Thanks for the thoughts, Ray, but I do not consider myself to be a casual, recreational rider, which is the target market for most if not all of these new saddle designs. Contradictory as it may seem, the harder and more rigid the saddle, the better it is for hard-core cycling. Let me explain.
In order to propel a bicycle, several factors must be overcome, including inertia, drag (wind resistance), weight, and friction. The more effort one can deliver to the pedals, the more power there is to overcome these factors. A healthy human can produce about 1.2 hp (0.89 kW) briefly (see orders of magnitude) and sustain about 0.1 hp (0.075 kW) indefinitely; trained athletes can manage up to about 2.5 hp (1.9 kW) briefly and 0.35 hp (0.26 kW) for a period of several hours. That's it; that's all you've got to get that bike from a standing start to easing on down the road, over hill and dale. So you obviously want to use it as efficiently as possible.
Another thing to consider is that a soft, spongy, cushy saddle absorbs a small amount of this energy in compressing that padding. Sure it ain't much, but when you've only got 1/10th of a horsepower to start with, you don't have that much to waste. So at some point in their career, every serious cyclist has sought out their own point on that fine line between comfort and efficiency — some go with rock-hard saddles
(and anyone who has every ridden a brand-new Brooks B17 saddle knows exactly what I mean!) while others go with more springy, spongy saddles and accept the sacrificing of some power in the name of comfort.
Then of course there's the problem of weight. The more spring, padding, and other gee-gaws there are, the more the saddle will end up weighing — and what's pushing all that weight down the road? That little 1/10th of a horsepower human, that's what. That's why, if you compare the saddles used by riders like Eddy Merckx, Fausto Coppi, or even Greg Lemond to the saddles today's riders are using on the Tour de France, for example, you'll see that the saddles the modern riders use are the epitome of minimalism.
And humans are nothing if not adaptable, and can become used to practically anything. People who work with their hands, for example, accept the pain until callouses form — which is the body's way of adapting. Shake hands with a career carpenter, for example, or check the fingertips of a long-time guitar player and you'll see what I mean. Going back to the example of the Brooks saddle, after a period of time
(which varies from one rider to another), it becomes 'broken in' to the rider — or the rider becomes broken in to it, take your pick — and the two become one efficient unit. In fact, it is not at all unheard of for a rider to switch saddles when buying a new bike, 'transplanting' the old, familiar saddle to his or her new ride.
So again, thanks for the heads-up, but I've found my soulmate of a saddle, and I doubt that I'll be trying any of these items at any time in the future.
-"BB"-