# £2000 vs £5000 and above Carbon bike performance



## Arrowfoot (10 Jan 2016)

Assuming that both bikes have identical components and the same competitive rider only the cost of carbon frames differ. Unlike expensive cars which can deliver material differences in speed, what can an expensive carbon frame do in terms of speed and overall performance. I understand that carbon fibre technology for bikes above £2k are pretty much the same.


----------



## Citius (10 Jan 2016)

Very little difference...


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (10 Jan 2016)

A lot of it is paying for a name on the downtube and the prestige of it.


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

Larger manufacturer and and sponsorship budgets to fund

Or prestige and cachet as above due to smaller production runs (which also impacts cost of course). Some people have the wherewithal to buy the 'best' (most expensive there is)

Which two bikes are you comparing?

Ultimately the vast majority of riders won't be able to tell the difference but it's their money


----------



## Citius (10 Jan 2016)

Arrowfoot said:


> Unlike expensive cars which can deliver material differences in speed, what can an expensive carbon frame do in terms of speed and overall performance



The comparison isn't valid. Expensive cars usually deliver their performance via a powerful engine. On a bike,* you* are the 'powerful' engine.


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

Are we all assuming that @Arrowfoot doesnt have a powerful engine?


----------



## PeteXXX (10 Jan 2016)

Bragging rights at the cyclocafe, or 3000 quid..


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

PeteXXX said:


> Bragging rights at the cyclocafe, or 3000 quid..


Do you honestly think that everyone who buys an expensive bike only do so for bragging rights? Some do, I use admit, but believe that most actually don't. Some people buy because they like it strangely enough.

Does this follow for someone on a £1,500 bike when they park up next to a £500 bike then?

I detect a touch of reverse snobbery again?


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

The way it's put together may differ.

The more expensive frame may be custom built to the riders geometry and riding style.

Even though the frames may look similar there may be subtle differences such as the carbon weave, the integration of seat posts or (if hand built) the lugging look and quality.

Then there's the after sales experience. There may be differences in warranty periods and general after care experiences.

In terms of speed, then for the average Joe very little. But there may be marginal differences that help top riders.

Feel is largely subjective, but there could be benefits from a better fitting frame and geometry.


----------



## Oldfentiger (10 Jan 2016)

Everyone in this life have different levels of money and assets. For some, £5000 is just pocket change. 
Wouldn't it be nice to go into a bike shop and say "I'd like to get into cycling, what's the best bike you have please"
Then again, for most of us the research, aspiration and anticipation is all part of the fun.


----------



## Arrowfoot (10 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> The comparison isn't valid. Expensive cars usually deliver their performance via a powerful engine. On a bike,* you* are the 'powerful' engine.



Actually thats my point. You get a more powerful engine with a car and a motorbike but not a bike. This question was posed by a pub landlord to us, a group of cyclists. We were stumped to the last man when he asked if an expensive bike went faster. It does tell us that some of us have made too many assumptions. 

The cost threshold is much lower for a bike and the rest is very much up to the rider.


----------



## Citius (10 Jan 2016)

Arrowfoot said:


> This question was posed by a pub landlord to us, a group of cyclists. We were stumped to the last man when he asked if an expensive bike went faster



Really - a group of cyclists couldn't answer this?


----------



## Arrowfoot (10 Jan 2016)

400bhp said:


> The way it's put together may differ.
> 
> The more expensive frame may be custom built to the riders geometry and riding style.
> 
> ...




Understand the custom built ones. Apparently Obama and the White House cadre of cyclist all have custom built bikes to suit them. I guess the cost of personalised service.


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

I am always perplexed by people moaning about people spending on more expensive bikes, but that are quite happy to keep spending in changing bits of their cheaper bike, or regularly replacing cheaper bikes with other cheaper bikes, or simply adding to their collection. Ultimately, they spend the same as someone who buys a more expensive bike and sticks with it.

If having multiple cheaper bikes, or upgrading parts, floats your boat then that's all that matters. Similarly, owning a more expensive bike that you look after is equally enjoyable.

Either way, if it's simply to show off to others then I really don't understand that very shortlived phenomenon?


