Re: [CR]Snow Proof on leather saddles?

(Example: Framebuilding:Tubing:Columbus)

Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:55:22 -0400
From: "Elizabeth & Warren" <warbetty@eastlink.ca>
Subject: Re: [CR]Snow Proof on leather saddles?
In-reply-to: <E1HOxaJ-0000hM-Qc@elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
To: 'Classic Rendezvous' <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <45EE07F6.7010301@verizon.net> <568155.1766.qm@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> <000201c760b3$4bf490c0$6401a8c0@maincomputer>


However, Brooks has recently changed the formula themselves. What was a thick red wax is now a creamy white paste. Even smells different. What's up with that?

Should I be hording Ye Olde Brooks Proofhide with the intention of cornering the ebay market 15 years from now? What if it's a carcinogen, hence the change?

Dear me.What will I put on my vintage saddles now.

Warren Young Wolfville Nova Scotia

Mark Stonich wrote:
> At 3/7/2007 07:22 AM -0500, Ken Freeman wrote:
>> If the sagging of an expensive and critical component, a favorite
>> saddle, is
>> a risk, why would you take it if you don't have to? In other words, why
>> would you use anything other than what Brooks recommended as a
>> dressing on a
>> Brooks saddle? That means use Proofide, not neatsfoot, Snoseal, Snow
>> Proof,
>> motor oil, Wesson oil, or anything else.
>>
>> If the saddle as new does not have adequate comfort, you really
>> shouldn't
>> ride it for "ever" to force it to break in. If the shape or
>> dimensions are
>> wrong for you, break=in won't change that, and softening is just
>> likely to
>> move the pressure points to places you don't want tthem, like the
>> perineum
>> rather than the ischial tuberosities.
>
> Well put. Brooks has had 151 years to get this sorted out.
>
>
> Mark Stonich;
> Minneapolis Minnesota
> http://mnhpva.org
> http://bikesmithdesign.com