Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Click the "Create Account" button now to join.

To disable ads, please log-in.

Shop at TeamEstrogen.com for women's cycling apparel.

Results 1 to 6 of 6

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    50
    http://cw-x.com/ss

    Personally, I prefer seamless or flat seams as I want to avoid any friction on my skin.

    Also, search through http://www.roadrunnersports.com/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Utah, Gateway to Nevada, not to be confused with Idaho
    Posts
    1,872
    I started wearing the CW-X tights under my ski pants last year. I tele ski, so it's really quad intensive. For me, there was a noticable difference in fatigue level; I was able to ski longer (each day) than I had been able to without the tights.

    Now this may be because (1) I knew I had them on and therefore believed they were doing something, (2) I was just getting in better shape, or (3) they actually did something. I don't know the real answer. I do like the way they feel though; they are very supportive and for quad-dominant folks like me (another way of saying "thunder thighs" ), that's a plus. It won't hurt to try a pair if you have the $. They are very well made and I would certainly buy another pair.

    I just got some of the CW-X shorts from Sierra Trading Post but it's been too cold to wear them running. I have everything from Target Boutique knickers to the Hind Peak to Peak pant. Usually I get too warm in the Peak to Peak and just wear the standard Adidas running pant (not a tight) or the Brooks dryline tights. For me, the thinner the better; my main concern is having my knees covered.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •