Good wheels

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:46:24 -0000, landotter <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I took two short rides on a Brooks saddle last night, and as
always--they look great, but feel like [censored] and are fussy and
inconsistent.

Quoted message said:

Not long enough -- give it three or five years of solid riding and
you'll have a lifetime companion.

If it takes more than a half dozen rides to be comfortable on a Brooks,
either it's set up seriously incorrectly or it's just not the saddle for
you. I find the Brooks Pro to be comfortable out of the box, maybe a
ride or three is necessary to dial it in. The Brooks Pro S is my wife's
favorite saddle (as in, she dislikes sitting one any other saddle).

I've put 10K on a couple of B17s and 5K on this particular Flyer and
waiting for the comfort to set in. The B17s were bearable, but never
comfy. It's just a horrible design to begin with. There is only one
place of a single square cm for each ischia to find comfort in. There
is the idiotic rail in back with the double idiotic exposed rivets.
You either slide forward, or tilt up the horn enough to ovalize your
urethra. Firmness changes according to the day's humidity. Seriously--
I'm at the point where I hate these things. I tried for a couple
months to get rid of my last Brooks, this particular Flyer by flogging
it on Craigslist for very very cheap, but fate means for me to have it
on my beer bike to remind me of what overrated vintage garbage is.
Well designed nylon saddle shells covered thinly in a mm of foam or
two and some leather are so far superior to Brooks, it's not even
funny.

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:46:24 -0000, landotter
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

>I took two short rides on a Brooks saddle last night, and as
>always--they look great, but feel like [censored] and are fussy and
>inconsistent.

Quoted message said:

Not long enough -- give it three or five years of solid riding
and you'll have a lifetime companion.

If it takes more than a half dozen rides to be comfortable on a
Brooks, either it's set up seriously incorrectly or it's just not
the saddle for you. I find the Brooks Pro to be comfortable out of
the box, maybe a ride or three is necessary to dial it in. The
Brooks Pro S is my wife's favorite saddle (as in, she dislikes
sitting one any other saddle).

I've put 10K on a couple of B17s and 5K on this particular Flyer and
waiting for the comfort to set in. The B17s were bearable, but never
comfy. It's just a horrible design to begin with. There is only one
place of a single square cm for each ischia to find comfort in. There
is the idiotic rail in back with the double idiotic exposed rivets.
You either slide forward, or tilt up the horn enough to ovalize your
urethra. Firmness changes according to the day's humidity.

I don't experience any of these problems with my Brooks Pros (I have
four or five of them). I find the B.17 to be less comfortable- it is
too wide and the top is too flexible. I've never ridden a Flyer but the
springs give me pause- it'd take a lot of farting around to find the
right angle.

Quoted message said:

Seriously-- I'm at the point where I hate these things. I tried for a
couple months to get rid of my last Brooks, this particular Flyer by
flogging it on Craigslist for very very cheap, but fate means for me
to have it on my beer bike to remind me of what overrated vintage
garbage is. Well designed nylon saddle shells covered thinly in a mm
of foam or two and some leather are so far superior to Brooks, it's
not even funny.

Well, obviously for you Brooks saddles are not the right ones. But you
are making the logical error of generalizing your particular situation
to a universal one. While you may find this hard to believe, Brooks
saddles are very comfortable for many people- perhaps millions of
people, given how long Brooks has been in business. If the saddles were
such [censored] as you say, market forces would have driven the company out of
business. As it was, the weight-weeny attitude almost did put them out
of business a little over 10 years ago. A friend who owns a bike shop
finds Brooks saddles to be one of his biggest selling items and his
customers have been almost without complaint about them.

And I am not sure about fate- is Fate holding a gun to your head forcing
you to keep this hated saddle on your bike? [censored] fire, man, yank that
thing off of there and put a saddle you like on that bike.

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
drivetrain with brifters.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

Joe

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble understanding how
twine can be involved....

--

Quoted message said:

From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should actually
use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the 20th century, I
suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats and leather (or cloth?)
bar tape, but shouldn't you be using leather brake pads and wooden rims?

--

David L. Johnson

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not
certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
-- Albert Einstein

Joe Bernard said:

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

I couldn't agree more! You might want to look into Waterford as an
altenative to a RivenSchtick. Seem like it might be more up your
alley.

On Jun 22, 11:07 am, "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble understanding how
twine can be involved....

