[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/n/ - Transportation


Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 17 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



File: rockhopper.jpg (306 KB, 1974x1162)
306 KB
306 KB JPG
>local specialized shop
>looking for a new bike
>on the far right corner of the showroom there is a qt rockhopper
>i like the color scheme
>it's the women rockhopper
What did specialized mean by this? Where is muh gender equality for color schemes?
>>
File: EmilyMaye-CanyonSRAMRapha.jpg (351 KB, 2048x1365)
351 KB
351 KB JPG
>>1212398
Shouldn't you know already that women's bikes always have better color schemes? And understandably so because in a women's mind color scheme > technical specs
>>
File: 1531358263829.jpg (348 KB, 781x750)
348 KB
348 KB JPG
>>1212398
>>
>>1212398
Women's bikes, at least in principle, have shorter top tubes and longer seat tubes, as women have different body proportions.

In that vein tho, it's often because companies want to jump on muh feminism bandwagon.
>>
File: 1460316840344.jpg (14 KB, 200x238)
14 KB
14 KB JPG
>women's colorway
>still fucking murdered out except for the fucking logo
when the fuck are we going to get colors back
>>
>>1212524
When people stop trying to pretend they post on weightweenies and ride alibaba specials and actually start posting on weightweenies and riding alibaba specials
>>
>>1212524
Just buy a Trek or Orbea.
>>
>>1212511
How much shorter is the top tube in womens geo?
I considered getting a womens frame due to babylegs, but I do need some more reach.
>>
File: Cutthroat_Force_1-1.jpg (130 KB, 1140x641)
130 KB
130 KB JPG
>>1212540
still mostly black with color accents. My next bike is probably going to be a Cutthroat.
>>
>>1212511
>muh feminism bandwagon
how is making a bike specced for women muh feminism? is it muh midgetism when a company makes a 48cm frame? muh giantism when they make a 60cm frame?
>>
>>1212576
it's just muh muh feminism
>>
>>1212553
My mentally challenged friend both of them offer custom paintjobs through their Project One/myO programs.
>>
>>1212576
The only real difference is a different saddle and a shorter reach, they could as well offer the same bike with a shorter stem and different saddle.
>>
>>1212672
Shorter stem makes the bike twitchier.
>>
>>1212576
Because cycling, just like most straining physical activities, is something mostly done by men. If companies operated purely on cost/benefit then they would cater and market solely to men.

Regardless of how you judge the ephemeral 'feminists' it is almost certain that bike companies expanded into 'women's specific' bikes mostly because of the soft political pressure and desire to build a positive public image.

Granted - I have no issue with this whatsoever. Especially if it is done well, instead of painting regular bikes in pastel colors.
>>
>>1212688
That's such nonsense, you fucking retard. The 'woman's cycling' market is very small and exists only to the extent that it's lucrative.
It's also worthwhile as gender specific gear is very often genuinely advantageous for women.
>>
>>1212688
FURTHER it's not enough to have 'no issue with it whatsoever', you should be thankful and glad and happy and support something that gets more qts on bicycles
>>
File: 1484001232701.jpg (142 KB, 1000x1000)
142 KB
142 KB JPG
>>1212602
>paying $15K just to get a bike that isn't black
>>
>>1212688
Which is a shame because woman's bodies are genuinely more suited to cycling.
>>
>>1212701
in some ways yes but women are better when they're nice and soft not skellington mode
>>
File: 14tocstg2002_670.jpg (34 KB, 670x446)
34 KB
34 KB JPG
>>1212706
>Tfw when no QTT cycle gf
>>
File: 345345.jpg (220 KB, 800x1063)
220 KB
220 KB JPG
>>1212706
*blocks your path*
>>
File: _d813723.jpg (229 KB, 1280x854)
229 KB
229 KB JPG
>>1212706
wich mode is this qt??

>>1212805
>tfw never ever forever
>>
>>1212813
She could crush my skull like an egg with those and I would die happy
>>
>>1212674
Yea, but 150 mm sucks even worse since you start to steer with your core instead of your arms.
And I'm not going to fit a 180 mm onto a womens frame just because they don't make small mens frames.
>>
>>1212701
>have 2 unaero fat sacks attached to your chest
>can't easily take a piss with bibs
>more suited to cycling
>>
>>1212553
correction: a trek from 1980's-90's




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.