Showing posts with label SMP Evolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SMP Evolution. Show all posts

Saturday, March 10, 2018

Saddle Sagas in TT

Personal Experiences

I have to admit, I'm a bit sad to be writing another post about saddle issues.  I put a lot of time and thought into the last one.  Alas, all was not solved.

At last posting, I was on a Koobi 232T on my tri bike (a Cervelo P2C) and awaiting the arrival of an SMP Drakon for my road bike (Trek Domane).  Here's what happened.

SMP Evolution at 3 angles
I hated the Drakon.  Those of you who've played ice hockey may understand this comment: sitting on that saddle was a bit like wearing a female pelvic protector - intimate, form fitting, unyielding.  My shop had a Stratos in stock so I traded for that but it wasn't right either, and what I really wanted was to go back to the Evolution I'd been testing.  In fact, I liked the thing so much that I didn't want a new one I'd have to break in from scratch.  And that's where I'm at - 3 years on a tester saddle.

You might wonder how those 3 versions of the SMP saddle differ, as much of their line up looks very similar.  But it comes down to width and padding level.  I do not get on with wide saddles, and with this topological shape at any rate, "standard" level padding was not comfortable to me.
  • Drakon, 138 mm wide, standard padding
  • Stratos, 131 mm wide, standard padding
  • Evolution, 129 mm wide, minimal padding.  Nose width where I contact it, ~41 mm
Note the similar shape of the top middle SMP with the red Infinity
So much support













On to TT discomfort.  The Koobi was too wide.  I was getting stronger but I had hit a ceiling of being able to handle the thing touching my thighs.

Now paying much more attention to the measurements of saddles, I set out (mid-2015) to find a possible replacement.  Here's what I tried:
  • ISM Adamo Typhoon (~$119), 145 mm at widest, 60 mm at nose, soft padding; reference saddle I still had lying around, lesson learned: absolutely not trying any saddle 50 mm or wider, since the 45 mm Koobi was also too wide
  • Koobi 232T ($199.95), 140 mm at widest, 45 mm at nose, firm padding
  • Evolution ($260); moved from my road bike to the Cervelo: not bad, possibly ok, kept looking
  • Cobb V Flow ($160-209), 130 mm at widest, 35 mm at nose, firm padding; notes below
  • Specialized Power Expert ($130), 155 mm at widest, ~37 mm before it slopes down; notes below
  • Specialized Power Expert ($130), 143 mm at widest; used for 2 years
  • Fizik Vitesse Tri (came with my Cannondale Slice), dimensions don't matter: OMFG NO!!

Though ISM has models with slimmer widths, and my initial experience with them was on what was probably their widest and softest saddle - ie the worst possible combination for me personally - I was flatly unwilling to give them a try.  This could possibly have something to do with the argumentative attitude the proprietor shared with me in a forum thread.

Cobb V Flow
Cobb Plus





I'm not a fan of the bat wings.
Dimensions listed as 45 mm
at the nose bend.






I looked to Cobb.  As I recall, their innie/outtie dialogue pointed me to the Plus model, however with a nose width then reported as 45 mm (same as the Koobi) I was disinterested in trying it.  I took the narrower V Flow on a 2 h outdoor ride.  From the first minute I thought it was fantastic - almost like sitting on a mirror image of myself.  But with each passing 10 minutes, my mind was changing.  The issue was the bizarre flanges that extend down the sides of the saddle.  After 2 h of that pressing against my inner thighs I was done.  If I scooted just a tad forward so the saddle felt narrower, the pubic pressure became intolerable.  More notes on saddle adjustments are included at the end of the post.

About this time the Specialized Power Expert saddles were rolled out, and at the price point of half the SMP I thought sure, why not try it.  Specialized has an Ass-O-Meter for measuring sit bones.  I rolled my eyes and got on with a rolled forward TT position, to match how I intended to use it.  Result put me on a 155 mm saddle, which I just couldn't stand; the 143 was better.  Moral: trying to out out-smart the sit-bone measurement does not help.
Specialized Power Expert
Fizik Vitesse Tri, the Anti-Sue of saddles.



