Fox Diva Bike Shorts
April 29, 2010
I just got an email from a reader who felt that we had posted too many positive reviews lately. She said she missed my rants and was starting to wonder if I wasn’t getting paid to post postive reviews. Very flattering, but I don’t get paid for reviews, really I don’t. It’s not as if I can’t be bought; it’s just that no one has tried yet. I had just turned over a new, less prickly leaf, thinking that my gear experiences had mellowed me enough that I wasn’t taking the downside of each piece of gear personally. I was trying to focus on the positive and not be such a nitpicker. Turns out – people don’t like that! My public likes my hate-ons. Who woulda thunk?
So I cast about for some complete crap gear that I could write about. Luckily I had just gone bike shorts shopping so boy, do I have some commentary that will blister your computer screen. My wrath shall fall on the Fox Diva short, which after a day of bike short shopping stands out in my mind in large part due to its stupid name. My Gearguy even pointed it out in the shop and snickered, knowing that I would fly into an entertaining(for him) rage in the middle of the store about how manufacturers can’t figure out how to name women’s items anything but DIVA. I’ve already posted about this here and here. But it hasn’t gotten through to the industry so here we go again.
People, it is a red neon sign that you are not trying hard enough to develop your women’s market if DIVA is the only name you can come up with. A Diva is, in fact, a horrible person; a demanding, pushy, imperious bitch. Why do you name your gear after such a person? Is this what you think women are? For the record, I do know that the word “diva” has more than one connotation but I’m not buying that gear is named after a “female singer of outstanding talent” and nobody really thinks of a diva as a “goddess” any more. Even if they did, it’s an extremely over-used name. If I wanted to I could wear Diva ski boots and Diva bike shorts, carry Diva ski and hiking poles, hook a Diva wrench kit on my bike, put a Diva bike saddle on it too (it’s spelled Deva in that case but I am NOT FOOLED); wear Diva gloves, ride a Diva snowboard with Diva bindings, click into Diva skis, put on a Diva shirt and Diva socks; the list goes on and on. Stop it, industry! Put some thought into these things or just don’t bother.
So. Anyway. The shorts. Lately I’ve been envious of the cool baggy shorts the freeride girls are all wearing on the MTB trails. My staple spandex seems really quite lame at times and I feel like the odd woman out. I had the idea to go and buy some cool baggy shorts so I would feel more stylin’ on the mountain. This of course necessitated trips to various bike shops, which can be not nearly as fun as it sounds if you are female. I might save that discussion for another time (though I already have it written up but was waffling about posting it for fear of being too negative. Good thing my readers straightened me out – look for that one soon) but needless to say it was a frustrating day. Finally I gave up on the local places and headed to the big conglomorate which to its credit had a rather decent selection of women’s bike gear. I grabbed one of every style of baggy shorts and went to try them on only to find that not a single one fit remotely decently.
Is my body that weird? Is this really that hard? Is there a bike short conspiracy? I really don’t know but there has to be a reason. I tried on 6 pairs of shorts and NONE of them fit, but I’m picking on the Diva because not only does it have a sucky name, but it had by far the WORST fit of all. I’ll just come out and give you the stats; I’m a 5’5” size 6. This means I can buy a 6 or a small and I’m usually OK with the outcome. It also means I have size 4s in the closet that fit fine and size 8s that fit fine. That’s the way sizes are – inconsistent. So I’m OK with a little getting-to-know-you size surprize when trying a new brand. I am also over 35 so when the spandex comes into play I tend to bump things into the medium range just to be safe. Since women’s bike shorts only come in S, M, L it seems to be a no brainer that since I’m trying on baggies (which are supposed to fit loosely) and usually wear a size 6 bike short, the mediums will do. Well. To my horror I found that the medium Diva shorts were skin freaking tight in the hips and ass, as in, not remotely baggy AT ALL. Obscenely, ego-crushingly tight – and too big in the waist. Adding to the non-appeal of this look were the inner liner shorts, which basically fit fine but buttoned to the outer shorts in a spot that was just plain wrong, dragging the outer waistband down and creating a really non-cute fold/bulge thing unless I wanted to just tug the whole ensemble down and bust a sizeable crotch sag. A feeling of dread sunk in as I went back to the rack and grabbed a size L, knowing full well what I would find but needing to verify. Sure enough, the size L was WAY too big, falling-off too big, just ludicrously too big. I did a little web research and found that the women who were able to fit these shorts really liked them even though the comment that they run small was pretty common. I might – MIGHT – be OK with a line running small, but I am not OK with such a HUGE size disparity between the medium and the large. That is just ridiculous.
