I had my first experience with the women's specific movement in 2002. “I ride a Trek 6700 WSD,” my 12-year old self would say, smugly, to my friends. They didn’t know what on earth I was talking about, and neither did I. But I was hooked on clarifying to all who would listen that my bike was WSD (Women’s Specific Design), the label Trek applied to bikes designed with women in mind. The designation made me feel quite special. I had just gotten my first “race” bike, and I felt official.
I do remember asking myself what made my bike, of all bikes, a women’s bike. It wasn’t pink, it looked like other bikes. I knew next to nothing about geometries, fit, or what a saddle should (and shouldn’t) feel like. Was a women’s specific design exactly what I needed to launch my “racing” career, or was this all just some sort of marketing gimmick to sell more bikes? I didn’t really know.
Women’s specific bikes began surfacing in the late 90s, which included the release of “The Juliana” under the Santa Cruz brand in 1999. It was generalized that women had significantly different proportions than men; that a majority of women would have longer legs and a shorter torso (I am quite the opposite with shorter legs and a longer torso). There would also be other anatomical differences taken into consideration such as shoulder width, pelvic angles, etc., but all of these changes were made without a wealth of data.
Regardless, the demand was there. Women, myself included, wanted a bike designed specifically for them, whether that meant a full geometry redesign to include shortened top tubes and taller head tubes, or just saddles, handlebars, and grips specifically for women.
Here we are in 2019 and some of the original front runners of the women’s specific movement, companies like Trek and Specialized and Yeti, are reverting back to a unisex platform, leaving behind their women’s specific bike lines. Specialized just killed the Ruby, the world’s most popular women’s endurance road bike, and Trek has culled most of its WSD line. Is this where the industry is headed? Where are all the women's bikes going?
My first ponyCirca 2002, aboard my Trek 6700 WSD. I clearly had never heard of a bike fit before – why didn’t anyone tell me to raise my seat? Photo: Mom
The slow disappearance of women’s-specific bikes made me curious to learn a little more about the WSD that first started it all for me. I did a quick Google search, looking for any archived information on the 2002 Trek. I didn’t find much. I did, however, come across a few online customer reviews which felt like opening a time capsule.
| It's nice to see bikes designed specifically for women. |
| This bike fits so much better than my old (mens frame) bike. |
| WSD Geometry is a perfect fit for me. (being 5'3") |
| The fit is MUCH better than my previous bike and other "men’s" frames I have tried. |
| I think part of the reason I fell in love with mountain biking is because I started on this great bike. |
There are lots of reviews like that, from women who firmly believed that this WSD model fit them better than anything had before.
Did they?
It's not about tearing down the whole conceptMy burning question: Why are these companies switching away from women’s specific models, back to unisex, and will they lose loyal customers?
With all of this in mind I asked Stephanie Kaplan, Road Product Manager for Specialized, about the company’s transition away from women’s specific frames. Kaplan has been a huge driver in Specialized's Beyond Gender movement, which is how the company has branded its pullback from women’s-specific engineering.
“We created the women's specific movement,” Kaplan said. “It's not about uncreating it, but it's about changing the perception on it.”
When Kaplan began working with Specialized in the spring of 2014 as the Women’s Product Manager, she and a colleague initiated a research project with Retül, a fit company now owned by Specialized, to confirm that women’s bikes were necessary. Their goal was to bring more funding and support to larger development projects, because, as we all know, that money follows the biggest driver of sales which tends to skew towards the male demographic.
The study that Kaplan helped to conduct analyzed measurements of anatomical body parts and segments, cycling-specific proportions, and bicycle fit coordinates; data that Retül had been collecting for years. The data were used to understand the differences between men and women and their correlation to bike geometry, bike specifications, and equipment.
“We started looking at this digital database and what they were able to do,” Kaplan told me. Based on the data collected in their study, the results weren’t what they had been expecting. Body proportion ratios between men and women were far closer than common wisdom would suggest.
The old truism that women’s legs are longer and torsos shorter came from a poorly executed study by the US Military, and looks like it might not be true at all.