After a few months on the Power Expert, I moved to a TT bike that fits me better (Cannondale Slice) which came with the Fizik Vitesse Tri saddle.  This saddle is the Anti Sue.  I can in no way get on with that saddle, and I used the Power Expert on the Slice for ~25 months.  Ironically, the horrible Vitesse is marginally better than the saddle that came with my mountain bike, so I've moved it over there.

Alas, the time had come, I'd lost my happy place on my tri bike and was once again in the hunt for the right saddle.  This time, my increasing discomfort was self-induced: lowering the handle bars 3 mm increased forward soft tissue pressure, and attempting to reduce that by scooting back (or adjusting saddle forward) to find a little extra pelvis support, made it press against my hamstrings too much.   After all I've seen and tried (14 variants by now), the following saddles had caught my attention as possibilities.
Rough comparison of ISM and Dash saddle models
(Standard, Narrow, Strike)

SMP T3 from all angles.
Model is also called TT3.
  • Dash ($229-$465).  People swear by these and honestly, if it solved all issues I'd cough up the dough.  But who the hell wants to buy a $400 saddle that they aren't sure will work?  (The lower priced model is news to me as of this writing, and I hear they may have a $50 rental plan.)  Now that I'm looking, I see the Strike model is 52 mm at the nose, Narrow width of other models is 55 mm, and I'm unsure they are narrow enough for me anyway. 
  • SMP T3 ($249), 133 mm at widest, 47 mm at nose bend.  Doesn't look compelling but I like the road saddle so well that if this were handy, I'd give it a try.
  • Infinity L2 ($295, returnable for a $35 restocking fee), ~168 mm at widest, ~46 mm at nose closure.  Now this is a design that's thinking out of the box.
Infinity saddles


Infinity, older bare model






 


Infinity L2 is covered in leather










The Infinity shipped quickly and I found:
  1. It's wider than the Power Expert.  But it has a different degree of slope at the edges from narrow to wider part that I might prefer.
  2. It's difficult to install on my Slice.  The middle part ("tongue") that protrudes into the opening covers one of the bolts I need to access to install it.  (See the back bolt on the blue saddle against the tree - except my bolt goes in from the top and not the bottom).  The tongue has some flex and I was able to bend it just barely enough out of the way.
  3. To accommodate my aerodynamic position and have the saddle profile match my underside, my pubic bone ends up at the front end of the opening.  See how the padding bumps up there?  It's uncomfortable and I'm sore from my 2 trials with the saddle.  Like bone sore at the tipity tip of my pubic bone.
  4. If I scoot back on the saddle I can relieve the pressure on my pubic bone that's coming from where the opening ends at front part of saddle, however this makes the saddle too wide - it's contacting my inner legs and the tendons, not just the backs of my legs as the Power Expert did.  Adjusting the tilt didn't help.
  5. I inquired with the manufacturer about an alternate model, that is only covered on the side rails (L-Pro), however they said that the fully covered model (L1X, with mesh over the opening) is the one they recommend for small pelvises; that the covering helps to keep riders from falling through which improves the comfort.  They also offered to review video of my fit and make saddle placement suggestions, which seems pretty great.  However I can't install the L1X model on this bike and do not believe any adjustment of the L2 will ease my particular pressure points in TT, so back went the L2 and I'm out shipping plus the restocking fee.  Oh well.

I next contacted sportfit-lab which has a wide selection of saddles available to try -
over 70 models! between road and TT styles.  They are willing to ship to testers out of their area and offer a partial credit of the rental fee if you make a purchase.  I selected the SMP T3 and the two Cobb saddles below after some dialogue with Doug, their director and master bike fitter.
  • Cobb Plus2 ($219.95), 130 mm at widest, now listed as 40 mm at nose (measured in a different spot), and shorted up flanges relative to earlier versions.
  • Cobb Tenace ($199.95), 155 mm but with a bunch of slope it may feel less?, 40 mm nose that gets narrower as you move back.  No weird flanges.
    Newer color scheme of Cobb Plus2, with current measurements.

While awaiting arrival of those, I moved the SMP Evolution over to the Slice.  Man, I love that saddle.  It felt great on 1 h and 2.5 h trainer tests.

