Baggies for Road Riding?



sgnden

New Member
Nov 21, 2004
30
0
0
Here's what feels like an odd question. "Typically" are loose-fit riding shorts used for MTB riders and the tight versions for Road?

I am NOT looking forward to wearing those tight shorts...at least while am so out of shape!

Just curious if I'd be committing a scoffable offense if i hit the road in loose-fitting shorts (but padded of course).

SG
 

mises

New Member
May 27, 2005
247
0
0
sgnden said:
Here's what feels like an odd question. "Typically" are loose-fit riding shorts used for MTB riders and the tight versions for Road?

I am NOT looking forward to wearing those tight shorts...at least while am so out of shape!

Just curious if I'd be committing a scoffable offense if i hit the road in loose-fitting shorts (but padded of course).

SG
Yes that would be a scoffable offense and would instantly label you a Fred. But so would a long list of other things like wearing lycra shorts with unshaven legs or using a mirror.
 

sgnden

New Member
Nov 21, 2004
30
0
0
mises said:
Yes that would be a scoffable offense and would instantly label you a Fred. But so would a long list of other things like wearing lycra shorts with unshaven legs or using a mirror.
Bummer - and to think...I was just configuring bent clothes hangers to rig a rear-view morror from a '67 chevelle on there! <sigh>

Thanks for saving me from Fred-ness!

SG
 

roadhog

New Member
Feb 13, 2005
272
0
0
sgnden said:
Bummer - and to think...I was just configuring bent clothes hangers to rig a rear-view morror from a '67 chevelle on there! <sigh>

Thanks for saving me from Fred-ness!

SG
Nothing wrong with being a Fred sometimes. I would say a vast majority of recreational cyclists do not shave their legs, yet the previous poster thinks those people are Freds. Just do whatever you are comfortable with. If you feel comfortable then you will ride more and that is the important part. If that means wearing baggy shorts then wear baggy shorts. If it means wearing a straw hat on top of your helmet then do that too. Freds can ride with me any time, as long as they don't slow me down, and I've seen plenty of Freds much faster than me...

It is true, however, that the lycra is much more comfortable to ride in. Baggies will probably chafe (sp?). And you might be surprised how quickly you feel "normal" in them. Probably just a couple rides.
 

Dweezle

New Member
Mar 4, 2005
42
0
0
Far worse than Fred-ness (whatever the hell that is.) is people wearing things that don't work for them. I saw a hefty guy in a cycling jersey, he was constantly having to pull the front of his jersey down becuase his belly is too large for it, and so his jersey keeps riding up on him. I won't even discuss his shorts. That description would cause needless suffering.

A lot of the cycling stuff is designed for people who are thiinner than the average middle-aged guy. Don't force yourself into it. Don't bother trying to squeeze into stuff that isn't right for you.
 

sgnden

New Member
Nov 21, 2004
30
0
0
roadhog said:
Nothing wrong with being a Fred sometimes. I would say a vast majority of recreational cyclists do not shave their legs, yet the previous poster thinks those people are Freds. Just do whatever you are comfortable with. If you feel comfortable then you will ride more and that is the important part. If that means wearing baggy shorts then wear baggy shorts. If it means wearing a straw hat on top of your helmet then do that too. Freds can ride with me any time, as long as they don't slow me down, and I've seen plenty of Freds much faster than me...

It is true, however, that the lycra is much more comfortable to ride in. Baggies will probably chafe (sp?). And you might be surprised how quickly you feel "normal" in them. Probably just a couple rides.
What IS a "Fred" anyway?? There will be no shaving of the legs, here, man...fear-not.
 

sgnden

New Member
Nov 21, 2004
30
0
0
Dweezle said:
Far worse than Fred-ness (whatever the hell that is.) is people wearing things that don't work for them. I saw a hefty guy in a cycling jersey, he was constantly having to pull the front of his jersey down becuase his belly is too large for it, and so his jersey keeps riding up on him. I won't even discuss his shorts. That description would cause needless suffering.

A lot of the cycling stuff is designed for people who are thiinner than the average middle-aged guy. Don't force yourself into it. Don't bother trying to squeeze into stuff that isn't right for you.
In the end, that is what I will do. Luckily it's not a matter of potential embarrassment, but what I percived as comfortable. Of course it's always nice to know what the 'mainstream' considers "right or best" (I know, I know, believe me...this is a wonderful set-up for a much deeper philosophical examination <mainstream, right, best>...but we can slip right by that). I suppose "Fred-ness" is the 'form' (Platonic) of "Fred".
 

dgregory57

New Member
Jul 11, 2005
708
0
0
65
I weigh 300 pounds and just bought a set of bib shorts from Nashbar that actually fit me.

The XXXL jersey I bought is still a little small, but now I have a goal. I can squeeze into it, but if I lose another 20 pounds, I am there!

In the priorities.

1) Ride

2) Be safe

3) Be comfortable, unless you are pushing yourself for some reason :)

Everything else...
 

wheelist

New Member
Jul 7, 2005
638
0
0
To answer your question: "Typically" they're for offroad use. However I reckon baggies would be more suitable to road than off-road.