Based on the Retul data, a short top tube and tall head tube wouldn't be the best design for all women. “When we presented the first studies, we thought, ‘wait a minute, there really isn't a massive difference.’ Not only is gender not a signifier of a fit, but we were able to look at our own bike fits against the fit database and saw some deficiencies on how we were designing our bikes, from a stack and reach perspective. We presented in December 2014 and I think [Specialized] was already thinking about how we were going to balance and move forward.”
The fit differences between men and women, according to Retul’s data, are no greater than the differences found within a group of men or a group of women.
Specialized figured this out with its Retul data, but they weren't alone. Much of the industry drew similar conclusions around the same time. What once was a market that companies couldn’t enter quick enough, is now seeing companies like Specialized, Trek, Scott, and Yeti revisiting their product lines and reverting back to a more unisex platform, with some fine-tuning, of course.
“I think that's just kind of natural evolution for the industry,” Anders Ahlberg, Road Product Manager at Trek said. “It's not a bad thing that women's specific bikes were brought to the market. Trek wanted to try and cater to women, and wanted to get women more comfortable with getting into the sport. As Trek moves towards a more unisex platform, everyone gets more choice regardless of their color preference, regardless of their size, regardless of their riding style. It's better for women, better for everyone.”
Yeti launched their Yeti Beti line in 2015, and will be discontinuing it beginning with their 2020 models. Photo: Dave Trumpore
Colorado-based mountain bike brand Yeti expressed similar sentiments as they announced the discontinuation of their women's specific Yeti Beti bike line in July. Yeti released the Yeti Beti bike line, launching with the Yeti Beti ASRc and Yeti Beti SB5c, in June of 2015. The frames weren’t different, but offered different colors, component options, and suspension tunes.
Kristi Jackson, Director of Marketing at Yeti, explained their decision to discontinue the women's bike line. “The Yeti Beti line leveraged our existing frame platform. Our fundamental design remained, and instead, we focused on adjusting touchpoint components - crank length varied by frame size, handlebar width, smaller diameter grips, women’s specific saddle and tuning the rear suspension to achieve better performance for lighter riders.”
Having only launched the Yeti Beti bike line 4 years ago, the brand had already been researching if it was necessary anymore.
“We discussed it for quite some time and included rounds of internal testing on female and lightweight male riders to ensure the suspensions could be tuned appropriately,” Jackson said. “We tested the waters with the launch of the SB130, which did not launch with a Beti model. This bike continues to be a best seller for men and women. The final decision was made about a year ago as we finalized the 2020 line.
“What I’m gathering is that the more competitive, higher-level riders want to “ride the bikes that the guys ride,” she said. Yeti has found that variables such as body positioning and experience level have a greater impact on bike selection than gender.
Juliana released their first frame in 1999 under the Santa Cruz brand. 20 years later, Juliana is a standalone brand using the Santa Cruz frames for their builds. Photo: Robin O’Neill
I wanted to get the point of view of most of the major hitters in the industry. To be transparent, when I first learned about Juliana years ago, I didn’t understand - it’s a women’s bike, but it actually is the same frames being used in the Santa Cruz lines. How does this make sense? This must just be marketing ploy taking advantage of these poor women.
Katie Zaffke, Brand Manager for Juliana Bicycles, explained Juliana's concept: “We don’t believe in women’s specific geometry,” she said. “We believe that women want a bike that doesn’t let theory compromise real-world handling. They want a bike that’s been refined to have the most appropriate reach, height, and overall geometry for the terrain they’re riding. And that’s what Juliana has offered from the very beginning.”
Women’s specific geometries - who is still using them and why?There are still brands holding true to the women’s specific geometries, and insist that it’s what women are asking for.
Canyon is the new kid on the block and began their women’s line by giving a unisex frame the appearance a gender-specific finish. After collecting data entries of body measurements via their ordering system, Canyon determined that higher stacks and a shortened reach would better suit female riders. They concluded that women were generally shorter, their arm lengths were generally 2cm shorter than their given toros, and through other resources that they have greater pelvic flexibility. Canyon worked to release their women’s specific geometry road line in 2017, and their mountain bike line in 2018.
