At 60, with chronic neck pain, a more comfortable and lighter weight bike would make far more difference than aero considerations for my longer rides. So far neck spasms around the 30-50 mile mark have thwarted my attempts at a standard 100 mile century. The legs and lungs are fine, although the climbs are tough on an older 23 lb steel road bike that weighs nearly 30 lbs with all the crap I carry.

Even on an '89 steel road bike, using the finest of 1980 tech (the Centurion Ironman was a nice bike but hardly revolutionary by the late '80s), with way too much wind-grabbing stuff on my handlebar (phone, light, camera), etc., and no aero clothing, I'm still making decent speed on downhills and flat terrain.

But I'm a slug on climbs. Unless there's a strong head wind, aero wouldn't help. I need a better engine. At 60, the engine ain't gonna get much better. A lighter bike that I could ride comfortably all day would matter more.

I don't wear aero kit, other than tighty shorts for longer rides on windy days. Switching from casual fit to snug jerseys would matter more than an aero bike. I don't even use foot retention, just casual Merrell walking/cycling shoes and platform pedals. There are many little things I could improve in my approach before an aero bike would matter.

One of my local riding buds is in his 40s, a strong rider but devoted retro guy. Steel bikes, retro jerseys, toe clips, etc. I think he may have one older carbon bike with clipless pedals, but doesn't ride it as often. He's quite a bit faster than me, and managed to average about 17.4 mph not only during the summer's Hotter 'N' Hell Hundred (which wasn't hotter 'n hell this year but still pretty warm), but rode to the ride overnight, more than 100 miles, and back home for 345 miles in 32 hours without sleeping. On a Mercier Serpens steel non-aero bike.