I've got a pair and there's nothing worse than dropping back off the saddle for a steep decline, only to find yourself caught up in the saddle when you hit the bottom and need to climb. Baggies also don't provide the "ground-clearance" that lycra shorts offer either (if you know what I mean ;)).

Consequently I always wear lycra, whether on or off-road.

Oh, and whilst we're talking 'Fred' - I don't shave. My legs are still beautiful. :D
 

JouteiMike

New Member
Jul 29, 2005
15
0
0
Hoya1500 said:
What the heck is a Fred?
http://www.bicyclesource.com/you/culture/bicycling-glossary.shtml fred 1) n. a person who spends a lot of money on his bike and clothing, but still can't ride. "What a fred -- too much Lycra and titanium and not enough skill." Synonym for poser. Occasionally called a "barney".
2) n. a person who has a mishmash of old gear, does't care at all about technology or fashion, didn't race or follow racing, etc. Often identified by chainring marks on white calf socks. Used by "serious" roadies to disparage utility cyclists and touring riders, especially after these totally unfashionable "freds" drop the "serious" roadies on hills because the "serious" guys were really posers. This term is from road touring and, according to popular myth, "Fred" was a well-known grumpy old touring rider, who really was named Fred.
 

Mr. T

New Member
Aug 3, 2005
1
0
0
63
sgnden said:
What IS a "Fred" anyway?? There will be no shaving of the legs, here, man...fear-not.
fred 1) n. a person who spends a lot of money on his bike and clothing, but still can't ride. "What a fred -- too much Lycra and titanium and not enough skill." Synonym for poser. Occasionally called a "barney".
2) n. a person who has a mishmash of old gear, does't care at all about technology or fashion, didn't race or follow racing, etc. Often identified by chainring marks on white calf socks. Used by "serious" roadies to disparage utility cyclists and touring riders, especially after these totally unfashionable "freds" drop the "serious" roadies on hills because the "serious" guys were really posers. This term is from road touring and, according to popular myth, "Fred" was a well-known grumpy old touring rider, who really was named Fred.

Here's the source:
http://www.bicyclesource.com/you/culture/bicycling-glossary.shtml
 

VaBiker

New Member
Mar 14, 2004
19
0
0
JouteiMike said:
http://www.bicyclesource.com/you/culture/bicycling-glossary.shtml fred 1) n. a person who spends a lot of money on his bike and clothing, but still can't ride. "What a fred -- too much Lycra and titanium and not enough skill." Synonym for poser. Occasionally called a "barney".
2) n. a person who has a mishmash of old gear, does't care at all about technology or fashion, didn't race or follow racing, etc. Often identified by chainring marks on white calf socks. Used by "serious" roadies to disparage utility cyclists and touring riders, especially after these totally unfashionable "freds" drop the "serious" roadies on hills because the "serious" guys were really posers. This term is from road touring and, according to popular myth, "Fred" was a well-known grumpy old touring rider, who really was named Fred.
Wow I guess I am a "Fred" but the number 2 definition, I go shirtless and wear normal athletic shorts on my old schwinn tempo that I fixed after finding it next to a dumpster, and the chain ring marks on my unshaven calves. But I still blow away many of the "sophisticated, stylish, poseur and non poseur" roadies daily. The best is when they think they can pass you a leave you in the dust, only to realize that this "Fred" can't out ride them and they conveniently turn off.
 

JohnO

New Member
Jul 5, 2003
1,495
0
0
Not included in that definition, but one that tops my list of Fredness:

worrying about what other cyclists will think about you.



To get back to the question of baggy vs tight shorts... When I returned to the road after doing the mtb thing, and then not riding at all before that, I first started with my baggy mtb shorts. A. because I had them. B. The idea of going out in public in skin tight pants was a bit much.

Some months later, I was headed out for a ride, but couldn't find anything but the lycra cycling shorts I had bought for my wife. (she looks good in them) Definite improvement. No binding, no flapping cloth, a lot more comfortable. To hell with what anyone else thinks, I'm switching over.

Even later, we went out on a group ride, and my wife got steamed up that another one of the ladies was 'staring at me' in a way she didn't appreciate.

That did it. I'm sold on lycra.
 

sgnden

New Member
Nov 21, 2004
30
0
0
JohnO said:
Not included in that definition, but one that tops my list of Fredness:

worrying about what other cyclists will think about you.



To get back to the question of baggy vs tight shorts... When I returned to the road after doing the mtb thing, and then not riding at all before that, I first started with my baggy mtb shorts. A. because I had them. B. The idea of going out in public in skin tight pants was a bit much.

Some months later, I was headed out for a ride, but couldn't find anything but the lycra cycling shorts I had bought for my wife. (she looks good in them) Definite improvement. No binding, no flapping cloth, a lot more comfortable. To hell with what anyone else thinks, I'm switching over.

Even later, we went out on a group ride, and my wife got steamed up that another one of the ladies was 'staring at me' in a way she didn't appreciate.

That did it. I'm sold on lycra.
There ya go! Hmmmm....I guess I sholdn't have worn my sparring cup under those riding shorts....at least not after I had to ride by those pesky Sorority houses!