# Does the bike you ride make the difference...



## ray316 (27 Mar 2011)

l ride a vitesse sprint 21 speed and the frame is alloy tube with the wheels/tyres wider than alot of more expensive bikes... On this bike l average a speed of 15mph.
My question for the forum is.... Does what bike you ride make a difference or is it the rider.
If l bought a more expensive bike with a lighter frame and thin wheels/tyres would l see the difference in my speeds with the same effort l putting in at the moment, and if so how much difference in speed/ performance do you think it would make..


----------



## mark barker (27 Mar 2011)

I noticed a difference when I swapped from a slicked MTB to a flat bar road bike, my average has increased by around 4mph.

Edit: I should mention that the increase in speed is on decent roads. When I'm on cycle routes I'd guess my average would drop as it gets too uncomfortable to ride at any speed!


----------



## HLaB (27 Mar 2011)

ray316 said:


> l ride a vitesse sprint 21 speed and the frame is alloy tube with the wheels/tyres wider than alot of more expensive bikes... On this bike l average a speed of 15mph.
> My question for the forum is.... Does what bike you ride make a difference or is it the rider.
> If l bought a more expensive bike with a lighter frame and thin wheels/tyres would l see the difference in my speeds with the same effort l putting in at the moment, and if so how much difference in speed/ performance do you think it would make..




It does to a degree, the style of bike matters more IMO. On my 21 sp heavy hybrid (37mm tyres), I currently comfortably average around 13.5mph and with a lot of hard work I can get my average up to around 15mph. Before its conversion my much lighter (28mm tyres would average comfortably 14.5-15.0mph) and again if I really worked I'd get it up by mph or two (given relatively the same hilliness). I converted that to drops and added lighter wheels and narrower tyres (25mm); at that point, it'd comfortably average 15mph+, or more if I worked. I now have two other lighter road bikes (23mm), albeit I'm fitter but they would tend to comfortably average a minimum of 16-16.5mph and again with work will average more. The big difference I find on a lighter bike is endurance and I can average those speeds for much longer distances.


----------



## avsd (27 Mar 2011)

Yes the ike can make a difference. Biggest impact on the equipment is the quality of the wheels and the tyres.

Bang for buck - it is personal fitness and losing some weight. Losing 7Lb of body weight makes a massive difference on the hills

I find moving from my winter commute to the summer Cannondale (Carbon/Ultegra gears and good wheels) adds about only 1- 2 mph to my average but the feel good factor is . I like a nice bike. Some of that is the good weather we have being enjoying sunshine and very low winds.


----------



## steve52 (27 Mar 2011)

what is it with averge speeds so many say i average 15+ i often hit 22/25 mph on the flat and faster down hill but when i check the computer for my average it says things like 13.8
how fast will i have to go to get a 15 mph average?.ps average includes any stops if u stop


----------



## vickster (27 Mar 2011)

You'll have to go at 15mph on average to get a 15mph average - what does your question mean? Go and cycle 15 miles and see how long it takes? I expect the types of roads you ride on will make a huge difference if you are including stops. Do you reset the computer every time you go out? 

Way too many traffic lights and junctions around here for me to ride at 15mph including stops! Oh and I'm slow on the hillier bits  I am sure I could do 15mph average if my route was totally flat and devoid of hazards and lights! My computer says around 12 usually and that includes 20-25mph downhill bits but they are shorter than the 8-9mph uphill bits! During the school holidays my commute is quicker, less traffic to wait for and less queues to sit in even though I am surely pedalling at the same rate when moving


----------



## gbb (27 Mar 2011)

I found a new bike didnt give me appreciably more speed than i already had.
I used to run an 8 speed raleigh with a heavy steel frame...IRO 15 to 16 mph average, whatever distance i do, 20, 20, 50 miles
Upgraded to a 9 speed bianchi, lovely and light, but my circuit times barely changed.
Now on a 10 speed Bianchi, still the same.

What you do get a a huge grin riding a newer bike, lighter and more responsive. I'm sure there is a speed gain, but it wasnt outright noticeable for me.


----------



## Holdsworth (27 Mar 2011)

I have to say that swapping bikes made a big difference to my average and maximum speed. Not that surprising in that I went from a 2 year old bso (with dodgy brakes, massive knobbly tyres and right hand crank that falls off after a while!!!) to a light-er 531 road bike, 20 years old but still a huge improvement.

It used to take me 30 minutes or thereabouts to do my old 5 mile commute, getting on the road bike it tumbled to 20 minutes the first time out!!!

