brewer45

My stoker rides a Brooks B 66 'S' and absolutely loves it. On a club ride last week, we were chided several times for the weight and breadth of that saddle (210 mm). One uncouth even commented, "You must have a really unusual pelvis!"

I ride a Brooks B 17 'N' and also love it.

Cheers!

ken cummings

About 70 pounds without riders. Its a Counterpoint semi-recumbent tandem and we asked that it be made a little heavier then standard. With riders close to 550 pounds.

Possum Roadkill

I've always been tempted to try a Brooks saddle but I don't know if I'm willing to put up with the break in period. I've heard they can be really comfortable once you break them in.

I don't do well on wide saddles. I tried the wider TRK saddle my stoker has just out of curiosity and it was really uncomfortable for me. Received the heavier padding saddle today but haven't given it a try yet.

dfcas

I just built up a Cannondale road from a frameset,with a few significant upgrades. Total for bike, with the Ouzo Pro cross fork and 700x32 Pasela folding tires is 34.1 pounds.

Some weights,for the record.

Cannondale X/M frame only with seat post collars,no eccentric 4170g 9.19 lbs

eccentric 125 g

Reynolds Ouzo Pro cross fork 540g
Cannondale fatty fork with brake bosses and star nut 1110g

daVinci triple ring/triple hole crankset w.bolts 1240 + 2 UN-91 BB's 482g total 1722g

Wheelset- White MI6 disc hubs,36 14/15,Deep V brass wheels 2130g

Bike is built with rear disc brake,front V brake on the cross fork,with low end Campy Veloce ergo.

It seems as if 30 pounds presents a barrier that would be quite expensive to break through.Low 30's would be doable,but after that it gets expensive.

Once again,total bike weight is 34.1.

brewer45

I have tried several padded/gel saddles. I have always experienced some chafing and numbness/discomfort in the nether-regions on longer rides. I always thought this meant that I needed MORE padding. Completely wrong. The additional padding contributes to chafing and the squishy material puts additional pressure on the soft tissues, causing numbness and discomfort. So, prompted by my stoker, I decided to try a Brooks in spite of the stories about break-in. My LBS measured my sitzbones distance and found that I'm a bit on the narrow side (140mm), so I bought a B17 'N' (for narrow).

It is true that going from a cushy saddle to the hard leather of the Brooks was a bit of a shock. However, on the very first ride, I noticed a significant decrease in chafing, and NO NUMBNESS. Still had a bit of discomfort, but that was solved with careful positioning of the saddle (don't underestimate fit--proper height, distance from stem, and tilt made all the difference for me). I've been on the saddle for about 300 miles now and am completely satisfied and comfortable.

A final note. The Brooks doesn't get soft after the break-in period--it changes shape to fit your anatomy but remains hard. The feeling in the saddle isn't like being nestled in a couch or surrounded by padded comfort. It is more like being perched firmly on the saddle and being connected to the bike. The Brooks isn't for everybody, but it solved a raft of comfort and performance issues for me.

Cheers!

carpediemracing 

You're absolutely right, and if I made my post seem unfriendly, it's not what I meant. For the record, although we do own two Honda Civics, I also own a big van (for promoting bicycle races) and a non-US sporty type car. But we drive the Civics around most of the time, the van about 6 weeks a year (2000 miles in 5 years or so), and the sporty car only 8 months/year.

btw as a car nut too, I checked out wreckedexotics a bunch of times - it seems that the cars are priced accurately, taking into account the amount of time it would take to rebuild them. Still, though, the initial price is always appealing

The missus and I ride the tandem such that weight and speed are secondary to the pure enjoyment we get simply by riding together. Because of that it would be sort of ridiculous to put money into the tandem in order to make it more of something we don't care about (speed/weight related). I'm looking to update my position to match my single bike (much lower bars, seat higher and more forward), that's what I'll be updating next.

cdr

TandemGeek

It wasn't taken that way, so no worries.

However, I thought I'd expand on how different value systems and personal economics factor into bicycle purchasing decisions for the benefit of other readers who seem to struggle with this aspect of our sport / hobby.

Possum Roadkill

The SMP saddles have a pretty large cut-out which helps with numbness issues. My only reason for trying the TRK version was to possibly understand my stokers choice. I agree about padding and I have never been able to ride very far on a saddle with thick gel padding.