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

--

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

Quoted message said:

http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should actually
use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the 20th century, I
suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats and leather (or cloth?)
bar tape, but shouldn't you be using leather brake pads and wooden rims?

--

And rod-actuated FDs!

Joe Bernard said:

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

Joe

I just bought a NOS Guerciotti with lugged Columbus SL tubing that I'm
going to build up with basically the same philosophy. Carbon fork, Ti-
rail saddle, 2007 Veloce CT group, and my 28/32 stupid-light (for me
and my 235 lbs) sewup wheels. I'm gonna see if I can get the thing
under 20 lbs.

I wouldn't dream of putting a carbon fork or a non-Brooks saddle on my
PX-10, but my only rule for the Guerciotti will be, there are no
rules. If it's raining, or if the pavement's cruddy, I have three
other bikes I can ride for that. This will be the Light & Fast bike.

On Jun 22, 11:07 am, "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble understanding how
twine can be involved....

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

--

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

Quoted message said:

http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should actually
use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the 20th century, I
suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats and leather (or cloth?)
bar tape, but shouldn't you be using leather brake pads and wooden rims?

Yes, and use them humorlessly.

Hank Wirtz said:

Joe Bernard said:

Quoted message said:

Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Quoted message said:

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

Quoted message said:

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

Quoted message said:

Joe

I just bought a NOS Guerciotti with lugged Columbus SL tubing that I'm
going to build up with basically the same philosophy. Carbon fork, Ti-
rail saddle, 2007 Veloce CT group, and my 28/32 stupid-light (for me
and my 235 lbs) sewup wheels. I'm gonna see if I can get the thing
under 20 lbs.

I wouldn't dream of putting a carbon fork or a non-Brooks saddle on my
PX-10,

Your Peug would be happier with an Ideale, you know. ;-)

Quoted message said:

but my only rule for the Guerciotti will be, there are no
rules. If it's raining, or if the pavement's cruddy, I have three
other bikes I can ride for that. This will be the Light & Fast bike.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
John Forrest Tomlinson <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:46:24 -0000, landotter
> <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >I took two short rides on a Brooks saddle last night, and as
> >always--they look great, but feel like [censored] and are fussy and
> >inconsistent.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Not long enough -- give it three or five years of solid riding
> and you'll have a lifetime companion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If it takes more than a half dozen rides to be comfortable on a
Brooks, either it's set up seriously incorrectly or it's just not
the saddle for you. I find the Brooks Pro to be comfortable out of
the box, maybe a ride or three is necessary to dial it in. The
Brooks Pro S is my wife's favorite saddle (as in, she dislikes
sitting one any other saddle).

Quoted message said:

I've put 10K on a couple of B17s and 5K on this particular Flyer and
waiting for the comfort to set in. The B17s were bearable, but never
comfy. It's just a horrible design to begin with. There is only one
place of a single square cm for each ischia to find comfort in. There
is the idiotic rail in back with the double idiotic exposed rivets.
You either slide forward, or tilt up the horn enough to ovalize your
urethra. Firmness changes according to the day's humidity.

I don't experience any of these problems with my Brooks Pros (I have
four or five of them). I find the B.17 to be less comfortable- it is
too wide and the top is too flexible. I've never ridden a Flyer but the
springs give me pause- it'd take a lot of farting around to find the
right angle.

Quoted message said:

Seriously-- I'm at the point where I hate these things. I tried for a
couple months to get rid of my last Brooks, this particular Flyer by
flogging it on Craigslist for very very cheap, but fate means for me
to have it on my beer bike to remind me of what overrated vintage
garbage is. Well designed nylon saddle shells covered thinly in a mm
of foam or two and some leather are so far superior to Brooks, it's
not even funny.

Well, obviously for you Brooks saddles are not the right ones. But you
are making the logical error of generalizing your particular situation
to a universal one. While you may find this hard to believe, Brooks
saddles are very comfortable for many people- perhaps millions of
people, given how long Brooks has been in business. If the saddles were
such [censored] as you say, market forces would have driven the company out of
business. As it was, the weight-weeny attitude almost did put them out
of business a little over 10 years ago.

It wasn't "the weight weenie attitude" so much as the ready
availability of comfy, non-fussy saddles that also happened to be
lighter *and* less expensive. Saddles like the classic Selle Italia
Turbo, the San Marco Concor, Regal and Rolls and others from Avocet,
etc.

