Brooks saddle treatment
Aaron Thomas
describes treating the underside of his Brooks with Neatsfoot or mink
oil.
http://davesbikeblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/back-in-brooks-saddle-again.html
Has anyone heard of this approach or tried it? What are the pros and
cons?
Gino Zahnd
uses Neatsfoot oil under his saddles when they're new. When I first
asked him, "man, are you nuts? Doesn't it break down quicker?" He
replied (with snark), "yeah, I only get 15,000 miles out of a saddle
rather than 25,000. But man, it feel like a soft baseball glove out of
the gate." And he is right, it makes the saddle comfortable. But I
haven't been brave enough to try it.
dan...@aol.com
The late Sheldon Brown was a great proponent of oil from the foot of the neat for Brookses.
Dan Richards
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Aaron Thomas <aaron.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In Dave Moulton's blog entry yesterday (Monday, Feb. 25, 2008), he > describes treating the underside of his Brooks with Neatsfoot or mink > oil. > > http://davesbikeblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/back-in-brooks-saddle-again.html > > Has anyone heard of this approach or tried it? What are the pros and > cons? >
Tim McNamara
On Feb 26, 2008, at 3:14 PM, Gino Zahnd wrote:
>
> I know at least one guy that rides a billion miles a year, and also
> uses Neatsfoot oil under his saddles when they're new. When I first
> asked him, "man, are you nuts? Doesn't it break down quicker?" He
> replied (with snark), "yeah, I only get 15,000 miles out of a saddle
> rather than 25,000. But man, it feel like a soft baseball glove out of
> the gate." And he is right, it makes the saddle comfortable. But I
> haven't been brave enough to try it.
I'd be really really bummed (no pun intended) to only get 25,000
miles from a Brooks let along only 15,000. My favorite saddle is a
Brooks Team Pro I bought in 1976 or 1977 and has been a faithful
support for 30 years. It is the most comfortable saddle I have ever
ridden. Still pretty much hard as a rock, but it's a form-fitted
rock. I'd bet I have 100,000 miles on that saddle. If I'd used
Neatsfoot oil or motor oil or mink oil, etc., it wouldn't still be in
service. I didn't even know about Proofhide the first 15 years I
owned that saddle.
It's proudly mounted on my 11 year old A/R. When I bought that bike,
the saddle was 20 times as old as the A/R. Now it's only 3 times as
old. If I ride them long enough, they'll eventually be the same age!
I never ride it uncovered in the rain. Ever. I always have a
plastic bag with me just in case. I will mourn when that saddle
finally goes.
Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery
that describes a break-in technique for leather saddles. I'll spare
the details, but suffice it to say that the process involves driving
out the rivets with a punch, beating the leather to a pulp, and re-
riveting. It's rather involved.
We sell a lot of leather saddles. First-timers always ask if they
should put something on the saddle to break it in. Yep, your butt! It
really isn't that bad. For me, 50-100 miles is all it takes to make a
new B17 Champ Special feel decent (the plain B17 saddles require fewer
miles), and it only gets better from there.
One con of neatsfoot oil is that it will stain your trousers. One pro
about applying any goop to the underside of the saddle is that it will
soak in more effectively as that side of the leather is unfinished.
On Feb 26, 3:08 pm, Aaron Thomas <aaron.a.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In Dave Moulton's blog entry yesterday (Monday, Feb. 25, 2008), he
> describes treating the underside of his Brooks with Neatsfoot or mink
> oil.
>
Ray Shine
Ray
Aaron Thomas
seemed odd to slather anything on the underside, given that it is
unfinished when it leaves the factory. And I have read posts elsewhere
in which people claim that the underside should not be treated so that
it can "breathe" and dissipate butt sweat.
I don't know if any of this is true, hence my curiosity about others'
experience. For my part, all of my Brooks saddles have broken in just
fine with little more than an occasional application of Proofide and
regular riding. But when I read Moulton's post, I wondered if I had
been doing something wrong all along.
On Feb 26, 7:22 pm, Ray Shine <r.sh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I just can't get past the notion that if Brooks thinks that the underside of their saddle should be treated, it would be treated by them. I mean, they've been at this a long time. I had no trouble at all breaking in my four Brooks. They are very comfy. I really like them.