Cobb Tenace.  See how it appears to get
narrower between the nose and back end?








Back to new trials:
The T3 is eh, ok.  I miss the more pronounced up-swoop of the back of the Evolution, but understand this flatter model may be easier to execute a flying mount onto.  The shorter nose also leaves me a little more stand over room than the Evolution does.  It's wider than the Evolution (more heavily padded), and didn't seem unfavorably so initially.  If I set myself way back on it I still got that support I want, but the rubbing on my legs got to be too much over my 1 h trial and I ended up with a saddle sore.  A week later I tried again with a different saddle angle (this time nose downward versus top surfaces being mostly level) and pressed on for 2 h while trying to sit back less far.  I feel like the padding style/level ruins this model.  My delicate parts were squished into the channel with uncomfortable effect (pinching).

A note about install and the very annoying clamp system on the 2015 Slice: the T3 is so thick a saddle - nearly half an inch more than the Evolution - that my usual tool set was too short to reach the top facing bolt head and clear the saddle enough to turn the multi hex key tool.  And I don't have an extension for my torque wrench (now added to my list of things to buy <sigh>), so I had to use a stand alone hex key and guess the bolt tension.  In fact, I had the same issue with install of the Plus2, which is even thicker from the rails to the top surface than is the T3. 

Clockwise from lower left, in order of increasing nose
width where I interface: Evolution, Power Expert, L2,
Tenace, Plus, T3.
  

Now either this Plus2 tester is an earlier model than what looks to be available on Cobb's website, or I'm simply wrong about the side flaps being reduced; they are present on the tester and are still annoying - rubbing my inner thighs on every pedal stroke.  The gap in the padding at the front (nose end) of the saddle does improve my soft tissue comfort in this area versus the V Flow, however I still need to scoot back to feel correctly supported, which makes the saddle too wide for me.  Swing and a miss.

My first note for the Tenace, discovered on installation, is that the opening through the saddle is not as long as on the Plus.  This ups the difficulty factor for install: I have to semi-tighten the upper bolt first with its desired depth setting and with the saddle as rearward as the rails allow, then slide the seat forward into the position I want - which fully covers the topside bolt head, and then make up the necessary tension with the front bolt accessed from underneath.  Pretty inconvenient!

Trial one, with the long nose of the saddle level: I hit the squared off nose on every pedal stroke, leaving me to wonder why on earth they didn't taper this like the Plus and V Flow are.  The long side flanges are completely absent, yet I'm still getting rubbing I don't want.  Only way to avoid it was to pedal with my knees pointing outward, like I've seen some guys ride.  Clearly this isn't the right solution.  Second trial was with the saddle nose tilted up just a bit, which makes evident a slight pocket between nose and saddle back.  I had the same rubbing, now with bonus pubic contact (soft tissue pinching) in the central channel where the opening closes.  Damn, I wanted to like this. 

Result from Current Battery of Trials:  I'm moving the Evolution to the Slice and the Power Expert to the Trek.

Do I have any new favorite descriptions & depictions of saddle fit, since my last post?

I sure do!  For starters, you simply must read Cobb's updated fit guide, complete with pictures of plaster casts made from various vulva shapes.  It really provided me with quite an education though be forewarned, it is NSFW.  In the event it would help anyone else and give context to my saddle struggles, I confess to being an outtie (I suspect of the standard variety).
Graphic 1: Pelvis and lumbar position in aerobars

Graphic 2
I've also found a bunch of interesting graphics across the interwebs.  Some show alternate views of pelvis interactions with saddles and how that interaction changes at various rider positions.  Cartoony graphic 1 and the following graphic 2 show how rotation of the pelvis forward drives soft tissue into the saddle, and leave me with no understanding as to how totally flat TT saddles are a thing.  Without any support under the middle (inflection point) part of the pelvis in the 25 deg position, it looks like a ton of pressure is going to end up right at the pointy part of the pubic bone.  Ouch!

Graphic 3 shows how the width of the contact points change as the pelvis rolls forward and recommends which Bontrager saddle might work best for that position.

