Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Wouldn't you get a better workout with a heavier bike ?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Wouldn't you get a better workout with a heavier bike ?

Old 05-13-21, 02:39 PM
  #176  
Eric F
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 879 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 797 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
It does get easier if you don't change the input. That's a rider decision, not a bicycle design feature.
How is 250W on a light bike easier than 250W on a heavy bike? The human effort is the same.
Eric F is offline  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 05-13-21, 02:42 PM
  #177  
Eric F
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 879 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 797 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak View Post
The hypothesis regarding the plateau effect stipulates that repeated bouts of exercise at a given load result in diminishing improvements in fitness. "It never gets easier, you just go faster" is Greg LeMond's succinct account of the only way for an ambitious athlete to overcome the plateau effect: by increasing the load.

Which, of course, anyone can do just as easily on a light bike as on a heavy bike (and in my case, as I explained earlier in this thread, I find it easier to increase the load/work harder on my light bikes, a choice that, as you say, anyone can make).
I have found that, as my fitness increases, my tolerance for suffering also improves, and I'm able to (and do) work at my limits for a longer duration. From that, I conclude that cycling actually gets harder as you get fitter.
Eric F is offline  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 05-13-21, 02:47 PM
  #178  
livedarklions
Racerboyz' b'crat
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 9,817

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5078 Post(s)
Liked 4,375 Times in 2,462 Posts
Originally Posted by CheGiantForLife View Post
Sure it does. On a light bike, if you fly right up a hill with less work, you've gotten a worse workout. A heavier bike will absolutely give you a better workout up all hills. For those who are not racing, this seems the desired goal. Exercise, not ease, otherwise, you'd just sit on the sofa!

For the umpteenth time, this doesn't follow at all. The rider on the lighter bike may just fly up more hills, or take the same hill in a higher gear. No one is sitting on the sofa if they're riding a bike.

You're assuming that the two riders will do the exact same amount of climb and distance and that the lighter bike rider isn't setting his gears for high resistance. It's a set of silly assumptions.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 02:55 PM
  #179  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak View Post
Jingoism is nationalism in the form of aggressive and proactive foreign policy, such as a country's advocacy for the use of threats or actual force, as opposed to peaceful relations, in efforts to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests.
Yes, I stand corrected. I was thinking of a similar word that describes using a catchphrase to describe a situation that is more complex but for the life of me this escapes me at the moment. I will edit that post.

Originally Posted by Trakhak View Post
Precisely. It therefore follows that neither heavier bikes nor lighter bikes give a better workout.
I agree more with this than lighter bikes giving a better workout. In that case, from a purely exercise perspective, One mighneneed to justify the increased cost by some metric other than increased exercise.

Originally Posted by Trakhak View Post
The hypothesis regarding the plateau effect stipulates that repeated bouts of exercise at a given load result in diminishing improvements in fitness. "It never gets easier, you just go faster" is Greg LeMond's succinct account of the only way for an ambitious athlete to overcome the plateau effect: by increasing the load.

Which, of course, anyone can do just as easily on a light bike as on a heavy bike (and in my case, as I explained earlier in this thread, I find it easier to increase the load/work harder on my light bikes, a choice that, as you say, anyone can make).
I am aware of the reference but it really doesn't make sense, it's a catchphrase. If it were true human performance would have no upper limit. However, it does, and at that point the technology of the bike gives the competitive edge by making the same speed/distance achievable with less effort.

Originally Posted by Trakhak View Post
The issue of whether heavier bikes give a better workout than lighter bikes would make a good college application essay topic. (For those who assert that heavier bikes do give a better workout: there's absolutely nothing wrong with trade schools.)
You were doing well by making intelligent points until that insult. Fwiw, I am a physical rehabilitation assistant who studies and applies exercise theory.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 03:02 PM
  #180  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F View Post
How is 250W on a light bike easier than 250W on a heavy bike? The human effort is the same.
Correct. However, if one is covering a set distance at a set speed (as with recreational group.rides done for exercise) you are expending fewer watts to do the same workout. Many people who cycle only for exercise do not have power meters, some/many go only speed or distance.

