| |
Main
Date: 02 Aug 2007 17:18:14
From: Chris M
Subject: Saddle Rail and Related Technologies
|
I have used the Selle Italia Max Flite since I first used an OS
aluminum frame (Klein's first double butted, the Quantum II / Quantum
Pro). Going from a Vitus and a Columbus SL steel frame to the OS AL
tubes was pretty dramantic and the Flite saddles were not enough to
allow long rides / races. I tried many saddles until I found the Max
Flite, which was among the first to use a modest but much better-than-
nothing performance advantage in mitigating the road buzz. Racing in
NorCal tends to be on very poor pavement (another topic but...) and
the Max Flite filled the bill completely. Comparing back-to-back
against a ti railed Flite saddle (there was only 1 model at this time,
1992 1993) and I always had at least 1 spare on hand. I won't go in to
the models I rejected, though there are probably lessons others would
benefit from, but I'll assume there is no interest unless someone
asks. Most riders seem to struggle with articulating useful
information about components, and why they are favored or not. I have
identified several saddle attributes that influence personal
preference. The shell shape has 3 common types, where some think of
sitting in (shaped like a valley to fit very well in only one
position), sitting on (flat, allowing a range of fore and aft movement
that many riders prefer as they change cadence and terrain) and hybrid
(flat with a half ramp at the back, while the front allows you to
slide forward without having the front curve creating an acute
pressure point). The 2 classic shapes that exemplify these ideas are
the Selle San Marco Concor (a cradle style, one position saddle) and
the Selle San Marco Rolls (a flat saddle). I can't think of any hybrid
saddles off-hand and I think it is a shame that there are not more of
these available. They are really great for riding over many various
conditions and in my mind this is the ideal saddle style. I recall in
the late 1980s there was a saddle used by a French prolog and
breakaway specialist )Terry Marie (sp?) who used a saddle to won a
Tour prolog, that had a 5" or 6" vertical "back rest" that was
supposed to assist in power application. This is related to the tether
idea that the Italian TTT Olympic team used, that allowed them to
apply power at the peak point in the cadence phase that normally is
countered by arms holding the body in place. Both the saddle and the
tether were "outlawed" after the events that they won. There was a
period of many ideas being introduced as a result of the dramatic
Moser Word Hour Record events because the equipment was seen as the
reason that he shattered Eddy's record that was thought to be
"untouchable". Years later (too late to allow a proper perspective on
the relative importance of equipment) it turns out that among the
unpublished benefits Moser enjoyed, blood doping was said to be a
factor as well. By this time, the "funny bikes" or "plunging bike"
and their disk wheels, etc. were ubiquitous.
Anyhow, the point is that there are conditions where a saddle that
cradles the rider as he is countering the force of the power applied
to the pedals in approx. the 1:00 to 5:00 phase would seem to be
useful, especially when you do not have to sit in the saddle when you
want to slide forward.
Getting to my point, I have tried several saddle this past year and I
found that the Ritchey Streem WCS was ideal for me, and super light as
well. Unfortunately, the shell material is not robust enough to
survive past about 6 months pf 15 hours per week use on my bikes. I
had purchased 2 (because they are so great, aside from the shell
weakness I recently found out about) and now I need to find the next
best saddle that is either flat, or half flat with a curve up at the
rear.
I also am interested in some of the new saddles that are compliant
side to side, but crucial is that some aspect of the design must do a
better than average job at killing road buzz. The best indication that
the saddle is going to be serving you well for long harsh rides is
that when you do an A to B comparison, the ideal saddle with feel as
though you are running about 70 psi in your rear tire. This is the
sensation I had when I first installed the Max Flite and the Ritchey
Streem WCS. I have seen several others that claim to deal with road
buzz and most if not all of the designs that claim the shell is
resilient enough to deak with this are generally not much better than
any other saddle. The key to the Max Flite and the Ritchey Steem are
the rail attachment points that allow for the saddle to flex about
10-20mm. This will give the sensation of a rear tire going flat, and
then you get used to it and saddle soreness suddenly becomes much more
trivial if it does not go away completely (ride enough miles and there
is nothing that can protect your butt from a little soreness).
So, I looked at lots of saddles and their claims, and there are a few
that look like they might be at least as good as the Max Flite. The
Selle San Marco ERA series feature elastomer between the rail and the
shell. There is also a saddle model from a manufacturer that I forget,
but it comes with 3 sets of elastomer cushions that the rails sit on,
and I have not tried it because it seems like overkill and looks to
big for a performance saddle. . So. I am wondering if anyone out there
has done some of the same research that I have, and hopefully with the
SSM ERA or another similar model that gives enough dampening as I
described (feels like low pressure in the rear tire)
The shop I went to did not have the ERA in stock, but they did have
the Arione w ti rails, which I have tried on a Canonndale System 6 and
while I can't see why this would be any better than a run-of-the-mill
saddle like a Selle Italia C2 or one of the Flite saddles with a
medium sized shell and padding and nothing special for the rail
attachment. I hope the Fizik purchase was not a mistake, but it seemed
to be the best (according to my specs) saddle in stock.
