# Poll: What saddles do "us" females prefer?



## MJCBH (Nov 25, 2002)

I ride the SLR gel but am thinking about trying something different. Loved the aliante but needed a cutout. Specialized Toupe has got me thinkin' (I was surprised to find out that I would probably need a 143 width - guess i got a big arse!).


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

Speaking of womens saddles, I have a question on what women prefer. My gf hasn't ridden in 8 months mainly because her old mens saddle (rightfully) sucked. I got her a Bontrager CRZ+ Sport WSD saddle and we rode 16mi this past weekend. She complained that her ass was sore, but not her women-bits. Will she get used to it, or does she need a softer/wider saddle?

More on topic, I've heard many women prefer the Terry saddles.

http://www.bontrager.com/Road/Components/Saddles/7103.php (her bontrager, but in WSD form)


----------



## KayTee (Jun 24, 2006)

I ride Selle Italia's SLR gelflow on most of my bikes, the Terry men's Fly on the tandem and the bike I use on the trainer. The Terry Butterfly is OK but wider saddles like that seem to aggravate my sciatic nerve pain problem over longer distances.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

I have the Selle Italia Lady gel flow also. I had an older one for about 6-7 years and I replaced it with the updated model about 6 months ago. I was having some soreness "down in front there" so the other day I finally decided to tip the saddle nose down a bit further. Ahh...comfort at last. 

Now I think I'm going to have to raise the seatpost a smidge to compensate.


----------



## orbit (Feb 7, 2007)

*Ditto...*

... I have the Sella Italia Lady Gel on my hardtail. On my new road bike, I have the weird looking Selle SMP Strike - Stratos. http://www.albabici.com/selle/selle-smp-mp.htm Theres no soft tissue contact at all which is great, but the narrow support areas are giving me a fair amount of bone soreness and numbness. I'm hoping that this will lessen the more I ride with this saddle although there are other models with more padding. The LBS who sold me the saddle are keen for me to trial it for the feedback. The guy said he had only sold 2 of these seats to women, and the first woman used to be a man. :blush2:


----------



## JayTee (Feb 3, 2004)

I'm like a broken record on it: Terry Butterfly.


----------



## venus (Apr 27, 2006)

il sogno said:


> I have the Selle Italia Lady gel flow also.


Me too. I know this is too much padding for racers but oh well.


----------



## SadieKate (Feb 22, 2006)

For the road, Avocet Air O2 Ti - minimal padding, plenty of flat sit space narrowing fast to a narrow nose. 

On a mtb, WTB Stealth or something or other. They change the names far too often.


----------



## kermit (Dec 7, 2004)

*Terry*

I went through the endless saddle hunt and finally found happiness with the Terry Zero X. Nice cut out and comfy on long rides. Terry has a good selection for everyone and a good return policy.


----------



## whateveronfire (Sep 27, 2005)

I've seen the light. 

Road bike: Brooks B17  

Mountain: WTB Pure V

I have stacks of others, but when truth comes, accept it (however heavy).


----------



## sportschicfla (Apr 8, 2007)

*Perfect saddle????*

Been trying to find that perfect saddle for years. Years ago the Flite was it but then they changed it. I have tried everything from the Terry Liberator, Butterfly, and Falcon X (I think is the women's version) to the Fizik Pave, Serfas, Specialized and several in between. I seem to have quite a collection in my garage that I will be looking to sell after I get my custom bike. Recently someone said to me it is the bike fit that is just as important as the saddle and that the fit could be causing some issues. This made sense to me. Most of my saddles have had cutouts but I am thinking that I no longer need that. Saddle fit is important and subjective. Over the last several years I have suffered soft tissue damage and permanent swelling so I am thinking that a cutout is no longer the way to go. 

You need to first determine if you discomfort comes from soft tissue or sit bone issues and then try a saddle that will address those issue. Me after I get my new bike I wlll be goig back and trying these saddles again. If they don't work look for the on sale....

Good luck!:thumbsup:


----------



## stellaoc (Mar 29, 2007)

I ride a Brooks Team Pro S. no soreness anywhere! I got it from Bill at Wallbike (took advantage of the 6 mos guarantee...started out with the B17 and returned it)>

On my mtn bike: a very old, duct taped Terry Liberator Pro. I used to have this on my road bike, too. but it died...the new terry cut out just was not for me. 

iliveonitro: your girlfriends sit bones should get used to the saddle. double check to make sure it is the right width, though.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

stellaoc - without going into gynecology work, how do you make sure it's the right width in the right places?

*edit* She's still new so she can only really say that her butt hurts. She can't give me a specific location on the saddle that pressures her.


----------



## Rob P (Apr 29, 2007)

My wife rides an Aliente Sport, with the nose slightly down. We had trouble getting good bibs for her so I went all out and bought her those Assos bibs. They look hot on her.

