TechFrog
New Member
Got my Sargent seat on Saturday, just in time for a 200 mile day across a very hot Southern California trek. My initial reaction was: "wow, this foam is firm!" The first few miles left me wondering if there really was a benefit. Of course, the first few miles on the stock seat was never a problem for me. Let me also say, I'm about 210 lbs with a shortish inseam of about 30.5 inches. That being said, I was pleased that the Sargent seat seemed no higher than the stocker. About 50 miles into my trip, i started feeling a bit sore in a couple spots. By this time on the stock seat, I'd already want a break. So, so far, the Sargent seemed better than stock for the distance of toleration. What I found interesting is that with the stock seat, the pressure points were in a bit closer. The Sargent, being dished, moved my pressure points out a bit. Like an inch out per butt cheek. I'm 51, and someone mentioned that we middled-aged peeps might have a bit less natural padding down there and I might agree. I'm a husky guy, but I don't have too much of an ***, so I can't fill up that seat's dish. that might mean without a full custom made seat, I may only be getting incremental improvements.
So, my take on my 200 mile ride stretched over 4 hours? I couldn't wait to get off my NC. I rode my 2008 V-Strom to Utah and back a few years ago, and don't remember such butt pains. True, the Sargent took longer to hurt my bottom side than the stocker, but I'm not sure it was a $300 improvement. I like the seat on my PCX150 better and I've done 4 and 5-hour rides on it.
I'm going to put the stock seat back on and remind myself of how that felt, then I'll decide. One thing for sure is, if I use either the stock or the Sargent, I'm likely going to use my Airhawk for anything over 50 miles.
If I had to score the seats, I'll give you long and short distance scoring on a scale of 1-10
For in-city, or short distances: Stock Seat: 8. Sargent Seat 8. (I see little or no benefit for the Sargent for short runs)
For long-distance comfort: Stock Seat: 5. Sargent Seat: 7.5. Stock Seat with Airhawk: 9. ( Airhawk's do help, but you feel a bit disconnected from the bike and it's a hassle to tote around).
I haven't yet tried the Airhawk on the Sargent, but I bought the Sargent so I didn't have to use that. I might settle for a sheepskin butt pad on the Sargent (like someone else mentioned). That's likely what I'll end up with.
Damn my boney butt!
So, my take on my 200 mile ride stretched over 4 hours? I couldn't wait to get off my NC. I rode my 2008 V-Strom to Utah and back a few years ago, and don't remember such butt pains. True, the Sargent took longer to hurt my bottom side than the stocker, but I'm not sure it was a $300 improvement. I like the seat on my PCX150 better and I've done 4 and 5-hour rides on it.
I'm going to put the stock seat back on and remind myself of how that felt, then I'll decide. One thing for sure is, if I use either the stock or the Sargent, I'm likely going to use my Airhawk for anything over 50 miles.
If I had to score the seats, I'll give you long and short distance scoring on a scale of 1-10
For in-city, or short distances: Stock Seat: 8. Sargent Seat 8. (I see little or no benefit for the Sargent for short runs)
For long-distance comfort: Stock Seat: 5. Sargent Seat: 7.5. Stock Seat with Airhawk: 9. ( Airhawk's do help, but you feel a bit disconnected from the bike and it's a hassle to tote around).
I haven't yet tried the Airhawk on the Sargent, but I bought the Sargent so I didn't have to use that. I might settle for a sheepskin butt pad on the Sargent (like someone else mentioned). That's likely what I'll end up with.
Damn my boney butt!