I agree. There ain't nothing wrong with cyclin' shorts for the 100 mile ride. If you don't like the look, then you can get the baggy mountain-biking type or wear regular shorts over them.
I generally go bib-shorts or bib-knickers on 150-mile+ rides. --Perhaps there is some skin strengthening with callouses (to avoid chafing), but in general, the sit bones get acclimated, and that has nothing to do with callouses (in my experience). I don't really know why, but the bones don't hurt anymore after riding for long long times. I generally won't get chafing issues on rides under 50 miles, so I can pretty much wear normal/comfortable clothing of any sort for these sorts of rides... As an aside, I went horseback riding the other day for the second time in my life and my wife was suffering in her sit bones for days (she gets that from biking long distances too), but I didn't notice a thing and I wasn't wearing diapers :). I agree with Bill and Grant that the preconceived notion that you have to wear "diapers" to cycle is ludicrous and a disservice to the cycling community. However, the cycling clothing was developed and serves a function for certain rides, and snubbing that because the pros use them or you don't like the look may result in missing out on comfort (i.e. you are using the clothing because it serves a purpose--not because it conforms to any group of people or riders). Toshi in Oakland, CA -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