If only she'd ride more...


----------



## lonefrontranger (Feb 5, 2004)

iliveonnitro: the butt pain may or may not be just 'beginner's break-in'.

lemme explain.

those muscles you use to sit on the sit bones? they're not used to supporting your weight. i mean unless you're given to sitting on fence rails, you don't use those muscles to support your weight, ever, unless you ride a bike or a horse - and they won't be adequately 'conditioned' to support your weight unless you do it on a regular basis, and each time you increase your 'volume', your muscles have to adapt... like, almost everyone feels some butt fatigue after a century, unless they do them regularly. capice? 

you ever gone on a horseback ride and been practically unable to walk the next day? same thing. 

i'm talking about the muscles that surround and support the 'pubic arch' and sit bones. and googling 'gray's anatomy' these days only brings up idiotic fansites about that stupid tv show, so i cant explain myself better than that, sorry.

anyhow. for what it's worth: i ride a vanilla arione on my high-mileage roadie, an old school Flite Ti on my fixte and my MTB, and SLRs on my TT/crit bike and cross bike.

something the guys will never tell you: women who have had kids, may have to switch their saddles during and after pregnancy. those sit bones spread to accomodate childbirth, and often times they don't go back. i ride men's saddles because i have never, and will never, have kids. therefore, i have the sit bone width of a twelve year old boy and need a narrow saddle.

also, regardless of how wide/narrow your hips are, or what saddle you ride, you absolutely need to get your bike fit and your upper body balanced on it properly so that your saddle is LEVEL, ladies. Tilted = Very Bad. i'm a woman, and i fought with this stuff for years until someone straightened my fit problems out and got me onto a correctly sized bike. it was like magic and i've not had a day's saddle pain or hand numbness or stiff neck or any other such issues since.

i recently straightened my SO out on this one, too. his bike fit was ghastly and he had all kinds of upper back problems from it.

bike fit is the MOST important thing to saddle comfort. most people ride with their saddles too high, and too far back, often as a result of what i call the 'racing prejudiced' shop-style fits that get pushed on the unprepared beginner. competitive racers have years of muscle memory and core strength from riding hundreds of miles a month which allows them to support the 'bridge' for these long, stretched-out positions. beginner riders, and most recreational cyclists, on the other hand, do not, and the pain of the 'bridge position' of this forward lean without the muscle strength to support it, causes them to feel like they have to tilt their saddle to compensate. if you have to tip your saddle nose significantly down, then either your saddle is too high, or your top tube is too long, or probably both.

you should be able to just rest the heel of your stocking foot on your pedal, when it's at the very bottom of the crank revolution. on BOTH sides, without dropping your hip. have someone watch to make sure you're not 'cheating' by rolling your hip when you do this.

i cant emphasise this enough: in order to feel comfortable on your bike, you need to be BALANCED properly so that you feel centred IN the bike, not 'perched' on top of it. a proper road bike fit means that your weight is almost equally distributed in a tripod, or triangle, between the pedals, the saddle and your bars. if you tip your saddle forward or back, then it upsets this 'triangle of balance' and your weight is not properly balanced or centred over the BB. the most common issue i see with riders who are improperly fit, is someone who got put on an overly-large bike that the shop sold them as a 'great deal'. 

if you tip the saddle down, you end up with too much weight over the front hub and in your hands. this causes a host of issues including shaky control, squirrelly handling, numb hands, cramped wrists, and a sore back and neck. there's no way you can keep your elbows loose, and upper body relaxed when you're constantly pushing backwards. your hands, wrists, shoulders, neck, all suffer.

a properly fit and balanced rider should, from the forward 'hoods' riding position, be able to lift both hands from the handlebars and support their weight in a balanced, natural position without wobbling or correcting. if you can do this, and hold your hands out to the side 'airplane wing' style while riding a (levelled) trainer or coasting on a flat to slight decline, then you're properly fit. if not, you need to go back to the drawing board and do some more analysis.

i'm a cycling coach who specialises in starting beginner racers, for what it's worth.


----------



## stellaoc (Mar 29, 2007)

iliveonnitro said:


> stellaoc - without going into gynecology work, how do you make sure it's the right width in the right places?
> 
> *edit* She's still new so she can only really say that her butt hurts. She can't give me a specific location on the saddle that pressures her.


I can't find the link re: measuring your sit bones...once I do, I will post it. as far as the soft tissue (assuming that could be an issue)...that one is difficult to determine, it seems to be a trial and error until the right saddle is found. 

is she willing to read a message board like this one? if she's shy...direct her to Team Estrogen...they have a women's cycling message board and there is a ton of info on those boards, as well as women sharing their saddle experiences.


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

lonefrontranger said:


> .....lemme explain.......


That is about the best answer I've ever seen on this site. Great stuff LFR.

