Brooks is going for marketing glam over staid performance and dependability. Like Minh, I hope it's about adding new buyers whose patronage will support keeping their more traditional, if not lower volume, products in production.
If you made a heat map a bicycle of where weight reduction is graphically related to its impact on ridability or performance, I'd bet it would highlight the saddle. Wheels would light up for sure, rims, tires and spoke nipples especially. Super light saddle rail materials and aluminum nipples live in the same zone of folly for my uses. After getting in the ring with each of them and getting the horns from them, I hold them in a special regard. Regardless of the theoretical benefits, the weight reduction couldn't match the hassles introduced by each nor substantiate their shorter life span under my uses. Sometimes predictability and lack of hassle can overcomes a substantial weight differential. Doesn't sell more Red Bull and probably not Brooks Saddles to folks who use them for ten years or more. Andy Cheatham Pittsburgh On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 10:48:46 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Till wrote: > > I was noting in the link that they seem to be making multiple widths of > the carbon-railed saddle, including a 145mm and a 158mm, so you may be in > luck. > > Personally, carbon saddles are not for me, but it is cool to see brooks > bringing the idea of a suspended saddle to different markets. > > On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 6:32:18 AM UTC-7, Johnny Alien wrote: >> >> I actually like having a light version of a great Brooks saddle but these >> are too narrow for my taste. I ride Brooks for the ride quality and take a >> hit on the weight because of that. I believe most people here use smart >> parts that they like and deal with the weight disadvantage. If they made a >> carbon version of the C15 or C17 I would easily choose them over the >> standard version. Why not have the comfortable saddle WITH a reduced >> weight. I would love to have an incredibly useful bike that could be >> brought down a pound or two. And I understand the "lose 2 pounds off of >> the engine" argument and agree with it BUT if it's the same saddle quality >> wise and comfort I would pick the lighter one. I assume the counter >> argument will be that the carbon rails are destined to fail but I myself >> wouldn't think it would be an issue. >> > -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