Bonnie Tu, Founder of Liv Cycling – Photo: Liv
Liv and Juliana were both started with guidance from their parent companies, Giant and Santa Cruz. Juliana shares frames with Santa Cruz, albeit finished with their own colors and spec, spec-ed for women. Liv, on the other hand, launched their first women’s specific mountain bike, the Alies, in 2008. It has its own women’s specific geometry.
| “I believe if women want to feel comfortable and perform well on a bike, she should try a bike that has been designed specifically for women’s geometry and anatomy. We don’t tweak another bike to adjust for a woman, instead we look at how women’s bodies are built and work while riding, and build the frame around that.” - Bonnie Tu, founder of Liv Cycling |
Zaffke, from Juliana, countered this concept. “Some people (male or female) may prefer that kind of geometry, but there is nothing that proves it to be a good fit for women in particular.”
That seems to be the key point for those brands using unisex geometry, even if they apply women’s specific componentry and branding. There are exceptions to “rules” everywhere, including that the industry must standardize what constitutes as women’s bikes.
Just because it feels correct, doesn’t always mean it is.My Trek WSD bike was replaced about 15 years ago, and I haven’t owned another women’s specific bike. This is not because I felt they didn’t have a place in the industry, or that the marketing was trying to take advantage of the female demographic. I felt my own build didn’t find its best fit on a lot of the WSD geometries due to my long reach, and I did not understand the marketing of unisex frames with women’s branding.
The scatter plot shown above is taken from "When to Share Product Platforms: An Anthropometric Review. It shows the average total leg lengths and saddle heights of men and women showing that for the same leg length a female rider will be position with a lower saddle height (on average)
It turns out that I’m not much of an anomaly. In Specialized’s research review, "
When to Share Product Platforms: An Anthropometric Review," the company analyzed data collected by Retül over the last 11 years with over 7,750 fits. Authors Rita Jett, Samir Chabra, and Todd Carver concluded that it is not necessary to change frame geometries for men and women, but matching components to sizes is key.
Liv disagrees, to a point.
“We knew we saw specific differences between men and women yet needed a way to get there,” Tu from Liv said. She explained how they capture their data to determine their frame designs: “Our designers began using the global body dimension database that reveals female anthropometrics. This database is by PeopleSize.
PeopleSize includes nine nationalities such as American, Australian, Belgian, British, Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Swedish. We also now consult NASA’s published research and other sources to round out our understanding of women’s dynamic physiology, including anatomy, sizing variations, muscle energy and output.”
Trek collects their data similar to Specialized, through their Trek Precision Fit program at certified retailers around the world. By getting the right fit for their customer base, Trek was also able to determine that their unisex bikes were fitting both men and women with the appropriate adjustments of stem, handle bar width, saddle, etc. “A different sized bar is something that's almost more impactful than the frame size,” Ahlberg said. Plus, a unisex frame design means an increase in options. “Everyone gets more choice regardless of their color preference, regardless of their size, regardless of their riding style. It's better for women, better for everyone.”
In a
previous interview with CyclingTips, CEO of Trek, John Burke, said, "I think [women’s products] are really good to have. There are certain parts of the bike that need to be gender specific. And then there are certain parts of the bike that don’t need to be gender specific all the time. It’s really hard to put customers in a box and say you’re this or you’re that. I kind of like for the customers to make their own choices and so I think we’re going to continue to have women specific products and then we’ll continue to have more choices for women to make. I think there are different types of consumers and they want different things. And I think making sure that you satisfy those riders is a good thing."
Retailers and marketing conspiraciesFormer professional XC and enduro racer, Kelli Emmett, who is now Juliana’s Sports Marketin Coordinator . Photo: Brian Vernor
Juliana has not hidden the fact that their women's bikes are the same as Santa Cruz's frames, with different color ways and specs geared towards women. I've talked to fellow riders of both genders about this strategy. Some shake their heads, thinking that it's an unnecessary marketing technique, where others welcome the customizations geared towards women.
