Long shorts or short shorts?

[tattiefritter]

I prefer to wear longer shorts as well as my thighs just eat short shorts for fun on a bike. It ends up being really uncomfortable as they ride up whereas longer shorts stay put. I've worn short shorts for spinning as its the only time I get too warm, I had to use BodyGlide as they chafed badly when they rode up. I have the same problem with baggies as a lot of companies seem to think all women want really short shorts, not me. I will be looking into buying some longer baggies for my biking holiday this year.

My thighs are fairly muscular (the shorts don't stand a chance) and I don't blob out of them too much, don't care if I do either, a friend of mine is larger than me and wears short shorts and she flabs out a bit but doesn't give two hoots as she likes them - they still ride up her legs but it doesn't seem to bother her, it would drive me nuts and would chafe like hell on a longer ride. Buy what feels most comfortable, if possible try them on a bike to see how they feel - a bit of furious pedalling always moves short shorts for me.

[doc]

I think the "compression" and "muscle support" is a bunch of hooey. Since when do the strongest muscle in your whole body need support or actually get support from some thin lycra?
I like all short lengths, but admit the shorter ones do need the occasional tug to stay where they are supposed to be. But at 5'2" I would think 8" would count as long on you.

[Nanci]

I am 5'2" so have short legs with big quads and plenty of fat! I like the longer shorts, 8", and have even considered checking out the Terry Long shorts, if I wasn't afraid of hating the chamois. I _do_ think the compression of the lycra supports the muscles. Or maybe it just contains them and makes them feel good. I don't care about tan lines because A. I'm not a shorts person anyway, (Probably because I hate my legs) so wear pants unless it's in the 90's or I'm by water and B. I think bike tan lines are cool. I'd probably wear kinckers on the bike all year if I thought I wouldn't boil. Doesn't black make your legs look longer/thinner?

But- I have a pair of Trashy Cat shorts that are shorter- maybe 7"? that I love- they're the sunflower ones, so I just wear them and try to forget about the sausage effect!! Whatever, at least my outfit's cute! I probably look exactly like one of the models on the website when I'm wearing it! ;-)

I guess I can appreciate short shorts on cute skinny 20 year olds that have nice flat tummies and Sheryl Crow legs, though. Looks nice on them.

Nanci

[Kimmyt]

Long shorts for me. I had a pair of short ones, mid-thigh, and they cut into all my loose jiggly-bits and made me feel uncomfortable and gave me annoying elastic lines. The longer ones go down to where my legs actually get muscular so no lines from the elastic!

[fatbottomedgurl]

I think I'll stick with the longer shorts, I have baggies that I tug on so I never wear them. Nanci: what is it about the Terry chamois you hate beacause I was thinking about them too?

I wish I had thin thighs/ flat tummy, but I didn't when I was 20 and now I'm over 40...sigh. But my calves are rock-hard already.

[caligurl]

wow... ok... i'm the lone dissenter! i prefer short shorts! the shorter the better! my current favorites (performance ultras) have a 5.5 inseam... and i even roll that up! (kinda roll up and over on itself)....

i HATE tanlines.. and for me, personally, there is nothing worse than my shorts tanline being below my "normal" shorts hemline!

the only time i don't roll up my shorts is if i'm riding after dusk/dark or with leg warmers!

oh.. and i'm 5'2"... so short, too! that doesn't help with the shorts length issue!

(that's one of the main reasons i don't wear short sleeved jerseys too often... i HATE the farmer arm tanlines!)

[Eden]

I thought I was the only one - I too wear shorter inseam shorts (6"), not because of tan lines - I think of them kind of like a cyclist secret handshake, but mainly because I am short and I don't like knicker length shorts. I however do not like super short shorts (sure at my height 5' even they are hard to find, but I think its PI's Sugar shorts that even I find to be too short)- if my saddle has any contact with the leg elastic of my shorts (or my skin) it drives me bananas so they at least have to be long enough to clear the tip of my saddle if that makes any sense.

[Nanci]

Well, I don't _know_ that I would hate it, but:

PI 2006 knickers, new "improved" Touring chamois- hate (giant and mushy)

Bera Exte Ondo 3/4- Giant mushy chamois (hate)

Canari Gel Knickers- VERY nice chamois (thin gel covered by cuddly black polarfleece), maternity-style rise!!!!! like up to my boobs!!!, and only four panels. Hate.

