Maelochs

If you are a fitness freak who has been working out religiously for five or six decades. otherwise, you will find the "pro-racer" position uncomfortable after a while---in fact, unbearable, and you won't be able to maintain it, and will need to st up, which will blow your average speed entirely.

if you can deliver power efficiently in that position, it is "faster" in that it is more aero. But the idea that that position is Always "more comfortable on a long ride" is pure .... scrapple, let's say, for those too far north to eat grits and too far south to eat sausage.

Carbonfiberboy 

Well, one has to get fit to be able to experience 24 hour comfort in that position. Getting fit is rather the point of sport riding. Getting fast takes many years. Getting fit enough to ride a double only takes a couple of years. If one doesn't want to get fit, well . . . However it is true that it's more comfortable over the long miles, mostly because the spine is in flexion rather than compression. My road bike is the best back therapy and the cheapest doctor I ever had. I didn't get back on a bike until I turned 50. Most people who don't care for the position aren't really in it, thinking that a cramped cockpit is better, which used to be the conventional wisdom. It's not. I've solved a few friends back issues simply by putting on a longer stem and dropping the bars. After a while, one just drops into the position and is gone up the road. The sensation is one of dropping down into the bike.

On this one, I'm with Jan: https://janheine.wordpress.com/2018/...e-comfortable/

Here's a sampling of PBP bikes and riders: https://www.google.com/search?q=pbp+...w=1754&bih=843
750 miles in under 90 hours. The setups and positions are remarkably similar. These are endurance bikes, not racers.

Mountain Mitch

Maelochs

There is no "point" to sport riding, or any other type of riding, except that which the rider makes.

And the "best" riding position is the one which lets each individual rider ride the way s/he wants.

I can sit in the half-lotus position for a long time, and the lotus position for a pretty long time. It is in my mind the most comfortable way to sit---keeps my spine in its natural alignment, so every part of my body works and intended, and the energy circulates freely. I knew a runner who could do some amazing running, but her hips were too tight with running muscles to sit comfortably in lotus. Do I tell her, when she gets back form her fast, two-hour run, to get fit? Or do i get her a comfortable chairr, or better still a kneeler and a standing desk?

I just did a quick group ride on my racy Workswell .... but if I were doing ten hours of loaded touring in mountainous terrain, a more upright posture Would work better .... I know, because I have tested tit.

Let me qualify that---would work better For Me.

it is a lame trainer who ignores his trainee's abilities... and soon after, a lame trainee.

wphamilton

I understand about the guys, even older guys, going for long distances unimaginably faster. It happens to me too. But it's really because they're faster than me, or in better shape, Modern bike, or carbon fiber bike, or Dura Ace bike, isn't really going to fix that.

frogman

I agree with most of your post with the exception of brifters being disposable. Not all brifters are disposable. Shimano brifters fall into the disposable category,
they can't be rebuilt, just pitch them when they wear out. Campagnolo brake shifters however are rebuildable. I have rebuilt two Campy 10 speed brifters on my bikes.

350htrr

As I mentioned before In this thread, a modern bike "can" make a "difference" in your average MPH on longer rides... BUT, Having ridden my E-Assist bicycle for the last 6+ years and having experienced a 20MPH average ride for like 60 miles... Putting in every ounce of pedaling effort I could to achieve that... When I turn off the assist the best I can seem to do is what my effort is... something like 13.75 MPH average for the same 60 miles... how sad is that... IN OTHER words, while the bike can help, it is the engine that make things happen, Oh, and my assist cuts out at 20 MPH, so to average 20 MPH takes more effort than the E-Assist type I have, can do, on it's own...

ColonelSanders

I'll confess I am not completely sold on the colour, but the shape and dimensions of your frame/fork, is easily one of my favourites I have seen on this site.

ColonelSanders

Are you applying your thoughts to only your e-bike when it isn't using assistance?


Because an e-bike that isn't providing assistance is quite inefficient compared to a well designed non e-bike, to be making performance comparisons with.

Carbonfiberboy 

The thing is that here we have an OP who has gone from a 13 mph average speed to 16.5 in only 3 or 4 months. That speaks of a good bit of time and effort trying to get faster, specifically faster. So the question is not "is faster better" but rather "how do I get faster?" He's already doing what he can to train himself up, and wants to know if a modern bike would help. The answer is of course yes. As had been explained, that's why people buy them. I point out that along with a new bike, a better position will make even more difference than the bike itself, though very possibly this position will be more easily attainable and comfortable on a modern carbon bike. We do loaded touring on our tandem, which has as close as I can get to the same position I have on my carbon single. We cruise at 18 on the flat loaded, vs. 18.5 in sport trim. So yes, correct road position is faster on long multi-day rides and never uncomfortable.

