension seatpost. Or wait for the new Brooks offering this fall with the cutout and go with that one. Or wait for additional posts to see what others recommend.


Long Haul Trucker that is still basically stock. The tops of the handlebars are a cm or two higher than the saddle. I don't mind popping for a nice saddle, but I can't really afford to buy both and experiment (at least in the short term). Thanks for the suggestion.


----------



## treebound (Oct 16, 2003)

B17 then would be my choice, and I'm around 240ish.

Here's the B17 Imperial on my Fillmore, this is the saddle that Brooks will be releasing sometime this Fall:



















Years ago I had a standard and well broken-in B17 on a Raleigh Competition Carlton, had just enough give to it to soften the road but gave no noticible bounce while hammering down the roads.

I'll probably be swapping the B17 Imperial over to a Schwinn LeTour or converted Timberlin MTB I'm setting up for commuting/distance use.

One of the online vendors used to have a sitbone spacing dimensional chart to help decide if you need a standard, wide, or narrow style saddle. A google search should find it if it's still online.


----------



## PBike (Jul 6, 2007)

treebound said:


> B17 then would be my choice, and I'm around 240ish.
> 
> Here's the B17 Imperial on my Fillmore, this is the saddle that Brooks will be releasing sometime this Fall:
> 
> ...


What is your impression of the Imperial over the standard version? I am getting ready to purchase a B17 but may wait if the Imperial gives some added comfort.

Thanks!


----------



## brianmcg (Oct 12, 2002)

I tried out both the B-17 and the Champion Flyer at the same time. I first tried out the Flyer. After riding it for about two weeks, I put on the B-17. I wasn't expecting much of a difference, but the difference was huge. I really didn't think the springs were flexing that much. 

They really do take out a lot of bumps from the road. My back actually would start hurting when on the B-17. I sent the B-17 back to www.wallbike.com and am loving my Champion Flyer.

Also I thought the Champion Flyer looked better on my Long Haul Trucker.


----------



## bolandjd (Sep 12, 2008)

Thanks for the feedback all. I'm gathering that I would likely be quite happy with the regular B17, yet I'm still tempted to spring for the Flyer (no pun intented). Choices, choices.


----------



## treebound (Oct 16, 2003)

PBike said:


> What is your impression of the Imperial over the standard version? I am getting ready to purchase a B17 but may wait if the Imperial gives some added comfort.
> 
> Thanks!


My old B17 would sometimes lead to numbness, the Imperial seems to totally take care of the issue. In the test report thread on another site a few folks mentioned better results riding without padded shorts. Apparently Brooks is also going to offer a cutting service to cut slots into existing saddles (if I read it right). A few of the testers were not totally happy with the Imperial, but the majority seemed to rate it highly.

I just PM'd you a link to it.


----------



## treebound (Oct 16, 2003)

Have you considered the B72?








imagelinked from https://www.wallbike.com/jpgs/B72.JPG

I'm giving serious thought to getting one of these next year for the commuter bike.


----------



## buck-50 (Sep 20, 2005)

I've got 2 b-17s and a flyer. (and a sprung persons saddle, but the less said about that the better)

I found the flyer to be overkill on the road but awesome on my MTB- I rode both when I was at about your weight. B-17s are (if they fit your butt) insanely comfortable. The flyer just adds bounce.

Now, the flyer lives on the stoker seat of our tandem- my wife appreciates the bump protection.


----------



## Slim Again Soon (Oct 25, 2005)

*B-72*

Man, that's some funky spring weirdness.

But at least not scary, like some of those sprung Brooks saddles.

I wouldn't want my junior partners near some of those.


----------



## bolandjd (Sep 12, 2008)

No, honestly, I hadn't really considered the B-72. I figured it was more of a sit upright city bike or cruiser kind of saddle, but I've been known to be wrong before. What's the scoop on it? Is that funky spring sort of a half-way between unsprung and the usual double spring setup?


----------



## treebound (Oct 16, 2003)

Yep, as I understand it, the springcoils are sort of not quite springs but do spring a little. I've never tried one but want to. It looks sort of narrow in the nose as well which might help for those with bigger thighs. I can't find a top view of it showing the profile.

I've got a saddle at home on one bike that has a bit of a flare and it always bugs me in the back inner thigh area, other saddles I have have a more drastic transition on the sides between the nose to seating area.


----------