Your statement suggests paying more for a bike to ride harder to achieve the same watt output as a less expensive bike.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 03:19 PM
  #181  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,363

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1443 Post(s)
Liked 2,158 Times in 895 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F View Post
How is 250W on a light bike easier than 250W on a heavy bike? The human effort is the same.
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Your statement suggests paying more for a bike to ride harder to achieve the same watt output as a less expensive bike.
Reading comprehension: FAIL
Logical reasoning: FAIL
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 05-13-21, 03:21 PM
  #182  
Trakhak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 2,823
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 962 Post(s)
Liked 760 Times in 444 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Correct. However, if one is covering a set distance at a set speed (as with recreational group.rides done for exercise) you are expending fewer watts to do the same workout. Many people who cycle only for exercise do not have power meters, some/many go only speed or distance.

Your statement suggests paying more for a bike to ride harder to achieve the same watt output as a less expensive bike.
All that is inarguably true. In fact, one interesting effect I've noticed is that, once the weather turns cold enough in the autumn and I get out my heavier (tri-bar-equipped) hybrid bike, it takes only a few rides before I stop sulking about how much slower I'm going and start hitting the same effort levels as I was doing on the lighter bikes.

"Sulking" was meant as a joke, although there's some truth there, but it does take a while to acclimate to the slower acceleration and slower handling of the heavier bike. But, for some reason, the change back onto the light bikes in the spring doesn't require quite as much adaptation. There must be something going on psychologically there, since, once I'm used to the heavier bike, I ride along thinking that this is great and it's stupid to wear out thin tires when I'll never race again. Weird.

OK. Back to my taxes. What are the chances that Maryland actually does owe me $2,200? (I usually have to send them a check.) Wonder whether I'll be able to post to Bike Forums from IRS prison.
Trakhak is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 03:50 PM
  #183  
Eric F
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 879 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 797 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Correct. However, if one is covering a set distance at a set speed (as with recreational group.rides done for exercise) you are expending fewer watts to do the same workout. Many people who cycle only for exercise do not have power meters, some/many go only speed or distance.

Your statement suggests paying more for a bike to ride harder to achieve the same watt output as a less expensive bike.
I don't think you're quite getting it. It has nothing to do with whether or not I have a power meter on my bike. Output watts exist regardless of whether they are being measured directly or not.

Although the group rides I do are the same route every week, the effort is what I make of it (somewhat). If I want to work more, I'll put my nose in the wind more. If I want an easier effort, I'll hide deep in the group. Some of the rides have spicy sections where I'm at my limit to keep from getting mercilessly ejected out the back. The purpose of a light, efficient, go-fast , road machine is to maximize the results from the limits of my output capabilities at the times when the rides are pushing me to those limits, or to conserve energy during sub-maximal times so I have more to give when I need to go all-in. For the times I'm riding solo, a light, efficient bike is fast. Fast is fun. More fast is more fun. This is what works best for the kind of riding I like to do. It's more about the results than how much effort I put out during a set time period.
Eric F is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 03:58 PM
  #184  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 7,347

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3922 Post(s)
Liked 966 Times in 646 Posts
Fast is relative
Sy Reene is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 04:06 PM
  #185  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
Reading comprehension: FAIL
Logical reasoning: FAIL
You would do better explaining your perspective rather than resorting to insult. I understand the premise well.

If a medium grade bike covers X distance in Y time at Z watts. A lighter, more race oriented bike will cover X distance in Y time at fewer watts. To achieve Z watts one had to increase either distance or speed.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 04:18 PM
  #186  
guachi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 158 Posts
Originally Posted by fredlord View Post
Do people buy faster, flashier, more expensive bikes so that they can get a better workout, or is that just what they tell their spouse?
I buy an expensive bike so it makes cycling more enjoyable so I ride more so I get a better workout.
guachi is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 06:59 PM
  #187  
DeadGrandpa
Philosopher of Bicycling
 
DeadGrandpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Carolina
Posts: 1,103

Bikes: Too many, yet not enough.

