Shebeest S Pro Short

I finally found another pair of shorts that I like as much as the Terry Bellas. I have one pair of the Double D shorts they make and while they are great for very hot/long rides, I find the chamois to be too thick for "regular" rides of 25 miles, etc. Then I bought a pair of the Triple S shorts, which caused me nothing but pain because the chamois just didn't come up far enough in the front. The S Pros solved that problem. They have a wide, elastic-free waistband that is low, below the waist, which I love, but the back is at the regular place it should be. And the material has plenty of lycra, which is a must for me.

i like the wide waistband but when you say "below the waist" does that cover your navel?
I feel like my belly is hanging out in those low cut shorts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zen

I feel like my belly is hanging out in those low cut shorts.

---

+1, and I'm really short-waisted. The SSS shorts are almost too low for me. I prefer low-rise jeans, but not cycling shorts. I can't imagine how it must be for someone who actually has more than two inches between her ribs and her hipbones (not an exaggeration :rolleyes:).

The waist does not cover your navel; I know that a lot of people don't like this, but it doesn't bother me at all. I am just happy that I found another chamois and style that I can buy. It's boring having all of the same shorts.

I'm just sitting here shaking my head...

I need some new shorts. I have a long torso/waist. I love my low rise jeans. I just think the higher waist "mom jeans" make my pear shape curves look even bigger. Something about the jeans at the hip bones works better.

But, omg... the low cut cycle shorts... or without elastic... ick... I feel totally naked... and worries me to death about not being compressed. I know they make this style without elastic waist band all the way around for those that don't like it cutting into them. I would much rather be marked up with elastic post ride. I have this need to feel totally "locked and loaded" when I go out lol!:o:rolleyes:

I like the idea of the chamois being longer though... *sigh* think I'm long everywhere plus the vertical waist.

Is the rise really a full inch shorter than the SSS as the product description says?

On short-waisted me, the SSS are "peace rise." An inch shorter than that - "palm rise" - would nearly mean I'd have to wax. :eek: I don't even wear jeans that low.

I just keep asking because I need a new pair of shorts and the rest of the product description appeals to me. But I can't believe they're so low.

OK, I wore them again yesterday for a 25 mile ride. Yes, they are a little lower than the sss shorts. But, to answer Miranda's question, they do hold you in/compress because the lycra content is very high. In fact, that is my #1 requirement in a short, besides the chamois. I hate having an elastic waistband. It constricts me and I am one of those people who gets "lines" that last all day from elastic that is tight. If you mean you want the shorts to "hold in" your stomach area, well these shorts won't work, for the area right below the navel, because they are lower.
Also, I am long waisted, even though I am short and wear petite sizes. I often have trouble wearing dresses in my size, that have a defined waist, because the petite sized dresses have waists that come up where my chest starts! But regular sized dresses are huge on me.
I guess I am the only fan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crankin

I finally found another pair of shorts that I like as much as the Terry Bellas. I have one pair of the Double D shorts they make and while they are great for very hot/long rides, I find the chamois to be too thick for "regular" rides of 25 miles, etc. Then I bought a pair of the Triple S shorts, which caused me nothing but pain because the chamois just didn't come up far enough in the front. The S Pros solved that problem. They have a wide, elastic-free waistband that is low, below the waist, which I love, but the back is at the regular place it should be. And the material has plenty of lycra, which is a must for me.

---

I checked them out here on TE, and I think they look GREAT. I think we are about the same size -- did you get the XS? I believe the ad said to size up if you're between sizes, so I wasn't sure if XS or S would be best. I can't really justify $100 for a pair of shorts right now, but will keep my eye out in case they go on sale at some point. Or maybe I'll win the TE shopping spree! :D

I did buy the x smalls. I wondered about that, but I would rather have to pull them a little over my hips than have them too big. I thought that the chamois in the smalls would be too big and you know what that does...

Thanks...I'll keep that in mind in case I order some! I have bike shorts from XS to M, so I am never quite sure which size to get. The mediums are Performance Ultras from a few years back, and I definitely could have gotten a small...the chamois is not too large, but I do have some puckering on the back seams. Still, they ran really small. The XS are PIs, and the Smalls are Terry. Sizing...what a pain! :confused:

I ordered another pair of the S Pros, as I had to throw out my Ultra Ds after getting a saddle sore for the third time after wearing them. The chamois is just too padded. When I put the new pair of S Pros on, I swear, they come up a little higher than my first pair! Not a huge difference, but they feel a bit bigger overall. Very strange.
Emily, I wear x smalls in Terry, but we might just be shaped differently, even though we are about the same size.

[QUOTE=Crankin;437884Emily, I wear x smalls in Terry, but we might just be shaped differently, even though we are about the same size.[/QUOTE]

Very true, and I also think there may have been some "size creep" over the years. My Small Terrys are about four years old, so I would probably order an XS today as they are certainly not my smallest shorts that I feel comfortable in.