Showing posts with label saddles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label saddles. Show all posts

22 February 2017

Rubber Matches Leather?

Almost two years ago, I wrote about one of the funniest listings I've ever seen on eBay, or anywhere.  It expresses the seller's loathing for the saddle he or she was trying to sell:  a Brooks Cambium C15.

Now, I am not going to offer an opinion on it, or the C17, as I have never tried either.  I probably won't (unless someone offers me one for free), as I am satisfied with the Brooks saddles I have (Professionals and B17s) and don't want to change.

The idea behind Cambium saddles is, however, intriguing--and not new.  For one thing, Cambiums are certainly not the first saddles to come with canvas tops, though, when they were introduced a couple of years ago, they might have been the first such saddles in half a century or so.

More important, however, is what lies underneath that cloth covering:  a vulcanized rubber base.  That, too, is something that most cyclists who aren't collecting Social Security haven't seen before.  Rubber in a bike seat?  

Turns out, it was once fairly common, or at least not unusual. (Fifty shades of equivocation?)  I was reminded of that when I came across this:




Cyclists of a certain age will recall the name Wolber.  Until the '80's or thereabouts, it was the chief rival of Michelin in the world of bicycle tires.  In fact, to many cyclists, Wolber was even more highly regarded, as they made a more extensive line of tubular tires, which included one of the nicest pairs of tubulars I ever owned and rode. (I can't remember the model name.)  They also improved upon Michelin's "Elan", widely considered to be the first high-performance clincher.




So it's fair to assume that Wolber knew a thing or two about making things from rubber.  The saddle in the above photo was made by Ideale, the premiere French saddle-maker, from a "skin" Wolber fabricated.  The undercarriage appears to be the one used on the Ideale B6, which is remarkably similar to the Brooks B72:  the saddle that came with many classic English three-speed bikes.

A B6/B72 with a rubber top actually makes sense, at least in theory, for commuters and others who ride or park their bikes in the rain.  I wonder how long those saddles lasted.


Perhaps it's not surprising that another leading bicycle-tire maker of the time also made bicycle saddles, or at least the tops for them:




I don't know whether Dunlop made the carriages for their saddles, or whether--as  is apparently the case with Wolber saddles--they were made by a company that made leather saddles.  

Interestingly, Raleigh bicycles came with Dunlop tires, which were considered to be the finest quality (Riders did everything they could to extend the life of those tires!), until Dunlop stopped making bicycle tires in the late 1960s. To my knowledge, however, those same Raleigh bicycles were not equipped with Dunlop saddles:  Instead, they came with B72s or other Brooks models.  

Like the Cambiums, the Wolber/Ideale and Dunlop saddles were constructed of a rubber base layer topped with cloth that was treated with a rubber compound for waterproofing. The Cambium looks more cloth-like than the others--a conscious decision, I am sure, on the company's part.  The Wolber/Ideale has a textured appearance that makes me think of a cross between carbon fiber and leather, while the Dunlop looks like leather, at least from a few feet away.

Although Dunlop hasn't made bicycle tires in nearly half a century, they continue to make tires for motorized vehicles as well as other rubber products.  In the late '80s, Wolber absorbed Super Champion, then the best rim-maker in France (or anywhere else) with the exception of Mavic. (For a few years, Super Champion rims were marketed under the Wolber name.)  Then, a few years later, Michelin took over Wolber!

17 July 2014

Hold Onto Your Seats

Airlines are always trying to stuff as many passengers as possible into every flight.

So it shouldn't come as any surprise that they want to find ways to cram more seats into every plane.  Barring any sudden changes in human evolutions or American diets, seats can be shrunk only so much before no one can sit in them.

Back in December, European aircraft maker Airbus filed a patent for a new kind of seat:




A bicycle seat on planes?  Hmm.  I wonder if there are options for the kind of bicycle seat--racing, touring, cruiser, "Bummer" or whatever--a passenger might like.

An even better idea might be to install pods that can take  bicycle seats of the passengers' choice, including the passengers' own. I mean, if I want to ride my Brooks B17 or someone else wants to spend a flight perched on an '80's Concor, Ideale 90 Speciale Competition,  Terry Butterfly or Dimension Noseless saddle, why shouldn't we have that choice? 

Of course, if the airlines did that, they'd find an excuse to charge even higher fares. Or they actually implement an idea Ryanair had a few years ago.

18 May 2014

Cut From The Same Cloth--Or Hide

A couple of years ago, to a lot of fanfare, Brooks launched its Cambium saddles.  The stated reason was that some cyclists were looking for something that was, shall we say, is moins d'une douleur a l'arriere than their traditional tensioned leather saddles.

(Pardon my French. There, I said it!)

