Question for you vintage owners

[sidevalve]

I think what you should remember is that bikes have'nt changed that much in twenty or thirty years. Apart from more modern materials and advances in brakes plus seat comfort. So riding a bike from yout teens isn't going to that different and will give you a nostalgia trip! Just enjoy.

Ok up to a point [spot on about the nostalgia !] but I must disagree about seat comfort [unless we're talking full suss here]. After all, the human bum hasn't changed much in about half a million years and what was a good saddle thirty years ago is still a good saddle, which is why I and many others still rely on Brooks. Comfort is what fits your bottom and your riding style and has very little to do with the age of the bike or saddle.

 

[Cycleops]

The point I was making was that although human ananatomy hasn't changed as you cleverly pointed out advances and developments in seat design have. Instead of Brookes giving a couple of rails with a piece of leather stretched over it and saying ' Give it five years and it'll be comfortable' you can get what you need off the shelf.

But it seems you are making your own case here 'for', so you don't need a lot of convincing.

 

[tyred]

I have a huge box of saddles, including some well regarded ones like the Charge Spoon and the San Marco Rolls. The reason they are all in a box and not on a bike is that I find not one of them comes close to a Brooks for comfort. Some I find downright painful.

I also note that I own a lot of bikes at any one time but only the ones which get ridden regularly on long rides have Brooks saddles.

Each to their own but for me the one bicycle component which can't be improved in design is the Brooks B17 as it was right from the very beginning.

 

[Crosstrailer]

Guys

Unfortunately I didn't win this auction after my offer wasn't accepted. I sincerely appreciate all your advice and hope to make a purchase of a 80s era bike some time in the not too distant future.....

Thanks for all your help !

 

[Cycleops]

Thats very interesting tyred. Maybe we ought to start a thread and see if the Brooks gets the thumbs up or wooden spoon.

 

[vernon]

Thats very interesting tyred. Maybe we ought to start a thread and see if the Brooks gets the thumbs up or wooden spoon.

The thread will not really tell anyone anything other than the results reflect the views of a small unrepresentative sample of riders who are motivated enough to respond to an appeal for their opinions.

 

[Cycleops]

The thread will not really tell anyone anything other than the results reflect the views of a small unrepresentative sample of riders who are motivated enough to respond to an appeal for their opinions.

Isn't that all you'll ever get on CycleChat?

 

[vernon]

Isn't that all you'll ever get on CycleChat?

But your posting suggested that you were expecting a meaningful result

 

[Ed no-more-lemons]

What have I done!
Well about 6 miles on a Brooks B17 is the short answer. Although I am an avowed life long cyclist who has never owned any 21st century bike or any indexed road bike, I have never had the fortune to know the B17 well.
Now I'm thinking twice about having sold the thing, but as it came with an aluminium post that was bent and to large for the frame, it went as my only alternative saddle was not 'spear pointed'.
So several CycleChat users views have to be top banana. My thoughts at the time centred mainly around the weight of this classic saddle, not to mention the condition(and whether new rivets could be sourced and fitted).
My prejudice about leather saddles was not removed by a short test run, if I had ridden this longer the post may have gone, or I might have realised what I had been missing out on.
Apart from maintenance and renovation, I always used to think I could do with the extra padding of a moulded seat as I dont have so much of my own and had known suspect leather saddles during the 80's.
You certainly do live and learn.

 

[Spokesmann]

X 2 for the B17. I have 3 of them.

 

[clarion]

Brooks is a cult. Using one was such agony for me that it almost stopped me cycling altogether.

On the more general point, classic bike design works well. My commuter is admittedly only three years old, but it is steel. I've just replaced my 1995 tourer with one a couple of years older. My fast bike is a 1980 Woodrup. My other fixed is a 1981 Carlton. Much better than aluminium bikes, and, for all that I do rate the dual pivot brakes of my commuter over the sidepulls of the Woodrup, I still much prefer my tourer's cantilevers over V-brakes.

I've got downtube levers on the new bike. I prefer bar ends, but a couple of minutes was all it needed to convert back. Either layout is far better than the idiocy of indexed front mech with STI, which is the system we have on our (mid-90s, but recently updated) tandem.

The only difficulty with the ownership and daily use of a classic bike is not in the riding, but in sourcing decent quality replacement parts.

 

[asterix]

WRT cantilevers, I've found that I can now get brake pads that perform far better and also are easier to set up without squeal or judder. They are non abrasive and don't ooze black gunge when wet! (Salmon koolstops*.)

My next bike, once I have got it past Mrs A, will be a custom job in steel, as light as it can be consistent with enough strength to hill-climb without BB flex. My ambition is to do the Raid Alpine on it. I think it is likely to have a Brooks saddle* as it is the only saddle that is consistently recommended. Have tried others without success.

*no,I don't own the company, just a satisfied customer.

 

[Cycleops]

Brooks is a cult.

This is certainly true, you may never an advocate to change.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

you either have a brooks bum, or you don't, apparently.

 

[asterix]

you either have a brooks bum, or you don't, apparently.

IME it's the other way round. My efforts to find another brand of saddle that 'fits' have all failed and I have returned to a B17. I even tried other types of Brooks with miserable lack of success.