# What is the point of shorts with detachable inner?



## beanbag (Nov 20, 2005)

I have some fox shorts and I have never found a reason to cut the straps and detach the liner from the shorts. If I need to wash one, I probably need to wash the other. I haven't noticed much difference in performance vs my non-detachable shorts, except that the waist and shorts overall slide around more.


----------



## Shalom (Nov 7, 2008)

Makes life easier when you are out on an epic. Can detach the liner, use another liner/bibs/whatever with the same shell. As long as your chamois is clean, the shell does not really matter.


----------



## gnewcomer (Jul 2, 2011)

beanbag said:


> I have some fox shorts and I have never found a reason to cut the straps and detach the liner from the shorts. If I need to wash one, I probably need to wash the other. I haven't noticed much difference in performance vs my non-detachable shorts, except that the waist and shorts overall slide around more.


I've found that higher end shorts such as Nema, Royal Racing, Azonic to name a few made from heavy duty cordura or other abrasion resistant fabrics will far outlast any liner.

<shrugging>

gnewcomer aka OldMtnGoat


----------



## stevehollx (Apr 6, 2010)

Shalom said:


> Makes life easier when you are out on an epic. Can detach the liner, use another liner/bibs/whatever with the same shell. As long as your chamois is clean, the shell does not really matter.


So you ride with a spare pare of bibs/liner on an epic, and change midway through?


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

I have noticed that liners wear much quicker than shells, so there is that. Overall, it is not that big of a difference, but some people may prefer a specific shell and a specific liner, and those preferences may not always line up in a single product.


----------



## gnewcomer (Jul 2, 2011)

stevehollx said:


> So you ride with a spare pare of bibs/liner on an epic, and change midway through?


uhhh just a thought here, as I'm no expert.... but EPIC rides in my neck of the woods would be more than one day <shrugging>

gnewcomer aka OldMtnGoat


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

beanbag said:


> I have some fox shorts and I have never found a reason to cut the straps and detach the liner from the shorts. If I need to wash one, I probably need to wash the other. I haven't noticed much difference in performance vs my non-detachable shorts, except that the waist and shorts overall slide around more.


In my experience, the liner included with MTB shorts generally sucks in comparison to road shorts or bibs. I always remove mine, and usually ride with my Pearl Izumi bibs underneath.


----------



## Tim-ti (Jul 27, 2005)

+1 on Evasive's comment. Everyone I know who rides in road shorts is dissatisfied by MTB liners.

Also, shorts with the liners sewn in all the way around (not just with tethers) tend to be the worst at pulling the liner down, this means that the chamois doesn't stay in close contact with your nether regions (this can result in chaffing), it can also allow dirt thrown up by your rear tire to get in to the liner (unconfortable, and also bad for chaffing).

I'd not considered this before, but there is probably also a freedom of movement thing going on here. I think stuff would get twisted up if my jeans had built in underpants.


----------



## ajdonner (Apr 3, 2007)

Tim-ti said:


> +1 on Evasive's comment. Everyone I know who rides in road shorts is dissatisfied by MTB liners.
> 
> Also, shorts with the liners sewn in all the way around (not just with tethers) tend to be the worst at pulling the liner down, this means that the chamois doesn't stay in close contact with your nether regions (this can result in chaffing), it can also allow dirt thrown up by your rear tire to get in to the liner (unconfortable, and also bad for chaffing).
> 
> I'd not considered this before, but there is probably also a freedom of movement thing going on here. I think stuff would get twisted up if my jeans had built in underpants.


I'll echo the two previous posters. I prefer a shell and bibs-everything stays put and comfortable much more so than an attached liner/chamois whether completely sewn in or 'suspended'.

OT I just purchased a couple of pairs of shorts off hucknroll, Zoic and PI. Both have velcro sewn around the snaps at the waist at the top of the fly. Why? I've found it just makes securing the snap more of an effort (albeit a very, very small inconvenience) given the velcro often engages before and slightly askew of the proper alignment for the snaps/buttons.


----------



## elder_mtber (Jan 13, 2004)

I have Nema shorts with the separate lycra/whatever+pad. Couple times when it has been too hot for me I wore only the lycra short. Way, way cooler.

Terry


----------



## yoterryh (Mar 21, 2006)

Trying to resurrect an old thread here. What if I reject the arguments for detachable liners and want to find some with ATTACHED liners? Who makes 'em? I can't seem to find any! I've got three older pairs of Hoss Ponderosa shorts, which are apparently no longer made. They're not worn out yet, but I want something comparable in a baggy short with an attached liner. What is there?


----------



## kjlued (Jun 23, 2011)

Easier to wash, don't get tangled and twisted. 
Can wear the chamois with different shorts or different chamois with the same shorts. 
For example, when I go camping, I may take a spare pair of chamois for day 2 but wear the same shorts. No big deal wearing the same shorts but the same chamois is kind of gross.


----------



## RocketMagnet (May 22, 2008)

There is a very good reason that MTB shorts should have a non fixed liner. Over long distances and/or in wet conditions a fixed liner will take the skin off your arse. Fixed liners are ok for shorter rides.. otherwise steer well clear of them.
You can minimise chaffing by using a rear mud guard and waterproof shorts but in hot conditions you sweat down there so wet or hot and long distances over rough terrain = chaffing for a fixed chamois.

Essentially if your liner is fixed on an MTB you move around more than your realise climbing , especially on steep technical terrain so this translates to your arse moving independently of your short liner .. the result is chaffing. If the liner is separate then your liner moves against the outer short, thus the inner moves against the outer and "adsorbs" the tiny chaffing movements. So any chaffing is between the inner and outer short and not your skin.