Quoted message said:

A friend who owns a bike shop
finds Brooks saddles to be one of his biggest selling items and his
customers have been almost without complaint about them.

Sure, because it's hard to find sensible alternatives in today's
market. It's either a Brooks or a ridiculous, pseudo-high-tech, form-
over function, over-priced POS ass hatchet such as a Fizik, or the
"modern" offerings from Selle Italia, San Marco, etc.

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

On Jun 22, 11:07 am, "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

> Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble understanding
> how twine can be involved....

Quoted message said:

> --

Quoted message said:

>From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

Quoted message said:

http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should
actually use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the
20th century, I suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats and
leather (or cloth?) bar tape, but shouldn't you be using leather
brake pads and wooden rims?

Yes, and use them humorlessly.

IME most Rivendell customers have far better senses of humor about this
stuff than do their critics. You, for example.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Hank Wirtz said:

I just bought a NOS Guerciotti with lugged Columbus SL tubing that
I'm going to build up with basically the same philosophy. Carbon
fork, Ti- rail saddle, 2007 Veloce CT group, and my 28/32
stupid-light (for me and my 235 lbs) sewup wheels. I'm gonna see if I
can get the thing under 20 lbs.

Should be "doable." After all, my wife's 53 cm Heron (a former
Rivendell spin-off company) weighs barely over 20 lbs with a steel fork
and "retro" components (Superbe crank, derailleurs, brakes and
freewheel; Phil hubs, 32 or 36 spokes, MA2 rims; 700 x 28 tires; Brooks
Pro S saddle; Nitto bars and stem). Todd Kuzma managed to get his Heron
down to 16 lbs or something like that- not bad for a bike made from
Reynolds 531.

Sub 20 lbs was easy to do 30 years ago, I don't know why it seems to be
such a big deal to achieve this now.

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

landotter said:

On Jun 22, 11:07 am, "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble understanding
>> how twine can be involved....

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> --

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should
actually use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the
20th century, I suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats and
leather (or cloth?) bar tape, but shouldn't you be using leather
brake pads and wooden rims?

Quoted message said:

Yes, and use them humorlessly.

IME most Rivendell customers have far better senses of humor about this
stuff than do their critics. You, for example.

Aw, does a little ad hominem make you feel better, hon? I have a grand
sense of humor--but unlike a lot of people that buy bikes to hang on
the wall, I ride a lot, and gain strong opinions about certain bits of
gear.

It's unbelievable, for example, when a bike shop fails to stock what I
see as classic parts, things such as Rolls saddles and Kool Stop brake
shoes--classic moderately priced problem solvers, and instead push
overpriced junk like Aztec pads or overcomplicated and expensive
saddles, whose numerous seams and logos only cause more chafing and
redness.

Rivendell does the same thing with their bits. There's a ton of great
stuff and advice at their site. Then there's also this phony folksy-
craftiness that's just as eye-roll inducing as the unnecessary
technology they eschew. Sell Brooks saddles--fine by me, they fit some
folks--but I find it quite silly that they're the only option in their
catalog. Grant has decided that's what you shall ride and you must
obey.

landotter said:

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

landotter said:

On Jun 22, 11:07 am, "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >> Sorry to butt in, but what twine? I have trouble understanding
> >> how twine can be involved....

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >> --

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>From the Official Cycling Hobbit source comes this:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >http://tinyurl.com/2sgxxs

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Sheesh. I'm almost sorry I asked. God forbid that we should
> actually use electrical tape -- or any product developed in the
> 20th century, I suppose. I guess that goes with leather seats and
> leather (or cloth?) bar tape, but shouldn't you be using leather
> brake pads and wooden rims?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes, and use them humorlessly.

Quoted message said:

IME most Rivendell customers have far better senses of humor about this
stuff than do their critics. You, for example.

Aw, does a little ad hominem make you feel better, hon? I have a grand
sense of humor--but unlike a lot of people that buy bikes to hang on
the wall, I ride a lot, and gain strong opinions about certain bits of
gear.

It's unbelievable, for example, when a bike shop fails to stock what I
see as classic parts, things such as Rolls saddles and Kool Stop brake
shoes--classic moderately priced problem solvers, and instead push
overpriced junk like Aztec pads or overcomplicated and expensive
saddles, whose numerous seams and logos only cause more chafing and
redness.

