Gender and cycling?

[AnUnearthlyChild]

I'm a lurker on this topic, but generally just nod my head as I read rather than actually post.

Something has been bothering me though and Im Not sure what I think.

I'm a keen cyclist, and I was asked by a mate to help her choose her first decent road bike. When I researched women's specific geometry, several manufacturers stated they built the frames of supposed performance bikes specifically to be more relaxed, easier to handle than the equivalent 'male' model

One part of me feels outraged, I've been riding fast bikes for years I don't need or want to sacrifice performance for a less twitchy, easy to ride bike. Just because I'm not a bloke. I just want a bike that is configured for the fact that I'm shorter and lighter than the average male.

But another part does see that many of my female friends who cycle say they don't want a twitchy bike and the relaxed handling, even on a performance machine, for them that would be a selling point.

I just found it a bit patronising that it seems to be assumed that I'm willing to sacrifice performance for comfort just because of my gender.

That does sound odd. I've never really seen the point to women's bikes, so have never owned one. What does 'easy to handle' mean? They're not horses, they don't randomly bolt?!?

It's an engineering thing.

The performance of a frame is governed by stiffness, and geometry.

If it is really stiff more energy from the rider is transferred to the pedals = faster for the same effort. But a on a stiff frame the rider feels every bump. Not comfortable. All long distance bikes have less stiff frames but it would seem whilst men's performance bikes are, women's may not be.

The other biggie is geometry, if you just make a small Frameby keeping the design the same but using shorter tubes the bike just doesn't work, you can end up kicking the front wheel when you turn, or hitting pedals on the ground if you lean over, both dangerous.

So to build a bike for a small rider you do need to redesign, especially as the average woman has different proportions to a male of the same height eg femur length. So a women's spec bike is a good thing on the whole. Gives us shorter riders more choice. But manufacturers have taken it on themselves to alter in such a way as to sacrifice for comfort here too.

I would like to take advantage of ergonomic advances, but it seems decisions have been made for me about what trade offs I want.

I would have hoped / imagined that there was room in the market for bike frames fitting both larger and smaller people, with the options around hardcore speed vs a bit more comfort, commuting, off roady stuff, erm, whatever the different sorts are! I know there are lots.

Clearly some men are going to be in it for more comfort and less performance, and some women are going to want all out speed. I am surprised that they do not cater accordingly.

At top end of market these things are hand-built, right? Presumably they build to spec no matter what the spec is.

I assume the women who do circuit stuff aren't on slow-go mmm-comfy bikes?

This all seems ridiculous.

Do women want a softer ride on road racing bikes because the saddles are all built for men's arses and by god that hurts???

I think the issue, as with a number of products is that men are the default and women get what's left over.

I never saw the point of women's bikes either until I had 2 children and SPD. Now I can see the point. Plus as you say AnUnearthlyChild there is nothing wrong with wanting a better fitting bike. And why should the features change because of that? Do men get the option of 'relaxed handling'?

Part of me is like you though and if women find them easier to use then is it that bad? Women do have (generally) have proportionally less upper body strength than men (comparative to leg strength) so maybe that has something to do with it? But then a lighter smaller bike might already account for that.

Do women want a softer ride on road racing bikes because the saddles are all built for men's arses and by god that hurts??? Good point! Ouch!

I only ever ride using tiny little hard saddles, so I'm resting on my sitting bones. If you do a lot of riding (I end up doing maybe 6 or 7 hours a week, on average) then the tiny little hard saddles are absolutely the best. (Ok, maybe not if you have SPD.)

Actually it's more getting on and off the bike that's an issue with my SPD. Graceful like a baby elephant

Some physios are v good with SPD. Apparently there are some exercises that can really help ...