AS I said, I would appreciate any comments from those who have done
down the same or similar roads who can point out relative shock
absorbing performance along the lines of what I have discussed.
|
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 19:23:39
From: Mike Krueger
Subject: Re: Saddle Rail and Related Technologies
|
On Aug 2, 8:18 pm, Chris M <chrismcreyno...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> I have used the Selle Italia Max Flite since I first used an OS
> aluminum frame (Klein's first double butted, the Quantum II / Quantum
> Pro). Going from a Vitus and a Columbus SL steel frame to the OS AL
> tubes was pretty dramantic and the Flite saddles were not enough to
> allow long rides / races. I tried many saddles until I found the Max
> Flite, which was among the first to use a modest but much better-than-
> nothing performance advantage in mitigating the road buzz. Racing in
> NorCal tends to be on very poor pavement (another topic but...) and
> the Max Flite filled the bill completely. Comparing back-to-back
> against a ti railed Flite saddle (there was only 1 model at this time,
> 1992 1993) and I always had at least 1 spare on hand. I won't go in to
> the models I rejected, though there are probably lessons others would
> benefit from, but I'll assume there is no interest unless someone
> asks. Most riders seem to struggle with articulating useful
> information about components, and why they are favored or not. I have
> identified several saddle attributes that influence personal
> preference. The shell shape has 3 common types, where some think of
> sitting in (shaped like a valley to fit very well in only one
> position), sitting on (flat, allowing a range of fore and aft movement
> that many riders prefer as they change cadence and terrain) and hybrid
> (flat with a half ramp at the back, while the front allows you to
> slide forward without having the front curve creating an acute
> pressure point). The 2 classic shapes that exemplify these ideas are
> the Selle San Marco Concor (a cradle style, one position saddle) and
> the Selle San Marco Rolls (a flat saddle). I can't think of any hybrid
> saddles off-hand and I think it is a shame that there are not more of
> these available. They are really great for riding over many various
> conditions and in my mind this is the ideal saddle style. I recall in
> the late 1980s there was a saddle used by a French prolog and
> breakaway specialist )Terry Marie (sp?) who used a saddle to won a
> Tour prolog, that had a 5" or 6" vertical "back rest" that was
> supposed to assist in power application. This is related to the tether
> idea that the Italian TTT Olympic team used, that allowed them to
> apply power at the peak point in the cadence phase that normally is
> countered by arms holding the body in place. Both the saddle and the
> tether were "outlawed" after the events that they won. There was a
> period of many ideas being introduced as a result of the dramatic
> Moser Word Hour Record events because the equipment was seen as the
> reason that he shattered Eddy's record that was thought to be
> "untouchable". Years later (too late to allow a proper perspective on
> the relative importance of equipment) it turns out that among the
> unpublished benefits Moser enjoyed, blood doping was said to be a
> factor as well. By this time, the "funny bikes" or "plunging bike"
> and their disk wheels, etc. were ubiquitous.
>
> Anyhow, the point is that there are conditions where a saddle that
> cradles the rider as he is countering the force of the power applied
> to the pedals in approx. the 1:00 to 5:00 phase would seem to be
> useful, especially when you do not have to sit in the saddle when you
> want to slide forward.
>
> Getting to my point, I have tried several saddle this past year and I
> found that the Ritchey Streem WCS was ideal for me, and super light as
> well. Unfortunately, the shell material is not robust enough to
> survive past about 6 months pf 15 hours per week use on my bikes. I
> had purchased 2 (because they are so great, aside from the shell
> weakness I recently found out about) and now I need to find the next
> best saddle that is either flat, or half flat with a curve up at the
> rear.
>
> I also am interested in some of the new saddles that are compliant
> side to side, but crucial is that some aspect of the design must do a
> better than average job at killing road buzz. The best indication that
> the saddle is going to be serving you well for long harsh rides is
> that when you do an A to B comparison, the ideal saddle with feel as
> though you are running about 70 psi in your rear tire. This is the
> sensation I had when I first installed the Max Flite and the Ritchey
> Streem WCS. I have seen several others that claim to deal with road
> buzz and most if not all of the designs that claim the shell is
> resilient enough to deak with this are generally not much better than
> any other saddle. The key to the Max Flite and the Ritchey Steem are
> the rail attachment points that allow for the saddle to flex about
> 10-20mm. This will give the sensation of a rear tire going flat, and
> then you get used to it and saddle soreness suddenly becomes much more
> trivial if it does not go away completely (ride enough miles and there
> is nothing that can protect your butt from a little soreness).