Juliana's General Manager, Elayna Caldwell,
spoke with us earlier this year about the brand's differences between Santa Cruz. "They are the same frame, so let's not make any mistakes about that...I would say that it gives women a chance to have their own brand, their own look, their own feel. I want women to be able to have something that they can grab onto that is their own thing, that's not just the guy thing."
Kaplan and I discussed my first experience of buying my Trek WSD. Could I have been swayed in the buying process, if at all, or did the WSD label make the sale? “You might've felt better that it said women's on it. If they just walked up to you and said, "Oh, you want to get into mountain biking, this is the bike for you," you probably would have been just as happy with that answer as someone saying, ‘this is women's specific.’”
That’s not to say you should just sell for the sake of profits. “Don't tell somebody they need it when they don't need it,” Kaplan told me thoughtfully.
Culturally, the world has changed quite a bit since I picked out my old Trek WSD. In addition to having more data now, the move from women’s-specific bikes to unisex bikes may be a reflection of those changes.
| “I think that women's products served a really incredible purpose at the time of making cycling more welcoming for women. It's like, look, there's a lot of women that feel really comfortable within the brand that's for them. Right? And there's nothing wrong with that either.” - Stephanie Kaplan, Road Product Manager, Specialized |
“One of the comments that I hear in general [for the industry], is that brands are making these decisions strictly around the social trends and not with the consumers’ interest in mind; that it's not authentic,” she said. “If you love it, then ride it and enjoy it. For [Specialized] this was the path we felt most authentic to take for our brand, with no slight to anybody else and how they're approaching it at all.”
Trek is following a similar trend. “The market was calling and saying, ‘It's an easy conversation to say that this is made for you,’” Ahlberg told me.
This suggests there could still be a place for that women’s specific branding, especially if it helps with the barrier to entry into cycling for some women.
Women and men just want to ride great bikesEach brand I spoke with had the same end goal in mind - to not only create a great bike for women to ride, but a community that they can be a part of, and thrive in. “Our commitment to the women’s mountain bike community remains steadfast. Women and men just want to ride great bikes, creating gender specific models is no longer necessary to achieve this,” Jackson at Yeti said.
As we approach 2020, the industry is saturated with options, but companies still teeter on the fence, deciding how to market to women.
I teeter, too. What’s the point of a completely neutral frame platform when that’s only going to deprive the market of its demands? Some women do want pink. Some women prefer black. There's no right or wrong here.
The good news is that there are plenty of companies trying to make bikes a more welcoming environment for women. Embracing the brands that give us options will help bring the community together. Women’s-specific geometries are not necessary for my personal fit and riding style, but there is a place for them in the industry for women who are not me. There are women out there right now with their own preferences and riding styles just waiting to get their next bike.
What’s it going to be?
I for one am often put off buying an off-the-peg bike because I know half the contact points won't fit and will be costly to replace. I doubt I'm alone here!
Guys and girls come in all shapes and sizes, there's no way to generalise such specific requirements and measurements by gender alone.
I've always been against women specific bikes and joke that they were initially the brainchild of a man who wanted to hold women back by forcing them to ride shorter, steeper, more upright bikes.
As for the “women’s specific” bikes. I can’t imagine too many women would want to go back to riding a bike that cost more than a men’s but was the exact same thing? That was an issue in the past. You’d see women’s bikes that were essentially just “shrink’d and pink’d” with the same or lower build spec and they’d be a couple hundred dollars more.
With most new brands jumping on the newer geometry including short seat tubes and low standovers on all models, there’s no reason for a women’s specific bike other than color and marketing.
That’s like asking a shoe store to sew your converse to your color/materials preference. Ain’t gonna happen
You guys know Specialized and Trek did that for a long time...
Yes there are definitely ways to generalize measurements based off of the mean and modes of a data set when it comes to people! 'The Measure of Man and Woman: Human Factors in Design' is an important book for all designers and has enabled products to better suit the widest range of people from architecture to kid proof toys.
