Aerotech "touring" (baggy) bike shorts
 

Has anybody else ever bought Aerotech "touring" (baggy style) bike shorts?

These ones?


Some of you may recall my thread a few weeks ago about how long bike shorts should last as my current two pair of spandex pair are starting to wear thin in the inner leg area. I needed new shorts, so I thought I'd go with baggy style shorts this time.

I don't really like them. I feel like they constrict my leg movement a bit. They are ok for commuting, but I don't think I'd like them on a long bike ride. I think I need to order more spandex shorts again.

Anybody else have experience with these shorts? Do you agree about them constricting your leg movement?

I have them on my wish list does that count? :)

After what I'm complaining about, you may want to reconsider. I'd really like to hear other opinions of people who actually have them..maybe help you judge better.

I'm new to biking and had no desire to go with the spandex but after reading posts was convinced I needed bike shorts. I'm a "very well qualified" Clyde (down from 427 but still at 349) and went with the 5X baggy type. I can't compare them to anything else except regular shorts and they are noticebly better than those. The pad and lack of seams really helps. I do notice that they can "bind up" around my knees and constrain leg movement but I just pull them up a little and they're fine. I'm sticking with these for now as I don't think any innocent passer-bys should be exposed to me in spandex!!!!

I am with Kwhman! No one wants to see my fat a _ _ in spandex.I have a pair of Aerotech baggies. Yes, they bind at the knees. Pulling them up does help.The padding in them is great. I also like having pockets.

I have a pair of the Aerotech baggies too. I haven't had any problem with them constricting. I think the seat pad is overhyped because I can't feel much difference between these and the Nashbar Liquicell baggie shorts. I road 42 miles in them yesterday and they were fine. At 6' and 250 lbs I wouldn't go with the spandex either.

Makes you wonder.... What happened to SHORTS? Remember when SHORTS were just that...SHORT? :rolleyes:

Some shorts really should be reclassified, but most of the terms that could be used for knee length pants, are terms used in womens wear, and trying to convince a guy that they aren't for girls, or "gay" is difficult. Trying to think, a clam digger has a cuff just below the knee, forget the other term that is used, when they don't have the cuff. Maybe Becky or Mrs S could elaborate here. My Mrs is doing girls night out tonight....

325 and in spandex. What do I care! I am having fun and just trying to get healthy!

That's my feeling too. I bought the baggy ones because I "thought" they would be more comfortable. It seems not....at least not in my case.

I found baggys to be uncomfortable on the road bike. I love my Pearl Izzumi road shorts. On the hybrid, baggys are fine, even on long rides. I got some Borah baggys off ebay. I love them. Excellent pad, and not too long. They have side pockets, and one zipper pocket.

Would you be talking shants (shorts & pants)?

East Hill

From working in manufacturing/industrial plants, many have no-shorts policies for safety reasons. When conditions are warm, the question of "when do pants end and shorts begin" often comes up. In at least two places I've worked, the official definition is if they're at or above the knee, they're shorts. Below the knee is pants. Kinda wierd to see big ol' sweaty guys with their jeans rolled up, but then again, they're not as sweaty as the others.

I rode a mile into town yesterday evening to watch a parade, and I wore blue jeans. Even though they weren't tight, the effort of cranking with denim wrapped around the power parts was considerably higher. I wouldn't want to ride with anything restrictive around the knee.

Karl

I just ordered a pair last night even with the couple bad reviews they still seem to be what im looking for :)

I can't speak to the Aerotech's, but I have two pair of Hoss Technical Gear's Ponderosa shorts in XXL and they're my favorite pants. Great pad, tons of pockets, and the liner is attached to the shorts in a way that keepts the outer shorts off my knees. They're sold as MTB pants, but I'm no mountain biker - just a guy who can't see himself in spandex. And I think they're reasonably priced.

I have those shorts, got them about a month ago or so. And here is my impression.
The liner is great! I wish I could just order the inner liner by itself. It moves moisture the way a liner should and has just *enough* compresion where it counts but is still loose in certain areas.
The overlying "baggy" short leaves some to be desired. It seems like the crotch of them hang down too low forcing me to grab a handful of crotch and pull it "up" before I get on the bike, which then causes them to restrict a little bit.
In fact, after about 3 miles or so the baggy outer layer has completely ridden up my legs/and thighs and it looks like I'm wearing tight cycling shorts with a baggy diaper on.
If I had it to do over again, I would not have purchased these shorts.

I think so! I like* the word. Sounds reggae.

I've got a pair of these and, like pj7, think the liner is great. The outter short is just okay. Not badly made or anything, just maybe a little TOO baggy. Or maybe I bought too big a size. Dunno.

Anyway, they're not perfect but I still like them.

Much better word than 'capris', which are actually rather close fitting, and not especially comfortable on a bike. Shants are good on bikes :) .

East Hill