>
> So, I looked at lots of saddles and their claims, and there are a few
> that look like they might be at least as good as the Max Flite. The
> Selle San Marco ERA series feature elastomer between the rail and the
> shell. There is also a saddle model from a manufacturer that I forget,
> but it comes with 3 sets of elastomer cushions that the rails sit on,
> and I have not tried it because it seems like overkill and looks to
> big for a performance saddle. . So. I am wondering if anyone out there
> has done some of the same research that I have, and hopefully with the
> SSM ERA or another similar model that gives enough dampening as I
> described (feels like low pressure in the rear tire)
>
> The shop I went to did not have the ERA in stock, but they did have
> the Arione w ti rails, which I have tried on a Canonndale System 6 and
> while I can't see why this would be any better than a run-of-the-mill
> saddle like a Selle Italia C2 or one of the Flite saddles with a
> medium sized shell and padding and nothing special for the rail
> attachment. I hope the Fizik purchase was not a mistake, but it seemed
> to be the best (according to my specs) saddle in stock.
>
> AS I said, I would appreciate any comments from those who have done
> down the same or similar roads who can point out relative shock
> absorbing performance along the lines of what I have discussed.
Since none of the other respondents offered any useful advice, I will
make an attempt to do so. I have been riding the Selle Italia
Turbomatic saddle for over 15 years. The Turbomatic in it's various
forms has always been popular in the pro peloton, and has garnered
many favorable reviews.
The original Turbomatic was introduced in the early 1990's, and
featured the venerable Turbo saddle shape suspended on three elastomer
pads for shock absorbtion. It was offered in a titanium rail version
that weighed a very respectable 260-280 grams even by today's
standards. I still use this saddle and keep at least one spare on
hand. A Turbomatic titanium in near mint condition just sold on ebay
for under $50, and they do come up for auction occasionally.
If you are not familiar with the Turbo saddle shape, it is slightly
cupped in the center to cradle you, less so than the Concor, but not
as flat front to back as the Rolls or the Regal. It is also a bit
wider in the back than the Flite and most modern minimalist saddles,
which is good if you don't have a skinny ass.
The Turbomatic went through 3 more versions before being discontinued
entirely by Selle Italia. The later versions featured cut-down sides,
optional gel padding, perforated leather or synthetic coverings, and
rails made from various steel alloys. My favorite remains the original
Turbomatic titanium. It would be worth trying if you can find one.
Good luck.
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 20:03:16
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Saddle Rail and Related Technologies
|
Chris M wrote:
<snip long windy [dull] novelette >
> AS I said, I would appreciate any comments from those who have done
> down the same or similar roads who can point out relative shock
> absorbing performance along the lines of what I have discussed.
>
1. ti is not shock absorbing, simply more elastic.
2. you want shock absorbing, but you don't want elastomer.
3. you're asking subjective questions about matters of personal taste.
i predict that unless someone responds with something that aligns with
the opinions you already have, you'll be unsatisfied with anything we say.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 11:57:11
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Saddle Rail and Related Technologies
|
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:03:16 -0700, jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote:
>Chris M wrote:
><snip long windy [dull] novelette>
>> AS I said, I would appreciate any comments from those who have done
>> down the same or similar roads who can point out relative shock
>> absorbing performance along the lines of what I have discussed.
>>
>
>1. ti is not shock absorbing, simply more elastic.
>2. you want shock absorbing, but you don't want elastomer.
>3. you're asking subjective questions about matters of personal taste.
>
>i predict that unless someone responds with something that aligns with
>the opinions you already have, you'll be unsatisfied with anything we say.
And this is so personal and idiosyncratic that it'd be almost impossible to
offer help. I like nice flat saddles with a groove, 135mm wide, light non-gel
padding. Thanks. Got nothing else to offer. Oh, and the original concor is a
hideous device of torture being exactly the width and curvature necessary to
wedge my sit bones apart.
How the hell can anyone offer objective help in a subject that could inspire
that last paragraph.
