"Spring" Brooks Saddles?

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I have an old Brooks. I put it on one of the mountain bikes for a
while, but I concluded that I liked it better back on the ancient
English roadster that it came with.

Tastes in saddles are *very* individual; what works perfectly for one
person may be intolerable for another. I would not try to tell
someone that a given saddle was a good choice for them just because
*I* liked it, nor say that a given saddle was just plain junk and
should never be chosen[1].

[1] Okay, yes, there *are* saddles that I consider to be just plain
junk, but you're unlikely to buy one. They came as original equipment
on bottom-feeder Roadmasters (and their ilk), and have mounting clamps
so poorly made that they can't be tightened enough to prevent the
saddle from tilting on a hard bump under a 200lb rider. They're also
slightly less comfortable than the ShelBroCo Real Man Saddle.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I have an old Brooks. I put it on one of the mountain bikes for a
while, but I concluded that I liked it better back on the ancient
English roadster that it came with.

Tastes in saddles are *very* individual; what works perfectly for one
person may be intolerable for another. I would not try to tell
someone that a given saddle was a good choice for them just because
*I* liked it, nor say that a given saddle was just plain junk and
should never be chosen[1].

[1] Okay, yes, there *are* saddles that I consider to be just plain
junk, but you're unlikely to buy one. They came as original equipment
on bottom-feeder Roadmasters (and their ilk), and have mounting clamps
so poorly made that they can't be tightened enough to prevent the
saddle from tilting on a hard bump under a 200lb rider. They're also
slightly less comfortable than the ShelBroCo Real Man Saddle.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I have an old Brooks. I put it on one of the mountain bikes for a
while, but I concluded that I liked it better back on the ancient
English roadster that it came with.

Tastes in saddles are *very* individual; what works perfectly for one
person may be intolerable for another. I would not try to tell
someone that a given saddle was a good choice for them just because
*I* liked it, nor say that a given saddle was just plain junk and
should never be chosen[1].

[1] Okay, yes, there *are* saddles that I consider to be just plain
junk, but you're unlikely to buy one. They came as original equipment
on bottom-feeder Roadmasters (and their ilk), and have mounting clamps
so poorly made that they can't be tightened enough to prevent the
saddle from tilting on a hard bump under a 200lb rider. They're also
slightly less comfortable than the ShelBroCo Real Man Saddle.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I have an old Brooks. I put it on one of the mountain bikes for a
while, but I concluded that I liked it better back on the ancient
English roadster that it came with.

Tastes in saddles are *very* individual; what works perfectly for one
person may be intolerable for another. I would not try to tell
someone that a given saddle was a good choice for them just because
*I* liked it, nor say that a given saddle was just plain junk and
should never be chosen[1].

[1] Okay, yes, there *are* saddles that I consider to be just plain
junk, but you're unlikely to buy one. They came as original equipment
on bottom-feeder Roadmasters (and their ilk), and have mounting clamps
so poorly made that they can't be tightened enough to prevent the
saddle from tilting on a hard bump under a 200lb rider. They're also
slightly less comfortable than the ShelBroCo Real Man Saddle.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

I'm riding an unsprung Brooks so I can't make a direct comparison,
HOWEVER...

I've also heard a suspension seatpost offers more cushioning than a sprung
Brooks - specifically, from someone riding the "stoker" position on a tandem
where you don't always know there's a bump coming.

I suspect the post would also be lighter (but that's just me talkin' out of
my butt...I haven't weighed them)

I know several people who've "chopped" their Brooks. See these pics:
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35715
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35716
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35720

And this thread: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=123134

I haven't tried this myself but I gather it adds some leg clearance and cuts
a bit off weight. They sort of look like a Swift or Swallow once chopped...

re: rain, I melt/rub beeswax on the bottom of my Brooks and leave a thick
coat in place. No issues with water. (though to preserve your Brooks
warranty, use Proofide instead - it contains beeswax)

C.

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

Quoted message said:

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their
mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

I'm riding an unsprung Brooks so I can't make a direct comparison,
HOWEVER...

I've also heard a suspension seatpost offers more cushioning than a sprung
Brooks - specifically, from someone riding the "stoker" position on a tandem
where you don't always know there's a bump coming.

I suspect the post would also be lighter (but that's just me talkin' out of
my butt...I haven't weighed them)

I know several people who've "chopped" their Brooks. See these pics:
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35715
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35716
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35720

And this thread: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=123134

I haven't tried this myself but I gather it adds some leg clearance and cuts
a bit off weight. They sort of look like a Swift or Swallow once chopped...

re: rain, I melt/rub beeswax on the bottom of my Brooks and leave a thick
coat in place. No issues with water. (though to preserve your Brooks
warranty, use Proofide instead - it contains beeswax)

C.

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

Quoted message said:

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their
mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

I'm riding an unsprung Brooks so I can't make a direct comparison,
HOWEVER...

I've also heard a suspension seatpost offers more cushioning than a sprung
Brooks - specifically, from someone riding the "stoker" position on a tandem
where you don't always know there's a bump coming.

I suspect the post would also be lighter (but that's just me talkin' out of
my butt...I haven't weighed them)

I know several people who've "chopped" their Brooks. See these pics:
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35715
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35716
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35720

And this thread: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=123134

I haven't tried this myself but I gather it adds some leg clearance and cuts
a bit off weight. They sort of look like a Swift or Swallow once chopped...

re: rain, I melt/rub beeswax on the bottom of my Brooks and leave a thick
coat in place. No issues with water. (though to preserve your Brooks
warranty, use Proofide instead - it contains beeswax)

C.