Below that is a great arrangement of TT saddles by Sport-fit Lab with logical grouping of models by width and firmness of padding.  Across my trials I've moved from one extreme (ISM, lower right) to the other (T3, upper left).  They also have another chart covering saddles for Road bikes, if you're interested (follow the link under the graphic).

The last part of this post covers what I still think is missing in saddle options.

Bontrager biodynamic saddle posture (above) and curvature (below) comparisons.


A portion of the TT collection available through sportfit-lab's demo program. 



In my experience, too narrow doesn't exist.



So what's missing?

A wider assortment of narrow saddles and some general consideration as to how the girth of legs impact comfort.

On width: I question the helpfulness of statements about women having wider pelvises (as does the Cobb article and this other one from bicycle fit guru).  Sure, for a given height, woman may have a wider pelvis than men.  However at the shorter end of stature, I'd wager that my pelvis is not wider than that of The Average Build used to design most products.  Which is what, by the way - a person height of 5'7"-5'8"??  (Actually it's 5'8" according to this bike sizing/fit article.)  That's 4-5 inches taller than me and I haven't had children - just how wide do you think my pelvis is going to be??

On shape and topology: I've found on many saddles that I can slide around and detect a place where the saddle was designed to be sat upon.  V-shaped saddles appear to offer a rider the chance to customize the saddle width by sliding to a thinner spot, but this moves my pelvis forward of what feels like the intended contact points and puts all my weight on my labia (which sucks) or the pointy part of my pubic bone (also sucks).  Improvements to pressure can be found by making sure the saddle is low enough, positioned well-enough fore and aft, and not tilted too dramatically.  If after doing all that the soft tissue discomfort is too great, I guess you can move to a noseless and sit with soft tissue completely off the front of the saddle.  Admittedly, I haven't explored that space much, as my only trial involved a saddle much too wide and soft for me.  My alternatives have been to slide back on the saddle, which leaves it pressing into either the back of my legs at the hamstrings (pear shaped saddles) or the insides of the legs at the adductors (all models), or to adjust the nose down, which creates shear forces on soft tissue as I slide down (I'm sure I don't need to tell you that soft + tissue + shear is a seriously bad combo).  Another coping strategy has been to raise my handlebars so my pelvis needn't be tilted so much.  All this leaves me to think that a couple more narrow choices that include a little mid undercarriage support could fill a small void.

On leg girth: Surely you can see from the figure graphic below that the folks with fuller thighs are going to have a different experience on a saddle regardless of what shape their privates have.  We need support where it's needed, without excess saddle parts to get in the way.  While I found the flanges of the V Flow and Plus model annoying, I'm willing to believe that a rider with larger legs and average pelvis size might like those flanges for keeping their thighs away from the rails.  At any rate, good on Cobb for appearing to take thigh rub into consideration with his Tenace model, but I think there's still room to explore how leg girth impacts positioning and interaction with a saddle.  AND, due to the increasing popularity of indoor riding platforms like Zwift, I could imagine there being an increased interest by larger-sized people who might like to take up cycling from the comfort of their homes, if only they could find a saddle that suited them.  Additionally, this info needs to be easier to find than by personally plowing through 17 different saddle models + bike combos - ain't nobody got time for that!!
Even if all these people had the exact same sex organ landscape, there is no way
they'd all get by with the same saddle (from a Somatometric-Measurements image search).  
For reference, at race weight I think I'm figure A4, but at current weight maybe B5.






So many bottoms, longing to be happy on bicycles.

Sunday, February 1, 2015

Water Balloon Theory for Female Saddle Discomfort

Well, I'd rather not say I've been spending my time thinking about women's privates, but after a conversation with a few ladies recently I guess I have to admit to having given this more thought of late than I'd like to.  The result of that thought is shared below.

Part 1 - What I've read about bicycle seats and women's fit on them.