Rivendell does the same thing with their bits. There's a ton of great
stuff and advice at their site. Then there's also this phony folksy-
craftiness that's just as eye-roll inducing as the unnecessary
technology they eschew. Sell Brooks saddles--fine by me, they fit some
folks--but I find it quite silly that they're the only option in their
catalog. Grant has decided that's what you shall ride and you must
obey.-

"I am thy lord thy gRant, thou shalt have no gRants before me."

Ozark Bicycle said:

Hank Wirtz said:

On Jun 22, 8:54 am, Joe Bernard <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
> back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
> saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
> drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
ride and durability of steel.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Joe

Quoted message said:

I just bought a NOS Guerciotti with lugged Columbus SL tubing that I'm
going to build up with basically the same philosophy. Carbon fork, Ti-
rail saddle, 2007 Veloce CT group, and my 28/32 stupid-light (for me
and my 235 lbs) sewup wheels. I'm gonna see if I can get the thing
under 20 lbs.

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't dream of putting a carbon fork or a non-Brooks saddle on my
PX-10,

Your Peug would be happier with an Ideale, you know. ;-)

Quoted message said:

but my only rule for the Guerciotti will be, there are no
rules. If it's raining, or if the pavement's cruddy, I have three
other bikes I can ride for that. This will be the Light & Fast bike.- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

- Show quoted text -

I know, but the original is long gone (I think it had an Avocet
Touring II on it when my mom bought it used 25 years ago) and even NOS
ones on ebay are in pretty rough shape, for 2-3x the price of a B17,
which doesn't look horribly out of place.

Hank Wirtz said:

On Jun 22, 10:15 am, Ozark Bicycle

Quoted message said:

On Jun 22, 11:51 am, Hank Wirtz <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On Jun 22, 8:54 am, Joe Bernard <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > Something in me wants to get a Rivendell, and put a Renn disc on the
> > back and a Hed Trispoke on the front, along with the skinniest Ti-rail
> > saddle on a carbon fiber seat post. It would also have a ten-speed
> > drivetrain with brifters.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > --
> > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> I love it! But then I'm a '57 Chevy on a C6 Vette chassis kinda guy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> That's pretty much my plan. Modern drivetrain, carbon seatpost,
> lightweight wheels. There's no reason a lugged steel bike has to run
> friction shifters, 7-speed freewheels and touring wheels. It's just a
> frame-material and tube-joining choice. When I first got into road
> bikes in the early '90s, most high-end bikes were lugged steel with
> whatever components were the thing then. Mostly 8-speed Dura-Ace STI.
> I have no use for the retro thing. I just like pretty lugs and the
> ride and durability of steel.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Joe

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I just bought a NOS Guerciotti with lugged Columbus SL tubing that I'm
going to build up with basically the same philosophy. Carbon fork, Ti-
rail saddle, 2007 Veloce CT group, and my 28/32 stupid-light (for me
and my 235 lbs) sewup wheels. I'm gonna see if I can get the thing
under 20 lbs.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't dream of putting a carbon fork or a non-Brooks saddle on my
PX-10,

Quoted message said:

Your Peug would be happier with an Ideale, you know. ;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

but my only rule for the Guerciotti will be, there are no
rules. If it's raining, or if the pavement's cruddy, I have three
other bikes I can ride for that. This will be the Light & Fast bike.- Hide quoted text -

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

- Show quoted text -

I know, but the original is long gone (I think it had an Avocet
Touring II on it when my mom bought it used 25 years ago) and even NOS
ones on ebay are in pretty rough shape, for 2-3x the price of a B17,
which doesn't look horribly out of place.-

Oh, a B-17 doesn't look out of place, it's just lacking in
'Frenchness'. And you're right, Ideales are hard to find; I got lucky
a few years ago and found a NOS Model 92 "Rebour". It goes well with
my vintage Motobecane, but I must say I don't find it, or a Brooks, to
be "magical".

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Hank Wirtz said:

I just bought a NOS Guerciotti with lugged Columbus SL tubing that
I'm going to build up with basically the same philosophy. Carbon
fork, Ti- rail saddle, 2007 Veloce CT group, and my 28/32
stupid-light (for me and my 235 lbs) sewup wheels. I'm gonna see if I
can get the thing under 20 lbs.

