7 ms·

The gullibility of cyclists is the industry's most valuable asset. In tests, cyclists cannot tell the difference between frame materials when the frame is cover

by cultus 8y ago

The gullibility of cyclists is the industry's most valuable asset. In tests, cyclists cannot tell the difference between frame materials when the frame is covered. I think it is just really seductive to think you can get magically faster by a significant amount just by buying a new frame with that new bottom bracket that's claimed to be 30% stiffer.

dabeeeenster 8y ago
Although I generally agree, there are a couple of things that can have a big difference. Most obvious one being proper cycling shoes and cleat peddles. Big efficiency gains there.
- cultus 8y ago
  Oh for sure. Indexed shifting, better alloys, for example. There have been some major innovations, but most of what has come out in the last 10 years in road bikes hasn't been great. Lots of new BB standards that all creak, thinner chains, too few spokes, etc.
  - gameswithgo 8y ago
    There are certain spoke counts which have non trivial aerodynamic advantage. But going less than, I think it around 12? has greatly diminishing returns. Zipp had some good data on this years ago.
- gameswithgo 8y ago
  People have done power and efficiency tests with cleats vs flats, usually with no difference or minimal difference One such example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNedIJBZpgM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNedIJBZpgM
Eric_WVGG 8y ago
There's a blogger called “Bike Snob” who has been ridiculing cyclist gullibility and fleeting trends for over ten years. One manufacturer of wooden bicycles decided to just up and send him one, and… well I'll just quote him: > Before getting the bike: Intrigued by the novelty factor and an excuse to make gratuitous wood puns > Shortly after receiving the bike: Impressed by the exquisite craftsmanship but also kind of embarrassed by it at the same time > Shortly after riding the bike for the first time: Wow, it feels great, but what's that creaking? I bet it's broken > Once I'd solved the creaking by tightening the bottom bracket: I really like riding this bike > Today: All bikes should be made of wood, metal and crabon is for vulgarians His whole shtick is being a bit jokey, but anyway he's been writing about this thing for a year now and basically loves it. I'd also like to point out that people buy bicycles for factors other than speed. Most people, I would wager.
- ramy_d 8y ago
  I found a sequence of updates from the guy if anyone is interested: https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/bsnyc-field-trip-2017-philly-bike-expo.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/bsnyc-field-trip-20... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/would-that-i-could.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/would-that-i-could.... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/this-title-is-100-free-of-wood-puns.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/this-title-is-100-f... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/06/wood-bike-status-update.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/06/wood-bike-status-up... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/01/sawdust-in-wind.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/01/sawdust-in-wind.htm... read for yourself
  - hammock 8y ago
    This guy is funny!
  - asauce 8y ago
    This guy's writing style is fantastic. I just read through all of the posts you linked, and I'm not even into bikes! However I must say, the Renovo Aerowood is a good looking piece of wood.
Overtonwindow 8y ago
I think this is oversimplifying how changes in material and aerodynamics can improve performance. A person such as yourself might not be impressed by a “new bottom bracket” with 30% increased stiffness, but someone who races might. Every ounce and second counts.
- grogenaut 8y ago
  The problem is like 0.2% of cyclists actually race but it's about 95% of marketing.
  - Joeri 8y ago
    And arguably, if the goal is to get a workout, an easier ride just means you’ll have to cycle longer to reach your goal.
    - TomVDB 8y ago
      Counterpoint: for me, buying an easier (in my case: much lighter) bike, was the difference between deciding to ride or to not ride at all. I don't think I'm alone in that.
      - CydeWeys 8y ago
        You're definitely not wrong. I can (and have) ridden my cyclocross bike for hours, which I have no desire of attempting on a Citibike, what I was using before I bought my own bike.
        grogenaut 8y ago
        Sure but to you and go: you don't need to spend 10k to get a bike that meets those needs. Anything in the 1-2k range (eg laptop) prices is a very very nice bike. Both of my favorite bikes are cyclocross bikes. The first one I got used and upgraded the componyts to ultegra and bb7 discs. Was around 900 all in. I may be a bit hypocrite with my second bike which was a factory replace of the first with a top of the line racing cyclo cf frame (weld failed). But the cost and some velocity touring wheels (which caused the frame failure in the first frame by moving stress off the wheels). So to me that bike cost $1200... But is likely a $4k bike. I don't know if that makes me a hypocrite or just savvy. But a lot of the bikes I test ride in the 1-2k range we're super nice. And there were plenty in the 700-1000 range as well (trick in Seattle is to buy bikes in August when the Google kids and M$ kids are going back to school)
mikestew 8y ago
In tests, cyclists cannot tell the difference between frame materials when the frame is covered. Man, I have a hard time believing that. Now, I've not done a blind taste test, but I truly believe I'll tell the difference between a good carbon frame and an aluminum frame of equal quality. All of the frames in my garage have noticeably different characteristics, and it can't all be placebo. But, I'm an ex-racer, blah, blah, so maybe most people can't tell the difference. new bottom bracket that's claimed to be 30% stiffer. OTOH, if a Cat 3 thinks he's putting out enough power to torque a modern bottom bracket, yeah, he's deluding himself.
- jshevek 8y ago
  I agree with you regarding the specific bikes I've personally experienced. But if I'm doing a blind "riding effort" test and am not allowed to lift the frame by hand, I doubt I could differentiate between all the contributing factors to effort.
lvs 8y ago
It's similar to any hobby that attracts both disposable income and pseudoscience. Audiophiles. Skiers. Surfers. Surgeons. (Kidding.)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
toomanybeersies 8y ago
Back when I used to ride road bikes, I upgraded from a decade old (but very well maintained) aluminium Trek 1000 to a carbon fibre Merida Scultura. I had the same tyres, pedals, and shoes on my new bike (switched them over). I had a 3-4 km/h improvement on average on the flats instantly. So my new carbon bike was objectively better than my old aluminium bike. I'm not sure if the improvement was because the bike was brand new, or because it was carbon and had higher end components, but it was definitely there.
- spin 8y ago
  I'm curious what your new bike is. I currently have a 12 year old (but well maintained) Trek 1000. I'd like to get some better derailleurs (I'm constantly having to adjust and clean mine). But maybe I'll just get a better bike, I don't know. EDIT: oh, you already said it: Merida Scultura
  - toomanybeersies 8y ago
    I actually really liked my Trek 1000. I was very tempted at the time to just get a new groupset and wheels for the thing, but I had a really good deal on the Merida. It's a very well built frame, it doesn't look the prettiest, but it gets the job done.
- hinkley 8y ago
  That seems like a lot just due to a frame change. If I had to guess, more gear ratios, newer bearings, and rim profile probably all contributed to that. And maybe just a little bit of placebo...
- cultus 8y ago
  The vast majority of energy on a bike goes to aero drag, and most of that is the rider. Are you in a more aero position on the Merida? That would fully account for it. The difference in weight is not capable of causing much difference on flats, since it would just slightly increase rolling resistance. The differences in mechanical efficiency of well-tuned road bikes is also pretty negligible.
hasbot 8y ago
Do you have references to those tests? My personal experience says otherwise. I have steel, aluminum, titanium road bikes of about the same pedigree and setups. The different materials absolutely provide a different ride. But, if I'm thrown on some random, unfamiliar bike and ride it for a short period of time, I probably couldn't guess the frame material. I have a Scandium bike too with an oversized bottom bracket. Being 200lbs, on a climb, I can definitely feel the difference the bottom bracket makes. All the other bikes flex a little when I stand up and crank. Not the Scandium bike. Maybe that's unimportant to you, but I really enjoy the feeling of stomping on the pedals and having the bike immediately respond to the power.

