Specialized dropping women road specific designs
#126
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,261
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18428 Post(s)
Liked 15,582 Times
in
7,337 Posts
#127
Super Modest
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 23,468
Bikes: Trek Emonda, Giant Propel, Colnago V3, Co-Motion Supremo, ICE VTX WC
Mentioned: 107 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10965 Post(s)
Liked 4,621 Times
in
2,124 Posts
Before Siu closes this or moves it, I'd like to mention that there is a woman that I ride with regularly who is in her 70s and has a PhD in mathematics from Harvard. In fact, I bailed out of tonight's ride because it looks like storms but she was all ready to ride when I drove away. Tougher than me, obviously.
__________________
Keep the chain tight!
#128
Senior Member
I think the areas that probably impact many women (not all) are saddle design, bar width and lever reach.
Likes For smoore:
#129
Senior Member
There should be big differences in frames for size and weight if one is optimizing for performance. That is, IMHO, frames for lighter people should generally be made with lighter gauge tubes or frame walls. To this end, "girls bikes" of the same size could be made with a bit lighter wall thickness than "boy's bikes". That's not just for weight: its for comfort and shock absorption. The geometry, to me, is a second order problem. You can adjust geometry with seat height and forward/rear positioning, handlebar width and stem length, and crank length. Color is funny. A 16YO girl might want a pink bike. A gal with a little more maturity might choose something more universal and classic and less "girly". So when a woman has the means to buy an expensive bike, she may not be looking for a hot pink frame, with unicorn decals.
The discussion of color reminded me: When I was young, I had a bike in a "girls color". Then, I was a strapping (6'2", 230#) college football player manly man - Nobody mentioned the color. I'd love to have that '71 Raleigh competition back again:
The discussion of color reminded me: When I was young, I had a bike in a "girls color". Then, I was a strapping (6'2", 230#) college football player manly man - Nobody mentioned the color. I'd love to have that '71 Raleigh competition back again:
#130
Happy banana slug
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Arcata, California, U.S., North America, Earth, Saggitarius Arm, Milky Way
Posts: 3,696
Bikes: 1984 Araya MB 261, 1992 Specialized Rockhopper Sport, 1993 Hard Rock Ultra, 1994 Trek Multitrack 750, 1995 Trek Singletrack 930
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1533 Post(s)
Liked 1,530 Times
in
917 Posts
Agree. I am a short guy with short arms and 28" inseam. I can ride a 49 but only if it comes with a TT no longer than 51cm max. Which means a 48cm or 44cm is generally what fits me best. Women (or men) who are 4'11 to 5'4 most likely will find even a 49cm just a bit too large.
I think the areas that probably impact many women (not all) are saddle design, bar width and lever reach.
I think the areas that probably impact many women (not all) are saddle design, bar width and lever reach.
Problem is, there are enough people who are taller than us, but not too tall, that the big companies don't care about us around the edges. I'd gladly go custom, but that's too many $$$$.
#131
Senior Member
Before Siu closes this or moves it, I'd like to mention that there is a woman that I ride with regularly who is in her 70s and has a PhD in mathematics from Harvard. In fact, I bailed out of tonight's ride because it looks like storms but she was all ready to ride when I drove away. Tougher than me, obviously.
2016 SAT test results confirm pattern that?s persisted for 50 years ? high school boys are better at math than girls - AEI
"...5.1% of female test-takers scored in the 700-800 point range on the SAT math test (45,068 total) compared to 9.4% of boys ( 71,999) who scored in the highest range."
As far as performance on bicycles, men are again, superior by a wide margin:
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/final-...p-xc-2019.html
The men's winner of this weekend's mtb xc World Cup averaged just over 22 mph. The winning female rider just under 18 mph. In other words, the top man was 22% faster than the top woman. Not to mention the men raced an additional 4 km over the women at a much faster pace.
124 of 128 male riders finished with a higher average speed than the no.1 female racer. And this does not take into account the additional distance of the men's course. Equalizing for course length, there's a good chance there would have been zero overlap between the last place men and the top woman: it's only 3% overlap as it is.
In addition, there are many more men who are capable of riding at the elite level, then there are women. 124 finishers in the men's field, just 72 in the women's field.