----------



## Arrowfoot (10 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Really - a group of cyclists couldn't answer this?



Initially there were a lots of enthusiasm and comments about group sets etc until he asked about speed. It also could be because some had expensive rides and folks were guarded when the speed question was raised.


----------



## jonnysnorocket (10 Jan 2016)

To my mind it's a case of diminishing returns, whether it be Hi-fi, Cameras, fishing tackle, cars etc ...... whatever. 
When you reach a certain price point, the performance increase isn't proportional to the extra outlay.


----------



## Profpointy (10 Jan 2016)

For a lot of things (not all) the expensive one is simply "nicer" even if not objectively "better". My Condor (steel) bike is simply nicer than any previous bike I've owned. Not mega expensive but certainly a premium item. In part at least, it fits me better than any other bike but, and I may be deluding myself, seems to have a spring to it which makes it nicer to ride. I don't suppose I'm any faster on it than on a £600 bike.

Related to the price comment, a lot of people here run a fleet of bikes - and change bikes quite regularly. I'd rather have one nice bike than three OK bikes. And I tend to buy-and-keep rather than chopping things in too.

At some point I anticipate getting a nice steel lugged audax type bike, which'll doubtless be £3k but hopefully not £5k. Not currently cycling much, so no point at the moment, but one day.


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

bpsmith said:


> Are we all assuming that @Arrowfoot doesnt have a powerful engine?


@Fnaar


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

Arrowfoot said:


> Actually thats my point. You get a more powerful engine with a car and a motorbike but not a bike. This question was posed by a pub landlord to us, a group of cyclists. We were stumped to the last man when he asked if an expensive bike went faster. It does tell us that some of us have made too many assumptions.
> 
> The cost threshold is much lower for a bike and the rest is very much up to the rider.


Well obviously expensive aero wheels on a top end bike are much faster


----------



## AndyRM (10 Jan 2016)

vickster said:


> @Fnaar



The new Viz came out yesterday, he'll be busy.


----------



## Arrowfoot (10 Jan 2016)

vickster said:


> Well obviously expensive aero wheels on a top end bike are much faster



Aero wheels fall within component category. If you fit aero wheels in cheaper carbon frames they will also have the same effect.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

jonnysnorocket said:


> To my mind it's a case of diminishing returns, whether it be Hi-fi, Cameras, fishing tackle, cars etc ...... whatever.
> When you reach a certain price point, the performance increase isn't proportional to the extra outlay.



Depends who you are.

Agree for the average Joe though.


----------



## Apollonius (10 Jan 2016)

I think whoever you are then there are diminishing returns as you spend more. This applies, as jonnysnotrocket says to many "luxury" goods. Wheter you wish to spend that sort of money comes down to individual choices. I believe that some fishing rods, for example can cost a lot of money. Would I buy one? No. No interest in fishing, but I would imagine that for a fisherman whose passion it is, that would be a dream. Something to save and work for. Something to handle with joy, use with pleasure and cherish as an emblem of something beautifully crafted for its purpose. Can't see it myself, but then, I am not a fisherman, but the very best to those that think like this. It is a good job we are not all the same or the banks of the rivers would be packed with people waving the Superfish 5000. (Yes, I made that up.) Same applies to (say) vintage aeroplanes or bikes. Each to his own.


----------



## Joshua Plumtree (10 Jan 2016)

Depends what the bike is made for. A £2000 'aero' bike would probably outperform, in terms of speed, a £5000 bike that wasn't necessarily built with the same objective.

From my own personal experience, given two frames that fit, both with very similar components and wheels, but one being a fairly top end carbon aero frame and the other a cheapish aluminium frame, I reckon the difference in average speed would be less than 1mph. 

Marginal gains.


----------



## Citius (10 Jan 2016)

Thing is, a £2000 aero bike with an 18st mamil on board would not be as aero as a £5000 non-aero bike with a 10st racer on it. The rider and the position accounts for much more of the aero profile than the frame itself.


----------



## Apollonius (10 Jan 2016)

Citius, with respect, I think you are in error in suggesting that the sole purpose of an expensive bike is to go faster. This is not the only reason people choose a more expensive bike. Nor is the desire to show off the only reason either. As I said above in my fishing rod example, people who can afford to indulge their passions do so for reasons like enjoyment of a finely crafted machine, or pleasure in using it. If they have the money, then why not?


