I've found that the dynamic of a saddle is as important as the sit bone width consideration and close to both of those is the longitudinal dimension of your ideal sit bone stance.
When you sit on the saddle with those two points of your pelvis the force applied is way more than your thumbs when you handle the saddle in the LBS. I think cheaper padded saddles almost formulate construction anticipating the thumb testers. Even a brand new Brooks Professional will deflect under body weight applied at those two bony points. The dynamic I speak of, for me, has to do with what part(s) of the saddle deflect and which stay in shape. I got a new saddle for my custom that accommodated my sit bone width and nicely provided a level platform on which those bony points of contact rested without an angle promoting a slow slide in any direction I would have to actively correct or expend energy to resist. I remain seated longer than most before I transition to pedaling out of the saddle and being able to move back on the saddle and continue to have level platform of support of my sit bones is preferable. As I move fore and aft, pedaling while seated my body weight applies to slightly different positions and can have an effect on the less mobile portions of the cover which hopefully do not create problems. A lot of forecasting if veering from a tried and true saddle you've used in the past. Having a consistent platform of support for my sit bones through the fore and aft positions of my seated pedaling is key. The particular dynamic (actually static) feature I found disagreeable with my initial saddle choice, a Rivet Diablo, was the line of leather down the middle of the saddle from the nose to the cantle at the rear. As I began to break in the saddle I was getting a dull ache I hadn't experienced in a long time form my longer rides and realized this leather down the middle remained drawn tight like a ridge line while the leather under duress of my sit bones began to conform to them. The more break in, the higher the unsagging ridge was despite loostening the tension adjustment. The leather cover of the saddle was under varied foci of force and responded predictably. The answer was a slightly different saddle shape, the RIvet Pearl, and the slotted option. Not because I needed the relief of contact at the area of the cut out but rather the removal of material in that center strip, fore and aft, that didn't have forces like my sit bones deflecting it so removing some material allowing it to sag under the much less (and delicate) perineal contact did the trick. Here's a picture of a Rivet saddle like mine with the cut out and sit bone break in that really shows the concept I'm describing: https://rivetcycleworks.com. You can also see the generous fore and aft sit bone platform too.. >From the Rivet website: *Our Return Policy* *If you buy a saddle from a Local Bike Shop (LBS), then you are bound to their return policy. We support our local bike shops and want to support their policies.* *If you buy a saddle directly from us, then… We give you 365 days from date of purchase to ride it, tweak it, break it in, love it, or not. You can return it or exchange it for different models if it’s not the right fit. We want you to get the right saddle. Period.* *BUT, on the 366th day, you had better have a crazy good reason why you didn’t contact us within the year.If you do decide to return your Rivet, we will gladly take it back from you, and refund your money, minus the initial shipping cost for handling and re-stocking. Fair nuff.* I met the owner (Head Rivetress) , of Rivet Cycleworks, Deb Banks, at the Philadelphia Bike expo and bought from her saddle line after a nice conversation. Cocktails and dinner with her, Peter Gilbert of Cane Creek and Wayne Bingham of Mel Pinto Imports was the icing. Really nice folks. Andy Cheatham Pittsburgh On Wednesday, February 28, 2024 at 7:45:42 PM UTC-5 Jay wrote: > I'll preface this by saying I know saddles are highly subjective, and what > works for one may not work fo you. What I wanted to ask about is "general > thinking". Just wanting to confirm some thoughts I've had about this... > > My sit bones are 125mm apart. I've had them measured a few times. This > is when I'm sitting upright. I believe general rule is the more upright > you are on the bike, the wider you go with the saddle (e.g., if I'm 90 > degrees/straight up, add a few cm; aero, maybe just one cm). Any other > logic to share with respect to sit bones and saddle width? > > My saddle is level with tops of my bars (on two of three bikes). This > puts me in a comfortable position, maybe 60 degrees when I'm in the hoods. > All three bikes have drop bars, but only the older road bike has bars > below the saddle. My neck and upper back feel great in this position, and > I've previously had issues in this area, so that's a victory. > > I'm still dialing in my Roadini, but for now I have a WTB Silverado on > there (135 wide). It's maybe a little narrow, but I've done 2hr rides and > felt fine (pedalling is not impeded at all, and it's comfortable in the > nether regions). Feels like my sit bones are close to the edge but I can > feel around there and know there is just enough room to spare. I've had > that same saddle on another bike and that was also fine. Not a big fan of > the edges on that saddle, as it's very flat across and feels like it's > digging in a bit (a cm further out than my sit bones), but I'm trying to > sort that out and not really my point with this post (just sharing for > context). Reason I went with this 135mm saddle is my previous 147mm > Prologo felt too wide, and the cut out was digging in the nether regions. > So I tried something more narrow and I no longer get that discomfort. > > I do have a Brooks B17, and I've had one before on an older bike, and a > few other leather saddles over the years. What's attracted me to them is > that I rarely got any friction or chafing, or sit bone pain. I do set them > up, nose up, so rear of the saddle is flat and I'm not sliding forward. > > However, the B17 is 35mm wider than the WTB, and 45mm wider than my sit > bones, so I'm wondering if this saddle make sense for me...and anyone else > with similar 'specs'. I've read/watched reviews where much bigger folks > love the saddle (some hate it too, but that's maybe about > leather/hardness). Some of the reviews are from people who say their sit > bones are 150+ apart. That gives them 10mm on either side, vs. my 22.5mm > per side. I realize how we sit on the saddle, torso angle, etc., are > different, but generally speaking...like do skinny people or those with > somewhat narrow sit bones get along great with this saddle? If so, is > there a set up trick for them, that is different than someone with much > wider sit bones? I would say my problem with it is pedalling freedom, and > not feeling impeded by the size of the saddle, the skirt, etc. I can't say > for sure that's my problem with it, just giving a theory. > > I'll pause there, as I'll likely get some good questions/comments and can > take it from there. Thanks! > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/948dbffa-b144-4f8a-8589-e5c9b363ff6en%40googlegroups.com.
