Tights over or under riding shorts?

[GS]

The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight over my riding
shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during or after the ride, I
can easily slip them off. Try that with your tights on under your shorts!
I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under the shorts,
except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to display their
colors.
Any thoughts?

[Per Elmsäter]

GS wrote:
> The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their
> tights underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight
> over my riding shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during
> or after the ride, I can easily slip them off. Try that with your
> tights on under your shorts!
> I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under the
> shorts, except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to
> display their colors.
> Any thoughts?

Are you sure you haven't just seen people with legwarmers. I've never seen
anybody with tights under the shorts but a pair of legwarmers may look like
that.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

[David Kerber]

In article <cbwTb.6973$IF1.6466@fed1read01>,
says...
> The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
> underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight over my riding
> shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during or after the ride, I
> can easily slip them off. Try that with your tights on under your shorts!
> I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under the shorts,
> except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to display their
> colors.
> Any thoughts?

Depends on the design of the tights. I have a pair of UnderArmor
tights, which I wear under the shorts because they're designed and
styled like underwear (long-johns). You're correct about not being
easy to take them off; if I think I might want to take them off, I use
a pair of warmup pants over the shorts.


--
Dave Kerber
Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

[GS]

Yeah, I'm sure. I know the difference between legwarmers and tights. I use
both myself.

"Per Elmsäter" > wrote in message
...
> GS wrote:
> > The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their
> > tights underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight
> > over my riding shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during
> > or after the ride, I can easily slip them off. Try that with your
> > tights on under your shorts!
> > I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under the
> > shorts, except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to
> > display their colors.
> > Any thoughts?
>
> Are you sure you haven't just seen people with legwarmers. I've never seen
> anybody with tights under the shorts but a pair of legwarmers may look
like
> that.
>
> --
> Perre
>
> You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.
>
>

[Benjamin Lewis]

wrote:

> The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
> underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight over my
> riding shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during or after
> the ride, I can easily slip them off. Try that with your tights on under
> your shorts! I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under
> the shorts, except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to
> display their colors. Any thoughts?

Your experience differs from mine -- I can only recall cyclists with tights
over shorts, not the reverse. Another reason to do it this way: it's the
shorts that have the absorbent padding, so it makes more sense to have this
next to your skin.

The folks I ride with tend to be more practical than fashionable, though.
Perhaps the more stylin' people like to have their trendy shorts visible,
whether they're on a team or not.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.
-- Walt Kelly

[Peter Cole]

"GS" > wrote in message
news:cbwTb.6973$IF1.6466@fed1read01...
> The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
> underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight over my riding
> shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during or after the ride, I
> can easily slip them off. Try that with your tights on under your shorts!
> I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under the shorts,

Almost 100% of the riders I see (including me) wear tights over shorts (I'm
guessing they have shorts under, I do). I've never removed my tights while
riding, if the weather is marginal for tights, I'll wear leg warmers.

[Tom Kunich]

"GS" > wrote in message
news:cbwTb.6973$IF1.6466@fed1read01...
> The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
> underneath their riding shorts. I almost always wear my tight over my
riding
> shorts for one simple reason: if I get too warm during or after the ride,
I
> can easily slip them off. Try that with your tights on under your shorts!
> I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under the shorts,
> except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to display their
> colors.
> Any thoughts?

I've seen both ways and both seem to have their pluses and minuses.

If you wear them under the shorts the crotch doesn't catch on the nose of
the saddle (though I was going to say on the nose of brian trdina didn't
you?) and hop you forward like a sling shot when you sit down after standing
up a hill.

If you wear them over the shorts you don't have to wash them every time you
use them.

[David L. Johnson]

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:56:25 -0700, GS wrote:

> The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
> underneath their riding shorts.

Yeah? No one I ride with does. Most tights don't have a chamois, but
shorts do. Put the chamois against your skin, and the tights on the
outside.

> I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under
> the shorts, except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to
> display their colors.

Used to be, old wool tights had poor elastic and were badly cut, and would
fall down unless held up by your shorts. Really. But most of those
tights should be full of moth-holes by now.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Do not worry about your difficulties in mathematics, I can assure
_`\(,_ | you that mine are all greater. -- A. Einstein
(_)/ (_) |

[David L. Johnson]

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 18:19:35 +0000, Per Elmsäter wrote:

> Are you sure you haven't just seen people with legwarmers. I've never seen
> anybody with tights under the shorts but a pair of legwarmers may look like
> that.

