All My Posts Now Open With This |
When I last talked about Penn’s adoration of his new Brooks
B-17, I spoke about the advantages of the thin saddle. At the end of that piece, I promised to
return to the subject and talk about another reason he and his Brooks get along
so well: saddle width. Paying attention
to saddle width is another way a rider can custom-tune their equipment to their
anatomy.
Remember the pelvis? Well,
good; your sit bones are going to play an important part in this discussion,
too. The location of the ischeal
tuberosities upon which you perch are, of course, dependent upon the size of
your pelvis—the wider your pelvis, the further apart these two points of
intense contact are and vice versa. So
the size and shape of your “contact patch” with the saddle depends primarily on
your bone structure.
This point bears repeating:
the width of your saddle is determined by YOUR bone structure. I emphasized that pronoun because people make
a lot of misguided assumptions on this issue.
It is generally taken as a given, for example, that a woman needs a
wider saddle than a man. People make
this assumption because women generally have wider hips than men because they
have to move a baby through there. But
while that’s a generally rule of anatomy, it doesn’t tell you anything about
any particular individual woman. For men
it is the same; a big guy may have tiny hips under all the flesh or he may not. You cannot guess by looking at yourself.
Your pelvis deserves better. |
To complicate matters futher, because of the geometry of
your pelvis and legs, the more upright your position on the bike, the wider the
saddle you need. The more aero you get,
the more narrow a saddle you can get away with.
Besides their brutal weight, this is another reason you don’t see the
Brooks B-17 on a lot of racy bikes—if you have significant saddle-to-bar drop,
the Brooks ends up being too wide. If
you put an SLR on a beach cruiser, you will need some sort of lever to extract
it from your body at the end of the ride.
In practice, this rarely arises as a significant problem, though, as the
absurdity of the two examples just given generally works to prevent people from
trying them.
All of this speaks to why saddle recommendations are
generally useless: everyone’s anatomy is
unique to them, and their bike fit and riding style are additionally idiosyncratic. All of this also means that perhaps you can’t
have the saddle you really want. Specialized’s
idiotically-named top racing saddle, the Toupe, is a sleek and enticing piece
of bicycle engineering that comes no wider than 143mm because professional bike
racers are all freakish bird men. For
me, it is forever off the table. Finding
the right saddle is generally a time- and money-consuming marathon of trial and
error, but taking a tape measure with you to the bike shop can cut it down by at
least eliminating the non-starters.
(Annoyingly, very few manufacturers advertise their saddle’s dimensions,
so you have to do the legwork.)
To return to Penn’s situation, the Brooks B-17 is a whopping
170mm wide where the typical men’s saddle runs somewhere in the mid-140s. In person, Penn is more wiry scrapper than bruising
behemoth. He has the appearance of a man
who will survive easily in the backwoods and mountains when he finally turns
his back on civilization. Nevertheless,
it turns out that the guy has a wide pelvis.
Penn also rides with his bars at saddle height these days. The Brooks is considerably wider than the
saddle he replaced, and as a result, it provides a good fit for his body to do
the long and repetitive work of cycling.
Thus, love.
Damn, Val, that's a fine signature photo! Always raising the bar!
ReplyDeleteAs for Penn in the backwoods,I think you're right on. He does have a kind of literary Survivor-man schtick going on.