----------



## Citius (10 Jan 2016)

Apollonius said:


> Citius, with respect, I think you are in error in suggesting that the sole purpose of an expensive bike is to go faster.



My earlier point was specifically in relation to aero/non-aero bikes...


----------



## Arrowfoot (10 Jan 2016)

Can't wait for the day when one of the TV channels do a proper comparison. You will never get it done by any of the bike mags as they need the vendors.


----------



## Venod (10 Jan 2016)

Can't comment on £5000+ frames as never owned one, but I have ridden a lot of different bikes of various materials and find very little difference in my performance on a decent lightweight frame whatever the material, as the frames get heavier climbing performance diminishes, on the flat not a lot in it between light v heavy once up to speed, the material and construction of a frame determines how it feels when ridden, if I was paying £5000+ for a frame I would expect the best but may not get it.


----------



## Kajjal (10 Jan 2016)

A chap on YouTube compared two road bikes one very expensive and the other lower priced but not a very cheap and nasty road bike. He concluded there were differences but hard to justify the price difference and not as much difference as he expected. Once you get a half decent bike the rider and bike setup are big factors.


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Thing is, a £2000 aero bike with an 18st mamil on board would not be as aero as a £5000 non-aero bike with a 10st racer on it. The rider and the position accounts for much more of the aero profile than the frame itself.


Not even if 6'8" and built proportionally like Chris Hoy?


----------



## outlash (10 Jan 2016)

AFAIK, the difference between the Cannondale Supersix Evo frame and the HiMod version is about 250g. Build them both up with identical parts and the only real weight difference will be in your wallet.


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

outlash said:


> AFAIK, the difference between the Cannondale Supersix Evo frame and the HiMod version is about 250g. Build them both up with identical parts and the only real weight difference will be in your wallet.


Don't think there's a £3k price difference between the frames though?


----------



## PaulSecteur (10 Jan 2016)

Kajjal said:


> A chap on YouTube...



This one?


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihfp8hF3JYc


If what he says is true then the difference between a decent budget and bling bike isn't that large, so a good carbon and a great carbon would be less of a difference.


----------



## mattobrien (10 Jan 2016)

AFAIK there aren't many £5k frames, in fact the Cervelo RCA frame set at £6.5k is the only one I can think of.

In reality a lot of bikes in a range often have the same frame and it is the components that increase the price as the range move up the scale, so it is mostly likely any comparison would be between different manufacturers or different types of bikes, endurance, aero, lightweight etc, making a speed comparison tricky.

It would be great to have a way of accurately putting out a stable 200watts on a range of bikes in a test across an identical course to then actually be able to measure impact on speed. But as has been said, speed is achieved by factors other than solely power and aero, such as the riders ability to put down power potentially influenced by the comfort of rider, over both short and long term. I guess this is why a fact based comparison isn't as easy and it often comes down to weight and a load of bulls#%^ bingo when it comes to reviews.

Anyway, this is Cyclechat, where the cheaper the faster and anyone spending more than £50 on a bike is a mug with more money than sense


----------



## oldroadman (10 Jan 2016)

Past a certain price point, the only difference is in the rider and their fitness/ability. Subtle differences in handling might be detectable. For me the best handling frames were always Italian, and that makes a difference in competition when descending , but that's about it (and the frames were Columbus or 753 or equivalent, built by proper craftsmen to measure).


----------



## Dave7 (10 Jan 2016)

Well I must admit to being surprised by the ignorance shown here....and I'm relatively new to proper cycling.
Speed is nothing to do with the frame material or style..............its all about the colour!!
e.g. I was choosing a new jacket last week and the guy in Cycle-house told me I will definitely go faster in the red one than the black one. Its only common sense that the same principle must apply to the actual bike.
Isn't it


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

mattobrien said:


> AFAIK there aren't many £5k frames, in fact the Cervelo RCA frame set at £6.5k is the only one I can think of.
> 
> In reality a lot of bikes in a range often have the same frame and it is the components that increase the price as the range move up the scale, so it is mostly likely any comparison would be between different manufacturers or different types of bikes, endurance, aero, lightweight etc, making a speed comparison tricky.
> 
> ...


