SQLab Saddles: Review. Don't say I didn't warn you

[RustyIron]

In the past, I've endorsed the SQLab 6OX Infinergy saddles. A couple years of experience with them as caused me to reevaluate my position. They just don't last very long.

First, let me state that the 6OX is a good saddle to ride. It might feel a little less comfortable at first, but after a long, hard ride, I don't have the discomfort or tingliness that other saddles might create.

My first SQLab saddle was on my previous bike. After 1300 miles, the saddle was sitting crooked atop the seatpost. I attributed it to a recent crash, and the company replaced it. After another 650 miles, I sold that bike.

Soon after I got the new bike, I bought another SQLab saddle. It wasn't long before I put another SQLab saddle onto the new bike. It lasted 300 miles before it became bent. But this time, there were NO crashes on the bike or saddle. Again, the company sent me a new saddle.

The replacement lasted 275 miles before it became bent. This time I'm just throwing the saddle in the trash and going to a different brand.

Attached are three images. One on pic, the saddle rails are on a flat surface. Check out how the bubble on the level is way over to one side. That's how much the saddle is bent. The second pic shows the saddle inverted, with the most straight-on shot I could get. See how the rails are asymmetrical, with one higher than the other? Besides being different heights, the rails are different distances from the centerline. The last picture shows the paint on the rails. All SQLab rails are painted, and the paint flakes off within a week or two. It doesn't affect functionality, but it's ugly.

Keep in mind that these pictures are of a saddle that has been ridden for 275 miles.

 

[irie]

Had same, after 6 months about 500 miles wasn't as comfortable as new. Replaced with WTB Koda, no issues after another 500 miles.

 

[Stihldog]

I can’t comment on the durability of this saddle but I returned it asap.Thankfully I kept the packaging and exchanged for the Ergon Core.

Every saddle fit is different but I knew the moment I sat on it. I guess I like the whale-tail on the Ergon.

 

[George_KSL]

I have two pre-production models of this saddle (same as production I believe, except white labels instead of black) and each lasted 3000km and still look brand new except slightly worn labels("stickers"?). I only use the grey, weakest rubber, wife uses none. I pondered using none as well since I like the flexible sway. I crash my KSL fairly often as well...

Have to agree with the rails though, they're slippery and wear out the paint almost right away.
I also had briefly Ergon Core SMC, and I believe it is more comfortable saddle but it has such a massive "MAMIL on e-bike" vibe to it I had to get rid of it :- ) No offence.

 

[Suns_PSD]

Posting here as well with this huh?

I love my SQ Lab saddles and have thousands of miles on them.

What do you weigh? Maybe you sit a bit more than others over trail bumps?

 

[RustyIron]

What do you weigh? Maybe you sit a bit more than others over trail bumps?

I tip the scales at 200 pounds.
Trail bumps?
My preference is for trails that some might consider a bit on the rugged side. If ANY bike component is not capable of withstanding impacts, g-forces, and "trail bumps," then it definitely doesn't have a place on my bike.

 

[ipe]

I have owned, and currently own many SQ Lab 611 saddles. I have bent "active" models but never (knocks on wood) a non-active s-tube model. Obviously each riders experience differs but I'm a firm believer in SQLab saddles. Bummer you've had a poor experience with them

 

[RustyIron]

I have owned, and currently own many SQ Lab 611 saddles. I have bent "active" models but never (knocks on wood) a non-active s-tube model.

For a minute I considered one of their other models. After all, they have some good ideas. But there are other companies making top-tier saddles out of space-age materials, and their customer service is easier for me to deal with. Eventually if I discover I don't like their saddles, there's no rule against switching back.

 

[ipe]

Every bum has a saddle to fit it. Once I found "the one" (SQ Lab 611) I've stuck with it and not looked back.
I've never found a shop that offers "test tide" saddles, but I can understand why they don't. Prior to settling on the 611 I rode several different saddles (an expensive pain in the butt, literally), none of which agreed with my anatomy. When I was a kid it didn't seem to matter, but it sure does now. Good luck in your search.

 

[Suns_PSD]

I tip the scales at 200 pounds.
Trail bumps?
My preference is for trails that some might consider a bit on the rugged side. If ANY bike component is not capable of withstanding impacts, g-forces, and "trail bumps," then it definitely doesn't have a place on my bike.

Yah, you are not supposed to be sitting down on the saddle over those bumps. That's my point.

 

[TheMirrorVision]

As an aggressive and heavy 240lb rider I've carried the original 60X saddle over a few mountain bikes over the past several years since it was first introduced, and haven't had any issues thankfully. Obviously I don't doubt your experience as the pictures are quite evident there's an issue, but I'm wondering why my older saddles have been more durable than the newer Infinergy models...

 

[IW78]

I have a 60x and 612 Active. Both with 8000 Kilometers and 120 Kilogramm Driver. No Problem at all

 

[Durrti]

On my second 60x and still love it. Broke a rail on my first after about 2k miles and who knows how many crashes/drops. My favorite saddle by far

 

[Arminius]

@RustyIron
Thank you for the report.
As mentioned before there is a weight limit for the saddles, i.e. 110kgs here what you seem not to be exceeding but the white elastomer you are using is for less body weight.

