# Trads and Bicycles



## Colonel Ichabod (Jun 4, 2013)

As someone who considers himself both a part-time trad and a commuter cyclist, I was wondering: 
What do you ladies and gents in this forum think is the most trad bicycle and what a trad would wear while riding a bicycle?


----------



## MDP (Jan 14, 2012)

Maybe something like this:


I remember seeing a similar jacket from an English company that was less "trendy", but I don't recall where.

For my part, I ride a Peugeot (I'm sure there's something more trad than a French bike) with my chinos (right leg rolled up), ocbd, and sweaters/scarf/gloves if it's cold. But I'm less than 2 miles from campus. I would guess that those who had a longer commute would need to add some technical gear. Since wool does make a good technical fabric and trad tends towards natural fabrics, that might be preferable over synthetics.


----------



## adoucett (Nov 16, 2012)

Sorry... I know it's not _trad, _but I wear cycling kit in spandex and other performance fabrics. The bike? She is made of carbon fiber


----------



## oxford cloth button down (Jan 1, 2012)

I think that this is the most trad.


----------



## Colonel Ichabod (Jun 4, 2013)

^That's pretty trad.


----------



## Colonel Ichabod (Jun 4, 2013)

Oh, and I guess I should put up what I have: I ride a tan SS road bike with chinos, ocbd, and coat and tie. It does attract attention on campus. :{)


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

Old English cruisers like the above photo, preferably by Raleigh - And yes, in regular clothes


----------



## marinephil (Jun 30, 2013)

Check out this group in DC:


They host annual seersucker and tweed rides. Looks like hipster-central to me, but fun at the same time.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

I'm not sure it's Trad or not, but my chosen two wheel ride is a Schwin S-10 Mountain Bike. I don't generally use it for commuting, but it is a great addition to my cardio-exercise program.


----------



## AlfaNovember (Jun 27, 2011)

A Raleigh. There are two choices - Either the Sports, which is the canonical English 3-speed, with a Sturmey-Archer AW series hub and lousy brakes, or the International, which is the "racing" bike, with fancy lugs, Campagnolo drivetrain, and lousy brakes.

Go ahead, tell me you wouldn't like to go...


----------



## katon (Dec 25, 2006)

English roadsters are probably the "most Trad", although your options are fairly limited today. I believe Pashley is the only modern English roadster manufacturer left. They are quite nice, though.

You can also try rehabilitating an aging Raleigh, although I imagine you'll need to learn how to work on rod brakes yourself.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I think it's trad to have a driver.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

I think it's smart to get a bike that's light and practical, which is another way of saying, Raleigh three-speeds may look cool, but they suck in real life. There is a very good reason that they are no longer manufactured. In terms of bang-for-the-buck, bicycles have plummeted in price over the last couple-three decades--a bike that costs $400 or so today will out-perform, in every way, a bicycle that cost five times as much when Reagan took office. At the end of the day, it's your rear-end and your quadriceps, so suffer if you must in the interests of posing. But, if your goal is to actually enjoy cycling and get from point a to point b in a practical and efficient way, then get a modern bicycle.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

32rollandrock said:


> I think it's smart to get a bike that's light and practical, which is another way of saying, Raleigh three-speeds may look cool, but they suck in real life. There is a very good reason that they are no longer manufactured.


Could not* DISAGREE* more. Raleigh and other English three speeds are no longer produced HERE because the general American public doesn't view bicycles as transportation anymore, but as toys or hobbies. Ninety-nine percent of the bikes manufactured today are "purpose-built" for something extreme, whether it be mountain biking, BMX, cyclocross or road cycling. There are very few commuter bikes available in the US yet countries like Holland, where bicycle culture is huge, offer a myriad of new bikes that fit the English three-speed mold: upright seating position, skirt fenders and chain cases, Northroads bars, lights etc. and people ride them year-round, in regular clothes with toddlers and groceries in tow.

Picking up a vintage Raleigh and refurbing it is not a difficult proposition if you have a bit of mechanical skill. SA hubs are a dime-a-dozen and can be rebuilt on your kitchen table in an hour, but they usually just need a bit of oil. An 18 tooth rear sprocket will bring the high gearing down to tolerable levels and lacing some alloy rims to some drum brake hubs gives you all the performance of a newer bike with the benefit of having the entire drivetrain and braking system sealed from the weather. Very few modern bikes offer that anymore, with the exception of Worksman Cycles that makes industrial bikes in NYC with all the right features (and a few other manufacturers who are cashing in on the popularity of Dutch commuter bikes).

While I ride my road bike in full kit daily for exercise, I prefer to hop on my '74 Raleigh for when I actually need to get somewhere.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

New England has a storied history building bicycles. They have been building great bikes for years. Somerset was the home of Fat Chance and now IF. Merlin, Seven (I think) etc. 

Lugged steel road bike. Hand made to your specs. In America. Trounced a poseur with time trial bars on my morning commute. On a 20 year old Deda/Columbus tubed Henry James lugged road bike built in IL. Too funny. Looking at a Steelman or Cielo to add to the stable after the wedding. 

Wear what ya want to be comfortable. Anything cotton on a longer ride would be hell. Trad would be wool shorts. Awesome all around.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

Eric W S said:


> Trad would be wool shorts. Awesome all around.


Absolutely. I'm a big fan of Ibex shorts and jerseys and De Feet wool socks. All merino wool and Made in the USA. Top if off with a Walz cycling cap and that's about as trad as a road cyclist can get.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

32rollandrock said:


> I think it's smart to get a bike that's light and practical, which is another way of saying, Raleigh three-speeds may look cool, but they suck in real life. There is a very good reason that they are no longer manufactured. In terms of bang-for-the-buck, bicycles have plummeted in price over the last couple-three decades--a bike that costs $400 or so today will out-perform, in every way, a bicycle that cost five times as much when Reagan took office. At the end of the day, it's your rear-end and your quadriceps, so suffer if you must in the interests of posing. But, if your goal is to actually enjoy cycling and get from point a to point b in a practical and efficient way, then get a modern bicycle.


I can gaurantee you don't ride. Sh!t Bikes have plummetted in price.

However, A hand made steel frame by a top builder will set you back 3-5k. And that is just for the frame and fork. You can drop 2-3k on wheels. Then there is the whole dutch bike movement re-producing the old Raleigh style bikes... They are everywhere in the city. I like them. Good to see folks out.

Let me pick the bike from the Reagan Era. You can find many that will kill a $400 chinese scrap metal bike/cheap plastic bike. Reagan era old Campy that was at its zenith in quality and mystic. And still highly sought and collectible. I know four other commuters who still ride old campy daily.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

hardline_42 said:


> Absolutely. I'm a big fan of Ibex shorts and jerseys and De Feet wool socks. All merino wool and Made in the USA. Top if off with a Walz cycling cap and that's about as trad as a road cyclist can get.


I really like that stuff. Washes well. lasts well and just plain works. And you don't look like a Fred.