Let's start where everyone does and talk about sit bones
.  If I sit upright enough to firmly plant my ischial tuberosities, I'm sitting upright and not able to reach the handle bars of road/tri-bike set-ups - that is unless I hunch or round my back somewhere.  Sure, women's bike frames aim to help this, but I think that some of the thought processes behind the WSD concept, which have included: women have shorter torsos relative to their leg length; women may bend from the waist while men pivot more at the hips; women tend to sit further back on their saddles than men, possibly due to different distributions in muscle mass (ref 1) - are missing the boat.  Rotating our pelvises forward so as to maintain a strong core while reaching the handle bars pushes soft tissue directly into the nose of most saddles and is highly uncomfortable - I think that's why we as a gender tend to sit upright and farther back on the saddle. Personally, I want to rotate at the hips because this better positioning gives me much more power and feels more stable.  It's also the common positioning on a TT bike.  But guess what - this powerful positioning also completely disengages the ischial tuberosities from the saddle.  Therefore, I simply don't understand the frequent recommendation to choose a saddle based on a body part that is never going to touch it. (ref 1 = http://www.blayleys.com/articles/womensfit/).  

A browser search for bicycle saddles easily returns many results but seldom any actionable information on how to choose one, apart from reiterating reference to sit bones and that women have wider hips than men and may need a wider saddle.  An article on Cobb's site (Ref 2) describes a couple of trends they've found in fitting female cyclists.  The first is explained as a difference in hip orientation that results in some women having more prominent behinds but not a prominent pubic bone while others with flatter behinds may have more prominent pubic bones.  They go on to describe girl parts as being either more pronounced and exposed vs. being more enclosed and drawn up internally and have observed a 2nd trend between this and pubic bone prominence.  They've found that women fitting their trend tend to prefer certain models of their saddles and thus suggest one simply determine into which camp she falls - innie, or outie.  Sounds straight forward enough, I guess, if one knows how their parts stack up against those of other women.  The thing is, picture for a moment someone with an outie belly button.  It's only outie relative to an innie, right?  I mean, no one's belly button actually protrudes beyond the surface of their stomach - at least, not that I've seen.  So if you've never seen another belly button, how do you know which kind you have?  And really, wouldn't you need to see several to know whether yours is generally regarded as an innie vs. outie? 
(Ref 2 = http://www.cobbcycling.com/articles/female-cyclist).

Cervelo does not produce saddles but have shared a really thoughtful presentation on saddle comfort that includes pressure point mapping (of a male rider).  (Ref 3)  This piece comes around to suggesting 4-1/2 rules for choosing a saddle that I'm mentioning because I appreciate their rational and scientific presentation of information, some of which is useful if perhaps you haven't already been trying for years to find a comfortable saddle.  In short, their advice is 1) wide enough, 2) flat enough, 3) firm enough, 4) maybe a cutout, 4.5) T or pear shaped.  Unfortunately, this didn't provide me with additional direction since there are many saddles available now with cut-outs and still not many offerings on how to select among them.  (Ref 3 = http://www.cervelo.com/en/engineering/ask-the-engineers/the-four-and-a-half-rules-of-road-saddles-.html)

Part 2 - Water balloon
theory (volume and compressibility).

So now we come to my thought experiment where I was considering what happens when you squish a water-filled balloon vs. squishing a basketball.  To ease embarrassment, let's call the soft tissue 'the balloon' and the *sensitive* tissue inside the soft tissue 'the gem'.

What happens when you place the balloon on a firm surface and push straight down on it?  The balloon squishes out to the sides, away from the pressure.  I think there is also an increase of pressure inside, but as long as there is room around the periphery for expansion, a gem inside the balloon is perhaps not too bothered.  Now let's think of the balloon inside a snug box, so it is both on a firm surface (the saddle) and also restrained on the sides (the riders legs).  When you push down on the balloon there is now a dramatic increase in pressure inside and the gem is being strangled.  In the first case, a mild increase in friction may be eased by using a lubricating product (shammy cream).  But in the second case, no cream or shammy design is going to relieve substantial pressure to the gem.  

Saddles with central cut outs or grooves that run to the front of the saddle provide a means of pressure release.  But the amount of room needed for pressure release will vary depending on whether you're gem is sitting inside a balloon, or sitting inside a much less compressible basket ball.  If you're on a basketball, maybe a central groove/recess is sufficient to allow comfort.  Heck, maybe those folks don't need recesses at all.  But if you're on a balloon, extra work is involved in finding a cutout that is usefully positioned and both wide enough to allow for the displaced balloon and contents, but that does not result in a saddle so wide as to hinder movement of the legs.


