- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
review
£45.00
VERDICT:
Turns normal clothing into cycling gear with more style than anything comparable on the market
Weight:
0g
Contact:
At road.cc every product is thoroughly tested for as long as it takes to get a proper insight into how well it works. Our reviewers are experienced cyclists that we trust to be objective. While we strive to ensure that opinions expressed are backed up by facts, reviews are by their nature an informed opinion, not a definitive verdict. We don't intentionally try to break anything (except locks) but we do try to look for weak points in any design. The overall score is not just an average of the other scores: it reflects both a product's function and value – with value determined by how a product compares with items of similar spec, quality, and price.
What the road.cc scores meanGood scores are more common than bad, because fortunately good products are more common than bad.
- Exceptional
- Excellent
- Very Good
- Good
- Quite good
- Average
- Not so good
- Poor
- Bad
- Appalling
Can padded cycling undies look cute and work hard? Yes, if you're wearing Urbanist Cycling's Brigitte briefs.
The Brigitte briefs are one of two designs from Urbanist Cycling, a new Texan brand that was supported by successful Kickstarter funding. They are designed for city cycling, or indeed anything short of long distance or race rides.
Wearing the Brigitte means that any clothing can become cycle clothing, as the briefs provide both a chamois for commuting comfort and protection from the hems in non-cycle specific trousers or jeans.
The Brigitte has a snazzy black and white striped 'look at me' design. Although I prefer to keep my underwear to myself this is a design which I would be happy to be seen sporting in the changing rooms before spin class as it doesn't look like traditional underwear. The Brigitte briefs are definitely feminine, but in a fun, cute way. There is a thin pink stretch lace on the top of the waistband, sensibly not continued around the legs where it would chafe. This acts instead of a traditional waistband to avoid cutting in and producing the dreaded muffin top.
Find the Urbanist Cycling Padded Brigitte online here
The cut of the briefs is full without being grannyish. They are high at the back but not so high that they showed over the top of my trousers. This was useful as I generally wore non-cycle specific trousers or jeans with them and other cycling briefs I own can show significantly in use.
The chamois pad is of a good quality and really well attached to the briefs themselves with soft stitching which I couldn't feel in use. It is soft and flexible and didn't give a 'nappy' appearance in use. I've mostly been wearing these briefs under merino tights or jeans, and they've certainly got enough padding to wear for a medium to long commute. I didn't feel that I had to change out of them straight away afterwards either as they coped well with sweat and wicked moisture away fairly well.
The briefs stayed in place without riding up and were comfortable in use. My only gripe was that on the XL size the front of the crotch had been sized up too much, so there was excess material to wrinkle between my legs. This isn't an issue on the smaller sizes and didn't pose a comfort problem even in the XL.
The Brigitte briefs are available in four sizes, covering waists from 63 to 89cm between them. They are definitely on the generous side, so if in doubt (or buying as a present) go smaller.
I'm not surprised these briefs raised 250% of their Kickstarter target as they fill a real gap in the market.
Verdict
Turns normal clothing into cycling gear with more style than anything comparable on the market
road.cc test report
Make and model: Urbanist Cycling Padded Brigitte
Size tested: XL
Tell us what the product is for, and who it's aimed at. What do the manufacturers say about it? How does that compare to your own feelings about it?
Ever dreamt of a comfortable ride around town without having to resort to full-on cycling shorts? Something you can wear all day and feel feminine in, but still helps cushion your most sensitive parts as you ride?
Urbanist Cycling's Brigitte chamois-padded knickers are the answer to your prayers. Beautifully cut to fit and enhance the female form, they've been tested tirelessly by the Texas cycling community where Urbanist is based to ensure no chaffing or digging in. The material is sumptuous, whilst the chamois pads come from one of Italy's most respected chamois designers.
The Brigitte is well suited for medium/longer rides of up to 25 miles, or even longer. A quantum leap forward for women's cycling kit.
Tell us some more about the technical aspects of the product?
Full coverage cycling knickers
Extra thick, flexible chamois pad designed and made in Italy
Breathable, quick drying fabric to wick moisture efficiently
Polyester/elastane blend
Tested by real women to ensure no chaffing or digging in discomfort
Wear under clothes, for outdoor riding or spinning
Rate the product for quality of construction:
8/10
Nicely made with no loose threads. Labels are all heat sealed so nothing to rub.
Rate the product for performance:
8/10
Good for rides up to about two hours.
Rate the product for durability:
8/10
Despite me failing to wash them on a delicate cycle as instructed, these washed really well with no loss of shape.
Rate the product for comfort, if applicable:
8/10
A lovely chamois and soft, smooth all-round fit.
Rate the product for value:
7/10
Comparable with similar items available.
Tell us how the product performed overall when used for its designed purpose
The briefs were comfy to wear and fitted well.
