Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-18 Thread cyclotourist 
I measured the B17 and the Swift, and they're the same clamping area (60mm)
and same amount from rear to front of the clamping area (~130mm).   They
seem pretty similar in that respect:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyclotourist/

I don't know if they are different in their front-center measurement, but it
would seem like that's less important than the rear to clamp measurement,
which is the same.

FWIW, I just did 55 miles on my new to me but used Swift and was very
happy.  Bars about 10mm above saddle.  New cranks, too.  No knee problems to
speak of which is exciting for me!!!


On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 9:20 AM, grant  wrote:

> Colt and cutaway saddles in general
>
> The flaps that get cut off are part of the saddle's structure. Without
> the flaps, the saddle sags sooner. The Swallow deals with it by
> riveting the two sides together underneath, but I've never seen a well-
> ridden Swallow (mostly they go on Show Bikes, not Go Bikes), so I
> don't know how well it works. Just because I haven't seen it and don't
> know doesn't mean they aren't out there, and it works great.
>
> The Colt deals with it, if it continues to deal with it the way it did
> when it was introduced in the  '80s, by overtensioning. That's what
> goes on with the Swift, too,  and you can see it manifested as a
> slight dolphin-hump from front to back. It's always kind of funny when
> mouths talk for crotches, but when my mouth channels my crotch, it
> says, "Hey man, that hump puts a lot of pressure right where I don't
> need it."
>
> I got the first two Colts in this country way back then, as gifts, and
> I wanted to love that saddle, but I couldn't do it.
>
> Another thing to examine is the rail shape. On the Swift (152mm wide,
> compared to 160 for the Pro and 170 for the B.17), the rails stop
> being parallel farther from the nose, which means you can't shove them
> back as far. Everybody I know except Keven shoves his/her saddle back
> as far as  it'll go, and 90 percent wish it would go back more. I
> think, but as always I don't know, that the rail shape is guided by
> the cutaway leather, meaning the designer doesn't like the look of
> parallel rails way far forward on a cutaway saddle.
>
> I'd like to end this on an up-for-Brooks note. The saddles delivered
> since the Italians bought Brooks in 2004 or whenever...have been
> better than the earlier ones. I think Brooks is overplaying the
> Heritage card, but that may be necessary to reach a younger audience
> who isn't familiar with it. The boxes are suspiciously stout---who
> needs 'em that thick and cleverly comparmentalized?--but overall, it's
> still the saddle to beat, and the Brooks saddles of today are the best
> ones that I can remember.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-18 Thread Thomas Lynn Skean 

Well, this thread has produced some good information/history/opinion.

Personally, I've decided that I will look into the B17 Select when I next 
need a saddle (maybe not 'til next year). I weigh around 245; the only issue 
I might have with my current B17 Special (which has always been comfortable, 
even straight from the box and basically slapped on in waning patience as my 
newly built-up Hillborne demanded riding; it's even more comfy now that I've 
tweaked angle and position to perfection; thank you Hillborne seat tube 
angle! thank you Nitto S83 adjustability!) is that I've needed to tension it 
more than I'd like to keep the creaky-squeaky sounds at bay. As of now, this 
need for tensioning is reducing. But still I wonder how long it'll be before 
the need for punching/lacing arrives, to be followed quickly by 
gnashing/rending (teeth and garments, respectively) and tossing out of the 
saddle.


If the B17 "Select" proves to be simply a more robust B17 Special, then 
that's the saddle I've always wanted. And I'll be checking the web and 
particularly this list for info on the "Select" B17's arrival. In the 
meantime, the B17 Special is serving quite nicely.


(The only reason I chose the B17 Special over the standard B17 was that 
where and when I bought the saddle, the difference in price was like $15 or 
something and, with my dying B68, even in the throes of its last weeks, the 
only truly uncomfortable bits are the tubular rivets, which sometimes dig 
into my butt in a manner most unhappy-making. I'm hopeful that the more 
broad copper rivets will stay in place longer and/or be more gentle on my 
posterior when the time of their unsettling eventually comes.)


Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean
- Original Message - 
From: "Montclair BobbyB" 

To: "RBW Owners Bunch" 
Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2010 3:42 PM
Subject: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?


It's nice to know that the most comfortable Brooks saddle may very
well be the least expensive.  Then again, I've never ridden a Swift or
B17 Titanium... but I'm OK with that..

Peace,
BB

On Sep 17, 11:37 am, Tim McNamara  wrote:

On Sep 17, 2010, at 8:06 AM, JoelMatthews wrote:

> The Colt is already available. Initial impressions I have heard are
> that the saddle is very hard and not terribly comfortable. Apparently
> it is meant to be a race type saddle for the heavier rider.

I have one of the old Colts that I bout 10 years ago, when it looked
like Brooks was going away forever. I think I paid $25 for it,
discovered it in a bike shop in Cannon Falls MN into which my wife
and I stopped randomly. I've never ridden it, it's on one of my
wife's bikes. She seems to do OK with it although she prefers the
Pro S saddles on her other bikes. It's narrow, about like a Pro or a
B.17N. The leather is thick like the old Pros were; it would take
some break-in but would end up being an old friend like my 34 year
old Pro on my Riv (which I bout just after graduating from high
school and it took about 2 years to fully break in. It is the most
comfortable saddle I have ever ridden).


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-18 Thread Ken Freeman 
I think I've seen some long-used Swallows, and they seem to need their
tension screws tightened way down after a while.  I'm guessing this is a
result of tension being distributed over less leather, increasing stretch.
I had a VO model 6, which stretched out quite a bit from the get-go.

I don't really know how much or how well these were used, just that they
were old and used.

I keep thinking Brooks saddles are best on frames with a 72 or 73 degree
seat tube, which would allow at least this rider to use setback v straight
seatposts to get my butt position right.  For me, 74 and 75 frames need
either an extreme seatpost or something other than a Brooks.  I don't find
any real difference in setback requirement between a B17 and my
Professional.  When I can get either adjusted, I like the B17Imp best, but
that's just based on shape.

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:20 PM, grant  wrote:

> Colt and cutaway saddles in general
>
> The flaps that get cut off are part of the saddle's structure. Without
> the flaps, the saddle sags sooner. The Swallow deals with it by
> riveting the two sides together underneath, but I've never seen a well-
> ridden Swallow (mostly they go on Show Bikes, not Go Bikes), so I
> don't know how well it works. Just because I haven't seen it and don't
> know doesn't mean they aren't out there, and it works great.
>
> The Colt deals with it, if it continues to deal with it the way it did
> when it was introduced in the  '80s, by overtensioning. That's what
> goes on with the Swift, too,  and you can see it manifested as a
> slight dolphin-hump from front to back. It's always kind of funny when
> mouths talk for crotches, but when my mouth channels my crotch, it
> says, "Hey man, that hump puts a lot of pressure right where I don't
> need it."
>
> I got the first two Colts in this country way back then, as gifts, and
> I wanted to love that saddle, but I couldn't do it.
>
> Another thing to examine is the rail shape. On the Swift (152mm wide,
> compared to 160 for the Pro and 170 for the B.17), the rails stop
> being parallel farther from the nose, which means you can't shove them
> back as far. Everybody I know except Keven shoves his/her saddle back
> as far as  it'll go, and 90 percent wish it would go back more. I
> think, but as always I don't know, that the rail shape is guided by
> the cutaway leather, meaning the designer doesn't like the look of
> parallel rails way far forward on a cutaway saddle.
>
> I'd like to end this on an up-for-Brooks note. The saddles delivered
> since the Italians bought Brooks in 2004 or whenever...have been
> better than the earlier ones. I think Brooks is overplaying the
> Heritage card, but that may be necessary to reach a younger audience
> who isn't familiar with it. The boxes are suspiciously stout---who
> needs 'em that thick and cleverly comparmentalized?--but overall, it's
> still the saddle to beat, and the Brooks saddles of today are the best
> ones that I can remember.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-18 Thread Ken Freeman 
Actually I had a pre-softened Pro, and it was if anything "pre-worn-out."
However, right now it's in the hands of a bud and Bob, who said it
disappeared under him.

