Can Saddles Restrict Bloodflow To Legs?

Per :
Saw the below posted on another forum. It looks like if your 95mm is
real, you're narrow. I like a saddle that's at least 20mm wider than
sit bone center-to-center dimension.

"Ischial Tuberosity Spacing stats

Found this in my old uni notes and wanted to post it here for easy
reference:

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among women:
5th percentile 112 mm
50th percentile 130 mm
95th percentile 148 mm

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among men:
5th percentile 100 mm
50th percentile 118 mm
95th percentile 137 mm

I don't remember the population this data was taken from, but I
remember being under the impression that it was a very large number of
individuals and it was considered "safe" to assume it might represent
the whole world.

I've used this info to help narrow the search - once I learned I was
wider the 95th percentile(!) I stopped bothering with a lot of narrow
saddles."

Your post is a breath of fresh air for me.

I spent quite a few hours trying to find data on IT width and
failed.

When I do the sit-bone measurement thing with a hunk of
styrofoam, my dents are 114 mm center-to-center and 152 mm
outer-edge-to-outer-edge.

The dents in my leather saddles confirm those measurements.

My experience, however, has been that saddles need to be quite a
bit more than 20 mm wider than the C-C measurement.

I used Brooks B-17's for years (170 mm), but with chronic
low-grade soreness that was worse the longer the ride.

After switching to the wider Brooks saddles (205 mm) the soreness
has gone away completely.


FWIW, when I measure the usable width (C-C of the flexible area)
on a WTB Speed-V saddle, I get only 90mm).




--
PeteCresswell

In article
,
" wrote:

On Nov 4, 7:26Â*pm, Steve Sr. wrote:

BTW, do any of you know of any resources on how to assess saddle width
knowing the spacing of your sit bones? Mine appear to be about 95mm. I
don't know if that could be considered narrow, normal, or wide and how
to pick a saddle for this known width..

Thanks,

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Saw the below posted on another forum. It looks like if your 95mm is
real, you're narrow. I like a saddle that's at least 20mm wider than
sit bone center-to-center dimension.

"Ischial Tuberosity Spacing stats

Found this in my old uni notes and wanted to post it here for easy
reference:

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among women:
5th percentile 112 mm
50th percentile 130 mm
95th percentile 148 mm

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among men:
5th percentile 100 mm
50th percentile 118 mm
95th percentile 137 mm

Center to center? 115 mm for me,
and _that_ is why I am comfortable on a racer's saddle.

--
Michael Press

On 11/4/2010 11:48 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
A complete and total solution to the problem of saddles is the recumbent
style of bicycle. Recumbents provided a proper seat which you can sit on all
day provided you tweak it for comfort.

Ed Dolan is correct (and I do not write that often).

The best way to tweak a recumbent
seat is to put the highest quality foam you can find on the seat base. That
will cure any and all butt problems!

Some find the inflatable Therm-a-Rest™ pads to be superior to foam. For
those with highly sensitive posteriors, there is the foam used for
high-quality wheelchair seats.

For most, a normal higher density foam, particularly on a sling-mesh
seat, is fine for 200+ km per day rides.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 19:21:30 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Nov 4, 7:26*pm, Steve Sr. wrote:

BTW, do any of you know of any resources on how to assess saddle width
knowing the spacing of your sit bones? Mine appear to be about 95mm. I
don't know if that could be considered narrow, normal, or wide and how
to pick a saddle for this known width..

Thanks,

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Saw the below posted on another forum. It looks like if your 95mm is
real, you're narrow. I like a saddle that's at least 20mm wider than
sit bone center-to-center dimension.

"Ischial Tuberosity Spacing stats

Found this in my old uni notes and wanted to post it here for easy
reference:

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among women:
5th percentile 112 mm
50th percentile 130 mm
95th percentile 148 mm

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among men:
5th percentile 100 mm
50th percentile 118 mm
95th percentile 137 mm

I don't remember the population this data was taken from, but I
remember being under the impression that it was a very large number of
individuals and it was considered "safe" to assume it might represent
the whole world.

I've used this info to help narrow the search - once I learned I was
wider the 95th percentile(!) I stopped bothering with a lot of narrow
saddles."

This is great information! Can you provide a link to a picture or
diagram of how these numbers were measured? This way I can confirm the
validity of my measurement and method.

Thanks,

Steve

On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:26:29 -0400, Steve Sr.
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 20:38:54 -0400, Steve Sr.
wrote:

Hello,

I am currently saddle shopping and are currently trying a Terry FLX
which was on sale at Performance. I went for my first ride today and
had little to no sit bones discomfort.

However, the saddle did feel kind of wide through the mid section to
the point that it might be restricting blood flow to my legs. The clue
was that my legs felt kind of heavy until I stood up. Then things felt
o.k. until after I had been sitting down for a while.

Am I imagining this or can this really happen? I don't think my sit
bones protrude very far but then I have no way of comparing to what a
saddle was originally designed for. I don't know if this could be a
contributing factor.

Thanks,

Steve

Thanks fo everyones input and suggestions. I think that I am going to
try a few more adjustments and see how things go. Terry recommended a
level position and I think it is currently slightly nose up but not
enough to cause any numbness issues. I'll get out a real level this
time so I'll be starting in a known position.

