I've been hunting various brands of light- and midweight long underwear, and none of the sample photos for anything I can afford look reasonable, so I'm hoping there are some women here who might be able to give some suggestions.
I don't seem to be the shape that manufacturers plan to fit in the first place ... AND I spend more time sitting than I do upright skiing.
I'm skinny with an applebottom; HOWEVER -- with long legs and a short torso (short gap between ribs and hips), there is only 8" difference between my waist and hips, so I don't need "relaxed" fit bottoms. A tight waistband with baggy hips is the exact OPPOSITE of what I need. I can't count how many size charts I've looked at that say my hips are S; waist is M. "Regular" fit for other people automatically gives ME a "relaxed" fit in the hips.
I seem to be on an endless quest for bottoms with a tipped waistline -- full butt coverage WITHOUT covering my bra -- lower half of price range.
Most of the "low rise" long underwear I've found has a perfect low rise front ... yet also has a low rise butt -- precisely what I DON'T want. If they don't cover my butt standing up, they'll be much lower when I sit down.
Sometimes I ski upright with outriggers, but sometimes I ride in a bi-ski, so even up on the slopes -- I need bottoms that provide full butt coverage WITHOUT covering my bra ... when SEATED.
Adaptive skiing isn't the newest sport on the planet. Upright racers crouch into MUCH tighter tucks than a bi-ski bucket forces. SOME manufacturer has got to make women's baselayer bottoms that DON'T require rolling down the front of the waistband three or four times. This is 2011, yes?
A lot of us adaptive skiers simply can't tolerate a full day on the slopes. I'm usually SITTING for half a day on the patio or in the lodge while my family is still up there, regardless of whether I skied upright or seated that day..
Those multiple folds of fabric all bunched up become incredibly uncomfortable even when they're dry ... AND folded: they don't wick sweat worth a rat's patootie. When I do get out on the slopes, comfort is imperative for me to STAY out there. Having altered sensation in my legs, I don't ski terribly often - particularly if it's too cold (serious frost bite risk), AND I'm on a fixed income, so I'm trying to find some full length long underwear built to fit a woman's curves, yet closer to the $30 mark than the $130 mark. As infrequently as I'm on the slopes, I just can't rationalize raiding my grocery budget for a pair of long underwear that costs JUST AS MUCH as my 3-in-1 parka!
This is one of those times when making men's cold weather clothing "small and pink" just WON'T suffice. The hunt is ... um ... let's politely call it frustrating!
Anyone else here who has dealt with the same [cover the butt; not the bra!] issues affordably?
Any suggestions would be IMMENSELY appreciated!!! Clearance (affordable) season is already beginning...