To the OP: Hills make you stronger, much more quickly than riding on the flat. Ride hills. A good motto is: See hill, ride up it. On an ordinary 50'/mile somewhat hilly ride, averages of over that 16.5 are going to come hard. You're at a point where your physical decline is going to be battling against your improving fitness, so the faster you can get fit, the better. In my late 50's, I rode a double century averaging 19.8 in the saddle and finishing in the top 100 riders out of maybe 2000. It was fairly flat, only 6000' climbing. I rode it solo but hooked up with many fast pacelines and had a slight tailwind most of the way. I never duplicated that. So that's about the limit for the average highly trained over 50 guy like me. Riding with my group on moderately hilly 60 mile rides, I seldom averaged 18. But anyway, that's about what can be done by folks your age on a good modern bike with a few years of consistent training. Remember that the power required goes up with the cube of the speed. It gets tougher pretty quickly and aero position is critical. I'm 73, still riding the same '99 model carbon bike, same position, though it is a smaller size of the same frame Lance won his first Tour on, so not a bad bike at all.

If you want to get faster, from here the place to go is the Training and Nutrition forum.

350htrr

I guess what I was trying to say was I would have to basically double my output ,to achieve the 20MPH average I could do with the E-Bikes (350 watts) assistance... To be able to gain 6.25MPH from my present speed, and no amount of technology/modern bike would gain me the 300/350 watts worth of speed I would need to get to 20MPH average.

BlazingPedals

Except, you CAN buy speed. The year after I got my first lowracer, I did a timed century at 5 mph faster than my best-ever performance on my road bike. In fact, my road bike time was with drafting and my lowracer time was solo. That is not 'small change.'

But I agree, if you're just upgrading to an improved version of the same platform, you can expect performance gains to be minimal.

caloso

Not only can you buy speed, but some folks have done the work to cost it out:





*note that this was done in 2010 so the dollar figures will probably be off, but you get the idea.

tony2v

It's one of their nine standard colors, this one is gray. All their frames are custom sized for each customer with an 8-10 weeks wait time.

350htrr

Don't really know, "if" my math is right, but with those numbers, all I would need to spend is about $9,100. to bring my speed up to... 16.72MPH from , 13.75MPH without putting in any more amount of energy than I am putting in today... ??? No problem… I think my $2,000 is well spent, and I am reaching the 20MPH average... I know, Yes, I know, I am riding an E-Assist bike, a "different" way, (even if it is cheating) to assist me on making my goal...

EDIT; MY "Point" being, its the engine that matters most... NOT the gearing, not, the weight, not the aero position, not the wheel, not the shoe covers, not the front wheel degree angle, not the helmet, not the frame, not the skin suit, not the ...

Maelochs

LOL. Everyone is trying to sell you every product which does even less than the last. You went right to the heart of the matter ... if the Engine is what matters, buy another engine!

I like it.

davester

The problem with these calculations is that they were done for a time trial, which is generally run at a very high speed where aerodynamics is the primary issue. Unfortunately, since aerodynamic drag increases proportional to the square of the velocity, it becomes vastly less important at the lower speeds that most of us ride at. Below about 15 mph, aerodynamics of bike and cyclist has little effect on most cyclists whereas above 20 mph it is most of what is slowing you down.

Carbonfiberboy 

Sorry, wrong about that last. Aero advantage is most important for slower riders, as they spend more time on the course. This is well established data. I know, counter-intuitive, but factual.

davester

If you've got such facts then post them. Seems to fly in the face of physics.

Carbonfiberboy 

For those who don't know how to do a Google search, here's the first result on the first page:
https://flocycling.com/slower-athlet...-more-time.php

Iride01 

You don't have to have a new bike, but you probably need new components. Depending on your abilities to do your own work on removing the old and installing and correctly adjusting the new stuff you may well come out better to buy a new bike.

I find that the more gears I have, the more I can find a gear that lets me ride and the pace and cadence I want and not tire my legs because I'm putting out too much torque.

I have a 91 Paramount with 105 5800 and a 78 Raleigh Competition GS that is about to get the same upgrade. I'm able to do all my own work and save a little and keep the bikes I like the look of. However for not much more money I could buy a new bike with the same components and a couple pounds less weight.

davester

That's an advertisement by an aero wheel company trying to sell aero wheels to slower riders. Hardly an objective or relevant link.They are pointing out the obvious, that the longer you ride, the more time you will save through aerodynamics. However, note that all their calculations are based on the aerodynamic savings of wheel rotation, nothing to do with the primary aerodynamic drag associated with the frontal area of a rider and bicycle. Also, time is irrelevant...this thread is about drag versus speed, which as I pointed out increases by the square of the velocity whereas time elapsed decreases linearly with velocity.

Carbonfiberboy 

Well, one could always simply go to the second site returned on the first page of that search:
https://wattmatters.blog/home/2013/0...er-riders.html

instead of trying to call out folks who are just stating facts. As has been posted many times, losses from wheel rotation are very small, on the order of 1-1.5 watts at 30 mph. FLO is measuring total drag per wheel as clearly stated in the article. A small portion of that is rotational, so small that November doesn't even bother measuring it. All that said, I still run CX-Ray spokes on my wheel builds for my bikes. I want every watt.

Facts really are facts.

jim p

Most people don't even need a bicycle, they could walk where they want to go.

If you want a different and better bike its your money. You get to decide if having the money brings you more joy than owning a new bike.

Oldbikeride

After reading all the replies I have to agree with the majority of them. If you want to gain a slight speed advantage with a new bike and can easily afford one, go for it! I am just getting back into riding also. I have no intention of upgrading my 1981 Schwinn Supersport or buying a new bike. In fact I want to keep my bike 100% stock except for the seat, which is on a shelf in the barn.