----------



## ds23pallas (Aug 22, 2006)

I ride a bike most days - a Batavus Personal bike. I chose this maker and model because it's comfortable, it has a rack on the front and the back, the brakes and gears are fully covered from the elements so it can (and does) sit outside 24/7 and suffer little from the elements. The covered chain means I can wear my everyday clothes when I ride it to work. Batavus has been around for over 100 years so I figured they knew what they were doing when they designed it.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Eric W S said:


> I can gaurantee you don't ride. Sh!t Bikes have plummetted in price.


You are right. I do not ride, owing to a muscle disorder (it's a long story). I once rode. A lot. My stable still includes a 1980 Colnago Super with full Campy, a 1977 Paramount P15 with full Campy (including the rare bar-end shifters and triple on front), a circa 1972 Peugeot PX10 (converted to full Campy--I don't care what anyone says, that Simplex and Stronglight stuff sucks) and a Cannondale road bike circa late 1980s, light and stiff as all get-out but before they figured out how to make aluminum frames so you don't feel every pebble in the road.

Are you getting the picture about my love for vintage road bikes?

Even though I can no longer ride, I'll never, with the possible exception of the Cannondale, sell them. I have an emotional attachment based on long hours in the saddle. The Colnago and the Paramount, especially, are beautiful machines. They are also obsolete.

While I can no longer ride any appreciable distance, I have ridden carbon fiber and CAAD long enough--and one block is long enough--to know that these modern bicycles are way, way, way better than anything available when I was riding 400 miles a week. A friend of mine just picked up a secondhand CAAD from CL for around $400. New, they cost about $1,500, and a carbon fiber Trek ain't much more. On the rare occasions I visit bicycle shops these days, I'll heft the new sport bikes in the $500 range and they're much lighter than the vintage ones that I love.

My Colnago cost about $2,000 new, and that was in 1980. The Paramount was about the same and I can't count the PX10, because I bought it used out of someone's basement, but IIRC, the sticker price was $400 or so in the early 70s. Perhaps the best production racing bicycle ever made was the 1977 Raleigh Pro, and the sticker price on that was $725.

Of course, you can spend whatever you want to on a bicycle, and that has always been true--a Klein back in the day was easily five grand, and that was if you shopped carefully for components to outfit the frame, which was sold separately. Now, you may look down your nose at the $400-$500 production bicycles being pumped out by the thousands, but there is no escaping the fact: They are lighter than vintage bikes, they are at least as stiff as vintage bikes, the brakes are better and the index shifters work better. Do they have the allure? No. Are they half as beautiful? No. But they deliver way more bang for the buck.

If the old designs were, truly, better, then that is what the pros would ride, but guess what? And I say this as someone who really and truly loves vintage road bikes. Put a neophyte on my P15 and another on a modern mid-priced Cannondale and see who goes furthest and fastest on their first century.

I am sorry to disagree with Hardline, but he is wrong, just plain wrong. Again, I say this as one who has ridden long tours, raced and commuted via bicycle (20 mile round trip). I would no sooner use a three-speed as serious transportation than I would use a skateboard to travel LA freeways.

The thing is, folks get all hung up in fashion and try to transfer those sartorial values to mechanical objects, and it just doesn't translate. Sure, wool shorts and Detto Pietros and Binda straps and downtube shifters were great 30 years ago, but that was 30 years ago.

Apologies for not knowing what I am talking about.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

32rollandrock said:


> I am sorry to disagree with Hardline, but he is wrong, just plain wrong. Again, I say this as one who has ridden long tours, raced and commuted via bicycle (20 mile round trip). I would no sooner use a three-speed as serious transportation than I would use a skateboard to travel LA freeways.
> 
> The thing is, folks get all hung up in fashion and try to transfer those sartorial values to mechanical objects, and it just doesn't translate. Sure, wool shorts and Detto Pietros and Binda straps and downtube shifters were great 30 years ago, but that was 30 years ago.
> 
> Apologies for not knowing what I am talking about.


32, I respect your history with bikes and your obvious love of the sport. However, you missed my point in your response. The English 3-speed, Dutch commuter or whatever you want to call the modern-day equivalent IS the standard for transportation in countries other than the US and has been for generations. It makes absolute sense when you need a bike to run errands and get you from point A to point B. It might not get you there the fastest, but it will get you there most comfortably and with the least amount of hassle.

-The handlebar and seat position are perfect for keeping the rider's head elevated for spotting traffic and allows for a leisurely cadence without discomfort. 
-The internally geared hubs are great for keeping road debris out and for easy gear changes while stopped (try that with derailleurs). 
-Fenders and chain guards keep road debris off of you. 
-Wider profile tires give the bike better stability over varying terrain. 
-Provisions for mounting panniers and baskets allow you to haul stuff. 
-Lugged steel frames absorb a lot of the NVH from an otherwise harsh ride.

I could go on and on. The only downside is weight (a Raleigh 3-speed can easily tip the scales at 40 pounds) but if you plan to load your panniers with groceries and pull your toddlers behind you in a trailer, it's not really an issue. But, if you're convinced that it's such a terrible bike design, why not make the case for your standard transportation bike of choice?

Also, I'm not sure if your familiar with modern wool cycling clothing. It is nothing like it was 30 years ago. When I ride my road bike, I look like every other Lance wannabe out there. I'm just more comfortable :cool2:


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

Why is it that every time we get into a discussion of Trad/Traddest X, where X is non-clothing, we end up in big fights? I hate these threads.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

Orgetorix said:


> Why is it that every time we get into a discussion of Trad/Traddest X, where X is non-clothing, we end up in big fights? I hate these threads.


All the good clothing fights have already been fought. :tongue2:


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

As the owner of both a "commuter" or "cruiser" bike and a road bike with very aggressive geometry, I will jump into the fray here. In DC, commuter style bikes are probably just as common as road bikes for getting around the city, and more common than SS/FG bikes. However, where the commuter bike fails is speed. When I commute on my bike, the last thing I want to do is be some schmuck holding up traffic and pissing a whole line of cars off because you never know what road-rage idiot is stuck in that line. I much prefer to move at or close to the speed of car traffic for a lot of reasons. Now, if I'm going out for a leisurely ride on a MUP, I'll take the commuter every time. A lot of times, I take my commuter to the grocery store, or I use it when fishing the canals. However, for actually commuting in rush hour traffic, a light, fast road bike with a wide range of gears is far superior. Especially when you have a fairly steep climb right as you get to the office :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

marinephil said:


> Check out this group in DC:
> 
> They host annual seersucker and tweed rides. Looks like hipster-central to me, but fun at the same time.


Also, this group is completely ridiculous. Absolute hipster-gatsby-caricature ridiculousness. They'll probably hold a bare-knuckle boxing match fundraiser soon.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Well meant, but still.

In response to your question, the standard all-around workaday bicycle of choice is a road bike. Consider.

That an upright position is more comfortable than a road-bike position is not true. In fact, it is much harder on the back, neck, spine and butt--when you are riding a road bike, the vertebrae have more space between them and so the back is in a better position to absorb shock. When you are riding an upright, all your weight is on your ass, and vertebrae are, for lack of a better word, stacked atop each other with less space between, essentially banging against each other. If you cannot adequately see traffic without riding an upright bicycle, then you should not be riding a bicycle at all--you are a hazard to yourself and others.

