Surly considering offering new pants in Clydes sizes, looking to hear from Clydes.
Like it says in the title, Surly has come out with a new cycling pant that looks very well thought-out, designed and tested. They're soliciting feedback trying to determine if it is worth it for them to offer it in larger sizes.
I e-mailed them and you should too!
Send to firstname.lastname@example.org with "fatsopants"* in the subject line.
Nice write-up here:
*Yeah, I know, I think the guy who came up with the idea for that is their Clyde who is testng their prototype larger pants, so I think it is about reclaiming the term, not negative.
For whatever it is worth, I don't work for Surly or anything, just a Clyde who'd like to see more options in clothing for us.
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like they are offering a ladies, much less an Athena version of these pants (yet!?). I would encourage Athena's to contact them as well.
Here's a few sentences from the blog:
The pants are available in these sizes 30 & 32x 32 inseam, 34-40x 34 (but really it’s a 36 read below)
There is one thing about the pants that didn’t quite go as planned. We have some really tall weird giants in this brand, each of who wears a 36 inseam in their trousers. When we had our samples made, the 36 inseam was too long for Wood (our handsome seven-footer), but the 34 fit him perfectly. So we went with that measurement, and that’s what we put on the tag in the pants.
Of course they fit like most other brands 36s, in fact they are even longer than some 36” inseamed pants out there (I just coined the phrase “inseamed”).
As if sizing in cycling clothing isn't confusing enough..........let's purposely mislabel the sizes. Big fail.
I already wrote them, they need to offer some smaller inseams for us vertically challenged folks.
I did the same, I'm fat not tall. If I was taller, I'd be just right. I'm just short for my weight. Know what I mean :)
|All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:56 AM.|