Sigma have a few in the 5k ballpark if you filter price high to low. I expect with Parlee for example a custom paint job ups the price

http://www.sigmasport.co.uk/bikes/road-bikes#,p:1,c:Bikes 11 > Road Bikes & Framesets > Road Bike Framesets


----------



## mattobrien (10 Jan 2016)

vickster said:


> Sigma have a few in the 5k ballpark if you filter price high to low. I expect with Parlee for example a custom paint job ups the price
> 
> http://www.sigmasport.co.uk/bikes/road-bikes#,p:1,c:Bikes 11 > Road Bikes & Framesets > Road Bike Framesets


Faster with a custom paint job too I'd imagine


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

mattobrien said:


> Faster with a custom paint job too I'd imagine


Yep certainly if not black


----------



## Hacienda71 (10 Jan 2016)

vickster said:


> Yep certainly if not black


That is where Wiggins and Froome went wrong on those black Pinarellos


----------



## Kajjal (10 Jan 2016)

PaulSecteur said:


> This one?
> 
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihfp8hF3JYc
> ...




Had quick look and could not find it but similar.


----------



## vickster (10 Jan 2016)

Hacienda71 said:


> That is where Wiggins and Froome went wrong on those black Pinarellos


Yep indeed


----------



## phil-b (10 Jan 2016)

it is a question of value for money. The expensive bikes are only marginally better but they are still better. If you are buying your own bike you probably want the biggest bang for your buck. If you are riding in a Grand Tour you will just want the best.


----------



## mustang1 (10 Jan 2016)

Difference between my low end aluminium road bike and mid range carbon bike is in comfort. I would never have believed anyone who told me carbon frames ride so smooth until I went out for a test ride. 

I only test rode the carbon to prove to myself its not that good. I ended up buying it in the spot!


----------



## Dec66 (10 Jan 2016)

bpsmith said:


> Not even if 6'8" and built proportionally like Chris Hoy?


Thinking of anyone in particular?


----------



## derrick (10 Jan 2016)

The green eyed monster has shown it's face.


----------



## Globalti (10 Jan 2016)

It's more to do with the year of the frame in my opinion. We have otherwise identical Roubaix SL3 and SL4 bikes and there's quite a big difference in the way they ride. The SL3 handles superbly but it's dull and stodgy and quite slow to react, making it easy to get dropped. The SL4, using carbon technology only a year older, has a more lively zesty feel and is faster. The difference is palpable.


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

Dec66 said:


> Thinking of anyone in particular?


Anyone who the cap fits. Do you fit the bill?

Definitely not me, at 175cm and 71kg.


----------



## Dec66 (10 Jan 2016)

bpsmith said:


> Anyone who the cap fits. Do you fit the bill?
> 
> Definitely not me, at 175cm and 71kg.


Not me either, at 180cm and 75kg (when it's not just after Christmas).

But we do have some man mountains who can climb like eagles, apparently.


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

Dec66 said:


> Not me either, at 180cm and 75kg (when it's not just after Christmas).
> 
> But we do have some man mountains who can climb like eagles, apparently.


Similar then.

That was the point I was making. Just because someone is 18 stone, doesn't mean that they're incapable of getting aero or going fast.


----------



## outlash (10 Jan 2016)

vickster said:


> Don't think there's a £3k price difference between the frames though?



No, but it's a good comparison between a very decent frame (the Supersix Evo) which can be had for around a grand as a complete bike and the HiMod which is the team issue/race frame starts around £3k complete.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

outlash said:


> No, but it's a good comparison between a very decent frame (the Supersix Evo) which can be had for around a grand as a complete bike and the HiMod which is the team issue/race frame starts around £3k complete.



Sorry but that's inaccurate. Look on Cannodale's website and the RRP difference (say, looking at the Ultegra version in both types, in particular the "3" version of the Super Six which has a similar crank ) is $1000, so about £600. And the Hi Mod looks to have a better wheelset (another £200 off).


----------



## outlash (10 Jan 2016)

400bhp said:


> Sorry but that's inaccurate. Look on Cannodale's website and the RRP difference (say, looking at the Ultegra version in both types, in particular the "3" version of the Super Six which has a similar crank ) is $1000, so about £600. And the Hi Mod has a better wheelset (another £200 off).



If you can find a Supersix Evo new for £600, post up a link as I'll have one.