Heavy is heavy. If you never travel more than six blocks and never climb a hill, you might have a point. But for a bicycle, or anything else, to be considered a practical mode of transportation, it should be usable over a variety of terrain and in a variety of conditions. If weight didn't matter, if you might as well ride a 40-pound bike if you're going to be using a trailer and panniers and carrying kids and groceries, then why did I spend so much time and effort trimming weight from my bike and gear when I was touring with full packs? Because extraneous weight means you have to work harder to go the same distance, which means less enjoyment. I'm not sure I get the point of owning a three-speed when you can only use it to travel a few blocks and if there are no hills involved. A road bike gives you flexibility and range you can never get with a three speed.

I also don't understand the advantage of having the gears enclosed. In fact, I think that is a disadvantage. External derailleurs are much simpler than mechanisms hidden inside hubs, and they are less prone to malfunction. If they do malfunction, they are easy to fix and adjust. A three-speed is a PITA if something malfunctions. You can fix it, yes, but it's much more trouble than a derailleur. If disaster strikes and the derailleur is damaged beyond repair, you can bolt a new one on in a matter of minutes. Similarly, I don't understand the advantage of having enclosed brakes. The main thing with brakes is that they work. Even vintage Campy brakes do that just fine, much better than internal brakes--the stopping distance is shorter even in wet weather. As with gearing, if an external brake needs repair or adjustment, it is easy to access and fix. Not so with an internal brake. So, if external brakes stop you better, are less likely to malfunction and easier to fix if they do, why would you want anything else?

You can put fenders and panniers and a trailer on a road bike, but not a chain guard. I would argue that chain guards, besides being extraneous weight, are more trouble than they're worth. They always seem to have a way of rubbing against the chain, for one thing. All things being equal, you are much better off rolling up your pant leg if you must ride in pants.

If you never leave pavement, there is no reason to consider anything but a road bike. For one thing, high-pressure tires used on road bikes reduce rolling resistance and make riding less work and more fun. And you can get a range of widths, from 20 mm to 32 mm, which is pretty darn fat, certainly adequate for both paved and gravel surfaces. If you do want the flexibility to ride trails, then go ahead and get a mountain bike with two sets of wheels, one for the city, one for trails. That's a way better solution, in my view, than a three speed.

Why do so many folks ride uprights? Only they know for sure, but lots of people wear Dockers and polyester and square-toed shoes. That doesn't mean that we should follow their lead. One explanation, I suppose, is that the type of upright you advocate is cheaper, I should think, than a proper road bike. You get what you pay for.

The Tour de France is in progress (and shaping up as a very good race, I think). Lots and lots of spectators arrive on bicycles, which they park alongside the road. I can't recall ever seeing a three speed, but there are lots and lots of road bikes and mountain bikes with external derailleurs and external brakes and no chain guards. There is a reason for that.



hardline_42 said:


> 32, I respect your history with bikes and your obvious love of the sport. However, you missed my point in your response. The English 3-speed, Dutch commuter or whatever you want to call the modern-day equivalent IS the standard for transportation in countries other than the US and has been for generations. It makes absolute sense when you need a bike to run errands and get you from point A to point B. It might not get you there the fastest, but it will get you there most comfortably and with the least amount of hassle.
> 
> -The handlebar and seat position are perfect for keeping the rider's head elevated for spotting traffic and allows for a leisurely cadence without discomfort.
> -The internally geared hubs are great for keeping road debris out and for easy gear changes while stopped (try that with derailleurs).
> ...


----------



## boatshoe (Oct 30, 2008)

Orgetorix said:


> Why is it that every time we get into a discussion of Trad/Traddest X, where X is non-clothing, we end up in big fights?


Because there's so little at stake.


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

32rollandrock said:


> You are right. I do not ride, owing to a muscle disorder (it's a long story). I once rode. A lot. My stable still includes a 1980 Colnago Super with full Campy, a 1977 Paramount P15 with full Campy (including the rare bar-end shifters and triple on front), a circa 1972 Peugeot PX10 (converted to full Campy--I don't care what anyone says, that Simplex and Stronglight stuff sucks) and a Cannondale road bike circa late 1980s, light and stiff as all get-out but before they figured out how to make aluminum frames so you don't feel every pebble in the road.


Ah yes, a Retro Grouch after my own heart! My stable includes a Peugeot Triatholon (12 speeds of friction shifting fury) a Falcon Europa (only 10 speeds) a Fisher Hybrid (before he was sued and had to change the name to Gary Fisher) and assorted 80s/90s ear Mtn bike. I have to chuckle when I see the kids riding around on crappy, heavy steel bikes from the 70s w/ ridiculous aero rims.

Oh, and when I ride, it's in wool bibs and an OCBD jersey.

Brian


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

Would just like to state, for the record, that I'm with Hardline 100% on this.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

32rollandrock said:


> Well meant, but still.
> 
> In response to your question, the standard all-around workaday bicycle of choice is a road bike. Consider...


32, lots of good info in your reply. Thank you for that. After reading it over a few times, it's clear that we have different end users in mind when making bike recommendations. You are recommending a road bike with cycling enthusiasts in mind and I'm thinking about the Average Joe, casual bike rider. Whether or not one bike is "better" than the other really depends on the user's ability to appreciate the features.

The road bike is the Corvette Z06 of the cycling world and the English 3-speed is more of a Volvo wagon. If you ask a driving enthusiast, who does autocross and HPDE on the weekends, which is the better car, he will no doubt say the 'vette on account of it's performance: better handling, better road feel, more power, better looks (arguable) etc. If you ask a mother of three, who schleps her kids to band practice, ballet and soccer, then heads to Trader Joe's for grocery shopping, she probably won't appreciate the 470 ft-lbs of neck-snapping torque and will likely bemoan the lack of car seat latches and the chaise-longue seating position. She probably isn't going to touch the adjustable suspension either. You COULD put a roof rack and a tow hitch on the 'vette but I don't think that solves all of the issues.

Going back to your points, the seating position on a road cycle IS more comfortable for someone who's core and leg muscles are sufficiently developed and who is pumping out enough watts to hold their body up with pedal resistance and not on the wrists and arms. The Average Joe who sits upright in an office chair all day, upright at the dinner table and upright in his car will appreciate the familiarity. Besides, that's what these beauties are for:

I won't make any excuses for the weight. Heavy is heavy, as you say. But steel makes for a better ride than aluminum and carbon fiber is $$$. You can have it both ways, but you have to pay to play.

I can tell by your reply that you haven't messed with IGHs very much. That's understandable since they haven't been the cycling standard for decades. Internally geared hubs are dead-nuts simple. They have exactly one, user-friendly adjustment. And IGHs come in all flavors, from the lowly, kick-back 2-speed to the Rholoff 14-speed (I should add that when I say "English 3-speed" I'm referring to a type of bicycle, not necessarily a number of gears). A road bike with front and rear derailleurs has at least eight adjustments. And heaven-forbid you bend a hanger.

In the end, both types of bikes are suited to different types of people depending on what they want to get out of cycling. If you're a fit individual with a knack for cycling, the road bike is the ne plus ultra. If you just want cheap, reliable, utilitarian transportation, no special clothes or gear required, the English 3 is the ticket. At least that's my opinion and that of the entire population of the Netherlands :tongue2:


----------



## blacksby (Jan 17, 2013)

just get a rudge or a specialized roubaix or a cannondale f300....get some levis commuter chinos, a ocbd, a harris tweed and call it a day..and lock it.