Ron
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 18:12:59
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Saddle Rail and Related Technologies
|
Chris M wrote:
> I have used the Selle Italia Max Flite since I first used an OS
> aluminum frame (Klein's first double butted, the Quantum II / Quantum
> Pro). Going from a Vitus and a Columbus SL steel frame to the OS AL
> tubes was pretty dramantic and the Flite saddles were not enough to
> allow long rides / races. I tried many saddles until I found the Max
> Flite, which was among the first to use a modest but much better-than-
> nothing performance advantage in mitigating the road buzz. Racing in
> NorCal tends to be on very poor pavement (another topic but...) and
> the Max Flite filled the bill completely. Comparing back-to-back
> against a ti railed Flite saddle (there was only 1 model at this time,
> 1992 1993) and I always had at least 1 spare on hand. I won't go in to
> the models I rejected, though there are probably lessons others would
> benefit from, but I'll assume there is no interest unless someone
> asks. Most riders seem to struggle with articulating useful
> information about components, and why they are favored or not. I have
> identified several saddle attributes that influence personal
> preference. The shell shape has 3 common types, where some think of
> sitting in (shaped like a valley to fit very well in only one
> position), sitting on (flat, allowing a range of fore and aft movement
> that many riders prefer as they change cadence and terrain) and hybrid
> (flat with a half ramp at the back, while the front allows you to
> slide forward without having the front curve creating an acute
> pressure point). The 2 classic shapes that exemplify these ideas are
> the Selle San Marco Concor (a cradle style, one position saddle) and
> the Selle San Marco Rolls (a flat saddle). I can't think of any hybrid
> saddles off-hand and I think it is a shame that there are not more of
> these available. They are really great for riding over many various
> conditions and in my mind this is the ideal saddle style. I recall in
> the late 1980s there was a saddle used by a French prolog and
> breakaway specialist )Terry Marie (sp?) who used a saddle to won a
> Tour prolog, that had a 5" or 6" vertical "back rest" that was
> supposed to assist in power application. This is related to the tether
> idea that the Italian TTT Olympic team used, that allowed them to
> apply power at the peak point in the cadence phase that normally is
> countered by arms holding the body in place. Both the saddle and the
> tether were "outlawed" after the events that they won. There was a
> period of many ideas being introduced as a result of the dramatic
> Moser Word Hour Record events because the equipment was seen as the
> reason that he shattered Eddy's record that was thought to be
> "untouchable". Years later (too late to allow a proper perspective on
> the relative importance of equipment) it turns out that among the
> unpublished benefits Moser enjoyed, blood doping was said to be a
> factor as well. By this time, the "funny bikes" or "plunging bike"
> and their disk wheels, etc. were ubiquitous.
>
> Anyhow, the point is that there are conditions where a saddle that
> cradles the rider as he is countering the force of the power applied
> to the pedals in approx. the 1:00 to 5:00 phase would seem to be
> useful, especially when you do not have to sit in the saddle when you
> want to slide forward.
>
> Getting to my point, I have tried several saddle this past year and I
> found that the Ritchey Streem WCS was ideal for me, and super light as
> well. Unfortunately, the shell material is not robust enough to
> survive past about 6 months pf 15 hours per week use on my bikes. I
> had purchased 2 (because they are so great, aside from the shell
> weakness I recently found out about) and now I need to find the next
> best saddle that is either flat, or half flat with a curve up at the
> rear.
>
> I also am interested in some of the new saddles that are compliant
> side to side, but crucial is that some aspect of the design must do a
> better than average job at killing road buzz. The best indication that
> the saddle is going to be serving you well for long harsh rides is
> that when you do an A to B comparison, the ideal saddle with feel as
> though you are running about 70 psi in your rear tire. This is the
> sensation I had when I first installed the Max Flite and the Ritchey
> Streem WCS. I have seen several others that claim to deal with road
> buzz and most if not all of the designs that claim the shell is
> resilient enough to deak with this are generally not much better than
> any other saddle. The key to the Max Flite and the Ritchey Steem are
> the rail attachment points that allow for the saddle to flex about
> 10-20mm. This will give the sensation of a rear tire going flat, and
> then you get used to it and saddle soreness suddenly becomes much more
> trivial if it does not go away completely (ride enough miles and there
> is nothing that can protect your butt from a little soreness).
>
> So, I looked at lots of saddles and their claims, and there are a few
> that look like they might be at least as good as the Max Flite. The
> Selle San Marco ERA series feature elastomer between the rail and the
> shell. There is also a saddle model from a manufacturer that I forget,
> but it comes with 3 sets of elastomer cushions that the rails sit on,
> and I have not tried it because it seems like overkill and looks to
> big for a performance saddle. . So. I am wondering if anyone out there
> has done some of the same research that I have, and hopefully with the
> SSM ERA or another similar model that gives enough dampening as I
> described (feels like low pressure in the rear tire)
>
> The shop I went to did not have the ERA in stock, but they did have
> the Arione w ti rails, which I have tried on a Canonndale System 6 and
> while I can't see why this would be any better than a run-of-the-mill
> saddle like a Selle Italia C2 or one of the Flite saddles with a
> medium sized shell and padding and nothing special for the rail
> attachment. I hope the Fizik purchase was not a mistake, but it seemed
> to be the best (according to my specs) saddle in stock.
>
> AS I said, I would appreciate any comments from those who have done
> down the same or similar roads who can point out relative shock
> absorbing performance along the lines of what I have discussed.
Um...nah.
Bill "sheesh, man, take a breath!" S.
|
|
