Regarding
I strongly disagree with the poster that said "I believe you want a leather saddle to be harder rather than softer when it fits right."Lets start by talking about how the Wisconsin made Selle An-Atomica saddle work. It has a fairly soft leather. To prevent stretching, the manufacturer laminates some other material on the underside. The saddle basically functions as a hammock for your left and right butt cheek. I don't care for this saddle because the shape is wrong. The technology is very interesting. And as I said, I have a friend who won't ride anything else.
With a Brooks saddle, a different technology is used. You start with essentially a rigid mass. Now that rigid mass comes in different shapes (B-17s, Team Pros, Swallows, etc.). Two things will happen over time. The saddle will stretch, and it will soften. I don't know if the saddle stretches because it softens, or soften because it stretches. The beauty of the Brook style leather saddle, is that there are all these small regions where the leather will stretch and soften to conform to the shape of the rider. For example, my pelvis is not symmetric. And ever since I turned 40, I can longer maintain a dense sheath of muscle that used to insulate my pelvis from the saddle. So if you look at any Brook saddle that I have ridden, you will find two dents that define where my pelvic bone were supported by the saddle. And one of those dents will be bigger and deeper than the other dent. This is the part I referred to when I expressed my belief that a broken in saddle will be softened.
From front to back, the saddle will stretch (and soften). This is why there is a tension mechanism. Perhaps this is what you are referring to with "I believe you want a leather saddle to be harder rather than softer when it fits right."
Regarding the properties of Team Pros and Conquest saddles. I slightly mispoke, it is the Team Pro that was longer (I feel the older I get, the more dyslexic I am). I bought my Team Pro in 2002, and the Conquest in 2004. It sounds like your saddles were older than that. Running changes get made to manufactured goods all the time, so perhaps we are both right. As I recall My Team Pro and 1st B-17 were the same length, but the Team Pro was an inch narrower. The Conquest was the same width as the Team Pro, but an inch shorter. When I started getting prostrate issues, I had to convert over to cut out saddles. There was a grad student at UofM that collected old steel bikes and wanted leather saddles to put on them. I sold him my Team Pro, so I can't go out and reinspect it for dimensions. Brooks replaced the Conquest with the Flyer, so I can't the dimensions off Brooks or Wallingford. This part of our discussion is starting to feel silly and stupid, as we arguing over a saddle that is not made anymore.
My perspective on leather hardness had to deal with how long it took me to break the saddle in. I use the formation of pelvic dents as my metric for saddle break in. It took summer of riding to break my Team Pro in to the point where it was comfortable. My Conquest broke in after a couple of rides as did my first B-17. Given that Brooks provides a saddle tension mechanism, the saddles probably never stop breaking in. I had heard that some saddles, like the B-17 Standard, come with softer leather because Brooks thinks the target market does not have the patience to break the saddle in. And there is the "Aged" product line that
guarantees a softer saddle from the very first ride http://www.brookssaddles.com/en/Shop_SaddleLineCat.aspx?line=Aged. Glad to hear that your Team Pro was comfortable from the first contact with your "behind".