----------



## Fraser Tartan (May 12, 2010)

Weight and gearing is less of an issue in the Netherlands because that country is mostly FLAT.

Also, those people wear wooden clodhoppers so what do they know? No surprise that they look to similar qualities in other forms of locomotion. :biggrin:


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Still can't agree, but that's OK. A road bike really is best for all users, not just casual ones, if your goal is practical transportation. As for the Netherlands, I wouldn't trust the judgment of people who decide to live, work and play in a floodplain. Not many hills in Holland, either, as the sorry record of the Dutch in the Tour shows. When I was a kid, before the days of mountain bikes, I used to love riding trails on Schwinn Heavi-Duties or Typhoons with two-speed kickbacks, and Brooks are still the finest saddles on the planet, so long as they are Brooks Pros.



hardline_42 said:


> 32, lots of good info in your reply. Thank you for that. After reading it over a few times, it's clear that we have different end users in mind when making bike recommendations. You are recommending a road bike with cycling enthusiasts in mind and I'm thinking about the Average Joe, casual bike rider. Whether or not one bike is "better" than the other really depends on the user's ability to appreciate the features.
> 
> The road bike is the Corvette Z06 of the cycling world and the English 3-speed is more of a Volvo wagon. If you ask a driving enthusiast, who does autocross and HPDE on the weekends, which is the better car, he will no doubt say the 'vette on account of it's performance: better handling, better road feel, more power, better looks (arguable) etc. If you ask a mother of three, who schleps her kids to band practice, ballet and soccer, then heads to Trader Joe's for grocery shopping, she probably won't appreciate the 470 ft-lbs of neck-snapping torque and will likely bemoan the lack of car seat latches and the chaise-longue seating position. She probably isn't going to touch the adjustable suspension either. You COULD put a roof rack and a tow hitch on the 'vette but I don't think that solves all of the issues.
> 
> ...


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

32rollandrock said:


> ...Brooks are still the finest saddles on the planet, so long as they are Brooks Pros.


Leather saddles can require too much care to protect from rain and sweat, or they will stretch out of shape, and the leather dye and protectant will stain your pants. I like Brooks saddles as much as anyone, but for heavy, daily use in all weather they can be, literally, a PITA.

Brooks has finally released a "Select" series with the option of undyed leather. Others have offered this for decades.


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

I ride a 1999 Klein Quantum race, is that trad?


----------



## benjclark (Mar 14, 2012)

$20 Frankenbike from the 80 y/o man who fixes bikes out of his garage in my little town.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

True to a point, but you'll never sweat a Pro out of shape, and you'd have to really, really mistreat it, as in leaving it out in the rain on a regular basis, for a Pro to go south. You either love them or hate them, but I think of them as BIFL.



Himself said:


> Leather saddles can require too much care to protect from rain and sweat, or they will stretch out of shape, and the leather dye and protectant will stain your pants. I like Brooks saddles as much as anyone, but for heavy, daily use in all weather they can be, literally, a PITA.
> 
> Brooks has finally released a "Select" series with the option of undyed leather. Others have offered this for decades.


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

32rollandrock said:


> True to a point, but you'll never sweat a Pro out of shape, and you'd have to really, really mistreat it, as in leaving it out in the rain on a regular basis, for a Pro to go south. You either love them or hate them, but I think of them as BIFL.


I will agree with this. One of the guys I ride with regularly has a Pro on his fixed gear with thousands of miles on it. He still loves it.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

It is a labor of love that pays huge dividends. I have a couple. The first one I rode, brand new and hard as a rock, on a week-long tour and nearly died. Did 140 miles the first day (that was a long, long time ago) and could barely sit afterward, then a little over 100 the next day (a lot of it standing on the pedals) and suffered greatly--more than 30 years later, I can still remember the pain when I mounted the bike that second morning and the purplish-scarlet hue of my butt. Some serious, serious saddle sores. It got better from there, doing 80 miles a day or so for the remainder of the week. By the time I got home, the saddle was broken in, and became the most comfortable thing imaginable. They form to the rider's particular anatomy during break-in, so no two end up alike--it is as if they are custom made. They say it takes at least 500 miles to break in a Brooks Pro, a process that can be helped with neats foot oil, and they are right. Do not do those miles all at once.



dkoernert said:


> I will agree with this. One of the guys I ride with regularly has a Pro on his fixed gear with thousands of miles on it. He still loves it.


----------



## AlfaNovember (Jun 27, 2011)

Alright, I gotta come clean here - Upthread I nominated a Raleigh Sports. In truth, I ride a 1974 Supercourse built to look like a Sports. I'm not trad enough to be a stickler for cottered steel cranks or chromed steel rims. The drivetrain is an alloy crankset with a 2010 Suntour Sturmey-Archer 3 speed for the alloy hubshell and reliable interior.. All told, the bike is probably 5 to 7 pounds lighter than the Sports.. but it's still not light. It is a darn fine grocery-getter and commuter, however. I'm never buying another bike that can't be mounted with racks and baskets.

Also in the garage - 1941 Schwinn DX (his), 195? Schwinn DX (hers), Early 1970's Raleigh Sports, 1992 Bridgestone MB-Zip, 2001 Raleigh Professional (full Campy) and piles and piles of oddball old parts.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

benjclark said:


> $20 Frankenbike from the 80 y/o man who fixes bikes out of his garage in my little town.
> 
> View attachment 8296


Nice canti frame. Single speed with a coaster brake?



32rollandrock said:


> It is a labor of love that pays huge dividends. I have a couple. The first one I rode, brand new and hard as a rock, on a week-long tour and nearly died. Did 140 miles the first day (that was a long, long time ago) and could barely sit afterward, then a little over 100 the next day (a lot of it standing on the pedals) and suffered greatly--more than 30 years later, I can still remember the pain when I mounted the bike that second morning and the purplish-scarlet hue of my butt. Some serious, serious saddle sores. It got better from there, doing 80 miles a day or so for the remainder of the week. By the time I got home, the saddle was broken in, and became the most comfortable thing imaginable. They form to the rider's particular anatomy during break-in, so no two end up alike--it is as if they are custom made. They say it takes at least 500 miles to break in a Brooks Pro, a process that can be helped with neats foot oil, and they are right. Do not do those miles all at once.


This story makes my butt hurt! I have a Brooks on my Raleigh but my road bike has a Selle Anatomica:









I wanted a Brooks but the rails are too short for the funky geometry my short inseam requires. The Anatomica is more comfortable than any other saddle I've ridden, right out of the box, and it's weatherproof (made in USA, too). Unlike the Brooks though, it requires significant fiddling with the adjustment screw (the company even encourages it) to get it right. I've got several hundred miles on it so far and am very satisfied. I just have to remind myself to stand every now and then to avoid "sleepy pee-pee" :redface:


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I have the most untrad saddle of all time: Fizik arione. I always wanted a Brooks (and those Selles above look great), but the Arione came with my bike, and once it stopped feeling like a hatchet, I didn't see much reason to change.