BTW, do any of you know of any resources on how to assess saddle width
knowing the spacing of your sit bones? Mine appear to be about 95mm. I
don't know if that could be considered narrow, normal, or wide and how
to pick a saddle for this known width..

Thanks,

Steve

I leveled the saddle. It was about 1/4"-3/8" lower in the rear (nose
up). I then went on a 25 mile ride. Overall this change seems to have
noticeably improved the previous blood flow issue.

However, after about 15 miles I began to notice pressure in the
perineal area. It wasn't to the point of numbness but more than I was
accustomed to with my previous saddle. I am sort of surprised by this
outcome considering that this saddle has a slot cutout in this area.

This would tend to indicate that the foam in the saddle is compressing
more and more as I sit on the saddle. It may also indicate that my sit
bones aren't very tall (or tall enough for this saddle) or the foam is
too weak.

I guess the next step is to try a little bit of nose down on the
saddle to see if this relieves the pressure on the perineal area.

Steve

"Steve Sr." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010 19:21:30 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Nov 4, 7:26 pm, Steve Sr. wrote:

BTW, do any of you know of any resources on how to assess saddle width
knowing the spacing of your sit bones? Mine appear to be about 95mm. I
don't know if that could be considered narrow, normal, or wide and how
to pick a saddle for this known width..

Thanks,

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Saw the below posted on another forum. It looks like if your 95mm is
real, you're narrow. I like a saddle that's at least 20mm wider than
sit bone center-to-center dimension.

"Ischial Tuberosity Spacing stats

Found this in my old uni notes and wanted to post it here for easy
reference:

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among women:
5th percentile 112 mm
50th percentile 130 mm
95th percentile 148 mm

Ischial Tuberosity Spacing among men:
5th percentile 100 mm
50th percentile 118 mm
95th percentile 137 mm

I don't remember the population this data was taken from, but I
remember being under the impression that it was a very large number of
individuals and it was considered "safe" to assume it might represent
the whole world.

I've used this info to help narrow the search - once I learned I was
wider the 95th percentile(!) I stopped bothering with a lot of narrow
saddles."

This is great information! Can you provide a link to a picture or
diagram of how these numbers were measured? This way I can confirm the
validity of my measurement and method.

Sure. In ASCII: (_*_)

Per Michael Press:
Center to center? 115 mm for me,
and _that_ is why I am comfortable on a racer's saddle.

I must've done something wrong when I measured mine.

--
Pete (Broad Butt) Cresswell

Per Steve Sr.:

This would tend to indicate that the foam in the saddle is compressing
more and more as I sit on the saddle. It may also indicate that my sit
bones aren't very tall (or tall enough for this saddle) or the foam is
too weak.

That's what is behind the admonition to avoid soft saddles.
--
PeteCresswell

Per (PeteCresswell):
I must've done something wrong when I measured mine.

Supported by this quote from the page that URL points to:

"If measurement is between 4.25" - 5", choose Small pocket. 5" -
5.75", choose Medium pocket. 5.75" - 6.75", choose Large pocket.
For measurements on borderline, choose larger pocket if user is
female or big-boned male."

The measurement I came up was in the 4.25-5" range and I am
definitely not "Small"... quite the opposite....
--
PeteCresswell

On Nov 6, 4:09*pm, Steve Sr. wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:26:29 -0400, Steve Sr.
wrote:



On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 20:38:54 -0400, Steve Sr.
wrote:

Hello,

I am currently saddle shopping and are currently trying a Terry FLX
which was on sale at Performance. I went for my first ride today and
had little to no sit bones discomfort.

However, the saddle did feel kind of wide through the mid section to
the point that it might be restricting blood flow to my legs. The clue
was that my legs felt kind of heavy until I stood up. Then things felt
o.k. until after I had been sitting down for a while.

Am I imagining this or can this really happen? I don't think my sit
bones protrude very far but then I have no way of comparing to what a
saddle was originally designed for. *I don't know if this could be a
contributing factor.

Thanks,

Steve

Thanks fo everyones input and suggestions. I think that I am going to
try a few more adjustments and see how things go. Terry recommended a
level position and I think it is currently slightly nose up but not
enough to cause any numbness issues. I'll get out a real level this
time so I'll be starting in a known position.

BTW, do any of you know of any resources on how to assess saddle width
knowing the spacing of your sit bones? Mine appear to be about 95mm. I
don't know if that could be considered narrow, normal, or wide and how
to pick a saddle for this known width..

Thanks,

Steve

I leveled the saddle. It was about 1/4"-3/8" lower in the rear (nose
up). I then went on a 25 mile ride. Overall this change seems to have
noticeably improved the previous blood flow issue.

However, after about 15 miles I began to notice pressure in the
perineal area. It wasn't to the point of numbness but more than I was
accustomed to with my previous saddle. I am sort of surprised by this
outcome considering that this saddle has a slot cutout in this area.

Check that your saddle is not too high by riding with flat soled shoes
and see that your not pedalling with your tippy toes. If correcyting
height does not solve it, try moving the saddle forward.


This would tend to indicate that the foam in the saddle is compressing
more and more as I sit on the saddle. It may also indicate that my sit
bones aren't very tall (or tall enough for this saddle) or the foam is
too weak.

I guess the next step is to try a little bit of nose down on the
saddle to see if this relieves the pressure on the perineal area.

Steve