Should be "doable." After all, my wife's 53 cm Heron (a former
Rivendell spin-off company) weighs barely over 20 lbs with a steel fork
and "retro" components (Superbe crank, derailleurs, brakes and
freewheel; Phil hubs, 32 or 36 spokes, MA2 rims; 700 x 28 tires; Brooks
Pro S saddle; Nitto bars and stem). Todd Kuzma managed to get his Heron
down to 16 lbs or something like that- not bad for a bike made from
Reynolds 531.

Sub 20 lbs was easy to do 30 years ago, I don't know why it seems to be
such a big deal to achieve this now.

Brifters weigh more than downtubes+ drilled brake levers w/o springs.
Dual pivot brakes weigh more than single-pivot ones, too. Only
retrogrouches ride sewups these days, and good luck finding 280-gram
rims.

Five more cogs. That's the real kicker.

Ozark Bicycle said:

Tim McNamara said:

While you may find this hard to believe, Brooks
saddles are very comfortable for many people- perhaps millions of
people, given how long Brooks has been in business. If the saddles were
such [censored] as you say, market forces would have driven the company out of
business. As it was, the weight-weeny attitude almost did put them out
of business a little over 10 years ago.

It wasn't "the weight weenie attitude" so much as the ready
availability of comfy, non-fussy saddles that also happened to be
lighter *and* less expensive. Saddles like the classic Selle Italia
Turbo, the San Marco Concor, Regal and Rolls and others from Avocet,
etc.

Those are all horribly narrow compared even to a B17, let alone a
B66. That doesn't work for everybody. What are the nylon equivalents
to the B17 and wider saddles like? Generally speaking, they're lumpy,
poofy, uncomfortable pieces of [censored].

I ride a couple of B90-3 saddles, no longer in production. I'm not
enamored of their overdone springiness, and I would be glad to opt out
of their nearly 5-pound weight. Buy what I get from them is a nice
wide, firm, smooth top of normal saddle shape. I don't see what
exactly is so difficult about that for saddle manufacturers to get.
Why do all the firm, smooth, normally shaped plastic saddles only come
in suppository size? I don't know-- because real cyclists' butts (sit
bones included) come in lots of sizes.

I like the Electra Townie and Comfort saddles alright, but they still
leave something to be desired. While much firmer and better shaped
than most wide saddles, they are still overpadded and too short for
their width (which is wider than necessary). And the one with a
plain, unstitched top has a bunch of useless springs and junk between
it and the rails.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A friend who owns a bike shop
finds Brooks saddles to be one of his biggest selling items and his
customers have been almost without complaint about them.

Sure, because it's hard to find sensible alternatives in today's
market. It's either a Brooks or a ridiculous, pseudo-high-tech, form-
over function, over-priced POS ass hatchet such as a Fizik, or the
"modern" offerings from Selle Italia, San Marco, etc.

There would be a decent market, I believe, for something like a Turbo
or a Rolls that's 8+ inches wide rather than 5" to 6". Vetta used to
offer something sort of along those lines in the late '80s or early
'90s, but it still had more padding than optimum for comfort.

Part of the blame must go to Specialized for poisoning the well by
getting ignorant people all fretful about their peckers if their
saddle doesn't have a fart slot. That has put all normal, smooth-
topped, potentially comfortable saddles at a marketing disadvantage.

Featuritis and gratuitous branding attempts on OEM and racing bike
saddles have resulted in normal, practical, comfortable plastic
saddles looking out-of-fashion. Not so for Brookses. They look cool
and authentic, like the real tack-and-harness stuff from which they
are descended. Lots of cool-kid bike messengers are using them. If
that's what you can buy to get an 8" wide saddle that isn't shaped
like a pie with a snout and isn't overly squishy, so be it.

Chalo

landotter said:

catalog. Grant has decided that's what you shall ride and you must
obey.

Well, no. He decided what he would sell, and if'n you don't like it,
you can buy from someone else. Exactly what I have done.

--

David L. Johnson

Accept risk. Accept responsibility. Put a lawyer out of business.

"Chalo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What are the nylon equivalents
to the B17 and wider saddles like? Generally speaking, they're lumpy,
poofy, uncomfortable pieces of [censored].
Chalo

How about the Avocet Gelflex 20 Saddle?

Wife says; "I don't know which one you proofhide more, your
Brooks B17 or your leather La-Z-Boy recliner.
-tom