Every single one of the products you interact with on a day to day basis use these data sets to make products that the majority of people can use and enjoy. And there are very easily definable generalities between men's and women's proportions that do make for better products. Even just the concept of clothing ranges that fit most people in some fashion between xs-xxl is based off this design principle.
What I do the most, I usually change saddles or cut too wide bars and that's it.
Saddles, Stems, Bars, Grips, Seatposts, Pedals, Suspension tunes ... all contact points on a "complete" bike are basically placeholders.
Has nothing to do with sex, has to do with the incredible range of human body types.
Nothing wrong with short reach/high stack bikes...except "WSD" logos "preventing" a man with short torso and t-rex arms from purchasing it.
And vice-versa for the 6'+ lanky ape-index-outlier amazon woman "but i want a women's specific bike"
Offer long and short bikes and let people customize.
"That’s like asking a shoe store to sew your converse to your color/materials preference. Ain’t gonna happen"
www.converse.com/c/custom
There has been too much volatility in component and geometry fit in the last decade to believe that this is based on anatomical/fit data. In the last decade, reach has grown on every bike, cranks have gotten shorter, stock bar widths on trail bikes have ranged from 680 to 800, etc. These must be following trends rather than data.
So they either weren't basing these decisions in data a decade ago and they are now, or they aren't now and were a decade ago. I guess the other logical explanation is we as a species have been evolving rapidly in the last decade.
Saddle model/width and stem length should be a minimum, if a coil shock is offered, variable spring rate should be offered too. I ride a large, but a 450-500lb spring is too much. Crank length would be nice too, fed up of bashing 175mm cranks.
I'd love an option of a bodyweight specific suspension tunes, but I understand why it's be very complicated to offer.
Bars can be cut down or raised, grips are personal preference, maybe dropper post lengths could be given though?
I don't think I or many others are asking for that much - it's not a custom bike, but a few options would be wonderful.
“For example, Inbar et al. (1983) measured the mean and peak power output for 13 subjects during a seated 30s effort using crank lengths 125-225mm. While the authors identified an optimal crank length of ~165mm for this kind of effort, there was no significant change in power when cranks were as long as 200mm or as short as 150mm. Beyond that, there was evidence of a small decline in power for 125mm and 225mm cranks, however the losses were relatively small (2-5%).”
If you're enthusiastic enough to be so specific in what you want, you're going to have to build our own bike.
Another point of view is that humans are so adaptable. Your body will quickly accommodate a 5mm difference in crank length, and extra 10mm of stem extension. It may be suboptimal, but again, if you're good enough to notice then you're probably going to be enthusiastic enough to build your own bike.
Buying all the parts and building a bike exactly the same as a stock bike would cost you about double. That's the thing I would like to see changed. Big retailers should be ordering stock directly from the manufacturers just like OEMs do. The savings could pass on to the consumer.
Only mildly related. I remember an article in Motor Cycle News maybe ten years ago. You could buy a brand new Kawasaki ZX6R for about £8000. They went through the parts catalogue and priced up the same bike from genuine Kawasaki parts, and it came to something ridiculous like £36,000. We're lucky we don't have that big of a difference in pushbikes!
Agree, could be a key differentiator for bricks and mortar bike shops to add value in the competition with direct to consumer model
true.
After piling many things into the build, things added up quite significantly vs. a stock build. Did you get industry or special pricing? Or if given any break on pricing wouldn't it be easier to order direct from the factory?
That 02 pic is priceless with those others you're mashing up against. Cheers
Also, women's bikes come in WAY cooler colors than men's bikes. The Mixtape Stumpy is pure eye-candy.
Reason why they werent selling well: Bad resale value. A man is not likely to buy a second hand womens bike. But not vice versa. Women are used to riding unisex or mens bikes.
It's driven by the bottom line like everything else.
Remember giant's 275 spiel?
A friend who used to own a giant franchise in Taiwan always rides last year's Livs that he was forced into buying bit never sold. He's a small guy so it works out ok for him.
