Maelochs

"Foolish" is YOUR value judgment. If you are so narrow minded and ungenerous that's your business. Sorry for yuo, but not my problem.

I don't know, but i doubt it. So what? I am not so insecure that I need everyone to do what i do or for the reasons I do it. I merely accept that people are different and that that is okay.

I actually will benefit from the lighter weight. Not a lot, but I will be saving 20 or 25 percent over my next lightest tide, and that is significant. "Significant" in this case meaning, "laughably marginal but measurable in a laboratory environment only."

And this is what I pointed out above. Some people feel a need to ridicule others for thinking differently. Just like buying a Porsche and using it to get the groceries is not empirically "foolish" or anything else ... buying and $15K Madone is not "foolish" or not. it is an option.

here;'s the best part: The person who bought that 15K Madone and never cracked 20 mph on even a downhill ... might be more satisfied with his/her life than you, happier than you, more generous, more caring, and more honest than you ... a better person in every way ... and still might have spent 15 k on a bike when a Big Wheel might have been a more appropriate ride.

Maybe you think everyone should wear gray, everyone should be tested for driving ability before being allowed to buy cars, and have to pass speed and endurance tests before buying a bike ... You might enjoy North Korea.

I kind fo like the freedom and the freedom to exercise that freedom I have here. And just because I know my lightweight CF bike will not make me "faster" ... that doesn't make me better. Your knowing it doesn't make You better.

And really, if you want to demean others for thinking differently than you, you have that freedom. I don't think it is a good thing to do ... but sadly I do it to.

Thank you for helping me to see some of my shortcomings.

bruce19

Nothing if I own them. Anybody else is just greedy and selfish.

bakes1

I stand corrected.
A wall of text has made me see the light.
High end cf bikes don't make you faster but they do grant you freedom.
And anyone who does not agree with this should be living in North Korea.
Great stuff

Camilo

I think you've been careful to use "look foolish" rather than "are foolish" so to give yourself the cover of it being an "opinion" rather than a judgement. Kind of like the "hate the sin, love the sinner" thing that also strikes me as disingenuous.

If you didn't care, you wouldn't make the effort to state your opinion that people who don't conform to your idea of appropriate riding equipment look foolish. I suspect it really does bother you when you see an aging recreational rider on a very nice bike. You certainly do notice it, no?

It sounds like you think that the only basis for measuring utility or worth of a bike is performance and more so, the actual "need" for that performance, rather than the performance itself.

How about simply fun? For a lot of people, including me... I'd dare say all or nearly all of those who buy a bike "beyond their need" actually buy them simply because they're fun to handle (lift in and out of the car, etc), look at, and also to ride. A well built light weight bike feels fun and sporty. Oh, and the fun of just learning about the high end options or for do-it-yourselfers, putting it together - picking the parts, hunting for bargains, building it up nicely, etc.

For whatever reason they are deemed by the individual to be more fun to own and ride than a lower level bike. I personally don't know anyone who actually thinks the more expensive, light weigh bike they bought makes them faster in any meaningful way, or that they actually need to be that slight bit faster. But of course that's not what's fun about it.

So if it's actually more fun, what's foolish about it? Nothing at all.

DaveWC

Sure you do. You see a lot of people saying that only "steel is real" and all other frame materials are inferior. You see a lot of folks saying that carbon frames have a useful life of 2 years. What I don't see is a lot of carbon bike owners say that only carbon makes them faster. There have been debates about whether a lighter bike (of any material) is faster than a heavier bike, but I can't recall anyone saying that this only applies to carbon. That's a strawman in your head that you are fighting because you have decided not to own a carbon bike. So if you cannot tell you how many times I have seen a cf snob advise another uninformed rider to get an expensive cf bike as it will help them keep up on group rides/hills perhaps it's because those statements have only happened in your head.

I'll bet that I can find 10x more incorrect statements regarding steel & carbon bikes where the author simply says that steel is better, or that carbon will asplode in 2 years than you can find carbon owners saying that only carbon bikes are worth buying. And I'll bet that I don't find a single post where you correct the misstatements about carbon. So don't try to sell the idea that you're only concerned about accurate information.

It's hilarious that you can personally justify a Rolex that does absolutely nothing better than a cheap watch but can't let a comment pass on expensive bikes without denigrating the owners of those bikes for reasons that you have decided that they have made when buying those bikes.

WalksOn2Wheels

I think there are quite a few people here who really need to see these two sentences, so I snipped these quotes to give them another shot to see it.

bakes1

My personal stalker strikes again
I never tried to personally justify anything btw. Quite the opposite in fact. You have comprehension issues methinks.
Either way I find it quite ironic that you found it 'hilarious'
Wouldn't that make you rude and judgemental?
Hrmmmm...

DaveWC

Ha ha ha. Not at all. I was trying to imitate posts where people decide why carbon bike owners own carbon bikes & react to their perception of that ownership.