I know there was a reason everyone missed you.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

lonefrontranger said:


> bike fit is the MOST important thing to saddle comfort. most people ride with their saddles too high, and too far back, often as a result of what i call the 'racing prejudiced' shop-style fits that get pushed on the unprepared beginner. competitive racers have years of muscle memory and core strength from riding hundreds of miles a month which allows them to support the 'bridge' for these long, stretched-out positions. beginner riders, and most recreational cyclists, on the other hand, do not, and the pain of the 'bridge position' of this forward lean without the muscle strength to support it, causes them to feel like they have to tilt their saddle to compensate. if you have to tip your saddle nose significantly down, then either your saddle is too high, or your top tube is too long, or probably both.


This is totally what happened to me when I bought my current bike years ago. I had been riding for 15 years at that time but the guy at the shop was one of those "all-out-race-position-or-nothing" guys and he wanted to take all the spacers out from below the stem. I had to beg and cajole for the three spacers I wound up with. He also wanted to raise the saddle up so high that I would've practically have been pedaling with my tip toes. That did not fly. 

Anyways 7 years later I have neck and shoulder problems. It's gotten so bad that several weeks ago I had headaches from my super tight neck. I flopped my stem after that and it's helped but really I could use another spacer or two below that stem. My TT is 52cm and I have a sneaking suspicion a 51cm TT would be more appropriate. 

I'm thinking of getting a custom frame.


----------



## lonefrontranger (Feb 5, 2004)

il sogno said:


> I'm thinking of getting a custom frame.


before you do that, you might consider trying a 'classic' italian build. Bianchi, DeBernardi and Colnago, to name three, are frames that historically have stuck to a 'square' or 'under-square' geometry, even in the smaller frame sizes which generally run longer due to toe overlap concerns. Colnago makes a 51.3 cm top tube in their 49/50 cm frames and equivalent sloping sizes, and that fits me to a T. my Pista 49cm fixte has a 51cm TT and is one of the most comfortable bikes I've ever ridden, tho i have to watch it at the stop lights as the combo of upright track geometry and short top tube means it's got some overlap.

one of my biggest complaints with american manufacturers is that after the Greg LeMond craze of the late 80's / early 90's, american builders have been making frames longer and longer in the TT as a result of the 'lemond' style fit and all its flunkies and adherents. i wont get into that rant, but it's the main reason i tend to buy Italian. even my custom TT / crit bike is a tetch long in the cockpit, but i'm (still) fit/strong and flexible enough to compensate. ten years down the road when i'm pushing fifty... who knows? but likely i'll have long since sold it.

the only challenge with custom builders is that they have to be willing to listen to you. i know its spendy but you might try Bob Parlee, as i know he's really really good. the builder CANNOT be willing to sacrifice safety, handling or proper frame proportions just to weasel a fit in that's way out on the margins, and i've seen too many who will do just that. to this day, my 46cm (sloping, it's a 49cm equivalent) stock Colnago is the only frame of its size that I have ever ridden that can fit a 700c wheel into a frame that tiny, with *zero* toe overlap and the thing still handles like a rocket on rails whilst cornering and descending. say what you will about Ernesto C, but dude _knows_ how to build a frame.

my next major project is to find a bike to fit my SO. he's currently on an old 57cm lemond buenos aires that is miles too long for him. he's a gangly little climber dude of somewhat freakish proportions and I'm tempted to recommend he try a WSD frame. he's 5'8" and has a 34" inseam - which is the same leg length as my roommate who's 6'1". i can just bet whoever sold him that bike only did the old 'standover clearance' thirty second fit run, and he's been riding it that way for the past eight years, ugh. no wonder he 'hated' road biking when i met him and was putting in close to 150 commuter miles a week on his old bianchi singlespeed MTB instead  any shop rat worth his peanut butter wrenches should know that that era lemond is not a great recommendation for a leggy rider.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

My bike is a 48cm sloping Colnago.  I'm long legged, shorter torso and arms though. 

I test rode the Orbea Diva a couple of months ago and it felt like the wheels were "under me" better. I have other issues with that frame but could still conceivably wind up with one. I gotta get on the phone and talk to some custom builders. 

I hear ya when you say some builders may not be willing to listen. I went to the Handmade Bike Show in San Jose in March and talked to a bunch of builders. One guy asked me what bikes I liked and I told him that I like my Colnago. He said, "Colnagos handle terribly". I politely excused myself and mentally crossed him off of my list of potential builders.


----------



## lonefrontranger (Feb 5, 2004)

il sogno said:


> My bike is a 48cm sloping Colnago.


you know that's equivalent to a 52 cm standard, right? or is that what you're supposed to be riding?

i've known some seriously egotistical builders in my time. like i said Bob Parlee is one of the best.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

lonefrontranger said:


> you know that's equivalent to a 52 cm standard, right? or is that what you're supposed to be riding?
> 
> i've known some seriously egotistical builders in my time. like i said Bob Parlee is one of the best.


