Help me understand bike shorts
 

I'm puzzled by something. I've been commuting by bike for about two years, and learned early on that a soft cushy saddle does not make for a comfortable ride over the long haul. So I got myself a hard saddle (a Brooks) and have been very pleased with how comfortable it is. My understanding was that a hard saddle transfers your weight directly via the sit-bones, whereas a soft saddle, by molding to one's butt, spreads weight across soft tissue causing numbness and all that.

Up until today I've always commuted in regular street clothes because my commute was only five miles, and again, my Brooks saddle has been very comfy when doing so. Recently, my office moved and so my commute is either a train ride plus ten miles of biking or about 23 miles on the bike each way. I rode home the whole way the other day in jeans and learned a) that I'm dumb, and b) street clothes have their limits. So I bought some bike shorts, good ones with a relatively thin pad. Today, I rode in them for the first time and at first it seemed super cushy but over time the pad became kind of annoying, and I thought hey! if soft bike seats are bad for long rides, why do bikers stuff soft pads in their shorts?! Doesn't it cause the same problem?

Has anybody pondered this? Because I'm thinking about cutting the pad out of my expensive bike shorts but, as previously stated, I'm dumb, so I'd appreciate some insight on this.

Are you talking about Gel Pads?
Post a link to the shorts you bought.

Good bike shorts are wonderfully comfortable. Cheap bike shorts feel like you're riding with a big wad of toilet paper between your legs.

These are the shorts: http://www.ibexwear.com/shop/product...ool-bike-short

I think they're pretty good, but regardless, why do padded shorts make sense when padded saddles don't?

I have always used cheap shorts on sale for 29,000 miles.
Your butt is not my butt.

A chamois is for chafing prevention, not padding.
A think, padded chamois is as bad as a soft saddle.

My understanding is that the chamois was originally meant to wick sweat, in order to prevent saddle sores (before synthetics, bike shorts actuall had a leather chamois). I suspect the reason they have become what they are is that people copy pro riders, who ride hard and in an aggressive position, and so need only a narrow perch. However, most of us do not ride like that, and so find these narrow saddles uncomfortable. They then try to compensate with "padded" shorts, rather than a wider, more supportive (but still firm) saddle.

You might try looking for triathlon or recumbant shorts. These have much a much thinner chamois (or none at all), since triathletes want their shorts to dry quickly and recumbant riders don't have the narrow saddle problem.

Because I'm prone to riding stupid long mileage on the weekends, my view on things might be a little different than others, but here's my take on cycling shorts.

I also ride Brooks saddles on all my bikes. I can do a short ride (up to 40 miles) in street clothes with little to no discomfort. As you stated, the Brooks allows you to put your weight where it belongs; on the sit bones.

The discomfort creeps in when the temperature starts to rise, and I sweat. A lot. Sweat leads to damp clothing, damp clothing leads to chafing, which is painful and problematic.
If you look at old school bike shorts with a real leather chamois, there wasn't any padding in there. It was a semi form-cut slab of hide from Rupicapra rupicapra, which absorbed sweat and wicked it away from the skin.
Moving forward, technology advanced and people didn't want a leather chamois. They're a pain to wash and maintain; so the chamois was replaced with padding and technical fabrics. Wicking cloth with antimicrobial fibers now perform the same task as a chamois slathered with some conditioning creme containing witch hazel and menthol.
Levels of padding and associated comfort are totally personalized, much like chosing a saddle. And to make things even tougher, what's comfortable for one distance may not be comfortable for longer or shorter distances, or on a different bike, or a different saddle. For example: I used to wear Performance Century Gel bibs. They were comfortable until I started riding more than 30 or 40 miles, at which point they were bulky and non-breathable. I switched to Performance Ultras, which are a much higher compression fabric and thinner padding; very breathable and fantastic up to 200k. However, the padding doesn't evaporate sweat fast enough so it stays damp and ruins the viscosity of most chamois cremes. Bummer. I tried PI Ultrasensors, which have a thicker padding but claims of higher breathability and evaporation rates. They aren't kidding, and the Ultrasensors are great... until you wash them 5 or 6 times and the padding cover fabric takes on a microtexturing which is very unpleasent without large amounts of chamois creme. Also a bummer since the padding was just enough to be comfortable for a 300 - 400k ride without feeling like wearing a diaper (which is my personal point of contention with Castelli shorts).
So, my short and mid-distance shorts are now Performance Ultras, and I've stepped up to a pair of Assos FI.Mille S5 bibs for long distances. The difference between those and the Ultras is significant. The compression from the fabric is just as strong without the roughness of the lower priced bibs. The cut is designed specifically for a forward-leaning posture on the bike, so there is no bagginess or binding. Even the padding is cut specifically for on-the-bike posture. The padding is loftier at the sit bones because they are specifically an ultradistance short, but the wicking capacity is that of a much thinner pad. The covering fabric on the pad is very comfortable, even without reapplication of any creme after 60 - 70 miles. The downsides? I had to save up for 3 months to buy a pair, and they are known to be more "fragile" than other shorts... handwash only, special tech-wash from the vendor, don't hang by the straps to dry, etc. Some people also claim the stitching and fabric in general is not as robust as less expensive shorts, so they're my "tuxedo" of bibs and I won't put them on for anything under 300k.

Different shorts, just like different saddles, will have varied shapes and levels of padding which can make things more or less comfortable, depending on the rider, bike, saddle, etc.

This is an interesting question, and I've never heard anyone ask it, much less answer it authoritatively.

While Brooks saddles are not padded, they do have some natural give. And there are plenty of saddles used by serious cyclists that are lightly padded. So I wouldn't say padding = bad universally. Many overstuffed saddles also have a bad shape for serious cycling.