Ironically, Brooks created the Cambium--which is manufactured in Italy--as their tensioned leather saddles are more popular, at least here in the US, than they've been in decades.

The Cambium uses a fabric made of cotton and rubber instead of leather.  If you started cycling, say, about thirty or fewer years ago, you probably have not seen, let alone used, a cloth saddle.  But they've been around, in one form or another, almost from the earliest days of cycling.

One of the most famous examples is the "Bummer", which was inspired by Dan Henry's DIY project:

From American Cycling, July 1966

If you started cycling arond the same time as I did, you probably first heard his name in refrence to "Dan Henry arrows" or, later, "Dan Henry markers".  For decades, it seemed that every organized ride here in the US was marked by painting the symbols he developed onto pavement.

It seems that every other decade, someone makes a version of the Dan Henry saddle.  Late in the '70's Bike Boom, they were marketed as " Bummer" saddles; someone else revived them during the '90's.  Perhaps they'll return, soon, to a bike shop near you.

I've been tempted to try one, but never got around to it.  Maybe if somene rides one and is willing to let me take a few turns on it, I'd be willing. But I really don't want to buy another saddle that I might or might not like.  That said, if I were to try a new saddle, the Dan Henry/Bummer would probably be the one.

Now, if I wanted a cloth saddle purely for aethetic reasons, this is the one I'd get:


This saddle is said to be more or less a replica of one that was fitted to a Dursley-Pederson bicycle of the Edwardian era.  Tim Dawson, the author of the blog Vintage Bicycle, wites, "I  can report that I find it just as uncomfortable as the Dursley-Pedersen saddle."

Perhaps he needs to re-tension it:


24 September 2010

The Saddle Saga Continues

I've decided that I really don't like my Terry Falcon X saddles.  In fact, I don't think I like the "donut" saddles at all.  Maybe I'm still carrying residual male chauvinism or something.


Back in the day, I tried what was then the newfangled saddle:  the Avocet Touring II.  An Avocet saddle was different from any other available at the time because it had two "mounds" on the rear, which made for a center "groove."  You might say it was the inverse of today's "donut" saddles.


    Avocet Touring II women's saddle, circa 1980.   Note the "bumps" or "mounds":  They were intended to  lift the cyclist off her perineal area.



Ironically, the Terry saddles (I've also been riding a Butterfly on my Helene.) feel much like that Avocet saddle, at least to me.  On the Terrys (Terries?), the edges of the cutout rub against the inside of my perineal area.  So did the edges of the raised ridges on the Avocet.  But I think that, if anything, the Terry saddles feel worse to me than the Avocet did.  Well, maybe it's not a matter of the saddle itself.  I think that what's being rubbed is softer tissue than I had back when I was riding the Avocet.





Below:  Terry Butterfly, an example of a "donut" saddle.  The rationalization for the cutout in the middle is the same as that for the "bumps" on the Avocet:  relief of pressure on the perineal area.








Plus, I really don't think that the tear in my vaginal wall was caused by the Brooks Pro saddles I had been riding.  They may have exacerbated a condition I already had because it has more of a "dome" shape than some other saddles, which are flatter.


Another common dislike I have of both Avocet and Terry saddles is that they don't allow me free fore-and-aft movement.  Contrary to popular belief, highly technical mountain bikers aren't the only ones who like to slide forward and backward on their saddles.  Back when I first started to ride distances, almost every serious rider did the same.  And that is the reason why I had to give up, however reluctantly, an elegant suede saddle I rode for a time.  (I don't know of any suede saddles that are being made today.) I now realize that saddles with smooth, flat tops are most conducive to my riding style.


That's the reason why I'm going to try the Brooks B-17.  I'm thinking of riding the narrower version, which is about the same width (which I liked) as the Terry Falcon X , on Arielle and Tosca.  And I'll probably use the standard version on Helene, as it is actually slightly wider than the Butterfly.


Brooks B-17 


I believe (and hope) that the flatter shape of the B17, combined with its firmness, will keep me resting on my sitbones and relieve some pressure from my perineal areas.  And, of course, the saddle will become more comfortable over time.  


I'm going to ride the men's models.  Their width is right for me:  In spite of my surgery, my sitbones didn't grow further apart. (That's normal.)  Also, women's saddles are shorter than men's.  As someone who, as I mentioned, likes to slide forward and backward on her saddle as she changes position, I prefer the length of men's saddles.


Finally, I am happy to put Brooks saddles on my bikes again.  Neither Brooks nor anyone else pays me to ride the company's offerings, so I apologize if I sound like an advertisement.  But I'll say this:  Very few, if any, other bike parts are of as high quality as Brooks saddles.  Plus, what saddle is more appropriate on a lugged English frame made from Reynolds tubing?