"Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"

https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/

I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 16:57:55 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>"Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>
>https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>
>I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.

There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of different kinds of bikes
available. Same with bicycle suitable clothing. ....and I'm very sure
that most people don't need a busbody Lifestyle Editor guiding them to
something that makes sense for them.

On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>
> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>
> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.

I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
riding. That's fine with me.

I may quibble about the "functions well" point, in that ISTM the
expectations or standards have gotten extreme in recent decades. I mean,
reviews now seem to discuss shifting action the way guitar aficionados
describe the feel of guitar necks, action and strings. But we're not
playing Bach; we're just shifting gears. How good does it have to be? I
like the engineering maxim "Good enough is perfect." I don't think top
tier components have really been necessary for most users.

But for decades I've said I prefer bikes that are versatile, that can
carry loads when desired, that can be tuned and fixed by their owners,
that accept wider tires and fenders, etc. Oh, and that most of the "go
fast improvements" make no detectable difference. I think he's agreeing
with me.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>
>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>
>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>
> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
> riding. That's fine with me.
>
Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it’s often not that clear.

It’s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
that’s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.

MTB well baggie clothing has a looser fit.

It’s enough of a problem that a company was founded just for larger
lads/lasses https://fatladattheback.com.

> I may quibble about the "functions well" point, in that ISTM the
> expectations or standards have gotten extreme in recent decades. I mean,
> reviews now seem to discuss shifting action the way guitar aficionados
> describe the feel of guitar necks, action and strings. But we're not
> playing Bach; we're just shifting gears. How good does it have to be? I
> like the engineering maxim "Good enough is perfect." I don't think top
> tier components have really been necessary for most users.
>
> But for decades I've said I prefer bikes that are versatile, that can
> carry loads when desired, that can be tuned and fixed by their owners,
> that accept wider tires and fenders, etc. Oh, and that most of the "go
> fast improvements" make no detectable difference. I think he's agreeing
> with me.
>
Roger Merriman

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>
>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>
>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>
>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>
>Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it’s often not that clear.
>
>It’s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>that’s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.

What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
shoes.

<SNIP>

>Roger Merriman

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 21:43:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>
>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>
>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>
>I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>accept various styles of bicycling,

Most of us do, maybe you could give it a try. It doesn't hurt at all.

> and that not everyone wants to be a
>racer.

Understated...

>Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>equipment that functions well

Plenty of that available, and not the cheap Chinese crap at Wallmart,
either.

>and clothing that's comfortable for
>riding.

I see massive amounts of that. You can pay a hundred dollars for a
"cycling jersey," or you can pay thirty dollars for a non-cycling
shirt that functions exactly the same. It's your choice.

>That's fine with me.

When has other peoples choices ever been fine with you?

>I may quibble about the "functions well" point, in that ISTM the
>expectations or standards have gotten extreme in recent decades. I mean,
>reviews now seem to discuss shifting action the way guitar aficionados
>describe the feel of guitar necks, action and strings. But we're not
>playing Bach; we're just shifting gears.

I really like my trigger shifters. They've improved my enjoyment and
the safety of my rides.

>How good does it have to be?

That seems to have been your overall philosophy on life in general.

Striving for self-improvement is a common trait, probably more so with
men than with women.

> I
>like the engineering maxim "Good enough is perfect." I don't think top
>tier components have really been necessary for most users.

Most users will decide that for themselves. What you think about what
other people want or need is none of your business.

>But for decades I've said I prefer bikes that are versatile, that can
>carry loads when desired, that can be tuned and fixed by their owners,
>that accept wider tires and fenders, etc. Oh, and that most of the "go
>fast improvements" make no detectable difference.

Some people like to push the preverbal envelope. That you don't have a
desire to better yourself is insignificant.

>I think he's agreeing
>with me.

More likely you're agreeing with him. He doesn't know that you exist.

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>
>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>
>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>
>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>
>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it’s often not that clear.
>>
>> It’s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>> that’s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>
> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
> shoes.

Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
sweat, I like the “technical” t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
back.

And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I’d assume recumbents and
road would change some of this.
>
> <SNIP>
>
>> Roger Merriman
>
Roger Merriman

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>
>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>
>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>
>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>
>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>
>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>> shoes.
>
>Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>sweat, I like the “technical” t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>back.