----------



## blacksby (Jan 17, 2013)

The more you ride, the more you ride with proper technique, the more strength you have in your core, the more the saddle is an after-thought. It is there to support you, it's not there to carry 100% or your bodyweight,lol.


----------



## Corcovado (Nov 24, 2007)

*it's just the way we roll*









Clearly this is the most trad option.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

blacksby said:


> The more you ride, the more you ride with proper technique, the more strength you have in your core, the more the saddle is an after-thought. It is there to support you, it's not there to carry 100% or your bodyweight,lol.


Yep. That's why most of the guys I know who ride competitively use all-carbon saddles and never complain about them. On the other end of the spectrum, most folks I know who have an upright-style commuter bike use things like gel seat pads and still complain about pain in their sit bones.


----------



## benjclark (Mar 14, 2012)

hardline_42 said:


> Nice canti frame. Single speed with a coaster brake?


Thanks. What looks like safety reflector tape is actually many years worth of bicycle licenses in my little town. Yes, single speed with coaster brake.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

blacksby said:


> The more you ride, the more you ride with proper technique, the more strength you have in your core, the more the saddle is an after-thought. It is there to support you, it's not there to carry 100% or your bodyweight,lol.





Tilton said:


> Yep. That's why most of the guys I know who ride competitively use all-carbon saddles and never complain about them. On the other end of the spectrum, most folks I know who have an upright-style commuter bike use things like gel seat pads and still complain about pain in their sit bones.


Technically speaking, on a road bike, the saddle is there as a reference point to index your hips. The rider's legs act as the suspension (in an ideal world where you're pedaling at 100% intensity all the time). On an upright bike, even the most able riders wouldn't be able to hold themselves up with their legs because of the geometry involved. Those saddles should be sprung like a dune buggy.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

Orgetorix said:


> Why is it that every time we get into a discussion of Trad/Traddest X, where X is non-clothing, we end up in big fights? I hate these threads.


Who's fighting? It is apperent that most people are much more passionate about other things than clothes, which are fairly boring any way you look at it. Bikes can take hours to properly discuss just one component. I have a solid closet but I don't get excited about what I am going to wear. Seems stupid. If done right, anything in the trad closet goes with everything elso, more or less. I look forward to the 20 mile commute each and every day and the century on the weekend.

I didn't sign up to fight about anything online, nor complain about it on the other hand as well.


----------



## blacksby (Jan 17, 2013)

hardline_42 said:


> Technically speaking, on a road bike, the saddle is there as a reference point to index your hips. The rider's legs act as the suspension (in an ideal world where you're pedaling at 100% intensity all the time). On an upright bike, even the most able riders wouldn't be able to hold themselves up with their legs because of the geometry involved. Those saddles should be sprung like a dune buggy.


Agreed. I was referring to road bike geometry for sure. Truthfully, anytime I've ridden a beach cruiser with the big cushy seat...it was uncomfortable,lol.


----------



## linklaw (Aug 1, 2007)

I spent every day last week riding a beach cruiser with a big cushy seat. It was fine on the bike trails around Hilton Head. The bikes I ride at home all have the small hard seats everyone here seems to like.


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

dkoernert said:


> I ride a 1999 Klein Quantum race, is that trad?


'98 Quantum Pro, w/ 9sp Ultegra triple. I doubt there's anything trad about it, especially the iridescent blurple paint job. But it's been a great bike for me, and I get a lot of compliments on it.

Saddle, incidentally, is a non-gel Turbomatic 4.


----------



## MaxBuck (Apr 4, 2013)

The Breezer Uptown, made by Joe Breeze's company, would have to appeal to many of this forum's denizens.

https://www.breezerbikes.com/bikes/details/uptown_infinity


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

Himself said:


> '98 Quantum Pro, w/ 9sp Ultegra triple. I doubt there's anything trad about it, especially the iridescent blurple paint job. But it's been a great bike for me, and I get a lot of compliments on it.
> 
> Saddle, incidentally, is a non-gel Turbomatic 4.


Here is my '99. I just picked it up a few weeks ago. Ultegra 6600, carbon seatpost, carbon bars, carbon stem, and Specialized Alias with Ti rails. Absolutely in love with this bike. Best part is, it was one of the last few Kleins still made in Chehalis before Trek moved production and quality kind of went downhill.


----------



## Red Tractors (Jan 9, 2011)

If you are somewhat mechanically inclined, and not out to win any imagined races, a 70's Raleigh (Super Course, Grand Sport or Grand Prix at a pinch) Refitted with Suntour parts and equipped with a Brooks B-17 is a pretty nice way to spend 5-35 miles at a time. Dawes Galaxys, Falcons and 70's/80's steel Trek's are also nice. You can pretty easily have roadster bars installed if you don't feel comfortable with drop bars. (I use the drop bars and good bar tape)

I love French bikes, but parts are difficult to find, and they can be very finicky. I avoid Schwinns because of the weight.


----------



## oxford cloth button down (Jan 1, 2012)

This has been an awesome thread. I had no idea that there were so many cycling enthusiast among us. Who has a 50-54cm (depending on geometry) light road bike for me? I need something at least from the 90s. I leave you with this.


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

oxford cloth button down said:


> This has been an awesome thread. I had no idea that there were so many cycling enthusiast among us. Who has a 50-54cm (depending on geometry) light road bike for me? I need something at least from the 90s. I leave you with this.


Here you go. Not mine, but a sweet bike.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

oxford cloth button down said:


> This has been an awesome thread. I had no idea that there were so many cycling enthusiast among us. Who has a 50-54cm (depending on geometry) light road bike for me? I need something at least from the 90s. I leave you with this.


(Heavy sigh!) Alas, the image of what appears to be a full sleeve "Tat" (on the rider's right arm) being burned into my minds's eye prevents me from fully appreciating the "butt" of your pictorial offering! However, the obvious effort is appreciated. LOL.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

eagle2250 said:


> (Heavy sigh!) Alas, the image of what appears to be a full sleeve "Tat" (on the rider's right arm) being burned into my minds's eye prevents me from fully appreciating the "butt" of your pictorial offering! However, the obvious effort is appreciated. LOL.


I hadn't even noticed until you pointed it out. Curse you, eagle! *shakes fist at sky*


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

oxford cloth button down said:


> This has been an awesome thread. I had no idea that there were so many cycling enthusiast among us. Who has a 50-54cm (depending on geometry) light road bike for me? I need something at least from the 90s. I leave you with this.


Ox, I might catch some heat for recommending this, but have you looked into 650c wheel bike platforms? I don't know what your cycling inseam is, but for me, the 650c bike is the only platform that offers me even close to appropriate geometry. If you're looking in the 50cm range, you'll have to make way fewer compromises in seat tube angle and pedal overlap than you would with 700c wheels.