It is also more responsive and the handling is miles better.


----------



## 515mm (27 Mar 2011)

Yes.

I have 2 road bikes, one is a winter trainer with guards, lights and 25mm tyres the other is the 'dry weather' bike - 23mm tyres, aero wheels much lighter and stiffer frame etc.

I'll let you decide which one is, on average, five minutes faster over my 14 mile each way commute............


----------



## Adasta (27 Mar 2011)

I currently ride a 14kg Giant hybrid and my mean speed is 18-20km (on London's roads). I'm convinced that if I were to get a road bike at around 9kg I could easily be a few km quicker. It doesn't matter all that much, though.


----------



## Banjo (27 Mar 2011)

I think its more about your enjoyment of the bike than out and out performance statistics.

A lighter bike with better quality wheels and tyres will be a joy to ride but still only as good as the engine turning the pedals.


----------



## Smokin Joe (27 Mar 2011)

It depends on the degree you upgrade and what you want to get from it. For a leisure cyclist to spend £500 on fitting better equipment to gain 1/2mph on the average speed doesn't make much sense, to a racing cyclist that would be cheap at twice the price.


----------



## 515mm (27 Mar 2011)

And I'm no racer!

But I am lucky enough to have a nice bike and I realise what a precious thing it is and so I look after it as best I can. 

I couldn't afford to buy it again if something horrid happened to it. 

It took me the thick end of 3 years to get it built. 

But I do ride it every opportunity I get - when the weather is dry!


----------



## Moodyman (27 Mar 2011)

Smokin Joe said:


> It depends on the degree you upgrade and what you want to get from it. For a leisure cyclist to spend £500 on fitting better equipment to gain 1/2mph on the average speed doesn't make much sense, to a racing cyclist that would be cheap at twice the price.




True. It depends on your level of ability.


----------



## snailracer (27 Mar 2011)

Bear in mind that the skinny tyres, lightweight saddle and aero position that help make a road bike faster also make it less comfortable.


----------



## NorrisCole (27 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> Bear in mind that the skinny tyres, lightweight saddle and aero position that help make a road bike faster also make it less comfortable.



Rubbish!


----------



## gbb (27 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> Rubbish!



Agree...and disagree.
To me, it wouldnt make it more uncomfortable because thats what ive always ridden, but to someone upgrading from a fatter tyred bike with a padded saddle and comfortable upright position...it may well seem very uncomfortable.
Almost everyone at work looks at my Ponza saddle and remarks 'that must be like sitting on a razorblade'...but i find it very comfortable. They're just not used to that kind of saddle. i wasnt at first...it just took a little time.


----------



## Norm (27 Mar 2011)

steve52 said:


> what is it with averge speeds so many say i average 15+ i often hit 22/25 mph on the flat and faster down hill but when i check the computer for my average it says things like 13.8
> how fast will i have to go to get a 15 mph average?.ps average includes any stops if u stop


It's the stopping that makes the difference. _Most_ who post their average speeds do so, IMO, by looking at the speed they are going when pedalling under good conditions. 

For instance, a quick spin along the river last week and I was doing 15.x mph every time I looked at the speedo, but the average when I got to Windsor was only 12.8mph. That's because I had other things on my mind than looking at my speed all those times that I was negotiating bridges, fighting through the mucky stuff, cornering etc. Whenever I *did* look at the speed, it was on smooth flat straight sections, so it's not surprising that it was faster.

I then spent a few minutes (so I thought) riding round Windsor, taking pix etc and, when I left again, I noticed that the average had dropped to 10mph.

Set off home again along the roads rather than the tow paths and I was doing 18-ish, when I pulled in, the average for the journey was up at 13.9. 



NorrisCole said:


> Rubbish!


Ooo, I love seeing people presenting a well-reasoned argument rather than just posting disrespectful stuff that they cannot substantiate. 

The bike makes a lot of difference, components more so. Changing tyres on my old MTB increased my speed by around 17% but changing between my Secteur road bike and my Tricross cx bike doesn't change my journey times at all. Because, despite Norris' considered justification, the lighter wheels, thin saddle and narrower tyres mean that my speed is less constant real roads because of the battering my bum and hands take.


----------



## fungus (27 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> Bear in mind that the skinny tyres, lightweight saddle and aero position that help make a road bike faster also make it less comfortable.



