Nigelnaturist
Guru
- Location
- Pontefract
Ha-Ha, you know where I was coming from.He was he guy trying to push the pillars apart, not go faster and be more hairodynamic. To be honest I think he was a bit before my time.
Does how much you spend on a bike actually matter for most cyclists..?
- Thread starter Upstream
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
- Location
- Glasgow
Every day riding on my 3 stone (
) single speed makes me want more high gears on the hybrid.
Boon 51
Veteran
- Location
- Deal. Kent.
Just my bobs worth..
All my bikes have been about a grand... but the things that make me go faster have been.... the right gearing for hills ( big cogs on casseette) some top tyres and a good saddle.. not much to do with the actual bike?
PS.. oh and padded shorts..
All my bikes have been about a grand... but the things that make me go faster have been.... the right gearing for hills ( big cogs on casseette) some top tyres and a good saddle.. not much to do with the actual bike?
PS.. oh and padded shorts..
carolonabike
Senior Member
- Location
- Boldon
The Guardian did an experiment a few weeks ago to see how much difference an expensive bike makes to an average cyclist. We all know what the answer is but it's still quite interesting.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/video/2013/jul/17/man-v-bike-video
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/video/2013/jul/17/man-v-bike-video
Nigelnaturist
Guru
- Location
- Pontefract
I think thats more the type of bike than cost.
Absolutely on the button! I restore and ride bikes between 43 and 65 years old, usually mainstream makes top end bikes (if that makes sense), mainly Rudge / Carleton / Raleigh. I usually use modern 27" wheels and the oldest lightweight NOS or original parts I can find. A finished rebuilt bike usually comes in around £75-90 unless I go for a professional paint job, and I reckon rides as well as anything you could buy now for £1500 or so. I have picked up some really nice steel from E-Bay that only needs a good servicing from as little as £30. Fitness and endurance are the key factors once you have any bike that is mechanically sound and properly set up for you. An added bonus is that old but good bikes are less likely to be targeted for theft.
Gravity Aided
Legendary Member
- Location
- Land of Lincoln
Except repair costs and acumen. There, the older bikes beat some digital controlled unit. I can fix an older bike myself.
I have driven both in the last couple of years and the Mondeo version is easier and far more economical, there is a pleasure in owning the older models which is why I usually hold onto my old bikes, but do not ride them.
Well I can fix a new one myself, differing skill levels I suppose. Great thing about cycling is it brings lots of different people together.
I had this exact thought the other day when I was stood in the Specialized concept store looking at a limited edition Campag Super Record equipped beast sporting zipp 404s with an £11k price tag swinging from its neck.
£11k!
My carbon bike cost me £1k initially and I've probably spent at least another £1k on upgrades.
Is that bike between 5 to 10 times faster than my bike? Is it 5 to 10 times more desirable?
Is it good value for money?
I would hope it would be faster, but more to do with the wheels and possibly a small weight saving, but I imagine it would be marginal. In terms of group set you're comparing the top end Campag group to the top end SRAM group that I have, so there shouldn't be any significant shifting difference.
Frame would be lighter and now a little more modern but both carbon, both relatively aero, and with a similar geometry.
Now at the other end, would the difference between a £100 - £200 road bike be similarly marginal in comparison to my carbon bike?
I would think massively different with regards to weight, aerodynamics, research and development, frame material, shifting performance, comfort, rolling resistance on the hubs etc
There is certainly a particular price point where you can get a lightweight road bike that performs in a similar manner to the top end machines and you will only see very marginal improvements by switching to the very top end specs.
I doubt very much that if there is a chap in my club who always beats me to the top of long, hard, climbs on a bike the same spec as mine by say a minute, but then i spend £11k on this specialized, I'm not going to suddenly start beating him. But put him on a £100-£200 bike and I fancy my chances.
Regardless, it depends on what you want from your riding. A club rider who is doing a bit of racing will appreciate marginal gains. It helps to get a pb in a time trial or shave seconds off a sprint.
If you're just riding for fitness or enjoyment and the occasional sportive then the more you spend over around £800-£1500 you're probably not going to get value for money performance gains.
£11k!
My carbon bike cost me £1k initially and I've probably spent at least another £1k on upgrades.
Is that bike between 5 to 10 times faster than my bike? Is it 5 to 10 times more desirable?
Is it good value for money?
I would hope it would be faster, but more to do with the wheels and possibly a small weight saving, but I imagine it would be marginal. In terms of group set you're comparing the top end Campag group to the top end SRAM group that I have, so there shouldn't be any significant shifting difference.
Frame would be lighter and now a little more modern but both carbon, both relatively aero, and with a similar geometry.
Now at the other end, would the difference between a £100 - £200 road bike be similarly marginal in comparison to my carbon bike?
I would think massively different with regards to weight, aerodynamics, research and development, frame material, shifting performance, comfort, rolling resistance on the hubs etc
There is certainly a particular price point where you can get a lightweight road bike that performs in a similar manner to the top end machines and you will only see very marginal improvements by switching to the very top end specs.