My size on my classic italian steel bike is 49cm.


----------



## orbit (Feb 7, 2007)

*Il sogno...*

Have you considered swapping the existing fork on your Colnago for an uncut one to get the front height you need? As I mentioned on a few other posts, this was the solution my fitter chose. I’m 5’6” on a production Colnago CLX sloping 45 frame to get the shorter top tube, but this is balanced with the extra front height of the Colnago “Dream” fork. I currently have a large stack of spacers but as my flexibility and bike skills improve, I expect to reduce this. The LBS were happy to take a pre built bike and customise for me, a good economical option, plus it meant I could still have a full carbon bike.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

orbit said:


> Have you considered swapping the existing fork on your Colnago for an uncut one to get the front height you need? As I mentioned on a few other posts, this was the solution my fitter chose. I’m 5’6” on a production Colnago CLX sloping 45 frame to get the shorter top tube, but this is balanced with the extra front height of the Colnago “Dream” fork. I currently have a large stack of spacers but as my flexibility and bike skills improve, I expect to reduce this. The LBS were happy to take a pre built bike and customise for me, a good economical option, plus it meant I could still have a full carbon bike.


Yes, I have considered just getting another fork. Thing is there's a good deal of mileage on my Dream and I'm thinking I'll just put this one out to pasture and get a new bike. 

Plus like I said, I rode the Orbea women's specific bike and holy cow, I was impressed with how much better it felt not only comfort-wise but performance-wise too. So I'm gonna either go custom or get an Orbea or wait for the Look 585 elle to come out next year and give that a try. 

Until then, I've just ordered a Salsa Poco handlebar from Excel Sports. I figure the shorter reach to the brake levers will be even better for my neck and shoulders.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

lonefrontranger said:


> you know that's equivalent to a 52 cm standard, right? or is that what you're supposed to be riding?


I did not know this. I just checked the Colnago website and yeah, that virtual TT is the same as a 52cm regular bike. Great...maybe I've been riding a bike that's been too big for me... sigh...

/I'm getting that "I'm a moreon" feeling creeping up my spine.


----------



## orbit (Feb 7, 2007)

il sogno said:


> I did not know this. I just checked the Colnago website and yeah, that virtual TT is the same as a 52cm regular bike. Great...maybe I've been riding a bike that's been too big for me... sigh...
> 
> /I'm getting that "I'm a moreon" feeling creeping up my spine.


But bike geometry is sooo technical so dont beat yourself up. My albeit limited understanding is that the seat post & headset angle has to be taken into consideration very much in relation to the TT. Plus the BB position in relation to the saddle. Aaargh. :cryin:  Thats why I went to an independant fitter who had no vested interest in one brand over another. (He took about 1 1/2 hrs assessing my entire body dynamics before he even put me on a trial frame) If you can find a good one, go there.

Im on the Colnago sloping 45 (TT 51.8cm) but the equivalent Orbea is the 53cm. Quoting my fitter (sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record here) in regard to the womens Orbea ....

.....but there is no convention on how to measure bikes and Colnago and Orbea go about it very differently. Basically, the only difference between the Colnago and Orbea in geometry is that the Orbeas are much higher at the front end....


Enjoy your bike shopping, and the Diva is a beautiful bike.

BTW, if you hold off for the Elle 585, I hope for Chas at Looks sake that it comes in other colour options than pink


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

orbit said:


> But bike geometry is sooo technical so dont beat yourself up. My albeit limited understanding is that the seat post & headset angle has to be taken into consideration very much in relation to the TT. Plus the BB position in relation to the saddle. Aaargh. :cryin:  Thats why I went to an independant fitter who had no vested interest in one brand over another. (He took about 1 1/2 hrs assessing my entire body dynamics before he even put me on a trial frame) If you can find a good one, go there.
> 
> Im on the Colnago sloping 45 (TT 51.8cm) but the equivalent Orbea is the 53cm. Quoting my fitter (sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record here) in regard to the womens Orbea ....
> 
> ...


LOL, I met Chas when he came to Southern California for a "Demo Day" at one of the LBS' here. Since I had told him I would be there he brought a men's 49cm 585 for me to try out. 

Chas and I went out on the test ride together. We did a short 10 mile loop.The men's 585 is an excellent bike. Rides nice and smooth and handles beautifully. What it (and sadly my Colnago) lacks is the "wheels under me in the perfect place" sort of feel that the Orbea had. Chas said that the 585 elle will be available in white and blue (and maybe black). No p*nk. 

I hear ya on the TT bit. I'm 5'4" and feel that overall the 48cm Colnago is the right size for me. It's just that the TT is a tad long and my steerer tube was cut too short.


----------

