We have unpublished data about the pressure that the BiSaddle® exerts on the bicyclist’s perineum in comparison with 4 other saddles.
It is our understanding that the measurements were taken using the same techniques as those documented in the study reported in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 1055-1062, 2004. Effect of Bicycle Saddle Designs on the Pressure to the Perineum of the Bicyclist. B.D. Lowe, S.M. Schrader, M.J. Breitenstein.
Download the pdf file “Effect of Bicycle Saddle Designs on the Pressure to the Perineum of the Bicyclist” to see the full text of the study.
The difference is that in the study there were 8 study subjects for each saddle and there were only 5 for ours at the time of the study. The study compared perineal pressure from 3 alternative saddles/seats and a standard saddle.
The following graph shows the average perineal pressure (kPa) for the 4 saddles in the study and the BiSaddle® shown as (e).
The traditional sport/racing saddle is associated with more than two times the pressure in the perineal region than the alternative saddles from the study and almost four times the pressure when compared to the BiSaddle®.
Shown below is a Pliance mat sensor pressure distribution matrix for the BiSaddle®. (The angle is misrepresented by hammocking of the pressure sensitive mat.) Similar graphs for the study saddles/seats can be seen in the study linked to above.
Our saddle is included in a current longitudinal study being undertaken by the National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety. It is our understanding that this study includes participants using alternative saddles in actual road cycling over extended periods. They hope to measure the health benefits, cyclists acceptance and effect of nonprotruding nose saddle designs on bicycle maneuverability, handling, stability and weight distribution.