----------



## Milzy (10 Jan 2016)

My friend upgraded from a 3k to a 6k build and knocked 45 seconds off his dartmoore classic time.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

outlash said:


> If you can find a Supersix Evo new for £600, post up a link as I'll have one.



Pease read again. I'm talking about the difference in price between the two.


----------



## outlash (10 Jan 2016)

You're taking this off topic for semantics. Have a medal.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

outlash said:


> You're taking this off topic for semantics. Have a medal.



And you're spouting bollox. Funny when peeps are clearly wrong they will do anything but to admit it.


----------



## outlash (10 Jan 2016)

How am I wrong?


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

You really need it spelling out. OK

You said the difference between a hi-mod and a standatd Evo is £2k (£3k less £1k). 

Here is the Cannondale Hi Mod Ultegra on the Cannondale website: It's $4260
http://www.cannondale.com/en/USA/Bi...parentid=9e0382fc-e3f9-4c61-9599-3aafb7a863b4

Here is the Cannondale Supersix Evo on the Cannondale website. It's $3,200
http://www.cannondale.com/en/USA/Bi...parentid=4b6987a4-968e-4016-8156-95582340b7db

The specs are almost identical, bar a better wheelset on the Hi mod. Same year, therefore directly comparable.

The difference in price is therefore $1,060. Around £600-£700 depending upon the exchange rate.

Knock a bit more off for the better wheelset and you are down to about £500.

Why do I know this? Because I was looking at buying one 6-9 months ago and so was a mate. My mate went for the Evo (non Hi Mod) in the end and I went for something completely different.


----------



## phil-b (10 Jan 2016)

Milzy said:


> My friend upgraded from a 3k to a 6k build and knocked 45 seconds off his dartmoore classic time.


I think this is the point. the bike can make only a marginal difference. If you are a competitive racer that difference may translate into a number of places on the leader board and it is worth every penny. If you are looking not to get dropped of the back of a club ride each week then you are going to be disappointed.


----------



## outlash (10 Jan 2016)

400bhp said:


> You really need it spelling out. OK
> 
> You said the difference between a hi-mod and a standatd Evo is £2k (£3k less £1k).
> 
> ...



So you've picked me up on pricing, which I see you have quoted in dollars and the last time I looked we still use sterling in the UK. As you know, this wasn't my original point as I was replying to Vickster and did a quick Google to check on prices the UK. All you're doing is being pedantic to score points and taking the thread off topic. As I said, have a medal.

Funny how peeps spout bollox when they'll do anything to prove a point.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

I give up

Really dim.


----------



## Elybazza61 (10 Jan 2016)

outlash said:


> AFAIK, the difference between the Cannondale Supersix Evo frame and the HiMod version is about 250g. Build them both up with identical parts and the only real weight difference will be in your wallet.



It's not just the weight as the 'better' versions will have a different lay up(and different types of carbon) so it may have different characteristics to the lower model and may be actually stronger in certain areas.

Got my Ridley Helium sl frame at half price so it's ended up cheaper than the standard version.

If anyone wants a hi-mod then look here;

http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m6b65s25p6646/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-HI-MOD-FRAME-2015


----------



## Racing roadkill (11 Jan 2016)

It's very much a case of 'casting pearls before swine', for the vast majority of leisure cyclists. There are differences, but most normal riders couldn't exploit the differences / utilise the full potential of a top end bike.


----------



## vickster (11 Jan 2016)

Racing roadkill said:


> It's very much a case of 'casting pearls before swine', for the vast majority of leisure cyclists. There are differences, but most normal riders couldn't exploit the differences / utilise the full potential of a top end bike.


Why does that matter if they enjoy riding it?


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Elybazza61 said:


> It's not just the weight as the 'better' versions will have a different lay up(and different types of carbon) so it may have *different characteristics* to the lower model and may be actually stronger in certain areas.



Characteristics which, realistically, nobody will be able to identify.


----------



## bpsmith (11 Jan 2016)

vickster said:


> Why does that matter if they enjoy riding it?


This is exactly my opinion. Who cares what somebody rides, as long as They like it.

Edit: as long as it's black!