I'd recommend a late '80s Centurion Le Mans with Tange tubing. The pink and white paint scheme might not be trad but it's definitely '80s prep! :cool2:


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

hardline_42 said:


> Ox, I might catch some heat for recommending this, but have you looked into 650c wheel bike platforms? I don't know what your cycling inseam is, but for me, the 650c bike is the only platform that offers me even close to appropriate geometry. If you're looking in the 50cm range, you'll have to make way fewer compromises in seat tube angle and pedal overlap than you would with 700c wheels.
> 
> I'd recommend a late '80s Centurion Le Mans with Tange tubing. The pink and white paint scheme might not be trad but it's definitely '80s prep! :cool2:


Very, very good point here about the 650c platform. Just be sure test ride whatever it is you buy before you buy it. I just got rid of a bike that was too small for me. I purchased online and completely guessed on the size based on my previous bikes. I was miserable every second I was on the thing.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

OTOH, I thrifted a Trek 830 Mountain Track yesterday for a friend who was looking for a sub-$50 bicycle for her daughter, who is heading off to college. Appears to be mid-1990s with a rigid fork and entry-level components, but the basics are there: Chrome moly frame, eyelets for rack/fenders, QR front-and-rear, cotterless crank, alloy wheels and covered in cob webs--it was right next to a Mountain Track that was identical in every respect save the color. Obviously purchased together with the best of intentions but ended up basement dwellers. The one I picked up was $40, the one next to it was $60--go figure. All I had to do was pump up the tires and remove the kickstand and reflectors. Of course, she now wants the kickstand re-installed. You can lead a horse to water...

Not the world's greatest bike, sure, but pretty good for basic transportation, considering it's going to get left out in the rain and likely stolen before too long. You don't often find rideable bicycles at thrift stores, but this was the second in as many weeks. The first one, a Univega mountain bike, was the superior ride--had a suspension fork and even some old-school Deore, but the price was $75, over her budget and so she dithered while time was of the essence. I probably should have bought it anyway and flipped it, but a lot of folks would rather ride a Huffy than a brand they've never heard of.


----------



## oxford cloth button down (Jan 1, 2012)

I just now saw the tattoo. Fortunately, I can tolerate and still enjoy the beauty of the pic :tongue2:


----------



## oxford cloth button down (Jan 1, 2012)

hardline_42 said:


> Ox, I might catch some heat for recommending this, but have you looked into 650c wheel bike platforms? I don't know what your cycling inseam is, but for me, the 650c bike is the only platform that offers me even close to appropriate geometry. If you're looking in the 50cm range, you'll have to make way fewer compromises in seat tube angle and pedal overlap than you would with 700c wheels.
> 
> I'd recommend a late '80s Centurion Le Mans with Tange tubing. The pink and white paint scheme might not be trad but it's definitely '80s prep! :cool2:


Hardline, thanks for the tips. I will look into a 650. I would also ride the bike above till the wheels fell off. It is right up my alley.


----------



## adoucett (Nov 16, 2012)

I am on a new university campus (starting Fall semester as a transfer student), and have acquired my father's old Peugeot OU-8 as my new runaround.

French made bike-boom era 10 speed...what do you say? Trad, or bad? (I'd like to hear 32's comments on this one)

I'll add another observation I came up with today:

*Prep Tip: Walking your (vintage) bike between classes is inherently preppier than riding, as it shows that while you are both practical and sporty enough to own one, you have enough tact to not be the pr*ck riding down the sidewalks running people over, as well as being in no inherent rush to get to your economics lecture. When you do ride, do it in the road, with little regard for buses or vehicles but ALWAYS stopping for the girls crossing the street in a crosswalk.*


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

adoucett said:


> I'll add another observation I came up with today:
> 
> *Prep Tip: Walking your (vintage) bike between classes is inherently preppier than riding, as it shows that while you are both practical and sporty enough to own one, you have enough tact to not be the pr*ck riding down the sidewalks running people over, as well as being in no inherent rush to get to your economics lecture. When you do ride, do it in the road, with little regard for buses or vehicles but ALWAYS stopping for the girls crossing the street in a crosswalk.*


I concur, to a point. My own contribution: "Pedestrian pace in a pedestrian space," a meme I'm trying to spread.


----------



## adoucett (Nov 16, 2012)

Well when the trek is a considerable distance of course the objective would be to ride, In my situation the dorms are far from the actual classes, which are closer to one another in the academic section of campus--if that makes sense. What I do commonly see is people (of all walks of life) riding full-speed down the middle of the sidewalks. Certainly non gentlemanly!


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Ouch, my big bear paws would make riding on those hoods impossible. 

Also, why wouldn't you just lock your bike up once at a central location if you're planning to walk to all your classes anyway? Far less of a hassle than locking, unlocking, and walking your bike every time you change buildings - unless your primary goal is to have a super-cute vintage bike to accessorize your wardrobe and transportation is only secondary.


----------



## adoucett (Nov 16, 2012)

I'm not trying for hipster bling status--Otherwise I would have invested in more than just a tune-up and some new brakes. Leaving it and returning would make sense if ones starting and ending location are going to be conveniently close, But if you want to make a speedy departure from location C without returning to B, it is nicer in a way to have it nearby.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Didn't care for the too-short mustard chinos in this film, but everything else was pretty nice. Bet you can't guess who made the clothes.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

It is a good thing, with that UO8, that you appreciate walking a bicycle, at least in inclement weather--that bicycle will never, ever stop in wet weather until it is far, far too late. Which is one of only many shortcomings.

I hope I'm not sounding too harsh.

It is a low-end French model, likely from the early or mid-1970s. Virtually no low-end models had down-tube shifters after 1976 or so and virtually all had so-called suicide levers for the brakes by then, but the French, on the other hand, would never stand accused of leading the pack when it comes to fashion in bicycles. They also saw fit to use different threading for components and diameter for frame tubing than used by the rest of the world, and so it is very difficult, nigh impossible, to find any kind of parts for that thing unless you can cannibalize another just like it, and even then. "Slug," in French, is pronounced "UO8." Heavy and slow.

All that said...

The saddle appears to be original and leather. I suspect it is likely made by Ideale, and if that is the case, then the seat alone could, likely, be peddled, no pun intended, for a fair amount, even though it is not by a long shot, Ideale's best, at least from the picture. Any leather seat by Ideale is a good thing to have, so take care of it by not allowing it to get wet and maybe even applying mink's foot oil once a year or so.

End of day, it is cooler than a Schwinn Varsity, but not by much, and I would never ride a Varsity.



adoucett said:


> I am on a new university campus (starting Fall semester as a transfer student), and have acquired my father's old Peugeot OU-8 as my new runaround.
> 
> French made bike-boom era 10 speed...what do you say? Trad, or bad? (I'd like to hear 32's comments on this one)
> 
> ...


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

adoucett said:


> I am on a new university campus (starting Fall semester as a transfer student), and have acquired my father's old Peugeot OU-8 as my new runaround.
> 
> French made bike-boom era 10 speed...what do you say? Trad, or bad? (I'd like to hear 32's comments on this one)
> 
> ...


