gregf83 

That's a long sentence. You have a low opinion of cyclists if you think they are incapable of figuring out what is important to them.

Personally, I don't think it is that complicated. I enjoy riding my bike and competing now and then with others of similar abilities. I spend money on what I think is important. You might consider my spending wasteful and that's fine, we all have different priorities in life.

halfspeed

Heresy! Burn the witch!

Stucky

You don't "get" what I'm saying.

Say a newcomer takes up cycling. They here all the hoopla about light bikes, and so they think that it's going to make a big difference on their recreational rides if they get a 17 lb. bike instead of a 21 lb. bike. Or they're told that shaving a few grams on wheels will make a significant difference.....

The thing is, just about all of us go through such iterations to a greater or lesser extent- and it isn't until we have some experience, that we see how much of that stuff, or how little, applies to us.

I was skeptical, coming in- but i still had to experiment a little. Some people take years or decades to figure it out. The fact remains, that there is a lot of info which "doesn't apply"- if not being overtly false.

So I come into the sport with no interest in racing- but wanting to be somewhat efficient and to go fast, so I have to figure out what applies to me and what doesn't. What will make a difference and what won't. Nothing wrong with that- but the average newcomer doesn't necessarily know of all the different niches; and you have to admit, that the majority of advertising/literature/culture surrounding road bikes, is geared [pun intended! ] towards racers...or at least toward getting the majority to buy equipment suited for racers.

McBTC

True, if anything Jan Ulrich probably should have trained by somehow simulating weighing less for the tour than he actually did in training leading up to the tour... if, what they say is true, that when Jan began the season his plan was always to ride into shape, dropping all the weight he gained over the winter that Lance Armstrong never put on to begin with because he weighed every morsel that went into his mouth.

gregf83 

I get what you're saying. I think you're wrong. Take a look at the website from any major bike manufacturer and they offer a full range of bikes from low to high end. I don't see a lot of new riders buying top of the line bikes. They generally start out with something basic and if they keep up with riding often decide to get a better bike.

It's very common for new cyclists to seek advice from other more experienced cyclists and are quite capable of figuring out what's important to them.

I don't see any difference between cycling and any other sport. You can enjoy golf on $30 courses or $200/round courses.

halfspeed

Once you say "fast and efficient", all bets are off and your ramblings about what "matters" are essentially meaningless because those are relative terms. It all comes down to disposable income and what people are willing to spend to be however "fast" and "efficient" they want.

SpeshulEd 

Who is telling this newcomer that they will get faster by buying lighter more expensive bits for their bike? Personally, I only see those people on here and in practically every thread those people are told to go ride their bike and not worry about it.

Obviously new gear and advertising is geared towards racer types, that's who buys it. Same with any sport, golf has already been mentioned, but look at high school football, basketball, baseball, etc...it's the same thing. When I played basketball in middle school, all the cool kids had to be rocking Air Jordans, do you think wearing $200 sneakers makes a 5th grader better at basketball? Who gives a **** if your dentist wants to spend $15k on a bike?

fietsbob

A Marketing driven athletic endeavor . the companies compete for latest gizmo

then make it a 'must have' by sending paid racers out on it.

and they convince you its the new parts that made those Highly trained athletes, Fast.

... as these pages show, It Worked.

halfspeed

How so?

Athens80

In my experience most people with bikes stick with simple, mass market bicycles with no gadgets whatsoever. People who ride a lot (except for those who don't have a car or mass transit) are more likely to be interested in more sophisticated bicycles and accessories.

I do find that people who are more "obsessed" about cycling are more obsessed about cycling equipment than the general public is. If you spend much time around those people, maybe you think they are representative of all bicycle riders.

I'm inclined to enjoy cycling more than judging how other people enjoy cycling. Unless the way you enjoy cycling is criticizing other riders, and then I'm at a loss about what to think.

f4rrest

Riding with weights is silly. Add a parachute. Or just ride faster. Same thing.

SpeshulEd 

What if it's the pro racers that ask for upgrades? Or what if it's just companies trying to perfect what is already established.

Should the bike industry stop innovating because you don't feel the need for it?
Should the car industry have stopped innovating with the Model T?

Do you think Specialized told Cavendish to ride his new aero bike so they could market it to people and think they have to have it, or do you think Cavendish told them what he wanted and they built a bike to suit his needs so he could win more bike races.

Stucky

Spot-on! Well-said! Exactly!


I doubt that that's the case, from what I've heard/seen of the bikes many pros ride on their own time, they know that the gimmicks only matter when they are trying to edge-out other elite athletes by a second or two.

And therein lies the problem: The "innovations" which might matter to an elite pro athlete, have zero benefit for the average recreational rider- or even for many amateur racers.....but by their affiliation with pro racing and elite athletes.....many are led to believe the opposite- like the parent [as you mention in an earlier post] who buys their 5th-grader the $200 sneakers. A large segment of the general consumer market have no idea what they are doing/no real knowledge of the new sport they are entering; they read a magazine; they see what other participants are using- and that is how they determine what paraphernalia is "good". They don't realize that often, the difference only has relevance to the top pro elite athletes. Put a $30 hockey stick in their kid's hand, or a $650 one; or $700 bike or a $7K bike, and it isn't going to make any discernible difference

Stucky

Geez....it seems a lot of people on this forum don't understand the psychology of advertising.