What follows are a couple of wild-ass guesses.

1. Having the padding move with your body (in the shorts) is somehow better than having it fixed to the saddle.
2. Saddles and bike shorts have been designed symbiotically to have an amount of padding that adds up to be about right.

I wouldn't rip the pad out of your shorts. One of the things that pad does is keep the seams in the shorts away from your sensitive parts. Those seams are part of why you found riding in jeans became uncomfortable.

Great reply Clifton!!!! Sticky that ***** !!!

I generally use tri-shorts and the pads are pretty thin.

My personal opinion is that some padding in either shorts or on the saddle isn't inherently bad. I think the problem is that people often subscribe to the notion that more is better and end up trying to compensate for an inappropriate saddle with extra padding.

It's probably also easier to design padding for shorts that provides some cush in the right places as opposed to a saddle which are often (not always) padded across their entire surface.

As has been said before, those particular shorts may have more padding or whatever than you need, and you might want to look into something else. but really, isn't "kind of annoying" still better than jeans? I'm not particularly in love with every aspect of my cycling shorts, for example the somewhat unnecessary padding coming up the front of the shorts, but I am pretty used to them now and I don't think about the aspects of them that bug me a little as much. In fact, I don't think about my butt as much at all any more...and I think thats the point.

Also going from a 5 mile to a 23 mile commute is a big jump and it is going to take a bit of time for your posterior to accustom itself to the task. a little discomfort is normal.

Different people have different needs. I own 3 pair of bike shorts, all about $25 or so, really cheap, and have been switching between them for 5 years and 21000 miles now. They work fine for me. I ride 21 miles every day, and once in a while I do 75 miles or so.

Jeans are only good for a couple of miles, after that, they're rubbing on things that you don't really want rubbed that much or that abrasively.

I had my issue with jeans last summer. I couldn't ride for almost 2 weeks. I ended up buying some of those lightweight cycling undewear by Andiamo the are light fabric with some chamois like biking shorts but being so thin you can wear a pair of shorts or other syle of pants other than jeans and they work great. They are about 19.00 a pair. I didn't like the REI Novara brand they are too heavy and the briefs feel like a G string

I haven't worn cycling shorts since the days when chamois was the only option so there is a lot of good info here to ponder. But I must admit, I'm really intrigued by jeffpoulin's "wad of toilet paper" idea. I'm willing to bet that Scot brand isn't anywhere near as comfy as Charmin... and who can resist that big cuddly bear mascot?

You build up callouses there after a while... a pumice stone keeps it in check.

They only use Charmin in good bike shorts, so by my definition, they would be wonderfully comfortable. :p

If you get the underwear by Andiamo the ones I got are the longer ones and ebikestop has them for $17.95 I can wear them all day and they don't feel like you have a diaper on but have just enough padding to help on the bike big time. The briefs may be ok but the Novaro by REI is cut too high in the front and just feel weird. Besides REI stuff is too expensive unless you get them on sale. They usually only have the white ones instead of the black, or at least everytime I have been in the store to get them they only had the white.

C'mon... is underwear really necessary under cycling shorts?

Brooks and no need for shorts for my commute. I rarely bother with shorts unless I plan to do 20+ miles. Honestly the Shorts seem to give me the tingles where just riding in regular somewhat loose clothing I rarely have a problem. I don't wear jeans or tight pants. I wear cargo pants and shorts. Never have a chafing issue.

I was using a pair of these as a liner with a pair of no-chamois fleece tights through the winter.
I just had to throw them away because the material *inside* the chamois eventually shrunk,
leaving the outer layers baggy resulting in large folds of fabric bunched up.
Other than that, I liked them.
I did get quite a bit of use out of them before that happened, so I would not rule out buying another pair.

+1

My first pair of cycling shorts had that real leather. I made the mistake of pursuing a career in business for about 10 years and let my riding go by the board. When I came to my senses shorts were using artificial chamois and I tried several and found the thinner padding was actually more comfortable. What clifton said was what I had intuitively arrived at. Those gel pads caused chafing and weren't comfortable after a couple of hours. I have heard so many good things on this board about the Assos I'm going to have to give them a try. Right now I'm using the Performance Elite II bibs because I really like that pad. It's well shaped and not too thick or thin. Supposedly has an antibacterial quality built in.

I have always heard good things about a well used Brooks. I've never had one. My saddle has tended to get more minimal every time it gets replaced. The peritoneal channel brought in in the last 10 years is a big improvement. Just for grins I mounted an old Selle San Marcos I used to love on a bike that came with a cheap stock Specialized and it was OMG how did I ride on this brick! I put the Specialized cheapy back on and the nice old Italian saddle back on the shelf. I have used a couple of generations of Fizik saddles that have worked pretty well for me.

It's a critical contact point that is a confluence of clothing, saddle and bike fit and adjustment. Nobody can ride anymore than their ass can handle.

Ya don't wear bike shorts with these they already have the chamois you can wear any other shorts or pants other than jeans over them.

I'll give you the advice I got from my long distance friends:

If you're not riding 300k (187.5mi) or more, don't bother with the FI.Mille short/bib. There were even a few guys who told me not to bother with them on anything less than a 400k.
For 100 - 200k rides, save a few bucks and buy the FI.Uno model instead. The cut is a little more forgiving across the waist (the compression on the FI.Mille is a little tight in the belly, even in the XLG) and the padding is not as heavy as the FI.Mille (which is their high mileage short/bib). I'm looking at picking up a pair or two of these for my 200k rides, or as a change during a 600k.