Modern tights are the best excuse to throw away those annoying legwarmers.
They never have, and never will, stay up where they belong. We used to
safety-pin them to the shorts to get them to stay put. RPITA. Tights are
so much better. I have a selection of weights to work for any range of
temperature when I can't wear shorts alone.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
_`\(,_ | That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being
(_)/ (_) | attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism
and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any
<country. -- Hermann Goering

[Per Elmsäter]

David L. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 18:19:35 +0000, Per Elmsäter wrote:
>
>> Are you sure you haven't just seen people with legwarmers. I've
>> never seen anybody with tights under the shorts but a pair of
>> legwarmers may look like that.
>
> Modern tights are the best excuse to throw away those annoying
> legwarmers. They never have, and never will, stay up where they
> belong. We used to safety-pin them to the shorts to get them to stay
> put. RPITA. Tights are so much better. I have a selection of
> weights to work for any range of temperature when I can't wear shorts
> alone.

Try Briko legwarmers. I've never had any problems with those, nor their
armwarmers.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article >,
David L. Johnson > wrote:
>On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 18:19:35 +0000, Per Elmsäter wrote:
>
>> Are you sure you haven't just seen people with legwarmers. I've never seen
>> anybody with tights under the shorts but a pair of legwarmers may look like
>> that.
>
>Modern tights are the best excuse to throw away those annoying legwarmers.
> They never have, and never will, stay up where they belong. We used to
>safety-pin them to the shorts to get them to stay put. RPITA. Tights are
>so much better. I have a selection of weights to work for any range of
>temperature when I can't wear shorts alone.
>

_ You should try modern leg warmers. My Hind knee warmers stay up
just fine. I even use them skiing to keep my cranky old knees
warm and loose.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQB++SGTWTAjn5N/lAQH6fgP+INM7LkA9yPRAxG1kH+i7Fvcjuneocnp3
8wz6lMHWR1NVD8xXTB4uflqziSp4H5WxIIb9LaiUXShMuDC1E6 SmpXIFBePfsP+n
2dIKgXMJk9U7WnROIAzvifqAJO2/fyGvA03A9GKX7ZM+rEDALUno1DtSIyGFeYVz
1BayRgzMb3A=
=SwcL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Matt O'Toole]

David L. Johnson wrote:

> On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 18:19:35 +0000, Per Elmsäter wrote:
>
>> Are you sure you haven't just seen people with legwarmers. I've
>> never seen anybody with tights under the shorts but a pair of
>> legwarmers may look like that.
>
> Modern tights are the best excuse to throw away those annoying
> legwarmers. They never have, and never will, stay up where they
> belong. We used to safety-pin them to the shorts to get them to stay
> put. RPITA. Tights are so much better. I have a selection of
> weights to work for any range of temperature when I can't wear shorts
> alone.

I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you want to be
able to strip down to shorts. But why? Most cycling garments have a wide
enough comfort range so that's not necessary. My most used garment is probably
my knickers -- which are perfect from about 50-70F, and fine for short periods
colder (or warmer) than that.

Some places have huge temperature swings within a few hours, but that's not the
norm. Usually it's more like 20 degrees (F), well within the comfort range of
most garments.

So I don't see what the big deal is with all this layering and re-layering. I
do understand leg warmers for one reason -- they cost like $20, and will do the
trick if you can't afford another $75 pair of knickers or tights.

I will only buy tights with chamois. Unfortunately they're hard to find, and if
you're new to the sport you might not know they exist -- especially if your LBS
is mute about anything they don't happen to have in stock.

Matt O.

[Harris]

Matt O'Toole > wrote:

> I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you want to be
> able to strip down to shorts. But why? Most cycling garments have a wide
> enough comfort range so that's not necessary. My most used garment is probably
> my knickers -- which are perfect from about 50-70F, and fine for short periods
> colder (or warmer) than that.

I've had many occasions where I was in doubt about whether to wear shorts
or tights based on the temperature. Padded shorts plus unpadded tights
solves the problem.

I have only one pair of padded tights and I find the fit isn't as
comfortable as with shorts. So even when I know it's too cold for shorts
alone, I usually wear shorts and the unpadded tights. YMMV.

Art Harris

[Peter Cole]

"Matt O'Toole" > wrote
>
> I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you want to
be
> able to strip down to shorts. But why?

I never remove tights while riding, but I really don't understand tights with
pads. It's hard enough to find a pair of shorts that have a pad & fit that I
like, I don't want to go through all that just for tights. I have 3-4 pairs of
tights in different weights and lengths (some are knicker length).

[Matt O'Toole]

Peter Cole wrote:

> "Matt O'Toole" > wrote
>>
>> I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you
>> want to be able to strip down to shorts. But why?
>
> I never remove tights while riding, but I really don't understand
> tights with pads. It's hard enough to find a pair of shorts that have
> a pad & fit that I like, I don't want to go through all that just for
> tights. I have 3-4 pairs of tights in different weights and lengths
> (some are knicker length).

I do too, but they all have pads. I'm a pretty standard size and proportion, so
most fit me fine. I do understand the fit issues, though. However, if you have
shorts that fit, the corresponding tights from the same company usually fit too.
And bibs usually solve most other fit problems, but then you're really kicking
the price up.

Matt O.

