Less is more?
Page 1 of 2

Author:  cyfa2809 [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:24 am ]
Post subject:  Less is more?

i mean cost. less saddle, more cost?
ok so that aside, has anyone tried these? (doubtful)
would you try one? you get ergo grips...
why are saddles designed how they are today? compared to this, it seems a bit backwards
you dont sit on the sofa with a bit in the middle..
maybe someone could diy one? rails could easily be put on one of those. cut it, get the material re-done, fit the rails properly


Author:  silverclaws [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:29 am ]
Post subject: 

Makes sense, anyway, the perineum will be happier, but a full saddle, gives that security factor and a bit of steerage, i.e. influence direction by using the hips instead of the steering.

Author:  cyfa2809 [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:37 am ]
Post subject: 

yeah thats a very good point but say saddles were orginally designed without the 'nose' you would think thats normal and adapt to that one.

id be very interested in some sort of study/comparison of turning/steering between the two types of saddle :?

Author:  silverclaws [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

I believe saddles were without a nose at one time, look at some of the old Victorian monstrosities. It seems a long nose might have developed with having to sit astride a frame with inline wheels rather than between wheels as in old tricycles.

As to long nosed saddles, they have come on leaps and bounds over the years, and despite having a retro bike, I have not got a retro saddle, the Specialzed body geometry I have, as it seems they have approached the problem with a bit of thought.

This website is brilliant, if a little freaky in some ways ;

I used it recently to explain to a friend who hated riding a bike, and when analysed, the hate was down to the saddle, he has now got a BG saddle and is riding, grumbling, but riding, it is a start, he gets fitter, his mind could change regarding cycling.

Author:  JamesM [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:39 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'd be worried about falling/slipping off it. Also you couldn't move your weight forward when climing.

Author:  cyfa2809 [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

i reckon there'd probably be enough room to move forward, unless you move forward onto the nose on your normal saddle? :shock: :shock:

not sure about falling off, your hands and feet are planted

i have a bg saddle, older one, but its not in use by me. they are good bits of kit though but i rarely sit down and hardly for long
im starting to think the nose is unnecessary, at least to the extent that some are :?
think bmx seats

Author:  silverclaws [ Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

My riding style is I have a seat, so it gets sat on, which helps keep the weight over the rear wheel and there more chance of traction. I tend to be more in low gear, where there is plenty of chance of spinning the wheel, so sitting helps, even when climbing. So the seat, is important to me.

Author:  barry2017 [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

Every ten years or so, someone tries to "revolutionise" the design of most parts of a bike. And it always fails. Every longtime cyclist has a box of old saddles that they hoped would make cycling more comfortable, but didn't.

The truth is, saddles have evolved to the shape they are because that's the best shape there is. The Brooks B17 hasn't changed at all since it was first introduced in 1894. :shock:

Author:  JamesM [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:05 pm ]
Post subject: 

cyfa2809 wrote:
i reckon there'd probably be enough room to move forward, unless you move forward onto the nose on your normal saddle? :shock: :shock:

not sure about falling off, your hands and feet are planted

You wouldnt have to move forward much to fall of the front of that saddle, which could result in you losing control and taking a spill, especially on bumpy ground. The nose of a saddle just gives you that extra security.

The only time I sit on the nose of the saddle is when using tribars. An inline post with the saddle as far forward as possible then slide to the nose of the saddle (padded shorts ofcourse :wink: :lol: ). You get the same or similar power that you get when you stand up but you're in an aero position. Just look at time trialists. I believe they have rules dictating just how far forward they can have their saddle with respect to the bb. I reckon the main advantage in standing up pedaling is that you're moving yourself in front of the pedals and into a better position to push. It's not so much about using your weight.

Author:  MikeD [ Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:17 pm ]
Post subject: 

Super-steep off-road climb with iffy traction? Sit on the nose.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group