BROOKS SPRUNG SADDLES B66 ETC. DOES ANYONE USE THEM?

[sd]

Anyone? Are they any good. Have been offered one. Not sure wherever to bother or not?

[phopwood]

I have often looked at these, other than looking at one in the shop I have never used one. 

Peter

[in4]

I use a Brooks Conquest and am very happy with it. As I ride over a variety of surfaces I appreciate the comfort a sprung saddle offers. As the Brooks Conquest does not have the saddle bag slots on it ( like the B17 does) It makes fitting a saddlebag ( in my case a Carradice Camper Longflap) problematic.

I guess if you are riding mostly tarmac then a sprung saddle might not make much difference comfort wise. You could also consider getting a err..thudbuster I think its called. I think Dan wrote quite favourably of the long travel variety of thudbuster. Use that with a non sprung saddle and you might have an effective solution. I no idea about costs though.

In short: I like my Conquest; I gather its being re-issued. If you ride purely on the tarmac the benefits over a non sprung saddle are open to debate. If you already have a non sprung saddle consider a thudbuster.

Oh and as I ride I creak so either the Brooks needs a bit of tlc or I need to see the bone cracker!

[JimK]

I have a Flyer on my Thorn and a B66 on my Azor/Workcycles. The Azor has a much more upright position. I think with a full upright position you really want springs because the bumps go right up your spine. The more you are leaning forward, the less the springs do anything. On my Thorn I have the bars level with the saddle so there is still a lot of weight on the saddle. Even with paved roads, there are always cracks and holes etc. On something like a track, with really uniform smooth surface, the springs are useless. But on real roads the springs are definitely nice. It's probably only once every ten minutes that they prevent a bruise, but that's well worth the extra cost.

[martinf]

I have Brooks B66 Champion (twin saddle rails) and the more recent B67 flyer (normal saddle rails). The B67 has slightly less "give", but still useful compared to unsprung saddles.

These are on bikes with flat bars, with these I tend to use a slightly more upright riding position, they are also on the bikes I tend to use most off-road. I use B17 saddles without springs on my bikes with drop bars.

All these saddles have more or less the same width and length of top, which seems to suit me best. I've tried narrower saddles and don't find them very comfortable. Not yet tried wider, but might as I get older.

Note that the B66 standard is wider, this might make it better for an even more upright position.

[Andre Jute]

Many of the Brooks touring/utility/upright saddles are built around the leather of the standard B66; it's a well-connected saddle. My own B73 is a B66 with an additional helical spring at the front, and twin rails for heavier duty. It's pretty good on tarmac too, especially bad tarmac like many of the lanes I ride. I'd say that on an appropriate bike (not one with drop bars, as has already been said twice) you can't go wrong with a B66.

[sd]

I use a Brooks Conquest and am very happy with it. As I ride over a variety of surfaces I appreciate the comfort a sprung saddle offers. As the Brooks Conquest does not have the saddle bag slots on it ( like the B17 does) It makes fitting a saddlebag ( in my case a Carradice Camper Longflap) problematic.

I guess if you are riding mostly tarmac then a sprung saddle might not make much difference comfort wise. You could also consider getting a err..thudbuster I think its called. I think Dan wrote quite favourably of the long travel variety of thudbuster. Use that with a non sprung saddle and you might have an effective solution. I no idea about costs though.

In short: I like my Conquest; I gather its being re-issued. If you ride purely on the tarmac the benefits over a non sprung saddle are open to debate. If you already have a non sprung saddle consider a thudbuster.

Oh and as I ride I creak so either the Brooks needs a bit of tlc or I need to see the bone cracker!

I have Thudbuster but I take it off to put another seat post in with a trailer hitch. Didn't notice a significant difference so I am going to sell it.

[sd]

Only thinking about it if I can find one dirt cheap on eBay. One I can sell on if don't like it. Thanks

[Andre Jute]

Only thinking about it if I can find one dirt cheap on eBay. One I can sell on if don't like it. Thanks

A Brooks saddle, sprung or unsprung, uniquely over time conforms to the rider. If you buy a secondhand Brooks saddle, unless it is almost unused, the leather will be softened at the spots of someone else's sitz-bones and it it will do you no good. Better not to buy a Brooks at all than one that someone else has ridden swaybacked.

[mickeg]

...
I like my Conquest; I gather its being re-issued....

Thanks for the comment.  I was unaware the Conquest will be available again.

[sd]

A Brooks saddle, sprung or unsprung, uniquely over time conforms to the rider. If you buy a secondhand Brooks saddle, unless it is almost unused, the leather will be softened at the spots of someone else's sitz-bones and it it will do you no good. Better not to buy a Brooks at all than one that someone else has ridden swaybacked.

Not sure I will agree with you on that. The bike I bought has done 20,000km. I assume he used that for the whole journey. Now obviously I cannot compare it to what it would have been like if I had had it from new but I must it is comfortable now. I think it still needs some tightening but hold back till I do a 60 miles on it. Then I will decide.

[Andre Jute]

Not sure I will agree with you on that. The bike I bought has done 20,000km. I assume he used that for the whole journey. Now obviously I cannot compare it to what it would have been like if I had had it from new but I must it is comfortable now. I think it still needs some tightening but hold back till I do a 60 miles on it. Then I will decide.

You got lucky. Congratulations. I presume you know to tighten the top in small increments, an eighth of a turn of the bolt at a time, no more than a quarter-turn.

[sd]

Yeah I am going to keep the increments small as I assume that if I tighten it to much it won't go all the way back.   

[JimK]

yeah once you stretch the leather it doesn't go back at all, so I hear. The idea with tightening that bolt is not to stretch the leather at all, but just to take up slack. The leather does stretch through use... probably more quickly when it is wet.