Chris S
Legendary Member
- Location
- Birmingham
I wonder how long it will be before you start a helmet debate?
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.
ushills
Veteran
Bike technology has not progressed as much as car technology so the changes are not comparable.
There is unlikely to be any real difference at the amateur level between a similar geometry and geared road bike from the 70's and now. My steel framed pro was similar in weight to my current bike and yes it has less gears, however, the overall ratios were the same.
Fitness and weight will make a bigger difference once you reach a certain price level and that is way less than £1000.
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
Justification please?
Fitness will always make the biggest contribution regardless of the kit, hence it is a moot point!
OP
OP
Upstream
Active Member
Rob3rt... From what I've seen of other questions you've answered in the past you seem to be very experienced. Answer this for me...
According to Strava (which may not be all that accurate - although I have put in accurate information pertaining to age, weight etc) it tells me that on my rides, on average - I put out between 150 - 200w and that when cranking hard uphill it can go up to bursts of up to 550w. From what I can tell, that amount of power is pretty modest.
When people talk about needing stiffer frames, stiffer wheels and stiffer cranks - in your opinion, would a person weighing in at just under 80kg (me) and putting out a relatively small amount of power cause even a cheaper frame, wheel or crank to flex? If the answer is no, then from my perspective, unless I'm riding a really heavy bike - making changes to components is unlikely to result in any performance gains. If on the other hand it's the case that my weight and power output would cause the components mentioned above to flex and therefore absorb a significant amount of pedalling energy - then there could be a case for upgrading.
Let me have your thoughts,
Thanks.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
As with any product, there's a "you get's what you pays for" curve, but it's slightly more complex than that. At the low end, you are basically buying crap, and essentially wasting you're money, but over a certain threshold you start getting something basically usable and you are then in pay-more / get-more equation, then at some point the curve starts to go very steep, and you're into diminishing returns. Usually there's some sort of sweet spot of value / performance. I guess for bikes that'll be in the £800 to £1500 range. My bikes are in this range (just)
But as well as outright performance, be they "diminishing returns" or not, you are also getting "niceness" which is a slightly different thing. That might be decorative lugs, some titanium, Campag record or whatever, but not out and out performance. I can see the appeal of that too.
But as well as outright performance, be they "diminishing returns" or not, you are also getting "niceness" which is a slightly different thing. That might be decorative lugs, some titanium, Campag record or whatever, but not out and out performance. I can see the appeal of that too.
I think it is similar to beach casting rods, you get the tackle tarts who have to have the latest and greatest £400 pound rod. Often they can cast 50 yards maximum. I'll cast 120 with a rod half the price. ...but they take a lot of pride in their gear and it gets them out fishing so why shouldn't they.
the difference in prices of road bike though is huge.. personally I don't see the point of spending over a grand on something when I wont be able to appreciate the benefits it brings (and it wont get my 15stone bulk up hills any quicker)
the difference in prices of road bike though is huge.. personally I don't see the point of spending over a grand on something when I wont be able to appreciate the benefits it brings (and it wont get my 15stone bulk up hills any quicker)
themosquitoking
Guru
- Location
- Spain
I'll pop a thought in in here. Frames and forks are designed to flex. If they were utterly rigid, they would be awful to ride, so they are designed to flex in certain areas, some more than others. To make an Alu or Steel bike stiffer, the tubing would be thicker which adds weight. Tricks can be done with tube shaping, but that is essentially it. Carbon has the benefit of being able to be stiff and also light.
On the flat when I'm just cruising along, it would make absolutely no difference which bike I was on, the top speed I could achieve would be the same (drag rules top speed, not weight). However, the bike with lighter wheels would be easier to accelerate.
When climbing, and you are putting out all the power you can, you will be flexing parts of the bike and wheels (yes, even us modest riders). If some areas (BB and chainstays most often) can be stiffened then more of your energy goes into turning the wheel. Add lighter wheels to that and the difference is noticeable.
IMO, if I put the new wheels on my Defy, I would see 90% of the improvement the new bike has shown, but over a decent distance ride, the overall speed gain will be very small. The only further improvement on the new bike would be an even lighter set of wheels, making it a little easier again, but it's ultimately up to me, my legs and my fitness to go any faster. It's all the bike I will ever need.
I wasn't gonna be buying the Advanced 2, I was after something for £1400, but when you're offered a £2k bike for £1600, it would be rude not to
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
To be concise.
1) Strava power figures are complete dross. Ignore them, they are meaningless!
2) "Stiffness" is only one performance benefit of more expensive bikes and overall stiffness is not what you are paying for, you are paying for stiffness where it matters whilst retaining compliance (for comfort) in other areas.
3) Most people who claim they need stiff this and stiffer that, have no idea what they need, they just think they need it because some dreck filled magazine told them they needed it.
On another point:
It is a myth that only elite athletes will gain from marginal improvements, in many cases, the overall speed returns for upgrades will be greater for a lower level athlete than for a high level athlete. Any wattage savings translates to greater speed increases at lower speeds than at higher speeds, even in the case where an elite athlete reaps a greater saving, wattage wise. For example, an elite athlete might save 5W, and gain 5 seconds in a 10 mile TT, a mid level club rider might save 3W and gain 8 seconds in a 10 mile TT (picking numbers out of the air, for the sake of illustrating my point) because the power increase required in order to gain a unit speed increase grows exponentially the faster you are going.
Powely
Well-Known Member
I was averaging just below 15mph on a 30/40 mile trip on my Carerra Virtuoso but that was on partially loose gravel then on my Cube Agree Race I averaged over 21mph in the 50 mile Great Manchester Cycle, which is closed road and tarmac. So I'd say yes but I'm not sure how much the closed roads had an effect and also the difference in road surface. Plus the Virtuoso wasn't really the right size and I wasn't riding clipless then either. So actually I'm not sure this is much help after all as there's too many factors to consider. My tuppence worth anyway.
OP
OP
Upstream
Active Member
Yes - lots of factors there
. I'd say that if I tried to ride with just flat pedals again now, my average speed would probably drop by 3 or 4 mph. If I threw some loose gravel into the mix - perhaps another 2 - 3 mph.
Powely
Well-Known Member
I quite agree with the above... I also feel that there's an enjoyment factor from the behavioural aspect of something engineered better to consider also.
OP
OP
Upstream
Active Member
Yes - I can understand that.
Gravity Aided
Legendary Member
- Location
- Land of Lincoln
As for me, I'd just rather have something older, that costs less, and still have the benefits of advanced engineering. Look at the Viscount/Lambert bikes from the 70's. Death fork aside, they broke a lot of new ground. Sealed bearings, aerospace tubing, all at a price point below other bicycles. Schwinns from the 1980's, in many cases, had road bicycles built from Italian Columbus Steel. Raleighs at the same time pioneered the use of aluminum tubing and epoxy joining. See what engineering and technical innovations work for you. Ultra light weight ? Shifting? Advanced design? Frame characteristics? All might be found in different guises in different bicycles.