Tell us what you particularly liked about the product
The snazzy colour scheme.
Did you enjoy using the product? Yes.
Would you consider buying the product? Yes.
Would you recommend the product to a friend? Yes.
About the tester
Age: 36 Height: 5'7 Weight: size 16
I usually ride: Trek 7.5 WSD My best bike is: Turquoise Cruiser
I've been riding for: Under 5 years I ride: A few times a week I would class myself as: Novice
I regularly do the following types of riding: commuting, general fitness riding, Leisure
Latest Comments
- Dnnnnnn 1 sec ago
And - while too many people *are* struggling - there are still plenty who the money for expensive bikes, kit, cycling holidays, etc.
- Rik Mayals underpants 2 hours 16 min ago
Here's my cycling related Christmas gift. Beautiful enamel garage sign to go above my Campagnolo Super Record RS equipped Colnago.
- Rendel Harris 6 hours 24 min ago
No idea if Cancellara was using a motor or not, I hope not as I greatly enjoyed him as a rider, but the tech was certainly available, I can...
- wtjs 8 hours 3 min ago
Fair enough:...
- SecretSam 9 hours 14 min ago
Usual ugly Pinarello, bumps and curves where they aren't needed. And, according to Mapdec, not well built.
- Rome73 11 hours 20 min ago
That's not strictly true - Reform will legalise immigrant baiting, trans bashing and tar and feathering of anyone woke. Loads of fun for all the...
- Rendel Harris 11 hours 7 min ago
What's a "legitimate cyclist" please? Someone who doesn't conform to your arbitrary norms? At the age of 56 I admit that you have 13 years more...
- mattw 1 day 1 hour ago
This risks turning me into a hanger and flogger....
- Spangly Shiny 1 day 7 hours ago
I had the pleasure of owning two of the featured builders here, in my history. When I joined the Army in 1971, I took with me my curly Hetchins:...
Add new comment
97 comments
I apologise if any of my comments have been taken as "man hating'. They weren't meant in that way. They were meant as an attempt to explain how the "nice arse" comments exclude the women from the conversation (and let's face it, the product is for women).
I think the most telling comment in the whole thread is along the lines of "women don't read this anyway" - it's OK if they don't know about it. But we women have read it. We've been insulted by it, angered by it, and we have tried to explain why we don't like it. Rather than accepting that we might be unhappy with the comments, we've been classed as man-hating party-poopers. Gee, thanks.
Why don't you just point her at the website instead?
FWIW after all the fuss on here, I showed the picture to my wife (who has no interest cycling at all) who just said 'nice bum, good for her'
Rapha do merino boxers in (lightly) padded and non-padded versions. Also Vulpine have something similar which Nick Hussey gets quite excited about the comfort of. I sometimes commute in the padded Rapha product under a pair of Ron Hills.
It's completely predictable. Road.cc is (should be) better than this. I'd like to see them commenting on this and taking a strong line against some of the crap that's been posted. If they want to grow their female readership then they really don't have a choice.
Indeed there are, but they are probably more difficult to explain to your IT department or SO should they question your browsing history.
With you 100 per cent on the "grow up" comment.
Yes, but many more on our facebook page. We delete the nastiest ones. Even my 8 year old had a nasty comment about what she was wearing in a bike test shot. It's the reason other female reviewers stopped having their photos taken too.
Nothing, but you can't say so here.
Firstly it's misogynistic and you'll get the politically correct teaboys all a'dither.
Secondly, you can only see her butt. That is fit, I grant you. But she might have a face like a walrus.
I was just wondering the same thing. I really hope this was somehow re-posted in error. Can someone from road.cc explain?
Blimey, you shouldn't be the one apologising here. joeinpoole is serially "a bit dodgy" to say the least when it comes to comments to do with women and cycling. But I'm not sure he's ever going to really understand why what he says is such a problem.
But she didn't post it on this thread. That's the difference. It's got nothing to do with whether the model has a nice bum or not - she wouldn't have been picked for the campaign if she didn't , it's to do with posting the opinion on the forum. It's a product review. It's not reviewing the model's bum.
Although, as we only get shots of the bum, how can we be certain the model's not a he - designers have been using Andrej Pejic on the catwalk for years because they think his figure show off women's clothes better than a woman could...
Actually, it is wrong. Of course, you should have said, "The girl's FIT. What's wrong with that?"
Just saying....
I really hope this isn't a cynical clickbait job. Mind you, the road.cc content system does seem to be a bit eccentric - a couple of weeks back stories were being added (and posted to Twitter) but never appearing on the front page for several days, while some stories do randomly disappear and reappear. So it's possible this review has been bumped up accidentally.
Bit depressing to see the same sort of "I'd hit that"/"it's not wrong to say she's fit" comments coming back out this time too.