>
> Ray
>
Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery
harder to break in than current models. Also, in the 1970s, they were
something of a standard issue item on decent quality bikes, rather
than the quasi-boutique aftermarket item they have become these days.
Perhaps this is where the practice of applying exotic oils and other
abuses became entrenched. If it was unyielding to your butt bones, and
if you were stuck with the damned thing, soaking it in oil may have
seemed like a great idea. I wouldn't bother with a new B17. They break
in easily with just a few rides.
CycloFiend
wrote:
>
> Well, it should be noted that older Brooks saddles seem to be much
> harder to break in than current models. Also, in the 1970s, they were
> something of a standard issue item on decent quality bikes, rather
> than the quasi-boutique aftermarket item they have become these days.
> Perhaps this is where the practice of applying exotic oils and other
> abuses became entrenched. If it was unyielding to your butt bones, and
> if you were stuck with the damned thing, soaking it in oil may have
> seemed like a great idea. I wouldn't bother with a new B17. They break
> in easily with just a few rides.
I've got an older B-15 on my Zeus which is probably 70's vintage. The
thickness of the leather is about twice what the current B-17's seem to
have.
- Jim
http://home.comcast.net/~cyclofiend/bikes/Project_zeus650b.html
--
Jim Edgar
Cyclo...@earthlink.net
Cyclofiend Bicycle Photo Galleries - http://www.cyclofiend.com
Current Classics - Cross Bikes
Singlespeed - Working Bikes
Workshops of the iBob's
Send In Your Photos! - Here's how: http://www.cyclofiend.com/guidelines
Gino Zahnd
Obenauf's goop on the entire saddle when new, and forget about it.
Then, once a year or so, I'll reapply.
Gino
Gino Zahnd
thin-skinned happy animals, due to all the PETA protesting that goes
on these days...
Bill Connell
>
> Ray's observation is precisely why I asked the question, because it
> seemed odd to slather anything on the underside, given that it is
> unfinished when it leaves the factory. And I have read posts elsewhere
> in which people claim that the underside should not be treated so that
> it can "breathe" and dissipate butt sweat.
>
> I don't know if any of this is true, hence my curiosity about others'
> experience. For my part, all of my Brooks saddles have broken in just
> fine with little more than an occasional application of Proofide and
> regular riding. But when I read Moulton's post, I wondered if I had
> been doing something wrong all along.
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 7:22 pm, Ray Shine <r.sh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > I just can't get past the notion that if Brooks thinks that the underside of their saddle should be treated, it would be treated by them. I mean, they've been at this a long time. I had no trouble at all breaking in my four Brooks. They are very comfy. I really like them.
People used to add formed plastic shields under Brooks saddles to
prevent them from being soaked from below, i don't see much difference
in adding a layer of conditioner there. I think the underside if
unfinished because it's the inner part of the hide (hence inherently
rougher), and out of view (so why bother). That doesn't necessarily
indicate that is *shouldn't* have any treatment. As Jim noted, if you
like a softer saddle or quicker break-in, applying something to the
underside is the quickest way to get it to soak in.
--
Bill Connell
St. Paul, MN
Bruce
I've not bothered to oil my saddle undersides, but I did spray some mink oil for waterproofing. Proofhide seems a waste on the finished upper surface, but seems to soak in once the coating wears away some. Like you, I find that the B17s break in pretty easily. I just put a NOS B5N on a bike and it also was pretty comfortable from the get go. It was a 1970s saddle with a pebble grain top and a B17N shape, plus lacing holes, but made from the thinner part of the cow hide. The B5N was standard on Raleighs, and comes with a nice chromed frame.
Bruce
From: Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thil...@gmail.com>
Well, it should be noted that older Brooks saddles seem to be much
harder to break in than current models. Also, in the 1970s, they were
something of a standard issue item on decent quality bikes, rather
than the quasi-boutique aftermarket item they have become these days.
Perhaps this is where the practice of applying exotic oils and other
abuses became entrenched. If it was unyielding to your butt bones, and
if you were stuck with the damned thing, soaking it in oil may have
seemed like a great idea. I wouldn't bother with a new B17. They break
in easily with just a few rides.