I agree with Norris Cole on this one, this statement is utter rubbish. Skinny tyres, lightweight saddles and a more aero position does not equal an uncomfortable ride, it's entirely down to what you are used to riding. Otherwise I wouldn't have managed to average 193 miles a day doing the end2end last year on my Giant TCR race bike.

Overall Stats -
1415km ridden
18024 metres of climbing
67 hours on the bike (moving average 21.2kmh)
Final elapsed time 4 days, 13 hours and 45 minutes - 109.45 hours. 


73% of the 4.56 days were spent in the saddle with no soreness or injury & that is only due to getting your position right & putting the hours of training in


----------



## snailracer (27 Mar 2011)

^^
I didn't say it was uncomfortable, I said it was LESS comfortable. If you paid as much attention and put in as many hours of "training" on a bike that was more comfortable by design, you would be so comfortable you'd be in danger of falling asleep on it whilst riding. You might even find you don't even need to tweak or "train" yourself to get comfy on it, isn't that an advantage?


----------



## NorrisCole (27 Mar 2011)

gbb said:


> Agree...and disagree.
> To me, it wouldnt make it more uncomfortable because thats what ive always ridden, but to someone upgrading from a fatter tyred bike with a padded saddle and comfortable upright position...it may well seem very uncomfortable.
> Almost everyone at work looks at my Ponza saddle and remarks 'that must be like sitting on a razorblade'...but i find it very comfortable. They're just not used to that kind of saddle. i wasnt at first...it just took a little time.



People who think road bikes are uncomfortable have either never ridden one or are riding the wrong bike/saddle etc


----------



## snailracer (27 Mar 2011)

^^
Well I have ridden many, and my hybrid is more comfortable even with the same saddles.


----------



## MacB (27 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> Rubbish!



Really, all else being equal I thought that a wider tyre was measurably more comfortable than a narrower one, or do you disagree?


----------



## Glover Fan (28 Mar 2011)

Only a small difference.

I went from a 1990's Peugeot steel framed bike with a 105 groupset that had seen better days to a brand spanking new carbon bike with new 105 groupset on it and obviously I did notice a substancial difference, more comfortable and maybe a bit quicker, climbing hills was a lot easier.

However, losing just 10lbs makes about a million more times difference. I notice it every year, I gradually pile on the lbs over winter and then come June I'll have lost those 10lbs again and combined with the additional fitness makes hell of a difference.


----------



## youngoldbloke (28 Mar 2011)

Yes it will make a difference. If you are confused by 'average' just enter the figures into http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/bike/speed_distance_time_calc.html


----------



## NorrisCole (28 Mar 2011)

MacB said:


> Really, all else being equal I thought that a wider tyre was measurably more comfortable than a narrower one, or do you disagree?



Yes, but anything over 28mm is overkill, and for most people 25mm at 90 psi is fine if you want to go down the comfort route.
Most people would class 25mm as 'skinny tyres'.


----------



## snailracer (28 Mar 2011)

^^
I have 1.75" on my bike, I would have fitted 2.00" if the shop had them in stock. Not overkill where I ride, your roads must be smooth.


----------



## the_mikey (28 Mar 2011)

I can complete a 30km round trip in an hour and 30 mins, including stops (for a cup of tea in a cafe) on a one year old road bike, the same ride would take about 2 hours on an old mtb, and more than 3 hours on a mountain bike style BSO, but also, the same ride would be riddled with reasons to stop on a BSO, stop to tighten all the bolts, stop to adjust the seat again, stop for a rest, it's hard work riding a BSO!


----------



## totallyfixed (28 Mar 2011)

ray316 said:


> l ride a vitesse sprint 21 speed and the frame is alloy tube with the wheels/tyres wider than alot of more expensive bikes... On this bike l average a speed of 15mph.
> My question for the forum is.... *Does what bike you ride make a difference *or is it the rider.
> If l bought a more expensive bike with a lighter frame and thin wheels/tyres would l see the difference in my speeds with the same effort l putting in at the moment, and if so how much difference in speed/ performance do you think it would make..


Not seen many Time Triallers on MTB's, course it makes a bloody difference, everything else being equal.


----------



## Wobblers (29 Mar 2011)

Yes, the bike does make a difference, but not as much as you might think. My carbon Focus Cayo is 1 mph faster than my Galaxy (which comes complete with mudguards and rack!). Going from an upright flat barred bike to drop bars makes more of a difference, due to the aerodynamics. A lighter bike will certainly feel more nimble and be better going up hill, but again doesn't make a huge difference to the overall speed. The biggest factor in speed is yourself, the engine, unfortunately!


