Terry 1/2 price sale - and shorts question

Did people notice that terrybicycles.com is having a 2-day sale where EVERYTHING IS 50% OFF AND SHIPPING IS FREE?

I have several pairs of Shebeest shorts that I like; what I'm looking for now is a high quality pair of shorts that will be great for *very* long rides (90+ miles). I've been lusting after the Shebeest Ultra D, but have yet to find it on deep sale. Thus my interest in the Terry shorts. (I like the various Shebeest chamois and heard that the Terry ones are similar? I do have a Terry Coolweather Tight and like that chamois...)

ANYWAY...Can anyone explain the difference between the Terry Bella Short and the T-short? The Bella is more expensive. The Bella is marketed for women who "ride a lot" whereas the T-short is marketed as a long-distance short. I don't really get it. I do both...ride a lot, *and* require a short for long distance.

Thanks gals...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mariposa

Did people notice that terrybicycles.com is having a 2-day sale where EVERYTHING IS 50% OFF AND SHIPPING IS FREE?

---

Did people notice?....theres a HUGE thread raging about it right now under the main cycling forum! ;)

I've never tried the Terry Bella shorts. But I do have both the Terry T short and the SheBeest Ultra D shorts. The Ultra D's are good chamois for long distances- they work well for me for 30-70 miles. The T shorts are substantially less dense chamois, really more puffy than dense- only good for like 30-40 mile rides for me. Your mileage may vary! ;)

I don't have the Bella, but I do have a 2007 low rise short. I believe that the Bella short and the low rise short are made with the same material. If I'm right, then the fabric of the Bella (and low rise) is significantly thinner than that of the T-short. It's really nice and luxurious feeling though.

I don't know how my low rise chamois compares to the Bella, but I do know that it is much nicer over long distances than the T-short. It's not as thick and puffy, but it is denser and holds up well when sat on for long periods.

I'm not a fan of the t-short, but I do really, really like my low rise. Because of this, I'd likely try the Bella if it weren't so long (I've got super short legs). My guess is that the Bella is a better bet for long rides - particularly if you are talking warm temps, too.

I love the Bellas; even though I am short and the legs are a bit long on me. But the material is smooth and holds you in and the pad is much better than the T shorts. I wore T shorts for 4 years and the difference is amazing. It is worth the price difference.
I have one pair of Shebeest Triple S. The chamois is "lumpier" and i had some chafing roblems with them at first. But now the are fine. I wear them on longer rides when it's really hot.

I placed my order for the Bella short back in Sept. maybe, and they were out of stock and would be available in October. Beginning of Nov. I received my medium Bella's. Oh my god. I had to jump off the bed to get into them. Sent them back for a size Large. This transaction took like 3 days total, I was impressed. I ended up sending them back becuase when I bent over, the belly roll that I have seemed to keep flipping out of the very nice contoured front piece they have. The material was almost form fitting and felt like they molded comfortably to my chubby legs but I just found it uncomfortable for that fat flopping sensation. I really liked the chamois that is in the Bella's. The pair of knickers that I own from Terry also have that same chamois in them and they are comfortable, did 77 miles and no chafing or irritation. I ordered a pair of the T short during the sale and another pair of Knickers. The T shorts can no more than go back if need be after reading the posts from this thread. I assumed the chamois would be the same. But will have to wait until my order gets here.