cycle shorts question

I understand that the main benefit to cycling shorts is the absence of seams; however several of you have said that you wear them under normal shorts or trousers, doesn’t this negate the benefit?

If it doesn’t, can’t you get the same effect by simply not wearing any underwear under normal shorts or trousers?

It certainly doesn’t negate the benefit. It’s a lot more comfortable wearing biking shorts, even when wearing normal shorts/trousers over the top.

Never analysed this too carefully, but it’s not just the seams coming into play, the padded area provides support, and wicks sweat away. The sweat wicking properties alone probably help a lot with the problem of chafing. Another benefit is that they’re held tightly to the body, meaning you don’t have them rubbing to and fro.

Having said all that, it’s probably not the best idea to wear them under shorts/trousers with large seams (e.g. jeans).

I find that the area of the outer clothing I wear stays more stationary, and the bike shorts move within them more, so probably a good idea to wear looser clothing.

Re: cycle shorts question

onewheeldave wondered:
> I understand that the main benefit to cycling shorts is the absence of
> seams; however several of you have said that you wear them under
> normal shorts or trousers, doesn’t this negate the benefit?

Not completely, though you still wouldn’t want to wear something with
thick seams like jeans.

There are 2 other significant benefits to bear in mind. The first is
the padding - no explanation required. The second is that they’re
skintight. This means that they move with your skin, rather than over
the skin. Clothes moving over the skin can chafe, clothes moving with
the skin don’t. It also means that you can hoist your genitals up away
from the saddle and they’ll stay put (at least for a couple of miles).

> If it doesn’t, can’t you get the same effect by simply not wearing any
> underwear under normal shorts or trousers?

I rode my first century (admittedly on a bike, not a yike) wearing
ordinary trousers with no underwear. I can safely say that riding with
no underwear is much, much more comfortable than riding with underwear.
But lycra shorts are much more comfortable still.


Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny )
Recumbent cycle page: http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/
“He who dares not offend cannot be honest.” - Thomas Paine

Re: cycle shorts question

On Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:48:44 -0500, onewheeldave
<onewheeldave.oo02d@timelimit.unicyclist.com> wrote:

>I understand that the main benefit to cycling shorts is the absence of
>seams;
Hmmm. Other benefits include:

  1. the ‘slippery’ outside so there no rubbing directly against the
    skin;
  2. the padding which adds a lot of comfort and soaks up sweat;
  3. the tightness helps in keeping the family jewels out of the sitting
    area.

>however several of you have said that you wear them under normal
>shorts or trousers, doesn’t this negate the benefit?
No, especially if you have the padded variety of cycling shorts
(recommended), you wouldn’t feel any seams of your normal shorts. The
SEAT might feel them but so what?

>If it doesn’t, can’t you get the same effect by simply not wearing any
>underwear under normal shorts or trousers?
Again no. In that case you would sit directly on the seams of your
normal shorts which would be quite uncomfortable.

Klaas Bil - Newsgroup Addict

Different drummer? I’m my own band!