[Claire Petersky]

"Matt O'Toole" > wrote in message
...

> I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you want
to be
> able to strip down to shorts.

So you can wear them x-c skiing, too. Of course, the last time I wore my
thermal tights x-c skiing, I did a low-speed but still flailingly
spectacular wipe-out that caused them to rip up the center seam. I probably
could have worn them for several more years cycling before that would have
happened.


--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
Please replace earthlink for mouse-potato and .net for .com

Home of the meditative cyclist:
http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm

Books just wanna be FREE! See what I mean at:
http://bookcrossing.com/friend/Cpetersky
My bookshelf: http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Cpetersky

"To forgive is to set the prisoner free and then discover the prisoner
was you."

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article >,
"Matt O'Toole" > wrote:

> David L. Johnson wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 18:19:35 +0000, Per Elmsäter wrote:

> > Modern tights are the best excuse to throw away those annoying
> > legwarmers. They never have, and never will, stay up where they
> > belong. We used to safety-pin them to the shorts to get them to stay
> > put. RPITA. Tights are so much better. I have a selection of
> > weights to work for any range of temperature when I can't wear shorts
> > alone.

My Trek leg warmers, when used with my ordinary cycling shorts, don't
fall down. You need to make sure there's enough overlap to keep
everything in place, but it's not hard.

> Some places have huge temperature swings within a few hours, but that's not
> the
> norm. Usually it's more like 20 degrees (F), well within the comfort range
> of
> most garments.
>
> So I don't see what the big deal is with all this layering and re-layering.
> I
> do understand leg warmers for one reason -- they cost like $20, and will do
> the
> trick if you can't afford another $75 pair of knickers or tights.

The other nice thing about leg warmers is that they don't get very dirty
during normal use (unless you're a nut and go play in the mud with your
mountain bike, like me). Because of that, one pair of leg warmers and
multiple pairs of shorts is as good as multiple pairs of shorts and
tights.

My entire lower-body bike wardrobe consists of a pair of cycling shorts,
a pair of mountain bike shorts (baggy synthetic shorts with zip-up
pockets and a liner), leg warmers, and Activa Stormfront fleece tights
with rain-shell fronts and no chamois. The tights are incredibly warm:
they are probably too warm above 10C (but I run cold-blooded, often
wearing a jersey, arm warmers, and a neck tube when I know it will be
dry and above 5 C)

I wear the tights over the cycling shorts, or sometimes on my short
commute with a pair of boxer-briefs instead.

The plan for this year is to buy a set of bib shorts for racing and some
really warm booties. I'm tired of cold feet.

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

[Steve Knight]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 19:06:10 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" > wrote:

>I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you want to be
>able to strip down to shorts. But why? Most cycling garments have a wide
>enough comfort range so that's not necessary. My most used garment is probably
>my knickers -- which are perfect from about 50-70F, and fine for short periods
>colder (or warmer) than that.

I do I have 5 pairs of shorts but I only need one pair of tights over them. if
they had chamois i would need 5 pair.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

[Bernie]

"David L. Johnson" > wrote in message >...
> On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:56:25 -0700, GS wrote:
>
> > The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
> > underneath their riding shorts.
>
> Yeah? No one I ride with does. Most tights don't have a chamois, but
> shorts do. Put the chamois against your skin, and the tights on the
> outside.
>
> > I can't think of any good reason to put the tights on under
> > the shorts, except for those who wear shorts for a team and with to
> > display their colors.
>
> Used to be, old wool tights had poor elastic and were badly cut, and would
> fall down unless held up by your shorts. Really. But most of those
> tights should be full of moth-holes by now.

Well I wear mine under my shorts. Of course they aren't really
tights. They are polypropylene long johns, and would look like undies
if I wore em over my shorts. But what the hey!
Keep Stylin'
Bernie

[Harris]

Claire Petersky > wrote:

> > I don't understand tights without chamois to begin with, unless you want
> to be
> > able to strip down to shorts.

> So you can wear them x-c skiing, too.

Ah, another good point that I forgot to mention. I wear my unpadded tights
for jogging.

Art Harris

[B a r r y B u r k e J r .]

On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 10:56:25 -0700, "GS" >
wrote:

>The vast majority of riders that I see when it's cold wear their tights
>underneath their riding shorts.

Are you sure? You may be seeing leg warmers tucked inside the shorts.
This would look just like shorts over tights.

Barry

[B a r r y B u r k e J r .]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 19:06:10 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" >
wrote:


>I will only buy tights with chamois. Unfortunately they're hard to find, and if
>you're new to the sport you might not know they exist -- especially if your LBS
>is mute about anything they don't happen to have in stock.

I'm exactly the opposite, I only buy tights without chamois, to be
worn over my normal bib shorts. I use the same shorts from 10F to
105F, as my first layer.

The LBS I work at usually favors tights with chamois, so I have to
order mine. <G>

Barry