I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
or bottoms, either.

>And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I’d assume recumbents and
>road would change some of this.

I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
Catrike stickers.

>> <SNIP>
>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>
>Roger Merriman
>

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>>
>>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>>
>>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>>
>>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>>> shoes.
>>
>> Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>> sweat, I like the “technical” t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>> cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>> back.
>
> I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
> or bottoms, either.
>
>> And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>> chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I’d assume recumbents and
>> road would change some of this.
>
> I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
> bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
> products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
> Catrike stickers.

For a recumbent that’s a less stretched position, ie will not need a
cyclist cut, nor do you need to have logos plastered all over, that’s more
of a older roadie thing ie folks who where cycling in the 80/90’s in
general it’s fairly muted.

MTB baggies are less restrictive than walking shorts, and have reinforced
areas, again riding on tarmac and with a recumbent that’s not needed.

>
>
>>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>
Roger Merriman

On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>
> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>
> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.

ISTM Mr. Frazelle is looking to create controversy where there is
none...really.

My first clue was when he wrote "the majority of cycling-specific
apparel that’s available is lycra and cut to fit the athlete’s body,"

The majority of cycling clothing is fit to what is known as a 'club
cut'. This clothing is designed to be larger in the midsection,
specifically allowing for 'regular size'. There are very few cycling
clothing manufacturers that sell what is known as the 'race cut' by
default. The issue here is that Mr. Frazelle is the stereotypical
American. From his pics I can surmise that even when he was fit he was a
husky gentleman, these days he's probably carrying more weight than he
should. BTW - I see plenty of and baggy clothes on the trails by me,
worn by hipster types as a protest to the lycra dogma, and many of these
guys can drop me on a technical trail like a stone.

I think it's unfortunate that he claims _every_ time he rides he
witnesses snobbery. That isn't my experience, and when I've been with
riders who treat non-competitive cyclists like that, I don't ride with
them any longer. At least in my area, recreational cyclists aren't
treated any differently. In fact, I've seen more disdain towards _my_
ilk than the casual rider out for enjoyment, especially when they have
kids in tow.

I don't know where Mr. Frazelle lives, but ISTM he's riding in the wrong
places.

--
Add xx to reply

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:34:56 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>>>
>>>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>>>
>>>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>>>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>>>> shoes.
>>>
>>> Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>>> sweat, I like the ?technical? t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>>> cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>>> back.
>>
>> I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
>> or bottoms, either.
>>
>>> And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>>> chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I?d assume recumbents and
>>> road would change some of this.
>>
>> I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
>> bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
>> products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
>> Catrike stickers.
>
>For a recumbent that’s a less stretched position, ie will not need a
>cyclist cut, nor do you need to have logos plastered all over, that’s more
>of a older roadie thing ie folks who where cycling in the 80/90’s in
>general it’s fairly muted.

I rode two wheelers for longer than I've ridden a recumbent.

>MTB baggies are less restrictive than walking shorts, and have reinforced
>areas, again riding on tarmac and with a recumbent that’s not needed.

The only differences I see are that MTB baggies have butt pads, that
and they cost a lot more.

>>
>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>
>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>>
>Roger Merriman
>

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 10:54:23 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>
>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>
>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>
>ISTM Mr. Frazelle is looking to create controversy where there is
>none...really.
>
>My first clue was when he wrote "the majority of cycling-specific
>apparel that’s available is lycra and cut to fit the athlete’s body,"
>
>The majority of cycling clothing is fit to what is known as a 'club
>cut'. This clothing is designed to be larger in the midsection,
>specifically allowing for 'regular size'. There are very few cycling
>clothing manufacturers that sell what is known as the 'race cut' by
>default. The issue here is that Mr. Frazelle is the stereotypical
>American. From his pics I can surmise that even when he was fit he was a
>husky gentleman, these days he's probably carrying more weight than he
>should. BTW - I see plenty of and baggy clothes on the trails by me,
>worn by hipster types as a protest to the lycra dogma, and many of these
>guys can drop me on a technical trail like a stone.
>
>I think it's unfortunate that he claims _every_ time he rides he
>witnesses snobbery. That isn't my experience, and when I've been with
>riders who treat non-competitive cyclists like that, I don't ride with
>them any longer. At least in my area, recreational cyclists aren't
>treated any differently. In fact, I've seen more disdain towards _my_
>ilk than the casual rider out for enjoyment, especially when they have
>kids in tow.
>
>I don't know where Mr. Frazelle lives, but ISTM he's riding in the wrong
>places.