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Tim McNamara  wrote:

>
> On Sep 17, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>  On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 11:14 -0700, Scott G. wrote:
>>
>>> For those who think Brooks has been going soft..
>>> (I love the headline)
>>>
>>> "New Brooks saddles "even harder" - Vans saddle"
>>>
>>> Read more:
>>> http://www.roadcyclinguk.com/gear-news/new-brooks-saddles-even-harder/5484-4.html#ixzz0zoNx5cjM
>>>
>>> "Swiss select Organic cowhide for your Brooks, perfect, almost as
>>> funny
>>> as the "Presoftened" saddles, British humour.
>>>
>>
>> I don't understand.  Where's the humor?
>>
>
> The "presoftened" Brooks Pros were still as hard as a plank.  They just had
> some Proofide applied at the factory and a stamped "Presoftened" logo on the
> top of the saddle.  Otherwise they didn't seem any different.
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-17 Thread Tim McNamara 


On Sep 17, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Steve Palincsar wrote:


On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 11:14 -0700, Scott G. wrote:

For those who think Brooks has been going soft..
(I love the headline)

"New Brooks saddles "even harder" - Vans saddle"

Read more: http://www.roadcyclinguk.com/gear-news/new-brooks- 
saddles-even-harder/5484-4.html#ixzz0zoNx5cjM


"Swiss select Organic cowhide for your Brooks, perfect, almost as
funny
as the "Presoftened" saddles, British humour.


I don't understand.  Where's the humor?


The "presoftened" Brooks Pros were still as hard as a plank.  They  
just had some Proofide applied at the factory and a stamped  
"Presoftened" logo on the top of the saddle.  Otherwise they didn't  
seem any different.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-17 Thread Steve Palincsar 
On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 11:14 -0700, Scott G. wrote:
> For those who think Brooks has been going soft..
> (I love the headline)
> 
> "New Brooks saddles "even harder" - Vans saddle"
> 
> Read more: 
> http://www.roadcyclinguk.com/gear-news/new-brooks-saddles-even-harder/5484-4.html#ixzz0zoNx5cjM
> 
> "Swiss select Organic cowhide for your Brooks, perfect, almost as
> funny
> as the "Presoftened" saddles, British humour.

I don't understand.  Where's the humor?



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-17 Thread Tim McNamara 


On Sep 17, 2010, at 8:06 AM, JoelMatthews wrote:


The Colt is already available.  Initial impressions I have heard are
that the saddle is very hard and not terribly comfortable.  Apparently
it is meant to be a race type saddle for the heavier rider.


I have one of the old Colts that I bout 10 years ago, when it looked  
like Brooks was going away forever.  I think I paid $25 for it,  
discovered it in a bike shop in Cannon Falls MN into which my wife  
and I stopped randomly.  I've never ridden it, it's on one of my  
wife's bikes.  She seems to do OK with it although she prefers the  
Pro S saddles on her other bikes.  It's narrow, about like a Pro or a  
B.17N.  The leather is thick like the old Pros were; it would take  
some break-in but would end up being an old friend like my 34 year  
old Pro on my Riv (which I bout just after graduating from high  
school and it took about 2 years to fully break in.  It is the most  
comfortable saddle I have ever ridden).


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-17 Thread Thomas Lynn Skean 
I'm looking forward to a "select" B17. If it's simply a thicker stiffer B17 
Special that'd be beautiful (unless they cost $300 or something; that'd be 
ridiculous).

Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean


On Sep 17, 2010, at 8:06 AM, JoelMatthews  wrote:

> The Colt is already available.  Initial impressions I have heard are
> that the saddle is very hard and not terribly comfortable.  Apparently
> it is meant to be a race type saddle for the heavier rider.
> 
> On Sep 16, 10:37 pm, Chris Halasz  wrote:
>> In another month or two, these beauties will be available from Brooks:
>> 
>> http://bikereviews.com/2010/06/new-products-from-brooks-saddles/
>> 
>> - Chris
>> Tucson, AZ
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
> 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-16 Thread Thomas Lynn Skean 
Well, as it turns out, I use the Nitto saddlebag grip. So theoretically a lack 
of loops wouldn't matter. Of course, there may come a time when i'd rather just 
use loops (for simplicity, for looks, for any-reason-except-to-save-weight :)) 
So it's definitely something to consider.

Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean


On Sep 15, 2010, at 6:37 PM, Earl Grey  wrote:

> I had a b17, b17 special, and a team pro. Replaced the team pro with
> another b17s. Comfort difference was slight, and I believe mostly due
> to lack of  break-in due to thicker leather, but the pro didn't have
> saddle bag loops. Looks like some do and some don't
> (see wallbike.com photos). Just something to be aware of.
> 
> Gernot
> 
> On Sep 14, 8:15 pm, Montclair BobbyB 
> wrote:
>> Ah yes, the B68... I was skeptical at first, but I love this seat.  I
>> commuted this morning on an old chrome Mongoose with a B68... it felt
>> GREAT... In fact it's my favorite short-distance saddle.  On longer
>> rides it's a bit wide for my liking.
>> 
>> I had a gorgeous brown Flyer Special which I could (and often did)
>> stare at all day long. This is based on the B17, but even though it
>> was sprung it wasn't nearly as comfortable as my standard B17.
>> Perhaps the it was thicker leather?  I don't know, I've toiled over
>> this for years. Same goes for my B17 Special.  It's awesome looking
>> and still very comfortable, but not quite as plush as the good ol'
>> honey B17... And I've been riding a standard B17 on my mountain bike
>> now for years, and will NEVER go back.  In fact I'll soon be heading
>> out to Colorado for a few days of mountain biking... I will likely
>> rent a bike, but regardless I'll take along a B17 for sure!
>> 
>> BB
>> 
>> On Sep 12, 3:28 am, "Rene Valbuena"  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> I also prefer the B17 over the Pro on bikes with handlebar on level or lower
>>> than the saddle. The Pro model seems to be stiffer perhaps not because it
>>> has thicker leather but because of its narrower design. I don't have a
>>> Swallow but I think the reason it is more pleasant on the butt is that it is
>>> longer than the Pro and B17.
>> 
>>> On B17s, I noticed that the standard model has a little more flex or bounce
>>> that I find more pleasant. But I cannot resist the allure of the bigger
>>> copper rivets on the champion special model. So I have both the standard and
>>> the champion special.
>> 
>>> But on bikes with handlebar which make you more upright riding, I like the
>>> aged special model B68.
>> 
>>> -- Rene
>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [email protected]
>> 
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Noel
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:20 PM
>>> To: RBW Owners Bunch
>>> Subject: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?
>> 
>>> I'm surprised to see the comments to the effect that the Pro is
>>> "flatter" than the B17. I have a couple of each and find them all to
>>> have that distinct "hammock" shape. The key differences, as far as I
>>> can tell, are that the Pro is a narrower at the back and is made of
>>> thicker leather. (I have one Pro that is at least 15 years old. I
>>> periodically mount it on a bike and use it for a few hundred miles,
>>> then take it off again, because I just can't get it to break in. I
>>> figure it's got at least 3000 miles on it at this point, plus several
>>> different (increasingly radical) attempts at softening it. It's still
>>> hard as a rock and looks/feels exactly like it did out of the box.)
>> 
>>> Overall, I just haven't had great success with Brooks no matter what I
>>> do, for exactly the reasons outlined by James: if I get the rear
>>> section level enough so that I'm not sliding onto the nose, the nose
>>> is angled so steeply up that it digs into me. Lowering the nose just
>>> causes the rear section to angle downward, sliding me back onto the
>>> nose. Arg. Even with a two-bolt post, there is no happy medium.
>> 
>>> For some reason, though, the Velo-Orange saddles don't do that to me,
>>> even though they have the "hammock" shape too. Go figure. It's just
>>> too bad the V/O saddles aren't quite as nicely put together as the
>>> Brooks...
>> 
>>> Noel
>>> Orange County, Ca.
>> 
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit this group 
>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.-Hide quoted text -
>> 
>>> - Show quoted text -
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-15 Thread nathan spindel 
I bought a new Brooks Team Pro nine months ago for the RB-1 and it
didn't have loops. The Viva loops work just fine on it:
.