----------



## Wobblers (29 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> Yes, but anything over 28mm is overkill, and for most people 25mm at 90 psi is fine if you want to go down the comfort route.
> Most people would class 25mm as 'skinny tyres'.



Unless you're touring. Or have 12 kg of shopping in your panniers. Or are going off-road. Or the roads happen to be cratered wastelands.

I've noticed a distinct improvement in comfort going from 23 mm Krylions to 25 mm Krylions on my Yukon. And, yes, the 50 mm Big Apples on my Dahon are much better still. Not overkill at all. Have you actually tried larger tyres?


----------



## Cletus Van Damme (29 Mar 2011)

I haven't been cycling that long and so far I only use it for an 18 mile round trip commute that is pretty hilly. At first I was using a Marin Mill Valley Alp 2004 flat bar hybrid with 28mm tyres. I got my first road bike, a Specialized Secteur Sport triple with 25mm tyres a few weeks ago. I much prefer the road bike but my average speed has hardly improved on it. Then again the Marin is a pretty light bike and the gearing is similar to the Secteur. Also when I ride the Secteur I am just about always on the hoods. I have to admit I was expecting to see more of a difference but I do not really care to be honest. When funds allow I am probably going to upgrade the wheels on the Sectuer and put the wheels from that on my Marin as it's front wheel is very close to it's wear indicator, I will also put some decent 23mm tyres on it, so maybe I will see a little improvement then.


----------



## GrasB (29 Mar 2011)

McWobble said:


> Yes, the bike does make a difference, but not as much as you might think. My carbon Focus Cayo is 1 mph faster than my Galaxy (which comes complete with mudguards and rack!). Going from an upright flat barred bike to drop bars makes more of a difference, due to the aerodynamics. A lighter bike will certainly feel more nimble and be better going up hill, but again doesn't make a huge difference to the overall speed. The biggest factor in speed is yourself, the engine, unfortunately!


+1 to a point. While on flat/rolling roads going from a touring bike to a 'standard' road bike will give a small speed gain. If you were to go from a 'standard' road bike to an 'aero' road bike with all the trimmings (aero tubing inc. seat post, internally routed cables, aero profile flats of the bars, etc) you'd actually notice a bigger performance gain even though the latter is a heaver bike. However, as things get steeper then aero v's weight becomes very dependent on the engines ability to keep the bike above 8mph or so.


----------



## Bicycle (29 Mar 2011)

Yes. 

But... the baseline is that you compare bikes only when they are in good condition and the road conditions are similar.

Something as minor as grubby chain, unwilling gearchange or low tyre pressures will make quite a difference over 20 miles.

As will an annoying click or whirrr... which will slow you down as it drives you mad.

Likewise an inconvenient headwind, wet roads or heavy traffic in the wrong places.

But... a bike you like and that's comfortable, responsive and rewarding when riding fast will always be faster than a bike that's just OK. It needs to be set up right for you (which may not conform with the 'classical' idea of correct seat height).

I think cost has (relatively) little to do with it.

As an end note, the thing that seems to have the biggest influence on sustained speed is rider weight...

Not a few grammes saved on carbon seatposts or titanium eggbeaters, but a few solid kilos worked off the abdominal circumference of the rider.

Right now, after a lazy winter I'm at the wrong end of the weight/BMI/speed scale.

A few pies fewer will work much better than a new carbon frame or lightweight rims.


----------



## Smokin Joe (29 Mar 2011)

McWobble said:


> Yes, the bike does make a difference, but not as much as you might think. My carbon Focus Cayo is 1 mph faster than my Galaxy (which comes complete with mudguards and rack!). Going from an upright flat barred bike to drop bars makes more of a difference, due to the aerodynamics. A lighter bike will certainly feel more nimble and be better going up hill, but again doesn't make a huge difference to the overall speed. The biggest factor in speed is yourself, the engine, unfortunately!


Because of the relatively low speed of a bicycle 1mph improvement on your average speed is quite a big increase. The other thing to consider is that every extra bit of weight uses more energy to propel, so on a longer ride or one that takes you to your personal limit more weight means fatigue will catch up with you sooner than it would on the lighter machine.

That's why pro cyclists are obsessed with saving every gram, running out of gas 500 yards before the end of a 180 mile race can be the difference between winning and coming 125th. Not something that matters if you just use the bike for a ten mile commute or a pootle round the lanes of course, but if you compete or cover long distances every little helps.


----------



## Fnaar (29 Mar 2011)

Everyone knows red bikes go faster!


