6 ms·

Meh. If your not a pro competing in the tour de france then there will be almost no performance difference between the $18,000 bike described and a c $600 bike.

Meh. If your not a pro competing in the tour de france then there will be almost no performance difference between the $18,000 bike described and a c $600 bike. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF4MIEkIBZs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF4MIEkIBZs When cycling your power/weight ratio is determined by you. Its obvious the purpose of these $1000+ bikes is to be status symbols for rich idiots.

Asbostos 11y ago
Yep. If you use a bike for exercise, then you want it to be hard work. If you use it for moving around, then add a motor and battery. Lightweight frames are only for artificial competitions. Then what are you competing at? Who can afford the most expensive equipment?
- mmmBacon 11y ago
  Yeah there's a bit more to it than that. Lighter stuff allows you to go further with less energy. Lighter wheels and tires make a really big difference as does tire rolling resistance. In something like a century (100 mike ride) a lighter bike may make the difference between finishing and not finishing. Also wind resistance goes up as the square of velocity so it's harder to go faster than it is to simply ride around a clunky heavy bike. There is a saying in cycling: strong,light, cheap. Pick two.
  - Asbostos 11y ago
    All those factors can be addressed with a small hub motor and battery which together is much cheaper than the high-efficiency parts. If you set the power level right, you could even tune it to give the same reduction in effort for the rider. Batteries and motors are more energy efficient than humans, so it's good from a more pure energy point of view too.
    - analog31 11y ago
      To me, that seems to add a lot of weight, cost, complexity, maintenance (battery charging and replacement), and failure modes (running out of juice) when you could just spend a couple more bucks for a lighter bike that's also more fun to ride.
- analog31 11y ago
  Granted, I don't ride a crabon super-bike, as my tastes and budget are a bit more proletarian. And if you want to see today's tech on one of my bikes, you might have to wait a decade or three. Still, an issue is that for many cyclists, there's no clear dividing line between exercise, recreation, and utility. I want all three, at once! All other things being equal, a lighter bike is more fun to ride.
- bch 11y ago
  > If you use a bike for exercise, then you want it to be hard work. Garbage equipment isn't inspiring or enjoyable. Nice frames and wheels are nice to use, and that gets a person out on the bike.
- aw0 11y ago
  If ridden purely for exercise, lighter equipment lets you cover more ground in the same amount of time. You don't work any less, you just go faster. There another reason many people ride bikes: purely for fun. High performance equipment tends to be more satisfying for many.
whistlerbrk 11y ago
I'm sorry, this really isn't true. The diminishing returns on a complete bike are real but that really starts at 2500+ where the drop offs are extreme. A dedicated TT bike for your triathlon is a status symbol if you're not a pro. A quality steel frame and fork, 105 groupo and well built wheels with good hubs is not and can easily run you 2000 and I would say there is a huge huge huge difference in that and a 750 dollar entry level bike with crap hubs.
- plorkyeran 11y ago
  Electronic shifters are the main thing you get past $2500 that's relevant to a non-racer, but even then they're purely a luxury feature that doesn't do much beyond making riding a little more pleasant.

Asbostos 11y ago

Yep. If you use a bike for exercise, then you want it to be hard work. If you use it for moving around, then add a motor and battery. Lightweight frames are only for artificial competitions. Then what are you competing at? Who can afford the most expensive equipment?

mmmBacon 11y ago
Yeah there's a bit more to it than that. Lighter stuff allows you to go further with less energy. Lighter wheels and tires make a really big difference as does tire rolling resistance. In something like a century (100 mike ride) a lighter bike may make the difference between finishing and not finishing. Also wind resistance goes up as the square of velocity so it's harder to go faster than it is to simply ride around a clunky heavy bike. There is a saying in cycling: strong,light, cheap. Pick two.
- Asbostos 11y ago
  All those factors can be addressed with a small hub motor and battery which together is much cheaper than the high-efficiency parts. If you set the power level right, you could even tune it to give the same reduction in effort for the rider. Batteries and motors are more energy efficient than humans, so it's good from a more pure energy point of view too.
  - analog31 11y ago
    To me, that seems to add a lot of weight, cost, complexity, maintenance (battery charging and replacement), and failure modes (running out of juice) when you could just spend a couple more bucks for a lighter bike that's also more fun to ride.
analog31 11y ago
Granted, I don't ride a crabon super-bike, as my tastes and budget are a bit more proletarian. And if you want to see today's tech on one of my bikes, you might have to wait a decade or three. Still, an issue is that for many cyclists, there's no clear dividing line between exercise, recreation, and utility. I want all three, at once! All other things being equal, a lighter bike is more fun to ride.
bch 11y ago
> If you use a bike for exercise, then you want it to be hard work. Garbage equipment isn't inspiring or enjoyable. Nice frames and wheels are nice to use, and that gets a person out on the bike.
aw0 11y ago
If ridden purely for exercise, lighter equipment lets you cover more ground in the same amount of time. You don't work any less, you just go faster. There another reason many people ride bikes: purely for fun. High performance equipment tends to be more satisfying for many.

whistlerbrk 11y ago

I'm sorry, this really isn't true. The diminishing returns on a complete bike are real but that really starts at 2500+ where the drop offs are extreme. A dedicated TT bike for your triathlon is a status symbol if you're not a pro. A quality steel frame and fork, 105 groupo and well built wheels with good hubs is not and can easily run you 2000 and I would say there is a huge huge huge difference in that and a 750 dollar entry level bike with crap hubs.

plorkyeran 11y ago
Electronic shifters are the main thing you get past $2500 that's relevant to a non-racer, but even then they're purely a luxury feature that doesn't do much beyond making riding a little more pleasant.