-nathan

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 16:37 -0700, Earl Grey wrote:
>> I had a b17, b17 special, and a team pro. Replaced the team pro with
>> another b17s. Comfort difference was slight, and I believe mostly due
>> to lack of  break-in due to thicker leather, but the pro didn't have
>> saddle bag loops. Looks like some do and some don't
>
> They didn't used to, but I think now some do.  The Viva add-on bag loops
> work fine with my ancient (vintage 1983 or so, put into service in 1991)
> Team Pro.
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-15 Thread Steve Palincsar 
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 16:37 -0700, Earl Grey wrote:
> I had a b17, b17 special, and a team pro. Replaced the team pro with
> another b17s. Comfort difference was slight, and I believe mostly due
> to lack of  break-in due to thicker leather, but the pro didn't have
> saddle bag loops. Looks like some do and some don't

They didn't used to, but I think now some do.  The Viva add-on bag loops
work fine with my ancient (vintage 1983 or so, put into service in 1991)
Team Pro.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-12 Thread cyclotourist 
FWIW, I took a couple quick pix of my B17 and Swift:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyclotourist/  Other than narrower, you can
(kinda') see the similar shape.

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Chris Halasz  wrote:

> From Wallbike, on Flickr:
>
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/wallblog/sets/72157624333065377/with/4777148941/
>
> - Chris
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

RE: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-12 Thread Rene Valbuena 
I also prefer the B17 over the Pro on bikes with handlebar on level or lower
than the saddle. The Pro model seems to be stiffer perhaps not because it
has thicker leather but because of its narrower design. I don't have a
Swallow but I think the reason it is more pleasant on the butt is that it is
longer than the Pro and B17.

On B17s, I noticed that the standard model has a little more flex or bounce
that I find more pleasant. But I cannot resist the allure of the bigger
copper rivets on the champion special model. So I have both the standard and
the champion special.

But on bikes with handlebar which make you more upright riding, I like the
aged special model B68. 

-- Rene

-Original Message-
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Noel
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:20 PM
To: RBW Owners Bunch
Subject: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

I'm surprised to see the comments to the effect that the Pro is
"flatter" than the B17. I have a couple of each and find them all to
have that distinct "hammock" shape. The key differences, as far as I
can tell, are that the Pro is a narrower at the back and is made of
thicker leather. (I have one Pro that is at least 15 years old. I
periodically mount it on a bike and use it for a few hundred miles,
then take it off again, because I just can't get it to break in. I
figure it's got at least 3000 miles on it at this point, plus several
different (increasingly radical) attempts at softening it. It's still
hard as a rock and looks/feels exactly like it did out of the box.)

Overall, I just haven't had great success with Brooks no matter what I
do, for exactly the reasons outlined by James: if I get the rear
section level enough so that I'm not sliding onto the nose, the nose
is angled so steeply up that it digs into me. Lowering the nose just
causes the rear section to angle downward, sliding me back onto the
nose. Arg. Even with a two-bolt post, there is no happy medium.

For some reason, though, the Velo-Orange saddles don't do that to me,
even though they have the "hammock" shape too. Go figure. It's just
too bad the V/O saddles aren't quite as nicely put together as the
Brooks...

Noel
Orange County, Ca.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-12 Thread Fai Mao 
I actually prefer the B17-N or any of the narrower Brooks saddles.