----------



## henshaw11 (29 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> Bear in mind that the skinny tyres, lightweight saddle and *aero position* that help make a road bike faster also make it less comfortable.





NorrisCole said:


> Rubbish!



Very helpful...

Ever wonder why some some people ride recumbents ?
I've had road bikes in the past, the shoulders/head down position *won't* suit everyone. On distance rides I'd be faster - and comfortable - on a road bike than on the mtb (on slicks/hard tyres). On shorter faster journeys the difference was less marked, it was harder to relax and apply grunt on the roadbike, despite it being sized and setup correctly, since there was more stress around my shoulders, etc.

The final straw on the road bike was the muscles in the back of my neck going into spasm - mtb bars are just about high enough on a good day.

Another 'bent rider I've ridden with, bought his after suffering a lot of grief from saddle sores.


----------



## NorrisCole (29 Mar 2011)

Seems like I created quite a fuss.
Let me clarify I was talking about a machine for use on the road only.
I still stand by the fact that anything larger than 28mm is overkill for use on the road. Bigger than 28mm, the trade off between a small amount of comfort compared to the reduction in speed and 'liveliness' just ain't worth it. 
You have to laugh at the 'state of the british roads' argument. What are people doing riding through holes, do you not have any skill on a bike? Compared to many places in the world our roads are positively glassy.


----------



## subaqua (29 Mar 2011)

gbb said:


> Agree...and disagree.
> To me, it wouldnt make it more uncomfortable because thats what ive always ridden, *but to someone upgrading from a fatter tyred bike with a padded saddle and comfortable upright position...it may well seem very uncomfortable*.
> Almost everyone at work looks at my Ponza saddle and remarks 'that must be like sitting on a razorblade'...but i find it very comfortable. They're just not used to that kind of saddle. i wasnt at first...it just took a little time.




no comfort difference noticed here between the MTB and the roadbike. the speed thing however is astonishing. I used to have an average of 15mph on the MTB and do the door to desk in 25-30 minutes including securtiy swipe and searchers at park entrance. its less than 20 minutes using the road bike.


----------



## pepecat (29 Mar 2011)

I have a steel frame 20+ year old 10 speed clunker of a mountain bike, and a 2 yr old aluminium 27 speed road bike.
I know which one is faster.........


----------



## snailracer (29 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> ...
> You have to laugh at the 'state of the british roads' argument. What are people doing riding through holes, do you not have any skill on a bike? Compared to many places in the world our roads are positively glassy.


You don't live in Surrey, I take it? You would spend more time dodging bumps than, say, looking where you are going or avoiding motor vehicles. It is also impossible to spot potholes under puddles.


----------



## snailracer (29 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> ...
> I still stand by the fact that anything larger than 28mm is overkill for use on the road. Bigger than 28mm, the trade off between a small amount of comfort compared to the reduction in speed and 'liveliness' just ain't worth it...


To coin a phrase...rubbish!


----------



## david1701 (29 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> You don't live in Surrey, I take it? You would spend more time dodging bumps than, say, looking where you are going or avoiding motor vehicles. It is also impossible to spot potholes under puddles.



man up , you live in a relatively wealthy county with a high population density, if your roads are too poor its because you don't pay enough council tax, I live in Cornwall which is a relatively poor county with a very low population density and difficult terrain making road maintenance worse + a lot of agricultural debris

+ people ride tourers all over the world which has to include some shitty roads


----------



## byegad (30 Mar 2011)

Back when I owned 9 bikes I found that, for a given ride, there was a pace that each bike was 'happy' at for the ride. A cheap 6 speed Dahon folder on 1.75" tyres would do a fairly hilly loop of 15 miles in 90 minutes. A more expensive 24 speed Dahon Speed-Pro on much narrower tyres would go round in 80 minutes and my Thorn Club Tour on 38mm tyres would also do it in 80 minutes. 
IF I was feeling energetic I could bully any bike a bit faster but frankly for a lot of extra work I'd shave a minute or maybe two off and that's all. 
On my commute (16 miles each way) I found the same effect with each bike having a time which varied by only small amounts day to day. The faster bikes would get me in to work in 1hr 3mins consistently (It was down hill overall to work.) and the slowest 1hr 10 minutes. The difference coming home (and effectively uphill) was greater for the different bikes but again fairly consistent. 

Hope that helps.


----------



## monkeypony (30 Mar 2011)

The bike does make a difference, although depending on the route, you may not notice it. 