----------



## jay clock (11 Jan 2016)

Apollonius said:


> ....... the Superfish 5000. (Yes, I made that up.) ..........



no you didn't https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=e...d=cr&ei=C62TVobUNMPyUNjgkdgB#q=superfish+5000


----------



## Apollonius (11 Jan 2016)

Again, Citius, I must disagree with you. I am no sort of expert, but there is no doubt in my mind that from my personal experience of riding a range of what might be called "high-end" bikes, I can feel a significant difference in stability, handling and stiffness between them. More significant, even than the difference made by tyres, which is huge. Much of it may be in the mind, admittedly, but minds are important!


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Apollonius said:


> Again, Citius, I must disagree with you. I am no sort of expert, but there is no doubt in my mind that from my personal experience of riding a range of what might be called "high-end" bikes, I can feel a significant difference in stability, handling and stiffness between them



Sure. And when I get into a different car, it feels different. Because it's a different car. If you get on a bike - any bike - you will notice a difference in handliing, stiffness, whatever - for all kinds of reasons, none of which has anything to do with the price tag.



Apollonius said:


> Much of it may be in the mind, admittedly, but minds are important!



If it's in the mind, then it's just a belief. Nothing more. Bike reviewers are paid to come up with this kind of nonsense - let's not do their jobs for them.


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Sure. And when I get into a different car, it feels different. Because it's a different car.
> 
> 
> 
> If it's in the mind, then it's just a belief. Nothing more. Bike reviewers are paid to come up with this kind of nonsense - let's not do their job for them.



Nor sure I quite follow which side of the debate you're on now. The "different cars feel different" thing I agree with, and for me is much more important than posh-ness or whatever. Likewise my Thorn nomad ( heavy tourer) feels very different from my Condor tempo (audax-ish -leaving aside it's a fixie). Ok these are very different styles of bike albeit at similar price point. Surely it's not unreasonable for bikes for similar purposes to still feel different if the designer had different ideas? Maybe a Woodrup versus an Argos or whatever.

Absolute speed /efficiency might be similar but a rider might well prefer one or the other for quite tangible reasons


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Profpointy said:


> Nor sure I quite follow which side of the debate you're on now



I'm on the side of the debate which says that 'feel' is totally subjective.


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> I'm on the side of the debate which says that 'feel' is totally subjective.



just to check - do you mean "subjective" as in preference for say Laphroig rather than Glenmorangie - a reasonable matter for opinion, or "subjective" as in the hi-fi nerd claiming to be able to hear the difference between copper and silver speaker cables - ie total bollocks


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Profpointy said:


> just to check - do you mean "subjective" as in preference for say Laphroig rather than Glenmorangie - a reasonable matter for opinion, or "subjective" as in the hi-fi nerd claiming to be able to hear the difference between copper and silver speaker cables - ie total bollocks



Well, both really, because they amount to the same thing - ie someone's belief or opinion.

PS - Old Pulteney is the way forward...


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Well, both really, because they amount to the same thing - ie someone's belief or opinion.



OK, let's try again - by "subjective" do you mean there's a difference but it's one of taste / choice but still real, or are you suggesting that it's all in the mind, albeit still some people's opinion?


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Well, both really, because they amount to the same thing - ie someone's belief or opinion.
> 
> PS - Old Pulteney is the way forward...



Good choice on whisky -

... I'm out on the other discussion as you're clearly just being too clever for me


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Profpointy said:


> OK, let's try again - by "subjective" do you mean there's a difference but it's one of taste / choice but still real, or are you suggesting that it's all in the mind, albeit still some people's opinion?



Not sure I follow. Facts are objective - opinions are subjective.


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Not sure I follow. Facts are objective - opinions are subjective.



I'm just trying to work out if you are rubbishing subjectivity: "it's all in the mind" or whether a subjective judgement in this sort of case has any meaning or value in your view.

Tried to use the whisky tasting example as it seemed clear enough, whilst the hi-fi cables example is clearly (to me) an imaginary difference.


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Profpointy said:


> I'm just trying to work out if you are rubbishing subjectivity: "it's all in the mind" or whether a subjective judgement in this sort of case has any meaning or value in your view.



I'm saying that a subjective opinion is only relevant to whoever holds it. As an opinion, it is perfectly valid. I would only 'rubbish' it if there was an attempt for that opinion to be presented as fact.