All I mean is, not many girls ride expert level mountain bikes in the grand scheme of things. Much like I'm sure not many men buy expert level lipstick or nail polish. Some do, no doubt. Just not enough to justify Mac or No7 doing a whole line of said products aimed at men. They're in it to make money.
Long time passing .
Where have all the women’s bikes gone ,
Long time agoooo !
There’s a song in there somewhere !
Sounds like companies are just trying to spin us that girls should just ride guys frames and make do with part changes.
Thunder Down Under?
Male Pinkbike commenters: I RODE A BIKE THAT WASNT IDEAL FOR ME ONCE, WHERE'S MY f*ckING PARADE?
Maybe tell me what the rules are, too. No one told me when I started riding.
If you are correct why is there almost zero women's moto market and mfg's pulling out of WSD despite the cultural demand they be accommodated with specific hardware? You can't.
I smattering of regional activity does not prove a world market.
That's the problem with text isn't it? Facial expressions, tone of voice, body language etc are not transmitted across to the other party.
That's why on the internet more than in face to face conversation we must be careful about how our words could be construed. And by that I mean everyone, not just you.
What you're saying is that despite the alarming amount of evidence present on this very site (all of which indicates that the paradigms which you surmise your community adheres to run contrary to the norms of the rest of the cycling community) you're more than happy to extrapolate from those perceived values to the cycling community worldwide, and use that fiction to discredit the opinions of someone who is fundamentally better suited to the argument?
Other places I ride, Tahoe, Mammoth, even Idaho. The numbers on actual MTB trails remain fairly consistent. I even asked my wife if I was missing some women in my numbers statement and she said , I'm probably OVERSTATING the numbers!
If anything, I'd be more concerned about cost of entry and developing the younger male demo in this sport to keep it going. Chasing women riders with marketing budget is probably a loser and always will be for a variety of real preferences women have for recreation.
When you take you girl there for a shopping date, do her a favour and drop her off and go check out Giant next door. She’ll be well taken care of.
“Also, no men allowed at our ride/shop/demo tent/whatever. You make us uncomfortable”
This is the type of thinking that makes mountain biking less inclusive.
And then there's the bottom line, which is the third factor and has to always be considered. The market is much smaller. That's just fact. And as a result, companies can't really afford to make completely different bikes (often times carbon molds) and such for a segment that represents 15% of their sales. They're already on bike industry margins to begin with. So this always plays a role in it. And I don't blame them for it. That's just what any business who wants to stay in business has to do.
Its like TV...everyone cuts the cable for the cheaper A La Cart Netflix, Hulu, YouTube. A big part of that is the stupid cable company just never evolved to give the customer what they want...one size fits all is a dated model, we see it in the bike industry. It's an opportunity, and just a matter of who figures it out first at the LBS level. Guessing Norco might be there with their online/lbs setup. They even have separate chainstay lengths for most sizes (again...not one size fits all).
Still, there are a mountain of bikes with horrid colors that my wife (a graphic designer) would NEVER buy, simply because of the color. That is on them, not the consumer model. Color does matter, but it doesnt have to be "girly colors" to quote her. No one wants a pink Ferrari. (Or crappy mustard color for that matter)
And she loathes all chick marketing, ie pink and flowers.
Likewise, she prefers 760mm wide bars, despite them being wider than her shoulders, and like many men, wants as much dropper post as possible.
However, buying a woman-specific bike just ruins the resale ability of the bike. Simply by cutting your target buyers in, err 5? more? The gender numbers aren't equal, sadly.
Woman specific saddles: yes.Bits are bits. They're different.
Sizing: you get small and large women and men. Our proportions aren't to dissimilar. That what bike setup is for.
Suspension tune: Same as above, you get light and heavy men and woman. Again, bike setup.
Colours? More the better. I want a pink and purple frame option.
As seen here: www.pinkbike.com/video/494963
I have a Ripcord for my 7 year old and it needed some love but it's a great 24" bike.
Shorter cranks should be standard on all builds. And an optional build kit with decent wheels and forks would be cool.