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

Quoted message said:

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their
mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

I'm riding an unsprung Brooks so I can't make a direct comparison,
HOWEVER...

I've also heard a suspension seatpost offers more cushioning than a sprung
Brooks - specifically, from someone riding the "stoker" position on a tandem
where you don't always know there's a bump coming.

I suspect the post would also be lighter (but that's just me talkin' out of
my butt...I haven't weighed them)

I know several people who've "chopped" their Brooks. See these pics:
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35715
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35716
http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=35720

And this thread: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=123134

I haven't tried this myself but I gather it adds some leg clearance and cuts
a bit off weight. They sort of look like a Swift or Swallow once chopped...

re: rain, I melt/rub beeswax on the bottom of my Brooks and leave a thick
coat in place. No issues with water. (though to preserve your Brooks
warranty, use Proofide instead - it contains beeswax)

C.

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

Quoted message said:

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their
mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I tried a Brooks Conquest on my mountain bike earlier this year. It
was too wide for me - it was hard to get behind it, and even harder to
get back onto it, on steep descents. Other problems I experienced:
it's obscenely heavy, the springs didn't seem to do as much as a good
suspension seatpost would, it has relatively short rails, and it looked
awful after I did a rainy, muddy ride (even with a fender). I
eventually put the Conquest on a commuter... much better place for it,
IMO.
I use a WTB Pure V saddle on my mountainbike now. It's almost as
comfortable as the Brooks, and it's much better suited to mountain
biking.

-Vee

Per Kinon O'Cann:

Quoted message said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I was using B-72s for some years, but started breaking the rails once I switched
to MTB riding.

Tried a B-66 (same footprint, but coil sprung), but decided that a sprung post
(Cane Creek ThudBuster) and an unsprung B-17 made more sense for MTB riding.

If you're riding road, I'd recommend the B-72 highly as long as the width isn't
too much for you. B-72's claim to fame in my book is that it supplies enough
springing to damp the bumps, but is firm/stable enough that control remains
uncompromised. You can get 4-wire adapters so you can mount it on a 2-bold
microadjustable post.
--
PeteCresswell

Per Kinon O'Cann:

Quoted message said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I was using B-72s for some years, but started breaking the rails once I switched
to MTB riding.

Tried a B-66 (same footprint, but coil sprung), but decided that a sprung post
(Cane Creek ThudBuster) and an unsprung B-17 made more sense for MTB riding.

If you're riding road, I'd recommend the B-72 highly as long as the width isn't
too much for you. B-72's claim to fame in my book is that it supplies enough
springing to damp the bumps, but is firm/stable enough that control remains
uncompromised. You can get 4-wire adapters so you can mount it on a 2-bold
microadjustable post.
--
PeteCresswell

Per Kinon O'Cann:

Quoted message said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I was using B-72s for some years, but started breaking the rails once I switched
to MTB riding.

Tried a B-66 (same footprint, but coil sprung), but decided that a sprung post
(Cane Creek ThudBuster) and an unsprung B-17 made more sense for MTB riding.

If you're riding road, I'd recommend the B-72 highly as long as the width isn't
too much for you. B-72's claim to fame in my book is that it supplies enough
springing to damp the bumps, but is firm/stable enough that control remains
uncompromised. You can get 4-wire adapters so you can mount it on a 2-bold
microadjustable post.
--
PeteCresswell

Per Kinon O'Cann:

Quoted message said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I was using B-72s for some years, but started breaking the rails once I switched
to MTB riding.

Tried a B-66 (same footprint, but coil sprung), but decided that a sprung post
(Cane Creek ThudBuster) and an unsprung B-17 made more sense for MTB riding.

If you're riding road, I'd recommend the B-72 highly as long as the width isn't
too much for you. B-72's claim to fame in my book is that it supplies enough
springing to damp the bumps, but is firm/stable enough that control remains
uncompromised. You can get 4-wire adapters so you can mount it on a 2-bold
microadjustable post.
--
PeteCresswell

Per Kinon O'Cann:

Quoted message said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their mountain
bike? If so, any opinions?

I was using B-72s for some years, but started breaking the rails once I switched
to MTB riding.

Tried a B-66 (same footprint, but coil sprung), but decided that a sprung post
(Cane Creek ThudBuster) and an unsprung B-17 made more sense for MTB riding.

If you're riding road, I'd recommend the B-72 highly as long as the width isn't
too much for you. B-72's claim to fame in my book is that it supplies enough
springing to damp the bumps, but is firm/stable enough that control remains
uncompromised. You can get 4-wire adapters so you can mount it on a 2-bold
microadjustable post.
--
PeteCresswell

Kinon O'Cann said:

Is anyone out there using one of the sprung Brooks saddles on their
mountain bike? If so, any opinions?

Not a great idea imho. I have a Flyer, which I love, but had to take it
off my single speed as you can really start to bounce from really rough
stuff or high cadences.

I'd save the Brooks for on-road. The rivets on the backside are pretty
gnarly too if they jump up and bite you.

You might want to look into a Lepper saddle if the leather thing floats
your boat. The frame design is different from the Brooks so no rivets on
the back.

Both will suffer greatly from the mud spray they're likely to undergo.