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked 239 Times in 159 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
Fast is relative
You are absolutely correct. In the end, you may have the sensation you're going faster or working harder. Whether or not you are actually going faster or harder doesn't matter. Ride, eat and sleep. The rest doesn't matter.
DeadGrandpa is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 07:11 PM
  #188  
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Posts: 11,864

Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, Catrike Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1276 Post(s)
Liked 420 Times in 272 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Correct. However, if one is covering a set distance at a set speed (as with recreational group.rides done for exercise) you are expending fewer watts to do the same workout. Many people who cycle only for exercise do not have power meters, some/many go only speed or distance.

Your statement suggests paying more for a bike to ride harder to achieve the same watt output as a less expensive bike.

A $25 Zebco rod/reel set can catch the same fish as an expensive set. So why spend more??? Maybe because the nicer stuff is more enjoyable to use.
BlazingPedals is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 07:32 PM
  #189  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,363

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1443 Post(s)
Liked 2,158 Times in 895 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
You would do better explaining your perspective ...
Not really worth the effort, considering the first sentence of your first post:
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
I am only arguing points for the fun of it.
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 05-13-21, 07:45 PM
  #190  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
Not really worth the effort, considering the first sentence of your first post:
Well, my intention was that I'm.only interested in the discussion as an intellectual exercise and am not going to get butt hurt or insulting if someone holds a different pov. I won't try to cancel others with ad hominem attacks because their views are challenging my preconceptions. You know, discussion for fun.

I really don't care why anyone buys whatever bike they choose. However I do see some truth to the OPS premise, though not in the extreme way he presented it, and am interested in exploring it further.

Hope that clarifies.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 05-13-21 at 08:08 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 08:06 PM
  #191  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by BlazingPedals View Post
A $25 Zebco rod/reel set can catch the same fish as an expensive set. So why spend more??? Maybe because the nicer stuff is more enjoyable to use.
This is true and also encapsulates the premise I'm making. Within reason, the mid grade bike will give the average rider as good a workout as the more expensive race oriented bike.

Almost all the arguments against that are presenting "subjective" reasons to do with how the bike makes them feel or how it motivates them to exercise more (in order to get a better workout) but that has nothing "objective" to do with the bike.

Those motivations originate in the riders mind, not the bike, and could equally be generated with a mid grade bike. You could want to ride faster/harder/longer if you wanted to.

What I am saying is to differentiate between "how this makes me feel" and "what this actually does".

How much extra would one pay for a stationary bike that relies on resistance being applied to the flywheel, to have it optimized to have near zero resistance/friction applied to its moving parts. In a stationary bike we can see why this additional cost for reduced resistance in a resistance based machine doesn't make sense but for a road bike meant solely for exercise we think it does make sense because we ascribe subjective meaning to the more expensive bike.

That's what race oriented technology does in a nutshell, it reduces the resistance in terms of weight and friction to optimize speed. It does this to win races wherein the riders have already optimized their physical outputs. That gives them the competitive "edge". Until one has done that physical optimizing, the reduced resistance is working against the goal of resistance based exercise.

I would posit that the average Joe or Jill looking to cycling as a form of exercise, is nowhere near optimizing a mid grade bike, let alone a race oriented one.


This is not a unique phenomenon to this discussion. Craigslist is full of very expensive exercise equipment purchased in early January with the intention that by buying an expensive machine, the owner would be more motivated to exercise.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 05-13-21 at 08:17 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 08:31 PM
  #192  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F View Post
I don't think you're quite getting it. It has nothing to do with whether or not I have a power meter on my bike. Output watts exist regardless of whether they are being measured directly or not.
I get it.
However, without a power meter one does not really know how many watts they are putting out. All they have is perceived effort.

I would posit that a rider on a mid grade bike on a set course, compared to a rider on a race oriented bike, would have a higher perceived effort because, all other things being equal, they would be putting out more watts. The race oriented bike rider has an advantage in terms of effort to speed ratio and would have to increase his/her effort to match that of the mid grade rider.. Ie. they have to compensate for the competitive edge the bike gives them over the mid grade rider.