by cultus 8y ago

dabeeeenster 8y ago

Although I generally agree, there are a couple of things that can have a big difference. Most obvious one being proper cycling shoes and cleat peddles. Big efficiency gains there.

cultus 8y ago
Oh for sure. Indexed shifting, better alloys, for example. There have been some major innovations, but most of what has come out in the last 10 years in road bikes hasn't been great. Lots of new BB standards that all creak, thinner chains, too few spokes, etc.
- gameswithgo 8y ago
  There are certain spoke counts which have non trivial aerodynamic advantage. But going less than, I think it around 12? has greatly diminishing returns. Zipp had some good data on this years ago.
gameswithgo 8y ago
People have done power and efficiency tests with cleats vs flats, usually with no difference or minimal difference One such example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNedIJBZpgM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNedIJBZpgM

Eric_WVGG 8y ago

There's a blogger called “Bike Snob” who has been ridiculing cyclist gullibility and fleeting trends for over ten years. One manufacturer of wooden bicycles decided to just up and send him one, and… well I'll just quote him: > Before getting the bike: Intrigued by the novelty factor and an excuse to make gratuitous wood puns > Shortly after receiving the bike: Impressed by the exquisite craftsmanship but also kind of embarrassed by it at the same time > Shortly after riding the bike for the first time: Wow, it feels great, but what's that creaking? I bet it's broken > Once I'd solved the creaking by tightening the bottom bracket: I really like riding this bike > Today: All bikes should be made of wood, metal and crabon is for vulgarians His whole shtick is being a bit jokey, but anyway he's been writing about this thing for a year now and basically loves it. I'd also like to point out that people buy bicycles for factors other than speed. Most people, I would wager.

ramy_d 8y ago
I found a sequence of updates from the guy if anyone is interested: https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/bsnyc-field-trip-2017-philly-bike-expo.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/bsnyc-field-trip-20... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/would-that-i-could.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/would-that-i-could.... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/this-title-is-100-free-of-wood-puns.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/this-title-is-100-f... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/06/wood-bike-status-update.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/06/wood-bike-status-up... https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/01/sawdust-in-wind.html https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/01/sawdust-in-wind.htm... read for yourself
- hammock 8y ago
  This guy is funny!
- asauce 8y ago
  This guy's writing style is fantastic. I just read through all of the posts you linked, and I'm not even into bikes! However I must say, the Renovo Aerowood is a good looking piece of wood.