Bib shorts are fixed but were initially aimed at road riding where you don't move around on your saddle as much and people often use a chamois cream to cope with the smaller micro movements. Really high quality bib shorts are utterly brilliant under normal MTB shorts though as they wick sweat away better and the lycra doesn't bind to the outer short keeping the chamois stationary against your arse and hence no chaffing.

Ultimate setup IMO is : Assos Bib shorts (correct size) + Fox Outer (or other decent MTB outer as long as its slippy against the bib short material) + Rear Mud guard + Chamois cream (Assos or other make).

With the above if you can't all day multiday ride in any conditions without getting chaffing then your bib doesn't fit.

I've suffered in the past due to fixed liners and learned the hard way.

Incidentally Assos are releasing new bibs in December where the inner chamois is only attached at the front and rear leaving the centre free to move against the outer.. they have done this for exactly the same reason outlined above... really surprised this hasn't been done before as MTB riders have essentially been doing the same thing for years by wearing a separate outer over their bibs.


----------



## motard5 (Apr 9, 2007)

maybe its just me, but the difference between an integrated and separate setup is night and day...the separate being light years more comfortable. Movement is simply better as you can fit and adjust both as you like. When they are sewn together its less airfow, worse fit, and when one moves it stretches the other. It feels like a big overgrown diaper.

Plus you can rotate liners, upgrade to better ones, and mix and match with different outers as you see fit. When my outers are all dirty, I have even used boardshort, hiking or gym shorts in a pinch.

And bottom line, any half way decent short in product lineups are separates. Only the crappy cheapest products are integrated.


----------



## jm2e (Mar 26, 2012)

The real question is; why even make an effort to integrate the two? Aside from the marketing appeal, it's a useless feature. Does your liner need to be suspended to stay up? Do your slacks have tabs in them to hold up your tighty whities? Isn't it easier to pull on your chamois first, then pull on your shorts? The whole concept is silly.


----------



## dan4jeepin (Apr 9, 2007)

yoterryh said:


> Trying to resurrect an old thread here. What if I reject the arguments for detachable liners and want to find some with ATTACHED liners? Who makes 'em? I can't seem to find any! I've got three older pairs of Hoss Ponderosa shorts, which are apparently no longer made. They're not worn out yet, but I want something comparable in a baggy short with an attached liner. What is there?


Novara makes some that are fairly nice. I've used them on 6hr rides without any issues.

Novara Exposure Double Bike Shorts - Men's - Free Shipping at REI.com

I have some Fox ones that are a couple years old which are terrible so I wouldn't recommend them.


----------



## Tim-ti (Jul 27, 2005)

Silly, Silly, Silly! I agree, it's not only a useless feature, it's a conspiracy of errors.

If you put anything heavy in the cargo pockets of your baggy shorts, or move about (as you do when riding technical terrain) the baggy shorts will pull down or move around your waist, then, being integrated, they'll pull the waistband of the liner short down too.

When the waistband of the liner short moves down the chamois will no longer be held in intimate contact with your crotch. The chamois' primary function is to eliminate chaffing, it's works in the same way as moleskin can to protect your feet from blisters, like a prosthetic callous. The padding itself is almost a secondary feature, though more padding is normally be better IF it's in intimate contact with your butt. However, if your liner shorts are pulled down by your baggy shorts, a thick pad that's not held in intimate contact with your butt will feel like a full diaper, which is particularly unpleasant when it's sodden with sweat and you're off the bike hiking.

A waistband can only cinch around you, so once things move South it won't do anything to bring the chamois back into place; the only fix is to hoik them up manually, at which moment movement and elastic fabrics will instantly begin conspiring to pull everything down again. This is why distance cyclists wear bibs (roadies don't even have heavy, cargo laden baggy shorts to contend with). Bib straps pull UP from the shoulders, keeping the chamois in prosthetic-chamois-mode. Not having a tight waistband (which is a little uncomfortable and can restrict your diaphragm breathing) when you're hunched over the handlebars is a side benefit.

*Yes, I'm the DirtBaggies guy. So you could argue that this is just my pitch. Well it is, I believed my pitch so strongly that I started a company and made stuff to try to rectify this.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I think the best are shorts where the liner is attached, but just at one point at each side. It allows the liner and shell to move separately, while keeping the shell from slipping around TOO much. 

I've had a few pairs where the liner is fully attached all the way around, and have never really liked it (I end up showing crack:eekster. I've also done the shorts-over-lycra thing, but it never feels quite right on the MTB to me, though it seems to work on the road, i think because I am not trying to move around my saddle. I'll often do that if I am doing a longer errand ride or a road ride in some seriously red-neck areas.

Good point about many baggy chamois being crap, but not all are. The liner in my Sugoi Gustov baggies is really top notch.

Cantrary to others' experiences here, my liners generally outlast my shells.


----------



## bjorn240 (Oct 4, 2005)

Assos bibs. 
Polyester golf shorts. 

My work pants don't sewn-in underpants either.


----------



## eric1971 (Apr 29, 2004)

yoterryh said:


> Trying to resurrect an old thread here. What if I reject the arguments for detachable liners and want to find some with ATTACHED liners? Who makes 'em? I can't seem to find any! I've got three older pairs of Hoss Ponderosa shorts, which are apparently no longer made. They're not worn out yet, but I want something comparable in a baggy short with an attached liner. What is there?


I'm with you! Down to one pair of Ponderosas after my other pair died. I haven't been able to find a suitable replacement yet. I used to ride with separates, but what I always found was the outer shell would bunch up. I really hated this. With the liner sewn in, everything stays put. Also, I really liked the attached belt. Something no current shorts seem to have either.


----------



## Berkley (May 21, 2007)

Separate liner/outer gives you A LOT more versatility when cold weather hits. Combinations of liner/bibs/tights/shorts are just about infinite.


----------

