![]() |
Originally Posted by Eric F
(Post 23176969)
I'm still hopeful that BRR (or someone) develops tires tests for non-perfect surfaces. I'm really curious to see power loss comparison data for how tires of different sizes/pressures/structures react to different surface textures.
(That said, measuring Crr is one of those things where you need to be careful with the measurements). |
When you can measure a difference repeatedly over a consistent course I'd say you have a data point as an amatuer. Pros don't seem to care a ton about a half-pound here or there or many of the other things we duffers obsess over. For a group ride it's a lot more about your personal capability and where you are in the pack.
|
Light weight high priced bikes are of a concern to those that race. For the rest of us a fairly good quality bike will serve us just fine.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 23180183)
Light weight high priced bikes are of a concern to those that race. For the rest of us a fairly good quality bike will serve us just fine.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 23180183)
Light weight high priced bikes are of a concern to those that race. For the rest of us a fairly good quality bike will serve us just fine.
|
Yes, a new bike can be a lot more fun. If you are not racing, buy a bike that fits and is comfortable. That will really make a huge difference.
|
Originally Posted by PeteHski
(Post 23183890)
Sometimes bland mediocrity is not quite enough, especially when it comes to our main hobbies and interests. There are thousands of riders out there who don’t race, but still enjoy riding high quality race bikes. It has nothing to do with what they “need”.
|
Originally Posted by terrymorse
(Post 23176577)
My assertion stands: a clincher tire with a latex tube can be as efficient, or more efficient, as a similar tubeless version of that tire.
|
Originally Posted by PeteHski
(Post 23183890)
Sometimes bland mediocrity is not quite enough, especially when it comes to our main hobbies and interests. There are thousands of riders out there who don’t race, but still enjoy riding high quality race bikes. It has nothing to do with what they “need”.
|
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184063)
And vice-versa. I race plenty, and my main race bike has a steel frame, because I like steel. Though unlike some of this forum's "steel is real" crowd, I am not laboring under the illusion that it is somehow superior to other materials.
|
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184063)
And vice-versa. I race plenty, and my main race bike has a steel frame, because I like steel. Though unlike some of this forum's "steel is real" crowd, I am not laboring under the illusion that it is somehow superior to other materials.
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184067)
So you're purposely giving yourself a disadvantage? Like a handicap, I guess.
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 23180183)
Light weight high priced bikes are of a concern to those that race. For the rest of us a fairly good quality bike will serve us just fine.
|
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184071)
Where did I state that it's a disadvantage?
|
Originally Posted by vespasianus
(Post 23183925)
Yes, a new bike can be a lot more fun. If you are not racing, buy a bike that fits and is comfortable. That will really make a huge difference.
|
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184073)
You didn't state it. You're right. I am assuming that you are such a fast racer that you need to give yourself a handicap to make it fair. My bad.
|
Originally Posted by Eric F
(Post 23184080)
Why are you assuming Koyote's bike is a handicap? Are you familiar with the type of racing he does?
|
Originally Posted by BikeCycling
(Post 23170081)
I will say, I actually feel cooler rolling up to group rides with my mismatched wheels, outdated frame, and hand-me-down pedals...and somewhat being able to keep up. But a new modern bike is cool in different ways, too!
Roll up on a vintage bike and ride like a pro - 'That's the ticket' ! https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...b20a2e0a06.jpg |
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184124)
I already said I was assuming! Geeze!
|
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184073)
I am assuming ...
Originally Posted by Eric F
(Post 23184080)
Why are you assuming ...?
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184124)
I already said I was assuming! Geeze!
|
Originally Posted by BikeCycling
(Post 23170081)
I will say, I actually feel cooler rolling up to group rides with my mismatched wheels, outdated frame, and hand-me-down pedals...and somewhat being able to keep up.
|
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184062)
Sure. But when the latex tube picks up a goat head, it rapidly becomes much slower.
|
Originally Posted by Eric F
(Post 23184129)
I know. I'm asking why you're making that assumption?
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 23184136)
When in doubt, ignore what was actually written and feign indignation.
|
Originally Posted by Wildwood
(Post 23184128)
If faster is the goal, learn to ride with your chin close to the stem, a flat back (or nearly), narrow bars, knees that nearly touch the top tube every stroke and a smooth spin. Aero on your body is even better than a little improvement at the wheel or aero carbon bars. ;)
Roll up on a vintage bike and ride like a pro - 'That's the ticket' ! https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...b20a2e0a06.jpg |
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184303)
He was trying to be clever. And failing, obviously.
So which is it? You have only mentioned that you’ve raced road and gravel, so we can start there. |
You've gone from this...
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184067)
So you're purposely giving yourself a disadvantage? Like a handicap, I guess.
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184433)
You said you don’t think steel is superior to other materials. So it’s either commensurate with other materials, or it’s inferior. Your only two choices.
So which is it? |
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184450)
You've gone from this...
...to this: Which seems like a non-sequitur borne of a reading comprehension problem. Hint: those are not my 'only two choices.' |
Originally Posted by Eric F
(Post 23184072)
Lightweight, high-quality bikes might also be a concern for people who recognize and appreciate the subtle differences between mediocre, good, and great. I don't buy bikes that just serve utilitarian needs. I bikes that excite me to want to ride them, and often ride them at the limits of my abilities. Lightweight, high-quality bikes serve my desires for the kind of bike I want to ride.
|
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 23184450)
Which seems like a non-sequitur borne of a reading comprehension problem. Hint: those are not my 'only two choices.'
|
Originally Posted by smd4
(Post 23184516)
I can only hope to be as cantankerous as you when I reach your advanced years!
|
You posted late last year that you were 60. So either that or possibly 61.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:42 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.