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 <grant...@gmail.com> 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 rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > 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 rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