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 7:09 PM, LF  wrote:

>
>
> On Sep 11, 5:39 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean 
> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >  I decided to simply
> > use a B17 to begin with. I like it fine. But I wonder if a Team Pro
> > would be even better.
>
> Thomas,
> I like the B17s better than the old Team Pro's for longer rides.
> YMMV.  See if you can borrow one. BTW, I also like WTB saddles such as
> the rocket V.
> Best,
> Larry
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Fai Mao
The Blogger who sometimes responds to comments

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-11 Thread james black 
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 16:47, cyclotourist  wrote:
> Bowed across the back, from side to side.  You can kinda' see it here.
> Front to back is pretty flat, with the tail up a touch.  B17 are like that,
> too.

I've been pretty happy on Pro-shaped saddles, although I have a Brooks
Pro that isn't quite right; my Fujita knockoff of the Pro was my
favorite.

The critical issue for me seems to be finding a flat (front to back)
spot to support my sit bones - if the saddle looks level overall, then
the spot where my sit bones goes is pointed down, and I'm sliding
forward, which means either I'm sliding forward onto more sensitive
parts or I'm resisting sliding forward with my arms, neither of which
is comfortable. So when the sitting spot is actually level, the nose
is pointed upwards. This is okay, as long as it's not pointed so far
upwards that it interferes with sensitive bits. My Pro has a sweet
spot where the back is level enough and the front is not too high, and
that looks like this:

http://james.architectureburger.com/cycle/bin/nish01.jpg

The problem I had with my first and only B17 was that it was too
saddle-shaped - I couldn't find a tilt that worked, I was always
either sliding forward or the nose was in the way of sensitive
anatomy. I think that not all B17s are the same and maybe I would be
better off on a different one, but I'm not sure.

I had a B17 narrow, and maybe it was too narrow - it seemed like I
couldn't keep away from the rivets.

So the Pro is the only one that worked for me. I would be interested
to try the Swift and the Berthoud, because judging by eyeball alone,
they look to me like they would work.

I guess if my email has a point to it, however, it's that you don't
know if a saddle is going to work until you ride it and experiment
with the tilt. Until I spent some time on rigid leather saddles, I had
no idea how saddles were supposed to work - in my foam-over-plastic
saddle days, I just sat down without thinking about it (and not always
with great results).

James Black
Los Angeles, CA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Re: B17 vs Team Pro... any direct comparison wisdom?

2010-09-11 Thread cyclotourist 
Bowed across the back, from side to side.  You can kinda' see it
here.
Front to back is pretty flat, with the tail up a touch.  B17 are like that,
too.

On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Thomas Lynn Skean <
[email protected]> wrote:

> "bowed" in that its front and/or back is/are higher than the middle?
> I'd so, does either point "up" more than the other?
>
> I may actually *like* it, for example, if the nose is turned up some,
> whether or not the tail is. However, if the tail is up and the nose
> not so much, I wouldn't Luke that.
>
> I think the B68's nose was a little higher than it's back; I liked
> that part if it.
>
> Yours,
> Thomas Lynn Skean
>
> On Sep 11, 4:59 pm, cyclotourist  wrote:
> > Team Pros are very nice saddles.  The leather is (used to be???) thicker
> > than a B17.  The top's big difference other than width is shape.  The top
> on
> > the TP is bowed a bit, instead of flat like on the B17.  I much prefer
> the
> > B17 to the TP due to the flat top.
> >
> > FWIW, I'm riding a new to me Swallow which has a similar flat top.  Even
> > though it's narrower by 8mm, the flat top makes it pretty comfortable
> over
> > 30-40 miles.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Lynn Skean <
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hi!
> >
> > > I used to use a B68. But I broke one's frame and then slowly turned a
> > > second one into a B17's width with my gravitas. So I decided to simply
> > > use a B17 to begin with. I like it fine. But I wonder if a Team Pro
> > > would be even better. The B17's width is good but I don't think
> > > shaving another cm of width would really make a significant
> > > difference.
> >
> > > What are the other real differences?  Shape? If so, how is it
> > > different? Thickness of leather (for me I think thicker would be
> > > better)? Don't care about weight per se. Or rail color.
> >
> > > Thanks for any info/opininons!
> >
> > > Yours,
> > > Thomas Lynn Skean
> >
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> .
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > [email protected] [email protected]>
> > > .
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > David
> > Redlands, CA
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.