+1

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:34:56 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>>>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>>>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>>>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>>>>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>>>>> shoes.
>>>>
>>>> Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>>>> sweat, I like the ?technical? t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>>>> cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>>>> back.
>>>
>>> I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
>>> or bottoms, either.
>>>
>>>> And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>>>> chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I?d assume recumbents and
>>>> road would change some of this.
>>>
>>> I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
>>> bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
>>> products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
>>> Catrike stickers.
>>
>> For a recumbent that’s a less stretched position, ie will not need a
>> cyclist cut, nor do you need to have logos plastered all over, that’s more
>> of a older roadie thing ie folks who where cycling in the 80/90’s in
>> general it’s fairly muted.
>
> I rode two wheelers for longer than I've ridden a recumbent.
>
>> MTB baggies are less restrictive than walking shorts, and have reinforced
>> areas, again riding on tarmac and with a recumbent that’s not needed.
>
> The only differences I see are that MTB baggies have butt pads, that
> and they cost a lot more.

Most folks will use padded Lycra shorts or tights under the Baggies which
will be more flexible and have reinforced areas and made with robust and
fast drying materials.

I have experimented with non cycling shorts etc on the commute and even
there they got worn though fairly rapidly, ie few months.

Though have discovered MTB trousers that look like walking trousers or
similar so work well on and off the bike for work.
>
>>>
>>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>
Roger Merriman

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 17:43:47 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:34:56 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>>>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>>>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>>>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>>>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>>>>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>>>>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>>>>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>>>>>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>>>>>> shoes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>>>>> sweat, I like the ?technical? t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>>>>> cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>>>>> back.
>>>>
>>>> I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
>>>> or bottoms, either.
>>>>
>>>>> And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>>>>> chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I?d assume recumbents and
>>>>> road would change some of this.
>>>>
>>>> I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
>>>> bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
>>>> products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
>>>> Catrike stickers.
>>>
>>> For a recumbent that?s a less stretched position, ie will not need a
>>> cyclist cut, nor do you need to have logos plastered all over, that?s more
>>> of a older roadie thing ie folks who where cycling in the 80/90?s in
>>> general it?s fairly muted.
>>
>> I rode two wheelers for longer than I've ridden a recumbent.
>>
>>> MTB baggies are less restrictive than walking shorts, and have reinforced
>>> areas, again riding on tarmac and with a recumbent that?s not needed.
>>
>> The only differences I see are that MTB baggies have butt pads, that
>> and they cost a lot more.
>
>Most folks will use padded Lycra shorts or tights under the Baggies which
>will be more flexible and have reinforced areas and made with robust and
>fast drying materials.

I bought a pair of padded pants a long time ago when I was riding my
old Giant. They didn't help.

>I have experimented with non cycling shorts etc on the commute and even
>there they got worn though fairly rapidly, ie few months.
>
>Though have discovered MTB trousers that look like walking trousers or
>similar so work well on and off the bike for work.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>
>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>>
>Roger Merriman
>

