undershorts vs shorts????

robertsims

hi. I've only recently started cycling and this may seem a dumb question but... comfortwise is there a difference between wearing cycling shorts compared with padded cycling undershorts with just normal shorts or trousers over them. Reason I ask is I want to buy my first pair of cycling shorts but only have a budget of about fifteen to twenty quid a pair. I've noticed that undershorts seem cheaper and wondered if better off buying these and then just normal shorts over the top? Also any recommendations much appreciated. I regularly cycle 30ish miles but hope to increase

Cheers

alihisgreat

Buy a good quality pair of bib-shorts and you'll never look back.
~£40 is the minimum for a half decent pair -> check out DHB kit on Wiggle.

Benefits include -> less chafing, aerodynamics, and more comfort for longer. Also you'll look like a proper cyclist.

TakeTurns

Not a dumb question at all. Riding for my second year, I'm still contemplating on whats the most economic combination without compromising comfort.

I've always used bib-shorts. However, I'm thinking of using undershorts beneath padless shorts. Reason being, the padding wears out within a couple months if you ride lots and it's not cheap to replace a bib-short, whereas an undershort is much cheaper. My Endura Equipe was about £100, lasted 4-5months, padding isn't as effective now. Cheap to replace? No.

If you want good quality bib-shorts, you'd need to spend more than £20. With your budget you'll have to make good with undershorts.

robertsims

thanks all. I know big shorts are better but commute fair bit as well so wanted to stick with shorts or undershorts really. It's either cheap muddy fox or tenn shorts or undershorts from wiggle or perhaps decathalon?

robertsims

sorry bib and big shorts!!!