----------



## Profpointy (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> I'm saying that a subjective opinion is only relevant to whoever holds it. As an opinion, it is perfectly valid. I would only 'rubbish' it if there was an attempt for that opinion to be presented as fact.



OK, I don't really agree with that. In my view some subjective opinions are useful and meaningful to others - Laphroig is peaty, Dallwhinnie is heathery, and in a sense these judgements are factual

Subjective opinions that silver hi fi cables have some magic property or other is simply bollocks - although some argue otherwise.


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Profpointy said:


> Laphroig is peaty, Dallwhinnie is heathery, and in a sense these judgements are factual



In which case, it's a fact, not an opinion.


----------



## bpsmith (11 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Well, both really, because they amount to the same thing - ie someone's belief or opinion.
> 
> PS - Old Pulteney is the way forward...


Strangely, you said Feel was a Science in another thread. Make your mind up.


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

bpsmith said:


> Strangely, you said Feel was a Science in another thread. Make your mind up.



Can you link to where I said that. I'm guessing you misunderstood it. You have form for that kind of thing...


----------



## Apollonius (11 Jan 2016)

I really don't think this is a good time for metaphysics, but I am not convinced that "mind" and "the imagined" are the same thing. A long time since I read Popper(and that was negligently and sketchily), but I really can't see how one can judge the "good feelings" a quality bike might give other than subjectively.


----------



## Citius (11 Jan 2016)

Apollonius said:


> but I really can't see how one can judge the "good feelings" a quality bike might give other than subjectively



You can't - that's the point.


----------



## Apollonius (11 Jan 2016)

That's fine then. The most important choices one makes in a lifetime are subjective after all. Let those with the cash enjoy their luxury bikes.


----------



## Winnershsaint (11 Jan 2016)

I am a very average rider. I have a bike which I will admit I cannot do justice to, probably two bikes if I'm really honest. One is worth two and a half times the other. The high performance (lol) engine in both is the same, me. When I bought the 2 grand bike four years ago i was like a dog with two whatsits when I got my Cervelo I was like a dog with two whatsits. In their own time frames, both made me smile. I can't point to any performance gains that I get from the new and more expensive bike, but riding it makes me happy. I'm looking at aero wheels currently, I understand that they won't add too much in speed, but boy they will look good and that will make me smile too. Sometimes I feel that some get hung up on practicalities and value for money when dispensing advice or they simply get off on being condescending and dismissive. Now that wouldn't be a first for an internet forum, would it?


----------



## mattobrien (11 Jan 2016)

Winnershsaint said:


> I'm looking at aero wheels currently, I understand that they won't add too much in speed, but boy they will look good and that will make me smile too.



A good looking bike goes faster. Fact. A good looking bike with a smiling rider, barely a blur as they zoom passed at such a speed.

I want new aero wheels, but I suspect a new kitchen will be required first. And ironically a new kitchen may make me faster, as i may get more time out to ride once the kitchen is done...


----------



## Accy cyclist (12 Jan 2016)

Just out of interest, do you think this 5 grand bike is a bargain at less than half price?
http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m7b0s6p5166/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-HI-MOD-RED-RACING-2013

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/...dale-supersix-evo-hi-mod-red-racing-12-46892/


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2016)

Accy cyclist said:


> Just out of interest, do you think this 5 grand bike is a bargain at less than half price?
> http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m7b0s6p5166/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-HI-MOD-RED-RACING-2013
> 
> http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/...dale-supersix-evo-hi-mod-red-racing-12-46892/


No, because it's black  also because it's got old 10 speed kit and if I were spending that sort of money, I'd want the newest version

Ultimately it's only a bargain if it's tne right bike at the right price for you. In reality, being sold at half RRP means the seller will make less margin / profit but it'll enable him to free tne capital to buy the latest model to sell at RRP and the old model will no longer be taking up space gathering dust in his showroom or warehouse

Yes it got a good review, but that means zip if it's not the bike for the buyer


----------



## Accy cyclist (12 Jan 2016)

Accy cyclist said:


> Just out of interest, do you think this 5 grand bike is a bargain at less than half price?
> http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m7b0s6p5166/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-HI-MOD-RED-RACING-2013
> 
> http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/...dale-supersix-evo-hi-mod-red-racing-12-46892/



I asked because my solicitor called me yesterday and told me the insurers of the boy racer who hit me have offered a final settlement of £5.500 for my injury, rehabilitation new bike, helmet etc. I'm thinking about blowing some of it on ANOTHER new bike and a 5 grand bike for just over 2 grand seems a bargain.