Basically I'm thinking it's not just the orientation - innie/outie as Cobb suggests - or volume (suggested by Cervelo), rather it may be the relative firmness or compressibility of the body part.  Is this water balloon analogy useful?  I'm not sure, but maybe it offers another way of thinking and talking about saddle pressure points.  Perhaps a boob analogy would be better; well, at least that would be one way to get men to understand the issue!  

I know a variety of other factors can go in to what makes for a comfortable experience in the saddle.  Poor bicycle fit is likely common enough and often easy enough to fix to make it a reasonable first question.  Below is my saddle and bicycle fit evolution which aims to support that it isn't always just poor fit that leads to discomfort.  I wonder if I would have had an easier time of it had I known a useful and not-so-embarrassing way to communicate what I was feeling and if the fitters I worked with understood that not everyone benefits from sitting on their ischial tuberosities.

Part 3 - First Hand Experience of a 5'3" enthusiast who's been riding road bikes for >30 years.

I'm guessing my sit bones 
weren't in play here, either

My first 10-speed (circa 1982/3) was a Royce Union that I won off a 5-chances for $1 raffle.  It was most definitely fitted by ensuring I could clear the top tube after the proprietor asked if I was sure I didn't want a women's frame.  Ugh - with the big downward metal swoop that made the thing weigh an extra 10 pounds, no thanks.  It was stolen my first year in college (1989/90).  It's replacement was a Schwinn Caliente with 12-speeds and index shifting (ooh, upgrade) and lasted me until I met a couple of bike racers who thought my cycling enthusiasm deserved a better bike.

The 48 cm Cannondale (now I was up to 14 gear combinations with down-tube shift levers) was born from the extra parts graveyard of several competitive cyclists (1996).  I initially thought the hard leather saddle was brutal compared to the generic ones atop my prior bikes but came around to wearing padded shorts and eventually put enough miles in to condition my interface.  Putting in still longer miles however revealed how fucking stiff and unforgiving this tiny aluminum frame was.  The super short top tube also resulted in significant toe overlap with the 700 cc wheels which I thank for honing my skills in riding a straight line up steep climbs.  In fact, unless I used 23 mm tires (not 25 mm) the front tire actually rubbed the down tube.  That's how tight the clearance was.  This led another ex-bike racer to wonder if the fork was bent.  Either way, it was suggested again that I could probably be more comfortable on a different frame.

The Cannondale preceded the digital era
and is pictured here during my first century
I narrowed my choices for a new bicycle to two.  The Giant TCR1 (size small) was fitted with a shorter stem and seemed ok during my test rides.  The LiteSpeed had that perfect like-a-glove fit, was very comfortable to ride, looked sharp as hell, and was titanium (drool).  It was also unfortunately twice my budget.  I bought the Giant (2001) and spent years fondly remembering the LiteSpeed I let get away (sniff).  With the original stem returned to the bike I quickly recognized I was less comfortable than I was on the test rides but I didn't know which size/angle the shorter one was so didn't know how to replace it. The bike shop should have been more eager to help me out and I should have been more vocal about requesting it because I entered a new unhappy world of saddle discomfort which the women's saddle I chose (Fizik Vitesse) did nothing to alleviate.  
The Giant TCR1 had brake-lever-integrated
shifting; a nice upgrade from all my prior bikes
Fizik Vitesse, aka 'the fun ruiner'





Saddles with cut-outs were appearing but I heard they were a gimmick that caused pinching (eek).  I tried (purchased) another saddle of the same usual shape
Terry saddle resembling 
the tester
  
This is similar-looking to the 
gel-middle saddle I tried
(seemed there was less variety back then) with a central gel insert (can't remember which one but it resembled the Selle Italia pictured) however this offered no relief and I returned to the Fizik.  In 2010 I couldn't go on and was in agony training for my first full distance triathlon.  I asked around about refitting a bike I already had (vs. buying a new one)
and found a shop with a saddle trial program (Guys Bicycles
in Feasterville, PA).  They recommended I find a comfortable saddle first and then have the bike refitted after for best 
Adamo ISM Typhon
results.  

