More Information
 On: 2006-05-20
I more or less wrote the same review for the "Short" version of these cycling shorts, but I wanted to share my positive experience with you. I gave the shorter version 5 stars and this pair only 4 stars, simply because I prefer the shorter ones to these. Otherwise, the quality and fabrication is exactly the same.
I was really surprised to read the other review that complained about the shorts riding up. I own two pairs of these shorts, two pairs of the "short" version, a pair of the Performance "Classic" (which are only good for spinning classes), and two pairs of quality Pearl Izumi cycling shorts. These particular shorts from Performance are my favorite early-spring/late-fall shorts out of the bunch.
For me, these dont ride up at all. (I use these pairs to train during the cooler months. Throughout the year, I continue to wear these if my short ones are dirty as I cycle 3-4 times a week, 30-45 miles a ride.) Im guessing the reason these shorts dont ride up on me may be because Im not built like a "normal" cyclist; Im not especially slender or thin. Im quite curvy (but not fat) and I have big/thick muscled thighs. Friends of mine who are "pear-shaped" also love these shorts as they fit snugly without pinching the legs or by being baggy in the waist. These same friends like these even better than the "short" version, since theres more coverage down the thighs. These are noticeably roomier in the waist, hip, and thigh area than my Pearl Izumi shorts. (The waist on my Pearl Izumi shorts actually cut into my lower waist/upper hip area, whereas all of the Performance Century shorts come up and over the hips, with the waistband comfortably resting just below/on the belly-button. This cuts down on that "muffin-top" look, too.) It appears that body shape may have more to do with these fitting well rather than anything else?
I do find that the Performance brand runs a little big, so if you prefer better compression and a snug fit (including the legs), you want to size down. (For reference, I wear a 10/12 in Levis jeans. My body dynamics shift from off-season to on-season, so I own a pair of these cycling shorts in Medium for off-season training and a pair in Small for racing/riding.) One more thing: if you like or require the silicone gripper in the legs, then these shorts are not for you.
As for care, these are really easy to care for. The chamois is synthetic and doesnt seem to trap odor or moisture. I hand wash them throughout the week and then machine wash them once a week. (For the past year, all of my Performance Century shorts have washed well in a lingerie bag thrown into the washing machine.) Just hang them to dry and thats it.
I suppose that the only way these could be better was if they were a little more shock-absorbing or the padding was (more) contoured. If thats what you really want, then I suggest that you pay the extra $10-$15 dollars to get the "Elite" or "Gel" pairs or go buy some Pearl Izumis or some other high quality cycling pair of shorts that will come with a better chamois, even higher compression lycra, and silicone leg grippers. If youre looking for a curvy-womans comfortable pair of good-coverage-with-decent-compression cycling shorts at a budget price, I think these just might fit the bill.
Overall, Im very happy with these shorts. For the price I paid (<$40), Im not sure these shorts could be beat. I hope my two-cents on the matter helps.
 On: 2006-05-19
I bought the medium of these shorts and they are baggy. Considering i bought the "short" version of the same short at the same time and that medium fits fine I find this a bit odd. The shorts are terrible altogether, the leg "grippers" are covered in cloth so the shorts ride up. I got terrible saddle sores from these shorts after only a 10 mile ride. I will say that the material they are made of is pretty good quality, but otherwise these are just terrible shorts altogether. Spend the money and get something good.
|
|