Strava data shows an average speed gap of 4.5 to 5.8kph (a little over 2 mph) in average speed between men and women.
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/l...-strava-303384
Interestingly, much like the SAT data, there is a universal gap in performance between men and women, and the gap grows ever larger at the highest levels of performance.
What total BS. I spend over a thousand a year on bike stuff alone, and that doesn't cover bike purchases. I don't think I haven't bought at least one new bike every year for that past 5 years. Have an entire stable of bikes I rotate through...walk into local bike shops where ever I travel for work, and typically buy "something" every time. Ride in two different regular club rides...one is mixed gender, the other is just women. They are buying new bikes, bike clothes etc every year too. I'm not an anomaly.
UCI Mountain Bike World Championships 2018: U23 Men & Women XC Results | Cyclingnews.com
I've ridden with three local club groups: all are disproportionately male, at least a 2 to 1 ratio, minimum. The c-level (slowest) road ride for one group is composed exclusively of women as far as I know.
There are many more male riders and racers. The only reasonable conclusion is that men spend far more on bicycling purchases than women do. Not to mention earn more money, although the gap has lessened over the decades.
Last edited by radroad; 05-27-19 at 03:22 PM.
#132
☢
Nail on the head. Stock saddles are expected to be replaced, but my size small Liv had man-size bars; I had about an inch taken off them and they were still a touch too wide for my taste, but there was no more room to trim. And levers; good grief, do they think I'm Andre the Giant or something?
Problem is, there are enough people who are taller than us, but not too tall, that the big companies don't care about us around the edges. I'd gladly go custom, but that's too many $$$$.
Problem is, there are enough people who are taller than us, but not too tall, that the big companies don't care about us around the edges. I'd gladly go custom, but that's too many $$$$.
If it makes you feel any better most of the world is designed for small to average individual. If you think losing one item is a sacrifice, you should spend a day in the shoes of someone taller than average. Nothing is designed to fit comfortable for us. Nothing!
Last edited by KraneXL; 05-27-19 at 03:26 PM.
#133
Senior Member
And bicycle companies can't afford to lose sales. Sales have been stagnant for decades here in the US, despite enormous population growth.
#135
Non omnino gravis
Where is this enormous population growth? The US just dropped below the replacement rate, and currently has the lowest recorded growth rate since the Great Depression.
Add to that the fact that hobbyists do not grow at a rate directly proportional to the population-- new humans ≠ new cyclists-- and you could easily have a dwindling market.
But I think the real thing here is the damage that the manufacturers have done to themselves. In 1989, Trek made the 5000, the first monocoque CF bike. It cost $2,500, and was the most expensive bike they sold by a wide margin. Adjusted for inflation, that would be $5,100-5,200.
Instead, today's top of the line Trek Madone is $12,000. There are 29 Trek road models alone that cost more than $5,000. I started driving in the '80s, and my first two cars combined cost less than a Madone SLR 9.
Add to that the fact that hobbyists do not grow at a rate directly proportional to the population-- new humans ≠ new cyclists-- and you could easily have a dwindling market.
But I think the real thing here is the damage that the manufacturers have done to themselves. In 1989, Trek made the 5000, the first monocoque CF bike. It cost $2,500, and was the most expensive bike they sold by a wide margin. Adjusted for inflation, that would be $5,100-5,200.
Instead, today's top of the line Trek Madone is $12,000. There are 29 Trek road models alone that cost more than $5,000. I started driving in the '80s, and my first two cars combined cost less than a Madone SLR 9.
#136
Senior Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogr..._United_States
1950: 151 million
1960: 179 million
2019: 328 million, assuming this does not account for the 11 to 40 million illegals in the US.
In other words, the US population has DOUBLED since the mid 1950's. Far more than that when you add in the tens of millions of illegals.
Last edited by radroad; 05-27-19 at 05:21 PM.
#137
Senior Member
OMFG! My sister is a full professor in math ed. at a good university. She can give you story after story about STEM professors who were clearly uncomfortable working with women when she was a grad student, and would try to avoid it like the plague.
Things may or may not be turning around these days, but historically, women in the STEM fields have had to continually face discrimination and discouragement from men who have stereotyped them as inherently "less capable."
