I weight 180 lb, and own a Champion Flyer and a B66 (original double railed version of a B67). I have not ridden the B66 extensively as I find it's too wide for my riding style. I have quite a few miles on the Flyer, which I have modified thusly:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/15750548@N04/3291263207/in/set-72157614095230958/ Why the cutout is probably self-explanatory. Without the hole I couldn't ride that saddle long without inducing pain. With the central pressure duly relieved, I find the Flyer quite comfortable. The springs do take the edge off of small bumps. It does not bottom on rough roads, but big bumps off-road can compress the springs enough to try to launch me off of the saddle. That can be a little disconcerting. I've had no trouble with the frames on either sprung or unsprung Brookses. If you liked the shape of the B68, a sprung one might work well for you. I am looking to sell my B66 (along with a Seat Sandwich that allows it to be used on standard one-bolt seatposts). Contact me off list if you're interested. BTW, if you have enough seatpost exposed, a Carradice SQR should let you use any traditional saddlebag regardless of your saddle. Bill On Jul 18, 12:51 pm, Thomas Lynn Skean <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, all! > > I've been debating whether or not to get a Brooks B-67 (which I believe RBW > does sell) or a B-72 or Flyer (which I believe RBW doesn't sell). The B-67 > and B-72 are are both 210mm wide; the difference is the spring style > (standard coil on the B-67, some loop-ity loop arrangement on the B-72). The > Flyer is 170mm wide; it is basically a sprung B-17. I'm not (yet) interested > in the front-and-rear sprung contraptions such as the B-33/B-190/B-135 or > whatever else they have out there.... though I have a friend who gave > thought to a black B-33 for his folding bike to establish a "steam punk" > motif. I liked that idea. > > I have used a B-68 (basically a B-67 without springs) in the past. It did > not work out well. It was somewhat wider than ideal to begin with. But that > was not such a big deal as it "broke in". In fact, it was superbly > comfortable for a while (maybe 1,000 miles or so). However, eventually it > broke completely; my heft (245# and riding very upright) and the width of > the saddle combined to lever the sides of the back of the frame (outside the > vertical rail attachments) downward a bit too far. One side eventually > broke. Just before it broke, I had probably turned the saddle into a > 190mm-wide saddle, as opposed to its original ~210mm. > > I have used a B-17 and like it fine. It is not as comfortable as the B-68 > was at its best. But I can ride it 50+ miles without giving it a second > thought. So it's okay.... I'm just wondering whether more comfort is > practical with the sprung saddles. > > My questions, for those of you who are large-ish (or, if you prefer, "have a > friend" who is large-ish :)) and who have put 100+ miles on a wider Brooks > sprung saddle: What kind of saddle is it? What sort of payload does it > carry? (I assume every pound over your ideal body weight is in fact in the > backpack you wear on every ride.) Does the spring "give" enough to bottom > out on trails or rough-ish roads? Do you have problems with the unsupported > outer part of the frame creeping downwards? (I'm wondering whether the > spring-y-ness reduces fatigue on the frame so that it might not completely > give way in only a couple thousand miles.) > > For those of you who put substantial mileage on any sprung Brooks saddle... > Again, what model? Do the springs generally feel "dynamic" or "static"... > that is, do they move significantly/continuously over uneven terrain? Or do > they mostly serve to take the edge off of rough roads without much bouncing > about? Are the springs noisy in a way that can't be address with a little > oil/grease? > > Lastly, and this is a somewhat forlorn hope... has anyone successfully used > a saddle-bag "quick-release" of any kind with any sprung Brooks saddle? I > can't see how the RBW-sold Nitto bag quick-release would work... but perhaps > there's some way I don't perceive for it or some other brand to be made > useful? > > Yours, > Thomas Lynn Skean > who also is liking the idea of the new Brooks "Select" line of saddles -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