If the goal is only exercise, why pay more for a competitive edge you then have to compensate for by doing more work.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 05-13-21 at 08:36 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 09:38 PM
  #193  
Eric F
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 879 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 797 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
I get it.
However, without a power meter one does not really know how many watts they are putting out. All they have is perceived effort.

I would posit that a rider on a mid grade bike on a set course, compared to a rider on a race oriented bike, would have a higher perceived effort because, all other things being equal, they would be putting out more watts. The race oriented bike rider has an advantage in terms of effort to speed ratio and would have to increase his/her effort to match that of the mid grade rider.. Ie. they have to compensate for the competitive edge the bike gives them over the mid grade rider.

If the goal is only exercise, why pay more for a competitive edge you then have to compensate for by doing more work.
You clearly have not gotten any of the points I have been attempting to make. I'm done with my effort.
Eric F is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 09:44 PM
  #194  
Eric F
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 879 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 797 Posts
Originally Posted by fredlord View Post
Do people buy faster, flashier, more expensive bikes so that they can get a better workout, or is that just what they tell their spouse?
Do people buy sports cars only because they look good, or also because they are also fun to drive?
Eric F is offline  
Old 05-13-21, 09:54 PM
  #195  
Eric F
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 879 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 797 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
Fast is relative
This is a fair point. Fast to Kenny Kruiser may be very moderate to me, but fast to me is a comfortable tempo to Peter Sagan. However, fast is still fun, no matter that "fast" means to you. Going fast under your own power is part of the magic of cycling.
Eric F is offline  
Old 05-14-21, 12:18 AM
  #196  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F View Post
You clearly have not gotten any of the points I have been attempting to make. I'm done with my effort.
I've gotten your points, I just don't agree with them in this particular context.

Like the subjective sentiment that fast is fun. Ok, for you that is probably true, but it has no bearing in terms of exercise. You can coast down a long steep hill really fast and have "fun" but get very little exercise.

Having a bicycle that allows you to go faster than the other guy for the same energy expended, in itself, does not give you a better workout. You are going faster because the bike rolls easier.

If you both had the same bike, and you peddled harder to go faster, That would give you a better workout.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 05-14-21, 01:08 AM
  #197  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,921
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1788 Post(s)
Liked 960 Times in 473 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Again, all things being equal. Trying to skew the comparison by having one person do all the pulling just avoids the question at hand.
I'm not just whimsically pointing out that it's synthetically possible for force the desired amount of workout for everyone by adjusting pull intensity and lengths. My point is that this happens naturally as a self-regulating process: if someone is riding for exercise and has some extra legs, they'll generally just use them.
This breaks down if the advantage is so massive that the person can just effortlessly ride off the front, but that's an astronomically larger difference than "mid-range road bike versus high-end road bike." As long as that rope isn't snapping, someone who feels like pedaling a little harder more can just do it.

This assumption you're making that everyone riding for exercise in a pack is expected to take equal pulls of constant intensity strikes me as fairly bizarre. It has certain obvious consequences in a very synthetic comparison, but it doesn't actually translate to a faster bike resulting in someone doing less effort in real-world group riding.

Last edited by HTupolev; 05-14-21 at 01:25 AM.
HTupolev is offline  
Likes For HTupolev:
Old 05-14-21, 05:04 AM
  #198  
livedarklions
Racerboyz' b'crat
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 9,817

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5078 Post(s)
Liked 4,375 Times in 2,462 Posts
I didn't think this argument could have gotten more ridiculous, but a "thought experiment" as to whether the grams shaved from mid-level bikes (good luck defining that, btw) and top-end makes the workout better or worse has done it. Let's all make up a bunch of psychological crap about how people will react to tiny variations in effort needed to climb or accelerate and then make up conclusions from that crap.