Overtonwindow 8y ago

I think this is oversimplifying how changes in material and aerodynamics can improve performance. A person such as yourself might not be impressed by a “new bottom bracket” with 30% increased stiffness, but someone who races might. Every ounce and second counts.

grogenaut 8y ago
The problem is like 0.2% of cyclists actually race but it's about 95% of marketing.
- Joeri 8y ago
  And arguably, if the goal is to get a workout, an easier ride just means you’ll have to cycle longer to reach your goal.
  - TomVDB 8y ago
    Counterpoint: for me, buying an easier (in my case: much lighter) bike, was the difference between deciding to ride or to not ride at all. I don't think I'm alone in that.
    - CydeWeys 8y ago
      You're definitely not wrong. I can (and have) ridden my cyclocross bike for hours, which I have no desire of attempting on a Citibike, what I was using before I bought my own bike.
      - grogenaut 8y ago
        Sure but to you and go: you don't need to spend 10k to get a bike that meets those needs. Anything in the 1-2k range (eg laptop) prices is a very very nice bike. Both of my favorite bikes are cyclocross bikes. The first one I got used and upgraded the componyts to ultegra and bb7 discs. Was around 900 all in. I may be a bit hypocrite with my second bike which was a factory replace of the first with a top of the line racing cyclo cf frame (weld failed). But the cost and some velocity touring wheels (which caused the frame failure in the first frame by moving stress off the wheels). So to me that bike cost $1200... But is likely a $4k bike. I don't know if that makes me a hypocrite or just savvy. But a lot of the bikes I test ride in the 1-2k range we're super nice. And there were plenty in the 700-1000 range as well (trick in Seattle is to buy bikes in August when the Google kids and M$ kids are going back to school)

mikestew 8y ago

In tests, cyclists cannot tell the difference between frame materials when the frame is covered. Man, I have a hard time believing that. Now, I've not done a blind taste test, but I truly believe I'll tell the difference between a good carbon frame and an aluminum frame of equal quality. All of the frames in my garage have noticeably different characteristics, and it can't all be placebo. But, I'm an ex-racer, blah, blah, so maybe most people can't tell the difference. new bottom bracket that's claimed to be 30% stiffer. OTOH, if a Cat 3 thinks he's putting out enough power to torque a modern bottom bracket, yeah, he's deluding himself.

jshevek 8y ago
I agree with you regarding the specific bikes I've personally experienced. But if I'm doing a blind "riding effort" test and am not allowed to lift the frame by hand, I doubt I could differentiate between all the contributing factors to effort.

lvs 8y ago

It's similar to any hobby that attracts both disposable income and pseudoscience. Audiophiles. Skiers. Surfers. Surgeons. (Kidding.)

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

toomanybeersies 8y ago

Back when I used to ride road bikes, I upgraded from a decade old (but very well maintained) aluminium Trek 1000 to a carbon fibre Merida Scultura. I had the same tyres, pedals, and shoes on my new bike (switched them over). I had a 3-4 km/h improvement on average on the flats instantly. So my new carbon bike was objectively better than my old aluminium bike. I'm not sure if the improvement was because the bike was brand new, or because it was carbon and had higher end components, but it was definitely there.

spin 8y ago
I'm curious what your new bike is. I currently have a 12 year old (but well maintained) Trek 1000. I'd like to get some better derailleurs (I'm constantly having to adjust and clean mine). But maybe I'll just get a better bike, I don't know. EDIT: oh, you already said it: Merida Scultura
- toomanybeersies 8y ago
  I actually really liked my Trek 1000. I was very tempted at the time to just get a new groupset and wheels for the thing, but I had a really good deal on the Merida. It's a very well built frame, it doesn't look the prettiest, but it gets the job done.
hinkley 8y ago
That seems like a lot just due to a frame change. If I had to guess, more gear ratios, newer bearings, and rim profile probably all contributed to that. And maybe just a little bit of placebo...
cultus 8y ago
The vast majority of energy on a bike goes to aero drag, and most of that is the rider. Are you in a more aero position on the Merida? That would fully account for it. The difference in weight is not capable of causing much difference on flats, since it would just slightly increase rolling resistance. The differences in mechanical efficiency of well-tuned road bikes is also pretty negligible.

hasbot 8y ago

Do you have references to those tests? My personal experience says otherwise. I have steel, aluminum, titanium road bikes of about the same pedigree and setups. The different materials absolutely provide a different ride. But, if I'm thrown on some random, unfamiliar bike and ride it for a short period of time, I probably couldn't guess the frame material. I have a Scandium bike too with an oversized bottom bracket. Being 200lbs, on a climb, I can definitely feel the difference the bottom bracket makes. All the other bikes flex a little when I stand up and crank. Not the Scandium bike. Maybe that's unimportant to you, but I really enjoy the feeling of stomping on the pedals and having the bike immediately respond to the power.