On 4/12/2024 1:17 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 17:43:47 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:34:56 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>>>>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>>>>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>>>>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>>>>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>>>>>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>>>>>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>>>>>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>>>>>>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>>>>>>> shoes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>>>>>> sweat, I like the ?technical? t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>>>>>> cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>>>>>> back.
>>>>>
>>>>> I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
>>>>> or bottoms, either.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>>>>>> chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I?d assume recumbents and
>>>>>> road would change some of this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
>>>>> bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
>>>>> products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
>>>>> Catrike stickers.
>>>>
>>>> For a recumbent that?s a less stretched position, ie will not need a
>>>> cyclist cut, nor do you need to have logos plastered all over, that?s more
>>>> of a older roadie thing ie folks who where cycling in the 80/90?s in
>>>> general it?s fairly muted.
>>>
>>> I rode two wheelers for longer than I've ridden a recumbent.
>>>
>>>> MTB baggies are less restrictive than walking shorts, and have reinforced
>>>> areas, again riding on tarmac and with a recumbent that?s not needed.
>>>
>>> The only differences I see are that MTB baggies have butt pads, that
>>> and they cost a lot more.
>>
>> Most folks will use padded Lycra shorts or tights under the Baggies which
>> will be more flexible and have reinforced areas and made with robust and
>> fast drying materials.
>
> I bought a pair of padded pants a long time ago when I was riding my
> old Giant. They didn't help.
>
>> I have experimented with non cycling shorts etc on the commute and even
>> there they got worn though fairly rapidly, ie few months.
>>
>> Though have discovered MTB trousers that look like walking trousers or
>> similar so work well on and off the bike for work.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>

Padding in cycling shorts mostly helps by not having a
central seam (although some models are quite thick with
padding). They will not cover for riding position problems
or medical anomalies but are generally more comfortable than
seamed shorts to most riders.

Personally, my most comfortable riding shorts (one each of
two brands) have no pad, just a thin chamois over lycra. YMMV.

I admit I am inexperienced with recumbents, so you're on
your own there. I suspect cycling shorts would be pointless.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:56:29 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 4/12/2024 1:17 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 17:43:47 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:34:56 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:18:13 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 09:49:03 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/11/2024 5:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I didn't see it as divisive. It's main point seems to be that we should
>>>>>>>>>> accept various styles of bicycling, and that not everyone wants to be a
>>>>>>>>>> racer. Other details are that non-racers should be able to have
>>>>>>>>>> equipment that functions well and clothing that's comfortable for
>>>>>>>>>> riding. That's fine with me.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ish most brands road bikes are split into race and endurance bikes very few
>>>>>>>>> people should be riding race bikes arguably. But it?s often not that clear.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It?s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
>>>>>>>>> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
>>>>>>>>> that?s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's difference between "performance" clothes and non-performance
>>>>>>>> clothes? The only specific bicycling items I've ever worn are SPD
>>>>>>>> shoes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Materials and fit, ie Lycra or similar that has some stretch and copes with
>>>>>>> sweat, I like the ?technical? t shirts over traditional tops, a normal
>>>>>>> cotton t shirt would get very soggy and remain so, and probably expose my
>>>>>>> back.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I never wear cotton when I ride, and yet I never wear bicyle jerseys
>>>>>> or bottoms, either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And with MTB/gravel riding do get wear from well grit and wet, and will
>>>>>>> chew though non cycling shorts quite quickly, I?d assume recumbents and
>>>>>>> road would change some of this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can get the same fit and material at venders not associated with
>>>>>> bicycling. I don't like advertising manufacturers, so I reject any
>>>>>> products that do that. I really like my Catrike but I've removed the
>>>>>> Catrike stickers.
>>>>>
>>>>> For a recumbent that?s a less stretched position, ie will not need a
>>>>> cyclist cut, nor do you need to have logos plastered all over, that?s more
>>>>> of a older roadie thing ie folks who where cycling in the 80/90?s in
>>>>> general it?s fairly muted.
>>>>
>>>> I rode two wheelers for longer than I've ridden a recumbent.
>>>>
>>>>> MTB baggies are less restrictive than walking shorts, and have reinforced
>>>>> areas, again riding on tarmac and with a recumbent that?s not needed.
>>>>
>>>> The only differences I see are that MTB baggies have butt pads, that
>>>> and they cost a lot more.
>>>
>>> Most folks will use padded Lycra shorts or tights under the Baggies which
>>> will be more flexible and have reinforced areas and made with robust and
>>> fast drying materials.
>>
>> I bought a pair of padded pants a long time ago when I was riding my
>> old Giant. They didn't help.
>>
>>> I have experimented with non cycling shorts etc on the commute and even
>>> there they got worn though fairly rapidly, ie few months.
>>>
>>> Though have discovered MTB trousers that look like walking trousers or
>>> similar so work well on and off the bike for work.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>
>Padding in cycling shorts mostly helps by not having a
>central seam (although some models are quite thick with
>padding). They will not cover for riding position problems
>or medical anomalies but are generally more comfortable than
>seamed shorts to most riders.
>
>Personally, my most comfortable riding shorts (one each of
>two brands) have no pad, just a thin chamois over lycra. YMMV.
>
>I admit I am inexperienced with recumbents, so you're on
>your own there. I suspect cycling shorts would be pointless.