Unfortunately, everything 32r&r says is true. Having myself owned several low-end French road bikes of that era, I'm well versed in their shortcomings. There is hope, however, if you're willing to spend a few dollars. For starters, replace the steel rims with some Sun alloys (about $25 to $30 each). I assume those wheels are 27" and not modern 700c, but alloys are available for both sizes. Add some Kool Stop Salmon brake pads and that combination should allow you some decent stopping power in the rain.
For the shifters, you can either learn the secret art of downtube friction shifters, or you can relocate them to either the stem (I think that's what 32 referred to as "suicide" shifters, since they'll impale you in the no-no spot in a crash):









...or you can relocate them to the bar ends, which is my preference:

A a set of aero brake levers will make those torture hoods much more comfortable and clean up the cables:

That's about it for the inexpensive upgrades. That bike will have either a French or Swiss threaded bottom bracket, both of which are obsolete, and replacements with modern tapers are hard to find and/or expensive so you won't be able to do much about the groupset. I'd suggest the few improvements I mentioned and then ride the wheels off it.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Small correction, Hardline: 32 said suicide brake levers, which are the bolt-on levers that allow you to brake from the top of the bars (without being on the hoods or in the drops and so you can ride more upright). Not so sure why they're called suicide levers, but they are, but they became popular as your average joes started riding racing-style bikes and weren't comfortable or didn't have the core strength to stay in the deep drops popular at the time.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Tilton said:


> Small correction, Hardline: 32 said suicide brake levers, which are the bolt-on levers that allow you to brake from the top of the bars (without being on the hoods or in the drops and so you can ride more upright). Not so sure why they're called suicide levers, but they are, but they became popular as your average joes started riding racing-style bikes and weren't comfortable or didn't have the core strength to stay in the deep drops popular at the time.


This is right. As for the UO-8, if it were mine, I would not change a thing on it. It is remarkably well-preserved, and it does speak to a certain era, plus upgrading something like that would be throwing good money after bad. You can't change the frame, and the frame is never going to work for any kind of serious cycling. So enjoy it as it is for basic transportation. You can probably put a rack on it, which comes in handy for carting books or beer or both. I would, personally, remove the metal protector disc thing that goes between the rear wheel and the freewheel. It serves no purpose and marks the bike as a pretender. Take it off and, from a distance, it would have the look of a classic club racer. It is super-easy to remove, and most bike shops with any integrity would do it for free, assuming you took the wheel in already off the bike.

Fair warning, you are going to have trouble with those Simplex derailleurs, especially the rear one, sooner rather than later. The French were the only bicycle makers on the planet during that time period who thought that plastic was a good material for making bicycle components, likely on the theory that plastic weighs less than metal. True enough, but it also breaks and flexes and was otherwise ill-suited for making bicycle parts during that time era. Unfortunately, replacing the derailleur on a French bike can be an adventure. To make a Campagnolo (that's state-of-the-art for a 1970s racing bike) derailleur work on my Peugeot PX10 (top end French and raced in the Tour as late as 1972 or so), I had to do surgery on the rear dropout with a hacksaw and file.

So own it, use it, ride it, enjoy it, but don't invest a lot of money in it.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

Tilton said:


> Small correction, Hardline: 32 said suicide brake levers, which are the bolt-on levers that allow you to brake from the top of the bars (without being on the hoods or in the drops and so you can ride more upright). Not so sure why they're called suicide levers, but they are, but they became popular as your average joes started riding racing-style bikes and weren't comfortable or didn't have the core strength to stay in the deep drops popular at the time.


Thanks. I had only ever known them as "extension levers" but "suicide levers" is definitely applicable! I had a '70s Astra (low end Motobecane) that came with those. Instead of actuating the cable directly like modern top-mount levers, they moved the drop bar levers themselves. They had lots of flex and slop and weren't very reliable for stopping.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

32rollandrock said:


> It is a good thing, with that UO8, that you appreciate walking a bicycle, at least in inclement weather--that bicycle will never, ever stop in wet weather until it is far, far too late. Which is one of only many shortcomings.
> 
> I hope I'm not sounding too harsh.
> 
> ...


You know your bikes! Would like to point out that its either neatsfoot oil or mink oil though. Not mink foot oil. Right? Now why this pedantery? I'm slightly hung over, and want to spread the misery around... 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Bjorn said:


> You know your bikes! Would like to point out that its either neatsfoot oil or mink oil though. Not mink foot oil. Right? Now why this pedantery? I'm slightly hung over, and want to spread the misery around...
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2


I stand corrected. Or you could use Proofhide by Brooks--I think they still make it.


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

32rollandrock said:


> I stand corrected. Or you could use Proofhide by Brooks--I think they still make it.


Whether it's Brooks Proofhide or some other goop, it can stain your clothing, along with dye from the leather -- one reason why all-leather saddles gave way to synthetic.

The "natural" (no dye) leather now offered by Brooks (the Select series) and Gilles Berthoud are a step in the right direction.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

Himself said:


> Whether it's Brooks Proofhide or some other goop, it can stain your clothing, along with dye from the leather -- one reason why all-leather saddles gave way to synthetic.
> 
> The "natural" (no dye) leather now offered by Brooks (the Select series) and Gilles Berthoud are a step in the right direction.


Huh? I have never had a brooks stain anything from street to cycling specific clothes. My daily saddle is a Brooks with well over 7k on it. 
Proof is still made and you are only suppossed to use it very sparringly and infrequently. 
Sythetic won over leather due to price more than anything else. On the high end it was all about weight. Brooks has seen a very strong comeback recently.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

I have a Brooks B17 with copper studs and it did stain a pair of stone trousers when wet 

So I keep it covered now. I use proofide sparingly maybe twice a year. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Weight, as much as anything, prompted the switch from leather to synthetics, at least in pro cycling ranks. A saddle from man-made materials weighs something like a third of a leather saddle with minimal comfort trade-offs (although leather remains, I think, the most comfortable material). Synthetic is also carefree; leather requires periodic treatment and a bit of pampering. Synthetic is better for the casual cyclist because leather is ungodly uncomfortable until it is broken in, and that takes hundreds of miles.

A leather saddle absolutely can leave stains, which is why traditional cycling shorts are black.


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

For you gents riding Brooks saddles, how bad/long is the break-in period? I am on a Specialized Alias right now and it is just not comfortable on longer rides. I want to switch to Brooks for the comfort, but I have heard horror stories of the break-in period being lengthy and painful.


----------



## MTJim (Dec 20, 2012)

I have zero break in period when I've had to replace my Brooks saddles. Put the new one on and ride! I end up replacing my Brooks every 25K miles.


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

dkoernert said:


> For you gents riding Brooks saddles, how bad/long is the break-in period? I am on a Specialized Alias right now and it is just not comfortable on longer rides. I want to switch to Brooks for the comfort, but I have heard horror stories of the break-in period being lengthy and painful.


I've found mine to be comfortable out of the box, though I'm a very casual cyclists, mainly using it for 20 minutes a day.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

dkoernert said:


> For you gents riding Brooks saddles, how bad/long is the break-in period? I am on a Specialized Alias right now and it is just not comfortable on longer rides. I want to switch to Brooks for the comfort, but I have heard horror stories of the break-in period being lengthy and painful.


Depends. I have a 20 mile commute 5 days a week and ride year round. So for me, not that long. Really depends on if you body tolerates the saddle while it breaks in. Break in time can be long but don't rush it with any conditioners or product.


