* OZZO Winter Training Bottoms -- Traditional Heavy Fleece with Double Seat & Rear Pocket. Black with Multicoloured Striped Ankle Cuffs. £23.95
* OZZO Anatomic Tights Fleeced Lycra with elasticated waist. No pad. Under-foot straps. Choice of black, red or blue. £20.95
I'm very happy with the lycra shorts I got from them some time ago, so I thought these longs may be equally good value for money. The problem is there are no photos on the website.
TIA
-- Michael Klontzas 'If everything seems to be coming your way, you're probably in the wrong lane' (Borstelmann's Rule)
Does anyone have any personal experience of the following items from Mike Dyson's website: * OZZO Anatomic Tights Fleeced Lycra with elasticated waist. No pad. Under-foot straps. Choice of black, red or blue. £20.95
I bought a red pair a couple of years ago, which I'm very happy with. They're warm, comfortable and of good quality. Sizing is about what you'd expect (Medium is nearly a perfect fit with a 30" waist and 31" inside leg, might be better if my legs were an inch longer).
In article <[email hidden]>, dated Sat, 17 May 2003 14:36:45 +0100, Danny Colyer <[email hidden]> says...
Quoted message said:
Michael Klontzas asked:
Quoted message said:
Does anyone have any personal experience of the following items from Mike Dyson's website: * OZZO Anatomic Tights Fleeced Lycra with elasticated waist. No pad. Under-foot straps. Choice of black, red or blue. £20.95
I bought a red pair a couple of years ago, which I'm very happy with. They're warm, comfortable and of good quality. Sizing is about what you'd expect (Medium is nearly a perfect fit with a 30" waist and 31" inside leg, might be better if my legs were an inch longer).
Thanks. Excuse the stupid question but are these supposed to be worn a) under trousers b) without underwear? In other words, are they the long equivalent of lycra shorts?
-- Michael Klontzas 'If everything seems to be coming your way, you're probably in the wrong lane' (Borstelmann's Rule)
Excuse the stupid question but are these supposed to be worn a) under trousers b) without underwear? In other words, are they the long equivalent of lycra shorts?
Usually people wear padded cycling shorts under them, and nothing over them. Trousers over them would defeat the object of the leggings: They dont flap in the wind, if they get wet they dry off your body heat and they keep you warm.
In article <[email hidden]>, dated Sat, 17 May 2003 14:42:36 +0000 (UTC), Alex Graham <[email hidden]> says...
Quoted message said:
Michael Klontzas said:
Excuse the stupid question but are these supposed to be worn a) under trousers b) without underwear? In other words, are they the long equivalent of lycra shorts?
Usually people wear padded cycling shorts under them, and nothing over them. Trousers over them would defeat the object of the leggings: They dont flap in the wind, if they get wet they dry off your body heat and they keep you warm.
Thanks. Makes sense really. I was just wondering whether I should read something more in that differentiation between long 'tights' and 'bottoms' in the OZZO catalogue.
-- Michael Klontzas 'If everything seems to be coming your way, you're probably in the wrong lane' (Borstelmann's Rule)