Things may or may not be turning around these days, but historically, women in the STEM fields have had to continually face discrimination and discouragement from men who have stereotyped them as inherently "less capable."
In other words, a "math education" professor needs no more proficiency in math than a high school graduate. and far less than a high school graduate bound for a higher quality college or university. Then again, there is no such thing as a "higher quality" college or university since all of them are products of the "patriarchy."
As far as discrimination against women, girls take the SAT in far higher numbers, graduate in far higher numbers and are vastly overrepresented in higher ed all over the world even though their objective performance is inferior on standardized testing, as I have already shown above.
https://www.studyinternational.com/n...the-boys-gone/
The logical conclusion therefore is that even though men are clearly more intelligent, men are systematically being discriminated against in k-12 schooling largely due to the fake propaganda of "discrimination against women."
You should just shut your mouth with your unsubstantiated, ignorant mansplaining anyway.
Last edited by radroad; 05-27-19 at 05:33 PM.
#138
☢
Since the imposition of Affirmative Action women in the professional fields have skyrocketed. In fact, the greatest recipient of AA has been the white female. There are also presently more women in higher education then men.
As for the population growth, there has been a surge in the push towards physical activity particularly in cycling. There are bicycles and scooter of all types located in central hubs all over the nation. In addition to the proliferation of trails, paths and bike lanes in all major cities. I'd definitely call that a substantial growth.
I don't think discrimination is the right word for this.
As for the population growth, there has been a surge in the push towards physical activity particularly in cycling. There are bicycles and scooter of all types located in central hubs all over the nation. In addition to the proliferation of trails, paths and bike lanes in all major cities. I'd definitely call that a substantial growth.
A "math education" professor only teaches future k-12 schoolteachers how best to teach k-12 math. It doesn't presuppose any knowledge beyond trigonometry, or third year math in an average high school curriculum.
In other words, a "math education" professor needs no more proficiency in math than a high school graduate. and far less than a high school graduate bound for a higher quality college or university. Then again, there is no such thing as a "higher quality" college or university since all of them are products of the "patriarchy."
As far as discrimination against women, girls take the SAT in far higher numbers, graduate in far higher numbers and are vastly overrepresented in higher ed all over the world even though their objective performance is inferior on standardized testing, as I have already shown above.
https://www.studyinternational.com/n...the-boys-gone/
The logical conclusion therefore is that even though men are clearly more intelligent, men are systematically being discriminated against in k-12 schooling largely due to the fake propaganda of "discrimination against women."
You should just shut your mouth with your unsubstantiated, ignorant mansplaining anyway.
In other words, a "math education" professor needs no more proficiency in math than a high school graduate. and far less than a high school graduate bound for a higher quality college or university. Then again, there is no such thing as a "higher quality" college or university since all of them are products of the "patriarchy."
As far as discrimination against women, girls take the SAT in far higher numbers, graduate in far higher numbers and are vastly overrepresented in higher ed all over the world even though their objective performance is inferior on standardized testing, as I have already shown above.
https://www.studyinternational.com/n...the-boys-gone/
The logical conclusion therefore is that even though men are clearly more intelligent, men are systematically being discriminated against in k-12 schooling largely due to the fake propaganda of "discrimination against women."
You should just shut your mouth with your unsubstantiated, ignorant mansplaining anyway.
#139
Senior Member
REPARATIONS NOW!
PATRIARCHY AND RACISM NEED TO END RIGHT NOW!
#140
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Congratulations guys on the complete thread hijack.
#141
Senior Member
The bottom line is that men buy many more bicycles and much more bicycling gear because we have much more money and are much faster and stronger than women and are therefore far more likely to enter bicycle races, endurance events, or to simply ride a lot. Common sense ftw.
And great job abandoning all of the social justice crap when confronted with the facts.
And great job abandoning all of the social justice crap when confronted with the facts.
#142
☢
The bottom line is that men buy many more bicycles and much more bicycling gear because we have much more money and are much faster and stronger than women and are therefore far more likely to enter bicycle races, endurance events, or to simply ride a lot. Common sense ftw.
And great job abandoning all of the social justice crap when confronted with the facts.
And great job abandoning all of the social justice crap when confronted with the facts.
#143
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,558
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked 2,180 Times
in
1,470 Posts
Thread closed