My experience with padded pants were with a two wheeler. Padded pants
would be silly on a recumbent. I do have some issues with chafing, but
involves body parts interacting with clothing, not the seat.

On 4/11/2024 4:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> "Whatever you like sucks. The bike I ride is best"
>
> https://bikerumor.com/op-ed-bike-industry-toxic-racing-culture/
>
> I found that needlessly divisive. YMMV.

I did not find it divisive as such but it points to snobbery. My guess
is most bike in the world are used for utilitarian purposes. People need
to get around cheap and they can be fast for some things. They type of
riding I do only applies to a very small percentage of cyclist world
wide I would also guess.

My road bike is great for what it does but if I was commuting to work or
used it to run errands around town it would be horrible. In fact I avoid
ever riding into town if I can avoid it because clipping and unclipping
is a pain in the ass.

The other side of the story is the LBS around here at least one is quite
a bit of snobbish folks. I never go in the place and it is all about
Specialized bikes and sleek cycling clothing, and getting a tune up or
work done is certainly available, I don't think they care where you come
to them or not.

I do think go solid components are for any type of riding but frankly in
3rd world countries they just want something that has wheels and works.

Racing bikes is like those guitarist who are professionals and play
entirely for a living. It is a who different world than the by are
majority of guitarist who simply play a few chords and strum. As someone
who played at one time guitars in the professional world and still would
if I needed to, most products I need and service do not come from
average music store. I need and use things that few strummers ever deal
with.
--
Deacon Mark

On 4/12/2024 2:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> Padding in cycling shorts mostly helps by not having a central seam
> (although some models are quite thick with padding). They will not cover
> for riding position problems or medical anomalies but are generally more
> comfortable than seamed shorts to most riders.

I've long suspected that the thick liner in cycling shorts isn't so much
to add cushioning. If that were true, an extra 1/8" padding on the
saddle would work as well.

I think a big part of its function is to prevent the fabric from
wrinkling under one's pressure points. That would have you sitting on
the relatively hard folded edges of the wrinkles.

I think the tight stretch of lycra has the same function: Keeping the
fabric flat where it matters.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/12/2024 10:54 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>
> I think it's unfortunate that he claims _every_ time he rides he
> witnesses snobbery. That isn't my experience, and when I've been with
> riders who treat non-competitive cyclists like that, I don't ride with
> them  any longer. At least in my area, recreational cyclists aren't
> treated any differently.

I agree, I haven't seen snobbery at that level. But ISTM that when
cyclists go by in the opposite direction, young racer types (slim, aero
sunglasses, riding hard on the drops) are somewhat less likely to
respond to a greeting or a nod compared to more casual riders, even if
the latter are in cycling clothes. Maybe the racer types are just too
intent on their time.

But similarly, I've long noticed that when walking around the area,
middle aged or older folks will readily say hi to us. Teens can somehow
pass by on the same sidewalk and not notice us. I think it's a parallel
universe thing.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/12/2024 5:49 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> It’s certainly true that performance clothing at least for roadies is
> intended for a type of body ie someone slim, a look around a bike club says
> that’s not the body type of all even performance minded folks.
>
> MTB well baggie clothing has a looser fit.
>
> It’s enough of a problem that a company was founded just for larger
> lads/lasses https://fatladattheback.com.

I notice that (almost?) all their offerings still convey "I'm sporty and
I arrived by bicycle!"

I'd often prefer clothing that's comfortable for cycling, not so loose
that it flaps in the wind, but doesn't look so cycling specific.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/12/2024 3:53 PM, Mark J cleary wrote:
>
> My road bike is great for what it does but if I was commuting to work or
> used it to run errands around town it would be horrible. In fact I avoid
> ever riding into town if I can avoid it because clipping and unclipping
> is a pain in the ass.