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

Good, I guess I'll give it a try. I rode a friends Raleigh fixed gear with a broken in b-17 on it. It was heavenly to say the least. Ever since, I have wanting to pull the trigger on Brooks but never did because of the comments on break-in period.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

Pro cycling has nothing to do with common sense like weight. It's all sponsorship there. You ride who sponsors you. Kinda cool but annoying as I ran into sponsorship on the grass roots level years and years ago.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

dkoernert said:


> Good, I guess I'll give it a try. I rode a friends Raleigh fixed gear with a broken in b-17 on it. It was heavenly to say the least. Ever since, I have wanting to pull the trigger on Brooks but never did because of the comments on break-in period.


Just buy one for wallbike.com? wallington or something like that. They have a buy back program for brooks. Even sometimes have used ones.


----------



## hardline_42 (Jan 20, 2010)

dkoernert said:


> Good, I guess I'll give it a try. I rode a friends Raleigh fixed gear with a broken in b-17 on it. It was heavenly to say the least. Ever since, I have wanting to pull the trigger on Brooks but never did because of the comments on break-in period.


I think I've already posted it in this thread, but if you like the B17 (the B17 Imperial, actually) I would take a good look at Selle Anatomica. It required little to no break in and is as comfortable a saddle as I've ever had out of the box.

https://www.selleanatomica.com/


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

I'll have to see if I can get my hands on one for a test ride or two. It doesn't look like they make a model with titanium rails though.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Eric W S said:


> Pro cycling has nothing to do with common sense like weight. It's all sponsorship there. You ride who sponsors you. Kinda cool but annoying as I ran into sponsorship on the grass roots level years and years ago.


Not true.

Huffy sponsored the U.S. Olympic cycling team in 1984, and no one on that team rode a Huffy. Huffy also sponsored Andy Hampsten's team when he won the Giro four years later, but no one on that team rode a Huffy. If memory serves, LeMond threw sponsors out the window in the '89 Tour when he beat Fignon in the final time trial to win the race, thanks to aero bars that he procured himself. When Merckx set the hour record in 1972, he did it on a Colnago--plastered with Windsor decals. When Pantani rode Alpe d'Huez, he was the only one who used downtube shifters, which almost certainly didn't come from a sponsor.

Yes, pro cyclists tend to use equipment provided by sponsors, but they are also quick to use other equipment if the situation or their personal preference demands. Happens all the time. And, just as a pro would never ride a Huffy, a pro would never use a Brooks Pro because to do so would put him at a competitive disadvantage.

Also, I don't know what kind of saddle Brooks is making these days (I haven't been able to ride for many years), but the saddle they made back in the day was rock-hard when new--no one would ever say it needed no break in.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

32rollandrock said:


> Not true.
> 
> Huffy sponsored the U.S. Olympic cycling team in 1984, and no one on that team rode a Huffy. Huffy also sponsored Andy Hampsten's team when he won the Giro four years later, but no one on that team rode a Huffy. If memory serves, LeMond threw sponsors out the window in the '89 Tour when he beat Fignon in the final time trial to win the race, thanks to aero bars that he procured himself. When Merckx set the hour record in 1972, he did it on a Colnago--plastered with Windsor decals. When Pantani rode Alpe d'Huez, he was the only one who used downtube shifters, which almost certainly didn't come from a sponsor.
> 
> ...


Yeah, your talking well over thirty years ago and none of it is true in today's peleton. You ride your sponsor's gear. Last Tour Of California, and all the crown races the riders were all spot on in their sponsorship. Using underfunded American teams breaking into the tour really doesn't bolster an arguement based on the present day.

Brooks makes the same saddle they always have. Some people like a hard saddle or feel comfortable off the bat. Kinda odd your posting all of these comments and don't even ride anymore...


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I prefer a hard saddle, but I have never been comfortable on a Brooks of any age. For whatever reason, they just don't fit.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Pantani wasn't 30 years ago. And some things never change.

If a rider believes that something other than what the sponsor provides is going to work better for him, the rider is going to use it. To do otherwise would be foolish, given that riders receive salaries from their teams and get nothing directly from sponsors.

Why do I post about cycling when I can't ride anymore? Because I love cycling. If I could still ride, I'd be on the bike every day. When I could ride, I rode anywhere from 200-400 miles a week. I raced. I toured. I commuted. I did STP in less than 11 hours. My saddle of choice was Brooks.

So, forgive my postings. I guess I don't know what I'm talking about.



Eric W S said:


> Yeah, your talking well over thirty years ago and none of it is true in today's peleton. You ride your sponsor's gear. Last Tour Of California, and all the crown races the riders were all spot on in their sponsorship. Using underfunded American teams breaking into the tour really doesn't bolster an arguement based on the present day.
> 
> Brooks makes the same saddle they always have. Some people like a hard saddle or feel comfortable off the bat. Kinda odd your posting all of these comments and don't even ride anymore...


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

Dave Moulton wrote a nice article on Brooks saddles; and an even better one on what to wear while riding. (This _is_ a clothing forum!)

There's no better saddle wisdom than Rando Richard's review. (Randonneurs ride _lots of miles_.)


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

This is great stuff, especially the clothing part. I once had a tandem built by Moulton, and it was an amazing bicycle.



Himself said:


> Dave Moulton wrote a nice article on Brooks saddles; and an even better one on what to wear while riding. (This _is_ a clothing forum!)
> 
> There's no better saddle wisdom than Rando Richard's review. (Randonneurs ride _lots of miles_.)


----------



## Drew G. (Sep 21, 2008)

For commuting I've got two 3-speed bikes-a '64 Gazelle with drum brakes and a chain case and a '73 Raleigh Tourist (now taken apart, and strewn around garage in a rehab project). 

I commuted on a mountain bike for many years, and on a friend's carbon-fiber Felt racing bike a few times. I prefer the 3-speeds for their more comfortable ride on city streets and the better view I get sitting upright. The Raleigh rides like a humvee; hard to get going, but once it does its smooth s hell. 
Both of these IGH hubs are very old, yet they've never had an issue, despite going through rain and muddy streets. The drum brakes on the Gazelle are ideal for when it rains as well (the rod brakes on the Tourist ensure it stays inside when there is a chance of precip-let's just say it's terrifying going down a hill on that behemoth when it's drizzling). 
Both bikes are heavy, but I'm commuting 18 miles, not racing or going on a cross-country tour, so not a big deal. I commute into DC, so not super hilly, either. I wouldn't mind a nice Raleigh Superbe or Sport for their lightness and more aggressive geometry, but the timing hasn't been right. And my wife would prob kill me if I got another bike. 
And I wear regular clothes, too. I find drivers aren't as aggressive toward me when I look like a regular joe.


----------



## Red Tractors (Jan 9, 2011)

I certainly don't ride enough, which is something I plan to correct. 

I have four or five Brooks saddles, B-17's, an Imperial (I was in the test group), and a B15 and a B5N. I don't think a more wonderful product has ever yet been devised. Proofhide once a year and they are good to go. 

It's been said, you are either built to be comfortable on a Brooks or you are not, I have met several people who have tried them repeatedly and never adjusted, I am lucky enough to be comfortable on a B-17 right out of the box. 

I read somewhere, within the last three or four years, where a pro-tour team was changing sponsors. (I don't recall which, but I am looking for the article.) The new sponsor did not make a time-trial bike that the team felt fit their needs, so they just repainted their old bikes in the new sponsors colors and logos.


----------

