Brooks saddle question

[mickle]

Hmmmm....I remain to be convinced by your unconvincidness.

I can't argue with that.

 

[jann71]

Where abouts in the UK are you?

 

[snailracer]

I'd like to be convinced that it's that simple. An undamped spring returns any energy not lost as heat for one thing, and then there's the reduced rolling resistance which results from the use of suspension - rudimentary though a sprung saddle might be, it does suspend a big old chunk of sprung weight. And then there's the strong possibility that a sprung saddle might have a positive effect on biomechanical efficiency if it flexes enough to allow the legs to move more easily.

+1
There is also another biomechanical advantage - you can carry on pedalling in the most efficient position (i.e. bum on saddle) even on rough roads - standing is not as efficient, and every transition up off the saddle uses up energy.

 

[aberal]

+1
There is also another biomechanical advantage - you can carry on pedalling in the most efficient position (i.e. bum on saddle) even on rough roads - standing is not as efficient, and every transition up off the saddle uses up energy.

-1
Sorry guys, I just don't buy into that line of thinking. If there was an advantage to be had from sprung saddles, we'd have seen them on the bikes of road racers or on the track long before now. You don't see them because there is no advantage to be had. Off road it's another matter all together.

 

[snailracer]

-1
Sorry guys, I just don't buy into that line of thinking. If there was an advantage to be had from sprung saddles, we'd have seen them on the bikes of road racers or on the track long before now. You don't see them because there is no advantage to be had. Off road it's another matter all together.

The OP was posting in the context of touring bikes, where riders expect to sit heavily on the saddle, unlike during a road or track race (tracks are smooth, don't you know? And track races are short).
PS if road racing was truly about speed, competitors would be riding recumbents (which pretty much all have sprung seats, BTW), but the UCI outlawed those to keep the racing close.
Even unsprung racing saddles are, in truth, sprung on their rails. And the more expensive unsprung saddles are more springy than the cheaper ones.

 

[thistler]

Where abouts in the UK are you?

SE Lincolnshire

 

[Sleeper]

I'd like to be convinced that it's that simple. An undamped spring returns any energy not lost as heat

You're absolutely right, but in this scenario it's not returned at the right time in the pedal power cycle...

 

[aberal]

The OP was posting in the context of touring bikes, where riders expect to sit heavily on the saddle, unlike during a road or track race (tracks are smooth, don't you know? And track races are short).

I know its about touring bikes. The principles of power transference remain the same. Energy transferred with every pedal stroke into the springs is energy not transferred to the drive train. The OP wanted to know if there were practical reasons for not having sprung saddles and that is the practical reason.

PS if road racing was truly about speed, competitors would be riding recumbents (which pretty much all have sprung seats, BTW), but the UCI outlawed those to keep the racing close.
Even unsprung racing saddles are, in truth, sprung on their rails. And the more expensive unsprung saddles are more springy than the cheaper ones.

This is a bit of a straw man here to be honest. Recumbants are about low wind resistance not about springs in their saddles. And unsprung saddles are just that - they don't have springs that absorb energy.

 

[thistler]

The OP was posting in the context of touring bikes,

Actually I was asking about road bikes...sorry if I was unclear!! I have taken the flyer off my touring bike and put it on my road bike for now, but will replace it when the money is available. Looks like it will be the Team Pro, unless I can convince someone to give me the Finesse for Christmas....

 

[mickle]

Is a Ti railed saddle with its more flexible (springy) rails 'slower' than a steel railed saddle?

 

[jann71]

Your a bit far away or you could have tried mine.
Ps lots of brooks on eBay at moment.

 

[aberal]

Is a Ti railed saddle with its more flexible (springy) rails 'slower' than a steel railed saddle?

The answer would be yes if the titanium rail and the steel rail were of the same diameter and wall thickness. But the true answer is no - because titanium rails are fabricated with either larger diameters or thicker wall thickness to compensate for the extra flexibility. In which case they are equally as stiff and strong as the steel, but still lighter.

 

[aberal]

Actually I was asking about road bikes...sorry if I was unclear!! I have taken the flyer off my touring bike and put it on my road bike for now, but will replace it when the money is available. Looks like it will be the Team Pro, unless I can convince someone to give me the Finesse for Christmas....

You'll have no regrets. I spent a fortune over the years buying ever more expensive and uncomfortable saddles. The cost of a Brooks saddle taken in that context, had I bought one at the outset would be much cheaper - they can last decades. You may never buy another saddle again.

 

[srw]

Ps lots of brooks on eBay at moment.

Legal ones? Don't laugh - Mrs W had one stolen from a bike at Marylebone a few years ago. Yes, just the saddle.

 

[mickle]

The answer would be yes if the titanium rail and the steel rail were of the same diameter and wall thickness. But the true answer is no - because titanium rails are fabricated with either larger diameters or thicker wall thickness to compensate for the extra flexibility. In which case they are equally as stiff and strong as the steel, but still lighter.

So you are suggesting that my limited edition Selle Italia Genuine Gel with its Ti rails and my name embroidered onto the white perforated Italian leather is a 'slower' saddle than the crappy steel railed (of the same diameter) saddle which resides on my hack.