John Barry wrote:
> After getting saturated on a charity ride yesterday, it
> occurred to me to ask why nobody seems to make Goretex
> cycling shoes. After all, plenty of lightweight Goretex-
> lined walking boots are available and they do a good job.
Your definition of "good job" is my definition of bleedin'
'orrible sweatboxes I much prefer to avoid...
> Surely a cycling equivalent would be better than
> overshoes and other things?
Thing about overshoes is you can take them off when you
don't want your feet boiled alive. Many cycling shoes are
designed with ventilation quite high on the feature list,
and you throw that straight out the window if you put a
goretex liner in.
Also the case that it won't stop the water that goes in
through the holes, and without the holes you won't get your
feet inside! So if you get water draining down your legs
(which you probably will unless you're in full overtrousers
going over the top of an extended cuff or you're wearing
gaiters) then you'll still get wet feet, /and/ they'll take
much longer to dry thanks to your miracle membrane. I've
never been convinced that sewing goretex into footwear
represents a good piece of design, to be honest. You're
stuck with it unless you carry spare shoes, and if it holes
then you have all the disadvantages of a sweaty membrane
coupled with them leaking anyway. There's a good reason why
cyclists don't ride in Goretex 100% of the time and that's
because it's less comfortable than alternatives if it isn't
sheeting it down. I don't see that shoes are any different,
but they don't pack up into a pocket so well.
For a wet summer ride I much prefer Shimano SD-60
cycling sandals. Your feet get wet straight away, but it
doesn't matter much and they dry straight out as soon as
the rain stops.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111
ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382
640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net
[email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