That's a great opportunity to get another bike!

I still sometimes ride my first "good" bike, a 1972 Raleigh. I first
modified it so it worked well as a commuter, and now for getting
groceries or other bulky shopping.

Then years later I built a fine Reynolds frame into a three speed for
short utility trips around the village. With the Raleigh, I still
(usually) clip my pants cuffs to keep them out of the chain, and clip on
an eyeglass mirror. With the three speed, I don't have to do even that.

> I do think go solid components are for any type of riding but frankly in
> 3rd world countries they just want something that has wheels and works.

I've donated to this charity:
https://worldbicyclerelief.org/

Supposedly they designed their own bike specifically to be super rugged,
to fit a large range of body styles and to be easy to maintain.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 22:13:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>I've donated to this charity:
>https://worldbicyclerelief.org/
>
>Supposedly they designed their own bike specifically to be super rugged,
>to fit a large range of body styles and to be easy to maintain.

That's the Buffalo bicycle:
<https://worldbicyclerelief.org/product-development/>
<https://worldbicyclerelief.org/the-bike/>
"The Buffalo Bicycle is engineered for heavy loads, long distances,
and rugged terrain, using high-quality parts and materials designed
specifically to meet our riders’ needs."

All steel. Weight is 50 lbs (22.7 kg). 26x1.75 wheels.
Notice the plunging top tube. That's for young (and short) riders.
Coaster brake but no front brake. Not a good idea for a heavy and
potentially overloaded "cargo" bike.

Some rather sketchy specifications:
<https://www.bikeroar.com/products/world-bicycle-relief/buffalo-bicycle-2017/specs>

"Ridden & Reviewed: World Bicycle Relief’s Buffalo Bike"
<https://bicyclingaustralia.com.au/bikes/ridden-reviewed-world-bicycle-reliefs-buffalo-bike/>

"The $134 Miracle Bike"
<https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/a20034900/the-buffalo-bicycle/>

Singletrack world - Buffalo bike
<https://singletrackworld.com/2017/06/bike-check-buffalo-bike/>

$134, $165 or $200 cost of parts (depending on date, source of
information and inflation) equals one bicycle. Parts from Giant of
Taiwan. Assembled locally.

An older Buffalo design:
<http://www.buffalobicycle.com/storage/documents/Buffalo_callouts_AFRICA.pdf>

More:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=buffalo+bicycle&tbm=isch>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 4/17/2024 9:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/12/2024 2:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> Padding in cycling shorts mostly helps by not having a central seam
>> (although some models are quite thick with padding). They will not
>> cover for riding position problems or medical anomalies but are
>> generally more comfortable than seamed shorts to most riders.
>
> I've long suspected that the thick liner in cycling shorts isn't so much
> to add cushioning. If that were true, an extra 1/8" padding on the
> saddle would work as well.
>
> I think a big part of its function is to prevent the fabric from
> wrinkling under one's pressure points. That would have you sitting on
> the relatively hard folded edges of the wrinkles.
>
> I think the tight stretch of lycra has the same function: Keeping the
> fabric flat where it matters.
>

It's more than just minimizing seams/wrinkles. Fabric that doesn't stay
in place will chafe. A snug fit of the material protects by moving with
the skin underneath. IOW, loose- fitting lycra shorts will chafe just
like any other non "performance" material since it will allow the skin
to move against the fabric.

Another important feature of the chamois is moisture absorption. It will
help 'wick' away sweat which - if allowed to wick through the lycra onto
the saddle - can cause the lycra to 'grip' and will lead to chafing as
well. As someone who has spent countless hours on indoor trainers and
has ridden with unpadded lycra while doing it, I can relate this
experience first hand.

All the 'padding' and 'anatomically designed' marketing hype is mostly
that, though I can relate that I have a pair of Garneau shorts with a
very thick chamois (advertised at 10mm, I won them as a prime in a crit)
that are more comfortable on very long MTB excursions.