I doubt very much that if there is a chap in my club who always beats me to the top of long, hard, climbs on a bike the same spec as mine by say a minute, but then i spend £11k on this specialized, I'm not going to suddenly start beating him. But put him on a £100-£200 bike and I fancy my chances.
Regardless, it depends on what you want from your riding. A club rider who is doing a bit of racing will appreciate marginal gains. It helps to get a pb in a time trial or shave seconds off a sprint.
If you're just riding for fitness or enjoyment and the occasional sportive then the more you spend over around £800-£1500 you're probably not going to get value for money performance gains.
Cletus Van Damme
Previously known as Cheesney Hawks
- Location
- Out in the sticks...
I got caught with the cycling bug a couple of years ago. My first bike was actually pretty good that I bought off a mate, a Marin Mill Valley Alp. More or less a flat barred road bike. I got into cycling because of a serious knee problem that prevents me from basically doing anything else. Still I read a lot and convinced myself that I needed a road bike. I got a previous years model Specialized Secteur Sport reduced to £520. Again more reading magazines etc made me think that I needed to upgrade the Sora shifters so I could change gear on the drops. I did this at considerable expense and never ride on the drops anyway, and the difference in gear change is negligable if anything with the better shifters. I also upgraded the wheels mainly because the stock ones that came with the bike were shoot. I have also changed various other bits and I guess a similar specced bike these days would cost about £1000. If I was to go back in time the only thing I would of changed is the wheels as the ones that came with the bike were utter garbage.
The difference in my speed between my old Marin and the Specialized is really small regarding my times etc. Still the Specialized is nicer to ride and makes me feel a bit better riding it. Still I now realise that as long as the bike does not weigh a ton it is not really going to make much difference to somebody of my ability and with my injury. I used to look at carbon road bikes and better groupsets but now I hardly ever bother as I am positive that Shimano 2300 would be more than adequate for my needs. I have finally realised that it is the engine that makes the difference, this is much better for my wallet to be honest.
So for me I think an expensive bike is a waste, but at the same time I would hate to ride a really cheap overly heavy bike.
The difference in my speed between my old Marin and the Specialized is really small regarding my times etc. Still the Specialized is nicer to ride and makes me feel a bit better riding it. Still I now realise that as long as the bike does not weigh a ton it is not really going to make much difference to somebody of my ability and with my injury. I used to look at carbon road bikes and better groupsets but now I hardly ever bother as I am positive that Shimano 2300 would be more than adequate for my needs. I have finally realised that it is the engine that makes the difference, this is much better for my wallet to be honest.
So for me I think an expensive bike is a waste, but at the same time I would hate to ride a really cheap overly heavy bike.
I have my answer 
The new bike is lovely. It's a bit more comfortable than the Alu bike, accelerates better and the 105 shifts crisper and faster. Biggest difference? It climbs better, very noticeably so compared to the Defy 2.
What's made the difference? I reckon 90% of the climbing improvement is the wheels. I've gone from a 2Kg+ wheelset to a 1700g one on the new bike, the rest is from less wasted energy with the carbon frame being stiffer in the right places.
Through one segment on the ride, I really went for it. I had done the same on the Alu bike when I got new tyres and the conditions were about the same. It starts off with a short climb, then a gentle descent followed by a lump, the whole thing is 0.8 miles. I was nearly 2mph faster through it
Overall, I was about 0.5mph better off on a 14 mile ride, but the longer the ride, the less that would be I think. I could well be less tired towards the end, which would be very welcome.
It was quite an interesting comparison
The new bike is lovely. It's a bit more comfortable than the Alu bike, accelerates better and the 105 shifts crisper and faster. Biggest difference? It climbs better, very noticeably so compared to the Defy 2.
What's made the difference? I reckon 90% of the climbing improvement is the wheels. I've gone from a 2Kg+ wheelset to a 1700g one on the new bike, the rest is from less wasted energy with the carbon frame being stiffer in the right places.
Through one segment on the ride, I really went for it. I had done the same on the Alu bike when I got new tyres and the conditions were about the same. It starts off with a short climb, then a gentle descent followed by a lump, the whole thing is 0.8 miles. I was nearly 2mph faster through it
Overall, I was about 0.5mph better off on a 14 mile ride, but the longer the ride, the less that would be I think. I could well be less tired towards the end, which would be very welcome.
It was quite an interesting comparison
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
I am not going to read this whole thread, because I suspect it will be full of the usual for this type of thread, a fair mix of practical answers and dross (the prevailing opinion on forums re. who gains most from marginal gains is rather misguided and seems to me, more like self justification for NOT spending more).
The answer to the thread title is, it does not matter, unless you think it does.
It may make a difference performance wise though. How much depends on many things!
So there is your cryptic answer, but it is correct!
The answer to the thread title is, it does not matter, unless you think it does.
It may make a difference performance wise though. How much depends on many things!
So there is your cryptic answer, but it is correct!
