Originally Posted by
StanSeven
This thing about performance is only for racers is somthing that gets me. Performance increases are just that - it doesn't make any difference whether you race or not. If you value that extra performance, that's it and all that matters.
People are free to value what they want. But that they value something doesn't mean it's rational.
Given the time and money that it takes to be a competitive racer and the rarity of winning, the extra cost of a small benefit
clearly makes sense.
Outside of racing, it is
not so clear. Yet many people think "it's worth it for me because it's worth it for racers" (which isn't really correct as a universal rule).
Many people buy really-expensive bicycles because they can, not because it's efficient.
An illustration of this is people who ride expensive bicycles but rarely use the drops!
Anyway, what people should be interested in is what
actual performance benefit any particular thing has. Instead, they often are vague and overly optimistic about the benefits.
Because cyclists are so fixated on weight, they might miss other (possibly more effective) ways to get a particular performance benefit.
You can see this happening in this thread:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...quot-is-a-myth