If you're not riding a bike that jams a seat between your thighs (e.g.
recumbent) these issues don't really matter, except that a good wicking
materiel would likely keep you much more comfortable much longer.
--
Add xx to reply

On 4/17/2024 10:02 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/12/2024 10:54 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>
>> I think it's unfortunate that he claims _every_ time he rides he
>> witnesses snobbery. That isn't my experience, and when I've been with
>> riders who treat non-competitive cyclists like that, I don't ride with
>> them  any longer. At least in my area, recreational cyclists aren't
>> treated any differently.
>
> I agree, I haven't seen snobbery at that level. But ISTM that when
> cyclists go by in the opposite direction, young racer types (slim, aero
> sunglasses, riding hard on the drops) are somewhat less likely to
> respond to a greeting or a nod compared to more casual riders, even if
> the latter are in cycling clothes. Maybe the racer types are just too
> intent on their time.
>
> But similarly, I've long noticed that when walking around the area,
> middle aged or older folks will readily say hi to us. Teens can somehow
> pass by on the same sidewalk and not notice us. I think it's a parallel
> universe thing.
>

A number of years ago I was riding my 26" hardtail in my favorite local
trails, and came upon a group of 4 on one of the moderate trails, one of
which had a CX bike. The others had 29rs. I know most of the local
riders, I had never seen these guys before. I thought I was being
friendly when I said 'wow, I don't know if I'd ride a cross bike on
these trails'.

He shot me an arrogant glance and scoffed 'there's nothing out here I
can't handle on a cross bike'. Very clearly he wasn't impressed with my
what was at that time a ten-year-old 26" mtb.

I said "yeah? follow me".

I took them on this trail:

https://www.strava.com/segments/29664440

Which averages about -20% rocky rooty windy single track for 100 yards
or so at the end. He was doing ok on the technical stuff leading up to
it, though he was definitely struggling given his CX gearing. At the
bottom, only one of them was with me. The other three including mr
badass CX hadn't made it down after about a minute. The guy with me said
"they're probably not gonna ride that".

--
Add xx to reply

On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:45:48 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/17/2024 9:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/12/2024 2:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> Padding in cycling shorts mostly helps by not having a central seam
>>> (although some models are quite thick with padding). They will not
>>> cover for riding position problems or medical anomalies but are
>>> generally more comfortable than seamed shorts to most riders.
>>
>> I've long suspected that the thick liner in cycling shorts isn't so much
>> to add cushioning. If that were true, an extra 1/8" padding on the
>> saddle would work as well.
>>
>> I think a big part of its function is to prevent the fabric from
>> wrinkling under one's pressure points. That would have you sitting on
>> the relatively hard folded edges of the wrinkles.
>>
>> I think the tight stretch of lycra has the same function: Keeping the
>> fabric flat where it matters.
>>
>
>It's more than just minimizing seams/wrinkles. Fabric that doesn't stay
>in place will chafe. A snug fit of the material protects by moving with
>the skin underneath. IOW, loose- fitting lycra shorts will chafe just
>like any other non "performance" material since it will allow the skin
>to move against the fabric.
>
>Another important feature of the chamois is moisture absorption. It will
>help 'wick' away sweat which - if allowed to wick through the lycra onto
>the saddle - can cause the lycra to 'grip' and will lead to chafing as
>well. As someone who has spent countless hours on indoor trainers and
>has ridden with unpadded lycra while doing it, I can relate this
>experience first hand.
>
>All the 'padding' and 'anatomically designed' marketing hype is mostly
>that, though I can relate that I have a pair of Garneau shorts with a
>very thick chamois (advertised at 10mm, I won them as a prime in a crit)
>that are more comfortable on very long MTB excursions.
>
>If you're not riding a bike that jams a seat between your thighs (e.g.
>recumbent) these issues don't really matter, except that a good wicking
>materiel would likely keep you much more comfortable much longer.

I disagree that clothing doesn't matter on a recumbent. When the
material in the crotch is not restrained from moving by a saddle
that's jammed between your thighs, it's free to move around and chafe
as you pedal, not matter how tight or loose it fits. For some reason,
no matter what kind if pants I'm wearing, they always ride up. I know
other recumbent riders and I've never heard of anyone else having that
problem. I assume it's something about the way I pedal. I do tend to
pull back very hard which does a seesaw action on the seat.