Printable View
... and that this article does not tell you either. Is it just me or is there no mention of saddle fit? Yes, bike fit and chamois butter are important but what about the saddle itself or is that just me:
http://girlbikelove.com/2012/08/thin...nmentionables/
Hmmm, easy as 1,2,3,...
Written for an audience of normal, top of the curve readers I guess.
"The Journal of Sexual Medicine studied female cyclists who rode at least 16 kilometers a week, four weeks per month."Quote:
Originally Posted by malkin
16 kilometers a week is about 8 miles. Hardly a great study. :cool:
it does say "AT LEAST"
I had to comment. That's too much - that saddles were not mentioned.
Heh, actually it's almost 10 (as a runner knowing that conversion is pretty crucial...every mile matters!), but, yeah. Almost 10 miles/week is practically negligible mileage. They need to be studying women who ride at least 5x that in a typical week to really have any sort of comparison with non-cyclists, I'd think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trek420
And the saddle is at least as important as the shorts. It took me a LONG while to find the best combo of both--and my saddle is still not perfect. I *know* exactly what I need, but no one actually makes my perfect saddle.
Ah, the illusive perfect saddle, shorts synergy. :rolleyes: :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by zoom-zoom
If only Gore weren't so freakin' $$...and they never seem to really go on sale like PI stuff. *grumble*Quote:
Originally Posted by Trek420
I get that blog on my FB. Kind of shook my head when I read the 16K a week.
The language that is used when talking about cycling is geared to "regular" people. Regular people who like to ride, probably more of the urban cyclists/fashionista cyclist variety.