Today I tried out the SMP Stratos and it was more comfortable for me than the previous saddle I tried (Evolution). To understand how much of a difference in padding, the model with less padding than the Evolution is a piece of THIN leather on top of a hard shell. Then they also offer one that is just a piece of carbon fiber with no padding at all. The stratos only has about 10 grams of extra padding. The difference would be like comparing a Selle Italia SLR saddle to the Flite.

I find that with padded saddles, it's not always more padding for more comfort but there is definitely an ideal amount of padding and how soft is also of importance. Again, it's not softer is better, just like more isn't necessarily better.

zonatandem

Have always preferred hard/narrower saddles on single and even tandem.
18,000+ miles currently on Selle Italia Flite/Ti on tandem and ride an SLR on single bike. In the old days rode leather and was happy with that too. Saddles with gel and cutouts are fine for some folk, however there's so darn many saddles out there that claim to 'cure' what really is lack of proper bike/saddle set-up.

Possum Roadkill

Have always preferred hard/narrower saddles on single and even tandem.
When compared to the SLR doesn't the Flite/Ti have just a little more padding?

I just spent the weekend fitting customers to saddles. For each saddle, I spent several minutes getting it to the best adjustment possible using the customers feedback to make minor tweaks to the positioning. One of the problems with trying to find the best saddle for any individual is that the adjustment is very important. If you just try to go through as many saddles as possible without taking the time to adjust each one so it is as comfortable as it can be, you reject saddles that might have actuallly been good choices.

I personally hate gel saddles for myself. I have never found one that was comfortable for me and I also like narrower saddles. I have the SLR saddle and it was very comfortable for me for a few years but not it has hammocked a bit and it's not nearly as comfortable as when it was new.

Cut-out saddles I find only work for some people. They are worth giving a try but they might just not be the best fit for you.

brewer45

Spent most of a 28 mile ride yesterday dialing in my Brooks on the new bike. As previously stated, fit is crucial and even very small adjustments (1 mm) in height, distance from stem, and tilt can make all the difference. Another thing I've learned is that a "neutral" position is, at best, only an approximation of fit.

Cheers!

Brian

I'm surprised at how heavy some of the road tandems weigh. Our MTB with a stout 5" fork comes in about 38lbs.

mburchard

Wow, just got new mostly carbon (adjustable) stoker stem and bars from Precision Tandems, dropping weight of these bits by 360 gm (720 for ControlTech stoker stem and Profile 26 stoker bars in a 47cm, 360 for adjustable carbon stoker stem with chopped and inverted 46cm Kestrel carbon bars). Will re-weigh bike when I get it put back together, but this will drop it to about 29.5 pounds for 64/52 S&S coupled Calfee, including pedals and cages.

TandemGeek

With all of this interest in "what's it weigh", perhaps it's time for me to break out the scale at the upcoming Georgia and Tennessee Tandem Rallies.

We actually did a ""What does it weigh?" thing at the first Georgia Tandem Rally back in 1999 and the results were interesting since most of the tandems were weighed the way they were actually ridden. You can find that data in this posting I made regarding tandem weights back in 2005:

https://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...87&postcount=1

Little-Acorn

My Schwinn Twinn Sport 10-speed weighs in at 52 pounds according to my high-tech super-precision bathroom scale. Only extraneous thing on it is the water bottle cage. Oddly, that's exactly what Schwinn literature says it should weigh. It has the Atom rear drum brake - are those heavier than a "normal" tandem wheel with a caliper brake?

I hope to put alloy wheels, alloy hbars (captain's) and an alloy gooseneck on it. Might not make much difference in the grand scheme of things, but my smile gets bigger.

oldacura

TG - your comparision chart is interesting. There is a pretty near inverse relationship (with a few exceptions) between the comparison weights & the price.

TandemGeek

Less is definitely more.... with perhaps one new exception.

Lynskey is apparently looking to break new ground / generate buyer interest by heading more towards personalization and a renaissance of the "bicycle as an art form" by taking cues from the custom motorcycle industry. While the product will no doubt be light, it's the engravings, etchings, and fine details that will likely drive the $$ to some dizzying heights for folks looking to differentiate their lightweight uber-bikes and tandems from the rest of the pack.