Castelli Zen Knickers- not quite as large, not quite as mushy chamois- didn't like chamois, though the rest of the styling was very nice. Sold at a nice discount. Hope the new owner likes them.

Shebeest Knickers from several years ago- caused diaper butt by large chamois and too-stretchy fabric. Never liked, gave away.

Loius Garneau knickers- in the mail. I hope they are ok...

So you can see why I'm reluctant to try new things at the moment.

Why, why, why is it so hard to put a nice, not mushy, not gigantic, without weird seams, chamois in a pair of knickers??? Or anything?

Why, when people put something on their website, and state it is the 2005 3D chamois, do they then send you the 2006 Touring chamois, which I was specifically trying to avoid?

A chamois needs to sit there and not move, not be mushing and wrinkling and bunching and all that. Too soft and billowy and covering your entire asz and halfway down the inner thighs is not a good thing!!! Less is more!! But maybe it sells well. And the manufacturers are all doing the same thing in a slightly different manner.

I just want it to be ergonomic with different heights according to what part it covers sit-bones, edges, sensitive bits), semi-firm, and reasonably-sized, not huge!!

Trashy Cat Satin Shorts where ideal, but they have mysteriously never re-stocked any more of the perfect shorts. :-(

Nanci

[Blueberry]

Shebeest Knickers from several years ago- caused diaper butt by large chamois and too-stretchy fabric. Never liked, gave away.
Nanci

I was the *very lucky* recipient of these, and I love them

They're the pair I'll do laundry to have ready to ride the next day (and that's saying a lot, because laundry most assuredly cuts into biking time)

I love this Chamois - they've changed it now This one was perfect for me - no diaper butt, and I love the soft fabric. Just goes to show we're all different

Thanks again Nanci!!

[Grog]

I think the "compression" and "muscle support" is a bunch of hooey. Since when do the strongest muscle in your whole body need support or actually get support from some thin lycra?

Well, I personally am also skeptical, but it seems like a claim serious enough for the racing authorities here in BC to have banned tights and knee/leg warmers at races because of the undue advantage some fabric could give to the riders.

That's annoying at the beginning of the season when it's cold. :S

(But I don't race, so I don't care that much.)

[Eden]

Well, I personally am also skeptical, but it seems like a claim serious enough for the racing authorities here in BC to have banned tights and knee/leg warmers at races because of the undue advantage some fabric could give to the riders.

That's annoying at the beginning of the season when it's cold. :S

(But I don't race, so I don't care that much.)

That sounds nuts!!! I've worn my tights in most of the early season races here and my knee warmers in the rest. Its been much too chilly to go without. Some of the pro teams make their guys wear knee warmers until the temperature reaches 55 or 60 degrees as they think the cold can cause knee damage!

I do believe that full body skin suits are not allowed in TT's, but that is because it is felt that they give an aerodynamic advantage and TT's are sometimes determined by fractions of seconds.

[DirtDiva]

I have the same problem with baggies as a lot of companies seem to think all women want really short shorts, not me. I will be looking into buying some longer baggies for my biking holiday this year.

I saw some Scott ones in Evans that looked longer (maybe they were these ones..?), but they cost more than I had to spend (I think they were sixty/sixty-five quid), so I didn't look too closely, let alone try them on. I did try on some longer-ish Altura ones, but they didn't fit right - the liners were too big for the outers. I've tried on a lot of pairs of baggies where the liners don't seem to be made for the same person as the outers. What's up with that? there's some pretty basic physics involved in something that's going to fit inside something else needing to be the smaller of the two objects. I did eventually get some Oakleys for 40% off though. (They're shorter than I would have ideally liked, but they're not too bad on a pipsqueak like me.)

[bcipam]

For a long time I bought men's shorts cause they were longer - women's short tended to be very short (I'm 5'8" and have long thighs) for me. I have been buying Terry's long T-Short. Love them. The length is good if you are tall. Note its a fairly padded short but the padding "adhusts" after a ride. I still wear my short-shorts in spin class or in the summer when working on a tan - hate for all that white to start just above the knee!!!!