----------



## Joshua Plumtree (12 Jan 2016)

It's a Cannondale, it has to be green, white and blue!  

Super thing, mind you. I'd be very tempted if I was looking for a n+1, 10 speed or otherwise. I have 11 speed Di2 on one bike, can't say I've noticed much of a difference!


----------



## vickster (12 Jan 2016)

Accy cyclist said:


> I asked because my solicitor called me yesterday and told me the insurers of the boy racer who hit me have offered a final settlement of £5.500 for my injury, rehabilitation new bike, helmet etc. I'm thinking about blowing some of it on ANOTHER new bike and a 5 grand bike for just over 2 grand seems a bargain.


Sounds a fair amount

Do you want an out and out race bike given you've had lots of wobbles about riding on the roads?

What actually makes it a 5k bike other than the price tag Cannondale gave it? 

Also race bikes are usually ridden smaller and cannondales come up bigger so do they have the right size

Also check how much it would cost to insure for replacement value based on where you live. From what you've said elsewhere it sounds like a high risk postcode


----------



## jowwy (12 Jan 2016)

im always of the opinion ride and buy what you want. who cares what anybody else thinks........if people dont like it, then tell them to move on


----------



## Joshua Plumtree (12 Jan 2016)

A club mate has the exact same bike. It really is as light as a proverbial feather and seems to go like stink (with him riding it anyway!) 
If it handles as well as my CAAD10 then I'm sure you wouldn't have any problems.


----------



## fossyant (12 Jan 2016)

That bike is a bargain. Buy it.


----------



## TheJDog (12 Jan 2016)

Great specs but I would stay away from it because of the tubulars. If you don't mind the tubs, I'm sure it would be fab. I've had 20 speed red and 22 speed red, and the 22 speed is an improvement for sure, but the 20 speed was very good, too.


----------



## fossyant (12 Jan 2016)

It's worth it even spending a little on new wheels. You are getting alot of frame and groupset for just £2k, ignoring the rest of the bike.


----------



## Citius (12 Jan 2016)

TheJDog said:


> Great specs but I would stay away from it because of the tubulars



The bike would still be a massive bargain, without any wheels at all. No reason not to buy it.


----------



## TheJDog (12 Jan 2016)

If we're looking for bargains

http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m6b0s25p6388/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-NANO-BLACK-INC-FRAME-2015

I'm tempted to buy this for the crankset and sell the frame separately (not in my size) :S


----------



## jowwy (12 Jan 2016)

i


TheJDog said:


> If we're looking for bargains
> 
> http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m6b0s25p6388/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-NANO-BLACK-INC-FRAME-2015
> 
> I'm tempted to buy this for the crankset and sell the frame separately (not in my size) :S


its not disc brake compatible - so on that note im out


----------



## Cuchilo (12 Jan 2016)

TheJDog said:


> If we're looking for bargains
> 
> http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/m6b0s25p6388/CANNONDALE-SUPERSIX-EVO-NANO-BLACK-INC-FRAME-2015
> 
> I'm tempted to buy this for the crankset and sell the frame separately (not in my size) :S


Wont the cranks be too short for you ? 172 on my S giant .


----------



## jowwy (12 Jan 2016)

Cuchilo said:


> Wont the cranks be too short for you ? 172 on my S giant .


Im taller than you and i run 170s on all my bikes


----------



## Cuchilo (12 Jan 2016)

jowwy said:


> Im taller than you and i run 170s on all my bikes


Everyone is taller than me  I just mentioned it as i have met @TheJDog so know he is a lot taller than me so it may be something to check before spending out . Although he probably already has checked .


----------



## TheJDog (13 Jan 2016)

Cuchilo said:


> Everyone is taller than me  I just mentioned it as i have met @TheJDog so know he is a lot taller than me so it may be something to check before spending out . Although he probably already has checked .



Good spot, luckily I wasn't committing to anything just yet


----------