Now, Lynskey clearly isn't the first to do this: our Erickson tandems, the Bohemians, Bob Browns and many other custom tandems built by artisians have offered rolling artwork as well. It's just been a while since a new player in the high-end market has vectored off from the 'techno-look' of their offerings to something more personal.

We're really looking forward to seeing the first Lynskey tandem at the Tennessee Tandem Rally; I'm sure the photos -- as nice as they are -- just don't provide the full effect that seeing it in person will have.

TandemGeek

BTW, and intersting enough, the exceptions both exited the tandem market over the past couple of years.

Knubby

I finally got a chance to weight our tandems on my digital bathroom scale.
Kuwahara Adventurer TK = 48lbs with drum brake, cages and rear rack
Santana Picante = 44.5lbs with cages and rear rack
Santana Arriva S = 42lbs with cages and rear rack

zonatandem

As for the cost of our custom c/f tandem, we consider it an investment in our continued good health . . . and that's pricele$$!
Pedal on TWOgether!
Rudy and Kay/zonatandem

Little-Acorn

Well, I did all of the above (plus replaced shifters, brake handles, all cables, and the rear cluster with a 14-34), and to my astonishment the bathroom scale now reads 47 pounds. That's with pedals, toe clips, water bottle cage, and Zefal frame pump. I keep reading here about people shaving off a gram here and three grams there. I never imagined this creature could drop five pounds like that.

The steel hbars, gooseneck, and the drum brake rear hub with steel rims were all pretty heavy, but it's still surprising to see what a difference it makes. Yes, I'm keeping the old parts, especially that hub, for "original" collector's sake, just in case. Going to replace the rear chain and derailleur next, with a Shimano Altus to take full advantage of that 14-34 cluster, don't expect any change in weight there.

Also replaced the disintegrating gumwall tires with new Continental Ultrasport clinchers, pumped them to 115psi, and now the bike is astonishing (to me, at least, I'm used to the 26"-wheel Fiore with really cheap tires). It feels like I'm riding my Sports Tourer (same tires) - it's incredibly slick and fast. This thing could actually turn into a real tandem, though it will still never be light, obviously. (Neither will its captain! )

pel

A bit dismayed to see that our Cannodale Mountain Tandem 2006 admittedly with hearvier handle bars front and back and a rear pannier rack weighs in at the top of the list at 23 kg or 50.6 lbs. Ouch.
Seems that weight always counts going uphill.
And yes, as our age edges up, we are starting think about what to do to get the bike weight down. (we are both at about optimum body weight for our height)

HelluvaStella

I wish I knew how much my tandem weighs. I have a 1965 Schwinn Twinn that started life as a single speed with coaster brake. I disassembled it, sanded and chemical stripped the paint and resprayed it silver. Tossed the wheels, front brake caliper + lever, saddles, chains and pedals. Cleaned off the rust from the handle bars, seatposts, cranks, fenders and chainrings. Built a new wheelset: front is a Sun Rhynolite rim on a Sturmey Archer XFD drum brake with 14 gauge SS spokes. Rear is a Rhynolite rim on a Shimano Inter 8 premium hub with Nexave roller brake. I bought new cheap rubber block 1/2" pedals, balloon whitewalls, SRAM PC1 nickel chains, a rear rack for wicker panniers and the piece(s) de resistance: two Brooks B73s.

Maybe I don't want to know how much it weighs. I rode it with a friend in a Philly alleycat race in March. One of the checkpoints was at the LBS and we were awarded points for pounds. The Topeak workstand with digital scale built in kept displaying "ERROR". I read online that the max weight for the scale is 55 lbs.

merlinextraligh

^ we need a pic.

Little-Acorn

Absolutely, HS. Let's see the beast! Does it have the frame that's mixte in front and rear? I believe Schwinn literature says those weighed 64# from the factory. Your changing the wheels surely reduced that some. What pressure in the ballooners? The Atom drum brake on mine, weighed quite a lot, don't know how much your Sturmey Archer weighs.

Mine started out at 52#, now weighs 47. Too bad the rider can't follow suit.

-Old Fat Guy Who Likes Bikes