SQlab GmbH Online Shop | Saddle 6OX Infinergy® ERGOWAVE® active 2.1 13cm | Ergonomic bike equipment

 

[TheKaiser]

I have owned, and currently own many SQ Lab 611 saddles. I have bent "active" models but never (knocks on wood) a non-active s-tube model. Obviously each riders experience differs but I'm a firm believer in SQLab saddles. Bummer you've had a poor experience with them

That's interesting, as I was reading the OPs post and thinking "what about the non-active models?" Sounds like they may be a bit more robust from what you're saying, although he seems to like the "active" swaying effect, so swapping out to one of them is only a partial solution for him. It's kind of counter-intuitive for me, as I would have thought the "active" elastomer would have reduced the loading that the rails see, but maybe the rocking of the shell allows for more off-center loading.

 

[RustyIron]

@RustyIron
As mentioned before there is a weight limit for the saddles, i.e. 110kgs here what you seem not to be exceeding but the white elastomer you are using is for less body weight.

Thanks. On this last saddle I installed the white elastomer, hoping that it might increase the life of the saddle. As you know, it didn't make any difference. Oh, well.

 

[ipe]

That's interesting, as I was reading the OPs post and thinking "what about the non-active models?" Sounds like they may be a bit more robust from what you're saying, although he seems to like the "active" swaying effect, so swapping out to one of them is only a partial solution for him. It's kind of counter-intuitive for me, as I would have thought the "active" elastomer would have reduced the loading that the rails see, but maybe the rocking of the shell allows for more off-center loading.

I've only seen reference to avtive saddles failing. Obviously non-active saddles could fail also, but I've never seen a report of that happening. My guess is that the rider who gets the failed saddle is below the weight limit but not radically below (as was my case at the time of my failure).

What follows is my theory on why active models bend vs non-active:

When you are seated and go over a bump/obstacle/gopher/etc your body follows Newton's first law and remains in motion. The bikes suspension does its thing and absorbs the shock. That said, Newton doesn't care, and your body remains in motion, accelerating downward.
The non-active saddle is "rigid" and there's nowhere for your body to go (the equal and opposite reaction). Newton's work is done and you continue on.
The active saddle, on the other hand (butt cheek), allows your body to continue in motion. The elastomer attempts to manage the shock but in the end all your weight ends up going into one rail, which ends up being unable to handle the load of your buttocks maximus which results in the single rail failing (bending). Newton smirks and snidely says "told you so!"

So that's my theory. My understanding of physics and gopher roll-overs is extremely limited, so take it with a bucket of salt. It's also why after my first SQ Lab saddle failed (active 611), I went non-active and never looked back.
Again, good luck.

 

[TheKaiser]

I've only seen reference to avtive saddles failing. Obviously non-active saddles could fail also, but I've never seen a report of that happening. My guess is that the rider who gets the failed saddle is below the weight limit but not radically below (as was my case at the time of my failure).

What follows is my theory on why active models bend vs non-active:

When you are seated and go over a bump/obstacle/gopher/etc your body follows Newton's first law and remains in motion. The bikes suspension does its thing and absorbs the shock. That said, Newton doesn't care, and your body remains in motion, accelerating downward.
The non-active saddle is "rigid" and there's nowhere for your body to go (the equal and opposite reaction). Newton's work is done and you continue on.
The active saddle, on the other hand (butt cheek), allows your body to continue in motion. The elastomer attempts to manage the shock but in the end all your weight ends up going into one rail, which ends up being unable to handle the load of your buttocks maximus which results in the single rail failing (bending). Newton smirks and snidely says "told you so!"

So that's my theory. My understanding of physics and gopher roll-overs is extremely limited, so take it with a bucket of salt. It's also why after my first SQ Lab saddle failed (active 611), I went non-active and never looked back.
Again, good luck.

Yeah, it's counterintuitive that adding elastomers for shock absorption would actually increase loading and stress on the rails, but weird things can happen. On further thought (and some of this may overlap with your hypothesis), it occurred to me that: A. the shock absorption of the Active saddle may encourage the rider to keep the saddle weighted over bumps more than on the regular saddle models and/or B. there could be some sort of additive effect of having the springiness of the saddle in series with the bike's suspension and tires. If you have ever watched any of the super slow-mo Pinkbike "huck to flat" videos, you will see how on encountering an impact, the tires compress first, but, before the suspension has even finished compressing, the tires are already rebounding, only to compress again as the suspension bottoms. These same sort of out of phase movements also are visible on the handlebars as they flex. I could imagine some sort of combo of forces of the tire, suspension, and saddle elastomer rebounding could combine to push the rails over their elastic limit.

Or, maybe SQlab just uses cheaper metal in the Active series of saddles?

 

[Eliadn]

If it's such a wide spread problem, why don't they change the rail material?