Really, Fox? REALLY? This is the best you can do for women; falling back on a stupid, hackneyed, overused and rather insulting name while not paying any remote bit of attention to how the item should fit? I mean, I try not to take it personally when an item doesn’t go with my body type; that’s just life. But for a size six person to go from a SKIN TIGHT size medium to completely drowning in size large; that is just not right. That’s just plain lazy on your end. Now, if you were flooding the men’s market with men’s shorts called the D-Bag, that would be just funny. But you’re not. You’re calling men’s shorts the Baseline, the Sergeant, the Ranger, the High Voltage, the Titan, the Altitude – and women get the DIVA. Again.
So I can’t tell you how the Fox Diva Shorts feel when you’re riding. I can’t tell you how tough they are or how long they last, or what you can expect when you launder them. I can’t tell you these things because the shorts are just unwearable. Adding insult to other insult AND injury is the fact that Fox clothing isn’t made for women at all, it’s made for “Girls”. They make clothes for “Guys”, “Boys,” and “Girls”. Not women, just girls. That’s all we are…just girls. All of us. From age 9 to age 90. Girls. Men can be either “guys” or “boys” but not us – no, we’re all just girls. I’ve seen this from other companies too and I don’t like it at all. I can’t be the only woman annoyed by this type of marketing. I’m not a girl and I don’t want to wear girls’ clothes! I am a woman and I want to look like one.
Fox does make a damn good front fork but I kind of feel like putting duct tape over that logo right now.
Chaco Paradox Sandal
April 28, 2010
Our readers know that I do not approve of stupid footwear, and by stupid footwear I mean anything ridiculously uncomfortable that does not serve a specific purpose, say, to look great at a party on New Year’s Eve. Such specific purposes do not apply to looking good in an airport while hiking 1/2 mile to the gate, making your legs look longer while hiking up a mountain, or evoking the pirate look for walking on the beach. All of those are honest-to-pete, seen-it-with-my-own-eyes examples, people. Stilettos in the airport. Platform flip flops on the mountain. Thigh high PIRATE BOOTS for walking on a beach trail in the Pacific Northwest. Pirate boots! The leather ones that come up to mid-thigh. With heels! I wish to go on record as saying that NO ONE looks good in this pirate boot trend (Halloween costumes excepted). You don’t look good, pirate-boot wearers. Just stop. It’s a dumb trend and you know it.
In all seriousness, though, there’s no reason that comfortable shoes can’t also look great. For evidence, I present the Chaco Paradox. I was skeptical at first, I admit, of these shoes. Why wear a shoe that is really a sandal? Or a sandal that is really a shoe? Well, I will tell you why – when you want to wear sandals but your feet are really beat up from being stuffed into rock climbing shoes at the crag or into cleats for playing Ultimate but you still want to wear your capris, or when you can’t find your socks and are late for work. Or when you finally get the chance to go kayaking on water that isn’t 33 degree instant death, or when you want to wander around on sharp rocks looking at tide pools without the accompanying trip to the emergency room. I greatly appreciate the Paradox for hiding my beat-up and unpainted toenails, but also for fitting and feeling like an ordinary shoe. I’m not saying I want to take it out running on the trail, but for kicking around at the crag or around town it’s great. Where the Paradox really shines, though, is the water environment. For kayaking, rafting, or even beachcombing, you’d be hard pressed to find anything that sheds water as well, stays put as firmly, and dries as quickly. True to Chaco form, the Paradox doesn’t get all stinky either. It’s a great full coverage sandal that is a bit more streamlined and sophisticated.
Mechanix Gloves
April 17, 2010
I can tell whether I’ve run into one of my soul sisters on the trail when I see a savvy MTB rider wearing Mechanix gloves. The blunt truth is that if you’re into MTB and you haven’t clued into these babies, you are behind the times. Why? Because if you buy Mechanix you get a burlier, longer-lasting glove with the same padding, the same armor, and the same grip with better Velcro and tougher construction for less cash. So if you’re still dropping your paychecks on MTB-specific gloves, get with the program and visit the Mechanix Web site to get yourself the glove that makes other MTBers nod knowingly.
The Velcro on Mechanix is so much better than on bike industry gloves it’s pretty ridiculous. I won’t wash my guy’s regular bike gloves with our technical clothes because the Velcro is so crap that it always comes loose and snarls up our lycra. Needless to say he quickly caved and bought his own Mechanix. One of our more notable arguments involved his callous return to the house bearing new Mechanix gloves for himself and none for me. What kind of monster would do such a thing, I ask you? He’s over my shoulder now, defending himself with some line about going back to the store to look for gloves for me but not being able to find any in my size; a likely story.