Do automakers state that buying their cars will make you a "hit" with the pretty ladies? No. Do they purposely pose curvaceous female models in front of their cars at car shows and in ads? You bet!

Pro bike racers are the curvaceous models of cycling. See? That's why they shave their legs!

McBTC

...or, is it the sexy hydroformed bars with hot angles and components?

halfspeed

Except that the reality is that new cyclists see a $1000 price tag on a road bike and instantly balk because "it's just a bike and it doesn't even come with a kick stand!" If they don't immediately rush to Wal*Mart for a Denali, they end up with something entry level, used or from the intarwebz. The people buying the expensive stuff are generally much better informed and, dare I say it, probably even more so than you.

SpeshulEd 

I guess everyone should just shop for at walmart then.

It's comical to hear someone who owns a $4k Venge Expert tell others not to drink the kool aid and buy a nice bike because they don't "need" it. What, was the $150 department store bike not enough for you?

I understand exactly how advertising works. What world do you live in where you actually see cycling things advertised? You have to spend a lot of time searching out internet blogs and websites to see what's on the horizon for cycling. I've yet to see a commercial for the new SRAM wireless shifting come across on the 6 o'clock news.

2702

You got a point, did not realize he rode a 4k Venge till you pointed it out.
I am more happy on my 26pd Coda Elite than when I had my 2 thousand dollars Spec Sirrus Carbon bike. The Coda is half the price and rides just as well and the gearing is better for my area, its a high weight triple while we are at it.
I love steel bikes, probably going to ride steel for rest of life, its got no love from the public. Steel is like form the 1050s some say.

Stucky

Wait, I get confused. Am I supposed to insert those plugs in the ends of the handlebars...or shove them up my Assos?(So I don't lose them)

That's just it- with all the hype out there; and all the people who have to justify their fancy bikes because it would hurt too much to admit that the bike you spent thousands on, really doesn't do anything more for you than a much cheaper one; even people such as myself [who come into the sport suspicious of what difference fancy bikes can make] just have to try-out a "good" modern, expensive bike; just to see if we're truly missing something; and to at least say that we tried it. (Actually, it's a $5K bike, with the carbon upgrades...)

And the Venge ownership has indeed proved what I had suspected: It's a nice bike; it looks great; the aesthetics are great....but seriously, I can't tell the difference between riding it and my 18 year-old Klein. In fact, I like the more substantial feel of the Klein, better. I'm going to be replacing the Venge with an old steel bike. Not a $150 Walmart bike- as there are some levels of quality one just doesn't want to go below, obviously- but clearly, a recreational rider like myself having a Venge is just stupid. (Luckily I bought it used, for a good price- so I won't lose anything when I sell it).

I really miss the feel of steel.

So what does the Venge do for me that my 18 year-old Klein doesn't? Ride times on the same routes, on days with similar weather are exactly the same on either bike. What does the Venge do, except perhaps impress some people whom I don't know, and probably wouldn't like if i did know them? Oh, and it's more delicate and prone to issues (and I'm not talking about the frame) than any other bikes I've owned.

^This.

SpeshulEd 

This is all well and good but you have to remember, people enjoy spending money on their hobbies. And every time I've ever bought anything for a hobby, I've done mass quantities of research on it...this is what interests me in life. It's no different than someone who is into photography, boating, travelling...as consumers, we spend money on things we enjoy doing. I definitely didn't need my recent wheelset purchase, but I saved up the money, read the reviews and made an educated decision of what I wanted and when the money was there, I made that purchase. Will I be faster because of it - probably not, but I will ride my bike more because I'm excited about it. At the end of the day, thats all people want, a little bit of freedom to do what they want with their money and have some fun in the process.

Stucky

Oh, I agree. I consider my 7-month Venge test period an interesting and worthwhile experience. I would have never known that CF wasn't for me, if i didn't actually try it out and live with it for a while (A mere test-ride won't do it). It's fun to try different things. At least I can say I tried it. And my opinion of CF is actually more favorable than it once was. Perhaps, if had never ridden good metal bikes, I wouldn't know what I was missing...and would be happy with the CF. Which brings up the converse scenario: How many younger riders today have never ridden a good aluminum or steel bike; or never used downtube shifters? etc. They might find CF adequate, simply because they just don't have anything (except perhaps for their old gas-pipe BMX Walmart bike) to compare it to, other than other modern CF bikes.

But I still see a lot of people buying expensive stuff, thinking that it will make a huge difference/thinking that improving the equipment is more crucial than improving the rider. The purely recreational rider who goes out and buys $1000 wheels, because "they're better" not realizing that "better" means a few seconds to a racer. I mean, C'mon, how many threads on this forum alone do we see like: "Should I get $1K Wheels For My 1994 VeloMediocre Or Get a New $6K Bike"?

Yeah...that's fine if the guy knows what he's truly getting (or not getting)- and thanks to forums like this, a person in such a position may well end up with more realistic expectations- but the thing is, (and it is obvious from such questions) that a large percentage of less experienced cyclists have been led to believe that fancy expensive equipment is crucial to their enjoyment/performance.

At least, I have been noticing more and more lately, that there are a larger contingent of people on forums like this, who give good advice, like "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades!". Whereas a few years ago (and this can be confirmed by looking at old threads) such advice was much rarer. Remember the 70's, when people would drill holes in therir components to save a couple of milligrams?!