The difference between my winter bike (which cost 1k, fully mud guarded up and weighs about the same as a small car), and my summer bike (which cost a lot more and weighs nothing) on my 14 mile commute is only a couple of minutes. Not much to justfy the bike costing nearly 6 times as much.

But, after 80 miles in the saddle, on my winter bike I'm ready to fall off and die but on the summer one I'm fresh as a daisy.

So, the longer you ride the greater the difference in machinery in both speed and comfort.


----------



## youngoldbloke (30 Mar 2011)

There was an entertaining article in the BMJ around last Christmas comparing commuting times on old steel bike v new carbon one - it prompted a lot of comment at the time. Here is a link for those that missed it carbon v steel


----------



## henshaw11 (30 Mar 2011)

david1701 said:


> man up , you live in a relatively wealthy county with a high population density, if your roads are too poor its because you don't pay enough council tax, I live in Cornwall which is a relatively poor county with a very low population density and difficult terrain making road maintenance worse + a lot of agricultural debris
> 
> + people ride tourers all over the world which has to include some shitty roads



We're not all frigging bankers and stockbrokers, and it's not exactly a cheap place to live 

Higher density than Cornwall, but 'high density' ? - I'd be curious as to how it compares to the rest of the uk. There's some big towns and it includes the edge of Greater London, but there's an awful lot of green space in between - ISTR we've got the largest proportion of tree cover in the UK. But relatively wealthy is correct, but with an awful lot of people driving around which probably doesn't help - public transport's decent if you're in the right place but patchy otherwise.

Certainly you'd expect the roads to be in decent nick, but Surrey County Council seem to be a law unto themselves...they've finally got around to patching up the worst holes in some of the roads locally, whilst leaving others which are little better a few foot away and will soon disintegrate in a similar fashion, some of the patches are repairs in previous patches so you can imagine the result.

In any case, crap roads are one thing when there's not much traffic, but when you've got to dodge the holes *and* the drivers...


----------



## Glover Fan (30 Mar 2011)

Potholes are bad everywhere and only getting worse. Sometimes when I am out on my road bike I almost think is it worth having this bike any more. A smooth tarmacked road is the preserve of the motorways and busy A-roads.


----------



## NorrisCole (30 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> You don't live in Surrey, I take it? You would spend more time dodging bumps than, say, looking where you are going or avoiding motor vehicles. It is also impossible to spot potholes under puddles.


Surrey?!
I think a serious dose of MTFU is needed!


----------



## david1701 (30 Mar 2011)

henshaw11 said:


> We're not all frigging bankers and stockbrokers, and it's not exactly a cheap place to live
> 
> Higher density than Cornwall, but 'high density' ? - I'd be curious as to how it compares to the rest of the uk. There's some big towns and it includes the edge of Greater London, but there's an awful lot of green space in between - ISTR we've got the largest proportion of tree cover in the UK. But relatively wealthy is correct, but with an awful lot of people driving around which probably doesn't help - public transport's decent if you're in the right place but patchy otherwise.
> 
> ...



was being slightly grumpy  sorry about that


----------



## henshaw11 (31 Mar 2011)

david1701 said:


> was being slightly grumpy  sorry about that



No worries, no offence taken


----------



## vorsprung (31 Mar 2011)

ray316 said:


> My question for the forum is.... Does what bike you ride make a difference or is it the rider.


Yes, I recently got a nice Specialized Roubaix. It is a tiny bit faster 10 minutes perhaps over 100km than my previous best bike(s)
More ramblings about this on my blog:

http://audaxing.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/oddly-fast/
http://audaxing.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/faster-the-feedback/


----------



## snailracer (31 Mar 2011)

NorrisCole said:


> Surrey?!
> I think a serious dose of MTFU is needed!


You suggested using a road bike to go faster. I MTFU'd and pedalled my MTB harder to go faster, hah!


----------



## snailracer (31 Mar 2011)

david1701 said:


> man up , you live in a relatively wealthy county with a high population density, if your roads are too poor its because you don't pay enough council tax...



Maybe the council spends it on hospitals and schools instead. Maybe Surrey is populated by Tory voters who would rather keep taxes low, who knows?

http://m.whatcar.com/car-news/surrey-tops-pothole-chart/248114

.


----------



## NorrisCole (31 Mar 2011)

snailracer said:


> You suggested using a road bike to go faster. I MTFU'd and pedalled my MTB harder to go faster, hah!


Everyone knows road cycling is cycling in its purest form...


----------

