In case everybody has forgotten, this is the real reason for cyclists shaving their legs.

If you want five watts, shave your head. ;-)

Are you saying my grizzly Adams beard is slowing me down? Dammit man, that's why I can't win my CATBP races.

Yep, understood. And I understand it matters for racing, or the rare long distance/fondo type people.

I'm just not sure how much of this applies to the majority of recreational riders. Most of us ride to time limitations - so going slightly longer distances doesn't change anything. Even if we do "train" a bit. X amount of time at X amount of watts is what really matters. Speed actually means nothing in this sense, and an extra 1/4 mph really means nothing - comfort is actually king. Comfort can help keep the average Joe on his bike longer.

Don't get me wrong - I like riding fast. Well, fast in relation to my abilities. I do enjoy the speed. But 22mph vs 22.5? I can't tell the difference. My computer can, but I can't.

Most of us, well actually just about all of us - are slow in relation to the real fast guys. Many are really slow - but, you will see B-C group pacelines with a bunch of duffers riding aero bikes that don't fit well, and as mentioned above - they can't get into the aero position anyhow - and may be in a worse position aero wise than if they had a bike better suited for them.

Oh, yes, agreed. When someone comes on here to ask whether some expensive new bike (or wheels, or whatever) will make them faster, whether it's "worth it," I usually ask, "Are you racing or at least riding in a very spirited group ride?" The response is usually "No, but I like going fast" or there is no response at all -- dead silence. I'm always left shaking my head, wondering why someone would consider stretching their finances to add a fraction of a mph to their speed on the local bike path.

Haven't shaved my legs since I stopped racing in the '90s, but I really liked the way that on high thread count or silk sheets, it felt like I had a girl in bed with me.....

I'm still having my morning coffee and have read the cringiest thing I'll see today. Kudos.

So, people who don't race or do fast group rides all stick to bike paths?

Well duh. Thought that was soooo obvious.

Not necessary. Time and age is taking care of that for me.

I think you got the idea, even if you are being deliberately obtuse.

Yeah, I get the idea - a throwaway insult to those of us who don't race or do group rides but still like to go faster.

I was referring to some posters – quite a few of them over the years – who come here looking for validation before spending rather significant (to them, it seems) sums of money on equipment that will gain them, at most, a tiny fraction of a mile per hour in additional speed, if that. And then the posters report that they don’t even do spirited group rides, much less races.

If you fall into that category, then yeah, I can see why you might feel that it was an insult.

Feh. I only look for validation AFTER spending significant funds!

I will say, however, that there is an oft-repeated sentiment here that if you don't race, you shouldn't buy better equipment that might make you faster, which to my way of thinking is nonsensical. Wanting to go faster seems to me to be a big part of why a lot of us ride bikes.

OTOH, if it doesn't stretch finances, they should go for whatever excites their enthusiasm, or seems to make sense (even if it really doesn't). This also includes buying new technology just because they want to give it a try.... and again, can afford it. I built up Ti bikes with electronic shifting for my wife and me during the pandemic simply because I always wanted a Ti bike and wanted to try electronic shifting, and had never had a bike with hydraulic discs. Since I was late 60s at the time, I just saw it as "if not now, when?" sort of deal. This, to me is very valid, given affordability.

As a final curmudgeonly comment, I can't make any sense of any recreational rider, even recreational racer, who buys bike equipment they have to finance. There's such good stuff nowadays at race-worthy quality at the lower tiers. I also buy lightly used cars for the same reason. But I'm an old coot so my opinions on this are irrelevant.

My bicycling philosophy reflects the above although for the most part, I get gear that is a step behind the flagship. I'm not wealthy, but at this stage of my life I know that spending $10k or even $15K (which I don't) on a durable item for recreation that is healthy and fun and with which I spend a lot time is well worth that (for me) compared to the sort of things my contemporaries buy for recreation. While any practical person would say I should probably stick with 3 or 4 steps lower . I never buy anything I can't easily pay cash for, but also don't buy everything I can afford. Although I have a 5 year old bike, the rest of my bikes range between 15 and 30 years old. And they're still fun to ride as fast as I can.

I've already "saved" some watts in the head, but that was a racing incident.

Sure, I get that. But you’re missing a key part of my post: these are posters why seem pretty concerned with money. They come here apparently hoping to be told that it will be well spent – that will make them much faster.

If I weren’t racing, or at least trying to regularly keep up with fast riders, and I wasn’t made of money, the last thing I’d be considering is an upgrade from a pretty good wheelset to a super duper wheelset — as an example. I’m guessing that some of those folks could gain as much speed by simply buying an aero jersey.

I, OTOH, dithered for a week plus over a $300 wheelset that I unquestionably needed.

No, but they should....

Over 100 comments and scant mention of the elephant in the room.

I've been following pro bicycle racing for 40 years, approximately half of them stained by the scourge of PEDs. The idea that the current era is clean while positives are popping all over the place in other sports beggars belief.

One feller, who happens to be my favorite rider and possibly athlete of all time…

Watching his spring campaign, and watching today’s stage at Romandie - which was insane on so many levels…

I tend to agree.

I've been following pro bike racing for 60 years and remember a quote from Jacques Anquetil, who said, in response to a question, "You can't ride the Tour de France on mineral water. You'd have to be an imbecile or hypocrite to imagine that a professional cyclist who rides 235 days a year can hold himself together without stimulants."

He also said that he believed that, having trained and raced as hard as he did, he wouldn't live into old age. He died at age 53.

But, as 63rickert very intelligently noted in a recent thread (maybe this one), most current pros race about a third as much as the pros did in past decades.

We all know how the state of the art has changed in tech, training, nutrition, etc. But my guess is that cutting back on race days and increasing the time spent resting and recuperating have made, if anything, more of a difference than any or maybe all of the other changes.

To me, what beggars belief is the suggestion that doping is responsible for the average speed of entire pelotons increasing as much as it has, despite the fact that almost no one has tested positive.

It’s just not the Pro Tour men that have sped up. Women average speeds are increasing at the same pace. Amateur racing as well in all age groups average speeds are increasing rapidly over the past few years.

To ignore the impact of modern bike tech doesn’t make any sense. Bikes are more comfortable, efficient, reliable which makes them faster. Is it the sole reason for the increases of course not, training and fueling have made huge strides in conjunction with other factors.

But I know even in my mid 60’s and moderate early season condition I can go outside and jump on my current model S Works Roubaix and comfortably do a 100 mile ride. To say an early 80’s bike be the same is silly, I rode those bikes BITD and my memory still works.

Well I certainly don't doubt the new race bikes can make almost anybody faster 1 or 2 mph faster. I can see CF bikes blow by me anytime, but the big IF is if they show up at all where I go. And it sure as hell is NOT just a fraction of a mph faster. Even 15 years ago I would be going 16 or 17 then a guy comes along at 23. I never in my life did 25 on the flat with any gears. Hell last year a fat guy on a fixie blew by me up a hill. And a young aspiring racer was doing near 20 mph up that same hill.

Help me out here, because you start with that famous Anquetil quotation implicating the entire peloton, and then you close by claiming that no current racer has tested positive.

So Anquetil used PEDs but the current generation is squeaky clean?