The first tester was a Terry (don't remember model) which was a wild improvement.  Figuring I shouldn't settle on the first one I next tested the Adamo ISM Typhoon and selected it since it seemed even better than the Terry.  Though comfort on the Giant was improved following changes to a much shorter stem, seat post with a different off-set (to move me forward), adding aero bars, and using the Adamo saddle (albeit slightly incorrectly), it still didn't seem quite right.  Fit aside, I also felt like I might benefit from different gearing (the Giant has 53/39, 9-speed 12x25) and so it was time to look for another bike.

In 2013 I moved on to a 50 cm Trek Domane with women's specific design (shorter top tube, taller head stack, with 10-speed 11x28, & 50/34 on a rather long 172.5 mm crank), unfortunately fitted to the saddle that came with it (Bontrager Afffinity RL WSD).  To quote the fitter (from BikeLine of Valley Forge), "most women like this saddle".  Turns out, even on what should be an appropriately-sized WSD bike, I am still not 'most women'.  That saddle has a small anatomical relief zone but its position is completely unhelpful (way too far back if I'm in the drops).  After several months, my tri coach refit the bike with the Adamo saddle.  
Bontrager Affinity RL Women's
'gender appropriate contour
relief zone' does not match
my anatomy at all
In 2010 the long and ample cut-out present in the Adamo ISM saddle had been such a welcome relief to the soft tissue smashing and tearing (yes, tearing) I experienced on other saddles, however it's still not the right answer for me.  I don't want to sit forward enough to have soft tissue hanging completely off the saddle (as it is intended to be used), and the thing is too bloody wide to sit on as done with most other saddles, though that is how I'd been using it (though positioned only on the front half).  (Zip ties void the warranty, which I don't really care about, but they also don't help enough.)  After 4 years on the Giant+Trek running concurrently with 3 years on my Cervelo it added up to where I couldn't stand the contact with my inner legs any more.  It was irritating my hip adductors and hamstrings, hindering my pedal stroke, and despite owning two of them, that saddle just had to go.



I ordered Koobi 232T for the Cervelo (48 cm PC2) last summer (2014) after seeing an overlay of it with an outline of 'the competitors saddle' on an advertisement stuck into a race packet.  It's a nice improvement to the Adamo with regard to width between the legs, and with that adage 'the stronger a rider you are the less weight you're putting on the saddle' I find this saddle pretty ok for 4 h of riding.  Unfortunately that's not enough to hold me over for 112 miles.  I hope to fix this by finding a way to add more watts instead of having to buy yet another saddle.


(Ref 4 - http://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/
bikefit/2011/09/all-about-smps/)
Intrigued by the design of the SMP saddles, which are even thinner between the legs than the Koobi, maintain a substantial central cut-out, and also possess a profile that looks to completely remove forward pressure, I decided to give the Evolution a try on my Trek via my shop's saddle trial program (Cadence Cycling and Multisport in Manayunk, PA).  For the first time ever (Jan 2015), I feel evenly and well-supported on a saddle, and I feel evenly and well-supported in every riding position: on the tops, on my brake hoods, in the drops, and even when stretched and lying on the handlebars as in aero position OR when sitting upright riding hands-free.  Oh dear god, where has this saddle been all my life ?!?  This saddle brand (like most) comes in a couple of flavors with variations in width, specific profile, and of course firmness.  I found this blog post (Ref 4) to provide an easy-to-follow presentation of how the various models relate to one another and ordered a Drakon after reading it.  That post also has the best depiction and description I've ever seen regarding how the pelvic bone structure sits on a saddle, and you should read it.  'Sit bones', my ass!  I'm siting on my inferior pubic ramen and loving it.  :-)

Conclusion - While writing this recap successfully offered me a fair bit of nostalgia, what I really wanted to convey is that many factors go in to achieving comfort on a bicycle and I find it darn disappointing that trial-and-error still plays such a significant role.  It's time consuming, it's frustrating, and it's expensive.  There really aught to be a better way.

Update: a newer post on saddle issues (here).