I did exactly that! But it would have been preferable that I could have sent her a link to this review without all the crap underneath it.
Does she show you pictures of Mat Brett for you to say "nice bum, good for him" in reply?
I think it looks great. Very sexy looking and if a lady wears that on commute in London she will be greatly admired.
If that's the case then I think the designer has done their job.
If any lady choose to wear them then they know what they are wearing and for what purpose.
Context matters, the article is a review and the comments aren't exactly welcoming to the intended audience.
I'll use a (possibly awful) analogy, which is the number of women I know who hate Page 3 and the sexualisation of music videos etc, but have no issue with pornography. The objection isn't with portraying anyone as sexual, but with normalizing that as a default view.
If my part in the banter caused any offence, sorry. None intended. I still find the picture amusing, in that it's slightly ridiculous. My work means I've been dealing with creatives and marketing people for years, and there's big kid inside me that sees the comedy in most advertising.
you can admire a nice bottom without feeling the need to publicly comment on it, read Caroline Dodgson's post again for why
Pics 3 and 5 show the garment.
Pics 1, 2 and 4 show an extremely fit female body wearing them outdoors. Are they to be worn without anything over them - if not, why show photos outdoors?
It's a lovely bottom. It was deliberately a lovely bottom and not a flabby out of shape one. That's what we are shown to display the product in an attractive light.
What is wrong with appreciating it out loud. Tell the model she has a lovely bottom - no problem. Say she has a lovely bottom on a forum -no problem. Nothing disrespectful or woman hating there.
The brainwash police are at work again.
It's ok to be a bloke - really it is, and it'll be a very sad world when people can't make a joke or be what they are.
Ho ho ho.
I hope you pinch the girls bums when they sit on your lap, Tina from accounts is a right hussy.
Ah, nice change of approach.
I get on well with all the bunches I've ridden in, and I play Santa at the party.
Jesus wept...going by some of the po-faced sanctimonious griping on here you wonder how they got on in a bunch. They must be a barrel of laughs at the club xmas party.
Lighten up ladies...
You may find dated sub carry-on film comments very funny but you must also appreciate that for many folks nowadays, perhaps female but also perhaps younger than you, perhaps used to a more diverse professional environment, perhaps who stayed at school a bit longer than you, that this kind of thing just comes across as a bit sad so it's probably best to accept that rather than keep trying to defend it. If you like 'barrackroom humour' I'm sure there are other more suitable outlets on the internet, or an actual barrackroom of course. Just because someone doesn't laugh at your jokes it doesn't mean they lack a sense of humour, it could just be you are not very funny.
You only deserve half an answer to that post, so here is the word 'off'. I'll let you guess the first half.
Some of the attitudes on display here would be shameful at a Jim Davidson gig circa 1980. You're an embarrassment.
It's still you, I'm afraid.
Making an inane comment then claiming to be a Devils advocate doesn't excuse it.
A Devils advocate in this case would suggest that women like to be talked about in this way, and that wearing garments like this is done precisely to invite such comments, not as you suggested, that it doesn't matter because women don't read things here.
This is what misogyny is.
It's a spectrum which assumes that women are less than men and which has absorbed years, decades, centuries of them being treated as second class people.
In terms of cycling, it's the way that women are judged on their appearance in the context of their sex rather than any other metric. A pair of padded shorts for men would not produce the same comments because women are judged differently to men.
Above all it's disappointing. It's disappointing because I would have thought that men would know better than to comment in a way that wouldn't dare to if they had to say it to the reviewer or the model face to face.
As noted above, it's sad.
(and as for all the Oo-er Madam comments, although some thought has gone into the visual appearance of the shorts, there is no way, no way at all that any woman would wear these and think 'Mmmm, how sexy am I with a big foam pad between my legs'...)
I don't like the fact that the accusation of misogyny is sometimes used as readily and as inappropriately as anti-semitism.
Regardless of gender, there's a high giggle factor when underwear is promoted by models standing around in settings where they wouldn't normally be standing around in their underwear. In fact the marketing will often use the giggle factor as a tactic to avoid relying on being too overtly sexual.
The comments thread is too laddish. I don't think there's much wrong with most of the individual comments, or that anyone deserves to have been called a misogynist. However, the overall tone is inappropriate. None the less, I will continue to find picture of people standing around in public places in their underwear slightly amusing.
I could be wrong but I believe the images of the model used are from the company that produce the product. Most likely because the reviewer and road.cc pre-empted the ridiculous misogynistic reaction from its readers. Sad, really...
As you were.
I wish Richard Keys was on this forum.
Not the usual Road.cc model. Having been criticised (although not by road.cc) for commenting on the fact that there were people who could make the clothes look better you seemed to have succumbed to doing exactly that.
Pages