"Special Women's Section"

[Cataboo]

Crankin, I don't think people are saying you can't be a serious cyclist or racer on a WSD bike - I think it's the problem that the top of the line wsd bike by one brand is usually not as nice a bike as the top of the line men's bike. That was one of the comparison's in the special women's section... I think it was the men's trek vs. the women's... they had to swap the wheels and something else on the women's bike to make it comparable....

As for myself - I don't have a wsd and would do very badly on one, because I don't have a wsd body... However, my boyfriend would do great on a wsd, 'cause he's got a wsd body - 33" inseam on a 5'7-5'8 body.

Bike manufacturer's should just offer short vs. long torso versions of their bikes, instead of mens vs women's wsds with pink highlights somehow. Or baby blue.

Short reach brifters & shorter cranks should be standard on smaller frames whether or not they're wsd.... And you wouldn't necessarily have gotten short reach ones with a wsd, because a lot of them really aren't that well thought out (they're not reading team estrogen, apparently).

I usually just buy a bike knowing that I'm going to eventually replace the saddle, cranks, handlebars, etc. - but a lot of people on here would argue that's why you should get a bike fitting by a good bike person when buying your bike at a lbs, so they'll swap all this stuff out and dial it in for you.

[ttaylor508]

I actually think that by the magazine adding a women's section, it is an indication that bike manufacturers are in fact listening and realize that there is a market out there for serious women cyclist. I know some of you don't think you need women specific products, but I am one (maybe the minority) that really likes that ever so slight touch of pink on my all black bike and though I probably could have fit on a men's frame just fine, I liked the women specific design, both the way it looks and feels. My only complaint about the women's section in that magazine is that I wish it would have had more editorial content, but I am still glad they had included it.

[ny biker]

I actually think that by the magazine adding a women's section, it is an indication that bike manufacturers are in fact listening and realize that there is a market out there for serious women cyclist. I know some of you don't think you need women specific products, but I am one (maybe the minority) that really likes that ever so slight touch of pink on my all black bike and though I probably could have fit on a men's frame just fine, I liked the women specific design, both the way it looks and feels. My only complaint about the women's section in that magazine is that I wish it would have had more editorial content, but I am still glad they had included it.

If bike manufacturers - and magazine publishers - are in fact listening and do realize that there is a market for serous women cyclists, there would not be a special women's section once a year. There would be more content in every issue of the magazine that recognizes the fact that many of the cyclists in their audience are women.

[Norse]

Many women's bodies, mine included, do not fit on a WSD bike. So if that's the primary focus of the bike shop or magazine, it doesn't do much for me. Now, clothing, shoes, helmets, sunglasses... that fit women, that's what I would like to see more focus on.

[malkin]

The magazine that shows up most inexplicably here is Family Circle, which is always like that. Of course with the addition of useful advice about what to do when kids get grumpy and refuse to change their socks and stuff like that.

And how to decorate cupcakes.