Let's be real here, the weight of the vehicle is the weight of the rider and the bicycle. Small differences in the weight of the bikes is a very small percentage of the weight of the vehicle you are ppropelling. We can argue all day over whether the small difference in performance is worth the difference in price, but that's clearly an individual preference issue. But just as a matter of math and physics, the difference in effort at any given mph is really small, and the likelihood that affects your overall workout energy use is probably close to zero. Now, if you think you're going to want to ride the $8000 bike more than the $3000 bike, go for it, but don't assume that's true for anyone else, nor should anyone assume that anyone 's quality of workout been adversely affected because they burned 5 fewer calories on the last hill. Buy a featherweight and do five jumping jacks at the end of the ride if you're that obsess.

Short answer --difference isn't worth considering.
livedarklions is offline  
Likes For livedarklions:
Old 05-14-21, 06:37 AM
  #199  
caloso
Senior Member
 
caloso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,323

Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur

Mentioned: 66 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2720 Post(s)
Liked 2,435 Times in 1,129 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post

If you both had the same bike, and you peddled harder to go faster, That would give you a better workout.
So close.
caloso is offline  
Old 05-14-21, 08:33 AM
  #200  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,022
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 1,236 Times in 670 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev View Post
I'm not just whimsically pointing out that it's synthetically possible for force the desired amount of workout for everyone by adjusting pull intensity and lengths. My point is that this happens naturally as a self-regulating process: if someone is riding for exercise and has some extra legs, they'll generally just use them.
This breaks down if the advantage is so massive that the person can just effortlessly ride off the front, but that's an astronomically larger difference than "mid-range road bike versus high-end road bike." As long as that rope isn't snapping, someone who feels like pedaling a little harder more can just do it.

This assumption you're making that everyone riding for exercise in a pack is expected to take equal pulls of constant intensity strikes me as fairly bizarre. It has certain obvious consequences in a very synthetic comparison, but it doesn't actually translate to a faster bike resulting in someone doing less effort in real-world group riding.
I'm not making the assumption that everyone riding in a pack does anything. I also think, in this discussion, people are confusing cycing for cycling sake and cycling as a form of exercise.

l would say it is more likely, on average, that two people get together and ride a predetermined distance together as a form of exercise rather than as a larger pack. This is what I observe a lot on the road in two very popular cycling areas. Pairs or small groups riding together but not drafting. They do the same distance at about the same relative speed. Husband and wife, two friends, small social group. It's not what everyone does but it's a pretty common way people exercise by cycling.

Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
I didn't think this argument could have gotten more ridiculous, but a "thought experiment" as to whether the grams shaved from mid-level bikes (good luck defining that, btw) and top-end makes the workout better or worse has done it. Let's all make up a bunch of psychological crap about how people will react to tiny variations in effort needed to climb or accelerate and then make up conclusions from that crap.

Let's be real here, the weight of the vehicle is the weight of the rider and the bicycle. Small differences in the weight of the bikes is a very small percentage of the weight of the vehicle you are ppropelling. We can argue all day over whether the small difference in performance is worth the difference in price, but that's clearly an individual preference issue. But just as a matter of math and physics, the difference in effort at any given mph is really small, and the likelihood that affects your overall workout energy use is probably close to zero. Now, if you think you're going to want to ride the $8000 bike more than the $3000 bike, go for it, but don't assume that's true for anyone else, nor should anyone assume that anyone 's quality of workout been adversely affected because they burned 5 fewer calories on the last hill. Buy a featherweight and do five jumping jacks at the end of the ride if you're that obsess.

Short answer --difference isn't worth considering.⁹
If there is no difference it's pretty hard to justify buying a more expensive race oriented bike on "better workout" grounds... which is my premise.

Originally Posted by caloso View Post
So close.
Thank you for bolding that text as a perfect example that it is equally possible to do that on a mid grade bike as with a far more expensive one. That decision resides within the rider and is not an objective function of the bike. Remembering we are talking exercise as the goal, and not cycling for its own sake.

If the goal is to.maximize exercise by increasing effort, using a bike that decreases effort runs contrary to the goal.

There are lots of very valid reasons to buy that sort of bike but saying it objectively increases the workout isn't one of them

Last edited by Happy Feet; 05-14-21 at 08:40 AM.
Happy Feet is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.