I’ve been riding with and washing the same pair of Mechanix for three years now and the Velcro is still stuck fast. There’s no visible wear to the gloves and they are still just as nicely padded as ever. I bought mine so long ago that I don’t even know which version they are, but they are pretty standard with a padded palm and full fingers. No armor on them, but I don’t feel that I need it. If you want armor, they have gloves with armor. If you want pink, they have gloves with pink. If you want flourescent yellow, they have that too. Most importantly though, they have a great, tough, useful glove at a great price.
You can order them through the Mechanix web site or grab them at one of the big box home improvement stores. The latter comes with the (typical) downside of not having much choice for size; I’ve never seen a size small utility glove at one of those stores. The web site has them, though, so that’s probably the best option for us ladies. If you are in a pinch, the mediums will probably work; mine are size medium and although they are a little big, they are fairly comfortable. I have been meaning to buy new ones in size small but since my old ones are still in such good shape, I don’t see the point. Then again, if I wait for them to wear out I might never get to buy new gloves; an interesting conundrum.
Mechanix has gloves for cold weather; too, and they even have fairly decent arm warmers. One thing they don’t have, though, is gloves with much ventilation (except for their ventilated gloves, which don’t have palm padding), so just get used to sweaty palms and serious wrist tan lines. They don’t have any fingerless gloves and they don’t even really make bike gloves at all. But they do make gloves that are excellent for biking.
Wenger Matterhorn Hiking Shoe
April 10, 2010
I’m not afraid of wearing orange shoes and you shouldn’t be either. It’s a great way to get attention, make sure people remember you, and ensure you have a nice matchy matchy look with your snazzy orange down jacket. The latter actually gave me pause while testing these shoes because I got so many compliments on my cute jacket/shoe combo that I didn’t want to get the shoes dirty and ruin my look. Interestingly enough I had been supposed to be testing the orange jacket too, but I was similarly reluctant to get it dirty. A job is a job, though, so I had to sacrifice my look for the greater good.
I hadn’t done much breaking-in of the Matterhorns before finding myself wearing them while sprinting through the SeaTac airport from the far end of terminal C, out the door, down the street, up the stairs, and all the way back again (yes, through security AGAIN). When the dog has to pee, the dog has to pee, and thankyouverymuch Seattle airport for not providing anything other than a urine-soaked concrete room as a “pet relief area” within the security boundaries. Luckily I had a little extra time to stop by the restroom myself, and was treated to the sight of a TSA officer leaving a bathroom stall and just walking straight out of the door and back to work without washing her hands. Yes, this is one of the people who pats you down and shoves her hands through your belongings. Ew. Air travel, such a treat these days.
Anyhow, the Matterhorns. Despite their intended purpose as a light hiker, I found that they are actually a passable airport running shoe, if you are into that kind of thing. In their natural habitat, though, they are much happier. They are nicely supportive and feature a tough sole providing protection against rough trail surfaces and a stable platform for climbing and descending. I found the fit to be adequate, yet I suspect they would fit a slender foot a bit better. They seemed to have a little extra room in the toe but didn’t seem too big; just a little better suited to a skinnier foot. I wear a regular width, by the way, before you get thinking I am some sort of mutant hobbit. If you don’t have a slender foot, you might need a little extra break in time for these shoes, but in general they fit pretty well. Most importantly, they have a nice snug heel to prevent slippage which is a nice and much appreciated nod to women’s specific fit.
I like the burly sole and the extra thick heel. Descending is my enemy so I like to have lots of shoe on my side for making my way down an incline. While not exactly padded, the Matterhorn is sturdy and reliable, with a nice grippy sole for traction on varying terrain. They even worked well on snow and were water resistant enough to be a reasonable choice for winterish conditions.
Their one downside is the lacing system. Instead of lace holes all the way up, what would be the most upper hole is replaced by those hooks typically found on hiking boots. This adds an extra step to slipping the shoes on and isn’t very stable or reliable. The hooks are also set too high or something, making the laces tend to work their way upward and under the tongue, loosening up the rest of the lace and requiring a stop to retie. This lacing choice is a surprise from the ultraengineered Wenger line, so I’d expect they’ll be seeing the error of their ways soon and replacing the hook with a regular lace hole. Once they do that, the Matterhorns are gold. Well, goldish orange. But they come in black too so if you’re more into stealth than spotlight, you’re all set.