Crank fit issues shouldn't be standard out of the box. Expensive to fix and not all parents are wrenches. Shock tune is 125$...the stock fork cant even be tuned aside from swapping the oil as the damper is just a simple plate etc. Big difference from what Norco just dropped for similar price. Transition is awesome people/company tho and just hoping to see them continue to do well in the kids space. I'm guessing they have something up their sleeve but even Norco is still specing heavy, wrong SX 155mm cranks. Someone has to finally get it right aside from Trailcraft, Prevelo, Spawn etc.
Optimally, a company would have a size range of XS all the way up to XXL, even if that means fewer different models available. Accommodate all humans from, say, 4'-10"ish to 6'-6"ish. That would probably cover 95% of the bell curve of adult heights who ride MTB. Offer a take-off/exchange program for stem length, bar width, saddle width, and dropper length. This would dial in the fit to each rider.
Hooked up a shockwiz and it confirmed that there was way too much high-speed damping on the fork and shock once we got the pressure and ramp to a place it was happy. She hated the feel and we went back to running lower preasure. :/
You'll not see many women charging hard on e-bikes for this exact reason.
Women specific bikes and skis have always been 99% a marketing gimmick.
Good riddance!
If I were running a bike company, I would offer multiple colors at all levels and allow selection of different length/width: stem, handle bars (inc. flat or rise), grips and seat. Perhaps the thought of bike companies is that people will replace those on there own (like cheap-o pedals).
I HAVE A PENIS AND I LIKE MY BICYCLES PINK AND BLACK AT THE SAME TIME!!!
With a hint of teal thank you very much.
Just bringing up the point that offering the same frame with the same branding in 4 colors (as opposed to 2 "mens colors" and 2 "womens colors" whatever that means) will probably sell more units for this very reason. (not even factoring in the resale aspect)
In the past 5 years or so I can't tell you how many "Women's" bikes looked SO much better than "men's" paintjobs. Specific bikes from Trek, Spesh, Juliana come to mind.
(1) tall/lanky woman with riding experience that has no business on anything short-reach (or they're a bigger lady or sendy rider and the light shock tunes will ride like garbage) but they are sure they "want a women's bike" (thanks, marketing!)
(2) shorter torso/arm/overall height men who would be SO much more comfortable on a short-reach/hi-stack bike BUT the only thing available has flowers on it and says "women's". Problem compounded since in my experience a lot of those cases were hispanic or east-asian men where they culturally were extra resistant to any women's branded product.
No-one took me up on my satirical suggestion of fair or dark-skinned specific bikes...
There is a strong argument for bikes to be designed more around rider weight, so offering shock and fork tubes with less damping for lighter riders and vice versa, and reducing the stiffness of smaller frames etc.
I’m glad the WSD thing is mostly over, it was faux science misapplied in the name of marketing.
And also this days is really a lot bad saddles on market... most of them are badly shapped and too narrow.
Next thing is handlebar... in combination with stem, you could make almost all M bikes with "normal" front end height work for most ladies.
Dont see special need for WSD, but I think all brands should be more interested in good saddles at least...
Test road a friends small anthem and a small Liv pique, she thought the pique felt more comfortable so that’s what she bought and loves the thing!
It might have been possible to get the set up similar with component swaps, but the pique was an end of season run out so the price was good regardless.
I would never buy a Liv or Juliana, mostly because if you end up selling it on you're selling to a smaller market. Funny that it's OK for a women to ride a Liv or Giant, but you won't see a man on a Liv!
Their road/cross bikes are roomy though. I ride a medium Endurace and I'm 1,82. That's why they often go down to 2XS...
There is no difference in the frames other than color. She just likes the more colorful women's bikes and not the (to her) boring colors that the men's bikes have. I also have a male friend who likes the colorway of the same Remedy women's
bike that my wife has and purchased it.
My wife will buy a bike based just on the color alone, if that means not buying from one brand compared to another based on the color than one company just lost a sale. Simple as that for her.
As long as unisex frames will have colorways that work for different tastes than that will work for most people. Just my wife does not like bland colors.
Conversely, plenty of sub-140lb teenagers who probably would benefit from light tunes.
Except for the one brand that is a complete women specific company that flies in the face of the article and it appears you didn't talk to.
I’m curious if Liv is the reason other companies are giving up.
• some of those women may be sold on the idea that they "need a women's bike" because that's what marketed
• as you say, small/light guys/kids can benefit from many design aspect of certain "women's" bikes - but probably won't buy them because of marketing
My last bike was a Specialized Rhyme XS. I was pretty impressed - it came with 165 cranks and I think I only swapped out the bars and stem. The shock tune was fantastic and it rode well straight out of the box. Credit to Spec for putting proper thought into what a small women rider needs.
My current bike is a Pivot Mach 5.5 XS. I had to change the bars, stem, dropper (to get more low clearance) and the 40mm wide wheels for something lighter. Cranks are 170. I mucked around with a shock wiz and tokens to get the shock how I wanted. It's a fantastic bike now and I've had a couple Pivots because they have a decently XS frame but all the gear it came with was waaay too big. It feels like they randomly stuck the same bits on all the frame sizes.
When your a small rider everything has to fit...
At the end of the day, we know a rider can adapt to most changes and few would ever know the difference (I too run what I brung the wrong way).
- men bikes had cooler names on stickers (think liv vs giant, juliana vs santacruz, etc.)
- frames are exactly the same anyway
- going to swap saddle, grips, cut the bar, etc. anyway
- going to tune the rear shock for lighterweight in general, or swap it (i suspect this is the only actual benefit for a women specific bike, because its an expensive part to swap - but lighter men while more rare also need to do this anyway - and many "tuned shocks" are just "less nitrogen" anyway, which can be serviced)
I suspect the rest is just marketing departments trying to make it a thing that there is "women mtbs" vs "men mtbs" "community", and many women, at least the ones I know, can't care less, they just want to ride their bikes.
I suspect It's just like pink razors (expensive, special for women!) vs blue razors (cheaper! its for men!) while they're nearly the same product.
Just bought a bike for my son and got exactly the same scenario there too. Who TF thought a 1.3m tall kid should be running 155 cranks!
I bought a Trek Marlin 7 (2020) for my wife recently. She wanted the women's specific model, but they didn't have a women's small in stock. I pointed out that the geometry of the men's small (which they did have in stock) was exactly the same, so she could try that out to get an idea of the size before ordering the women's. She found the top tube position was fine (lower on the women's) and she liked it, so we went for the men's. I do however have to get a women's saddle for her, and cut the bars down a little. She also preferred the green/purple flip colour of the men's model over the women's colour.
Why not long and short wheelbase option based on chain stay length. ?
There is no optimal reach or wheelbase that works for everyone's anatomy.
What I got from this article: men and woman come in all shapes and sizes.
I read that study, it said no such thing. If anything it basically said that women and men have the same length proportions, but different widths instead. It's available online. apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA074807
Anyway, that's beside the point. As a female cyclist, I am firmly in the unisex-bikes camp rather than the gender-specific camp. However, that's not to say bike companies are doing everything right. A lot of bike companies are terrible at making bikes for especially short people (and especially tall people too I suppose, though that's come a long way). The problem is that women are more often than not in that category of overlooked riders.
The only part of the bike that I feel gender-specificity is relevant is in the saddle design. I do prefer a wider saddle (not softer, just wider) and run a Specialized Power 150 saddle.
See Emily Batty etc.
Got to pump that numbers up!
1) Didn't make any money on them
2) It was all a marketing scam anyway
3) Women don't ride in the seriousness and volume of men
4) Didn't make any money on them.
5) We're gonna shift that market cat to E-bikes, they seem to like them more anyway.
BTW- My GG Pistola self identifies as a XXXL WSD. In flat black.
MTB riding(climbing) is more work than most people lacking in testosterone want to take on. Its a guy thing for that reason and the mechanical and dirty elements that go along with it.
www.liv-cycling.com/ca/bikes/e-bike