For instance... I have a nice carbon bike with a Powertap. It doesn't make me any faster than my previous, cheaper bike that I rode daily. I have never told anyone else shopping for a bike that they need to buy an expensive bike.

So here's the challenge... find 10 posts where someone is telling a prospective bike buyer that he needs to own an expensive carbon bike and it will make him/her faster. How hard can this be? You "cannot tell us how many times you have seen a cf snob advise another uninformed rider to get an expensive cf bike as it will help them keep up on group rides/hills". I know you're rather focus on me instead so do that... find a single post where I've done that. What you'll find instead is expensive bike owners explaining why they enjoy their bike, much like you could explain why you enjoy a Rolex although it admittedly does nothing better than a $50 Timex.

My guess is that you'll ignore all of that & just refer to me as a stalker and continue with the strawman.

bmthom.gis

It's just NASCAR that sucks....
And +1 on riding the Bianchi! Or, the OP can send it my way and I'll ride it for him

BillyD

@bakes1 please leave the thread. Your argumentative posts have gotten tiring. DO NOT post again in this thread.

bmthom.gis

There's a fundamental difference in the people who think they can buy speed and win the group ride sprints, and others who will buy an expensive bike just because that's what they want to ride. I like carbon (uh oh, mine is two years old, hope it doesn't asplode on my next ride!), and I like steel. There's nothing wrong with aluminum, either.

Camilo

Like someone else wrote, I can't really recall anyone here - or on my local rides - actually tell someone they needed to spend a lot of money on a CF bike to go faster and keep up. Or that it would make them fitter. I can't recall it, but that doesn't mean it has never happened, but I really don't think it's a pattern or a common thing.

Locally all I see is the entire spectrum of bikes from low level "vintage" steel bikes to beautiful vintage steel bikes, to 15 year old aluminum bikes, to modern mid to top end CF bikes. I've never, ever heard anyone who rides a top level bike criticize the lower level or older bikes, and I have never heard someone tell anyone that they "need" to upgrade. Sure people wax poetic about their own rides (in all of the categories I described above) and sure people have their preferences. But I never hear the mis-guided preaching you describe.

What is common - again repeating what others have written - is that I see people disparage modern and high end equipment - that technological changes aren't necessary, modern stuff wont' be durable, changes are simply a product of cynical marketing, etc. But more importantly what I regularly read is people who ridicule or question the naivety, ignorance, or motivations of those who own it, but apparently don't deserve it. Yes, I see that a lot.

I'm not embarrassed to ride a ~16 pound CF bike, nor am I embarrassed that I have spent a lot of time and a moderate amount of money to put that one together, piece by piece, exactly as I wanted it.

In the same vein, I'm not embarrassed that I spent a lot of time and a moderate amount of money to put together a very beautiful, and relatively light weight 80s-90s vintage Italian steel bike. Frankly, I think the time and money ... and vanity... I put into the steel bike is more frivolous than the CF bike. Love 'em both though. Is the fact that I can afford this "fun" factor a moral weakness now that I can't actually physically push the gear to its limits (not that I ever could)? Nah, it's just me spending money on fun.... just like I spend money to catch salmon when I could buy them cheaper at Safeway.

Bikes aren't "fast" to me, they're just "fun" in many ways.

Maelochs

Thank you, Camilo.

I am ultimately utterly selfish. I ride for me and only me-- and only because I like to. I am slow, weak, lazy, overweight, and I look ridiculous no matter what bike i ride---so i might as well ride what I like.

Considering how many times I have nearly lost my license in my little Honda before I smartened up, I can pretty much be sure if I had a Porsche or Ferrari I would drive it slowly---and enjoy it immensely. So there!

Perhaps I should change my user name to "Lanterne Ultra-Rouge." I hear the lanterne-rouge guys take pride in it ... so I have a lot more to be proud of.

Seriously, thanks for bringing this back to what was surely the starting point for almost all of us.

I doubt many if any people hopped on a tricycle at age three and dreamed of competing whether it was fun or not. I doubt many of us rode our first Huffy or Murray, with cards in the spokes, thinking "HTFU!" I am pretty sure every one of us came to this sport/passtime through one very broad common doorway---riding a bike is Fun. Some folks seem to have forgotten that, and the reminder is most welcome.

TheRef

That's funny. Carbon doesn't hold up well... funny.

Maelochs

I thought he meant the racers wouldn't hold up well ... traveling at the massively increased speed the carbon bikes would provide.

smarkinson

Uh oh! I'm riding a 4 year old carbon bike.

If you don't hear from me again you know the reason.

Dan333SP

Well said, @Camilo. Good post.

big john

I think you are way off here. I think people who ride a lot and have been riding a while have no illusions that a bike is going to make some huge difference in their performance. I'm 62 and fat but I ride a pricey machine (used) and I got it because I liked it and I wanted it, just like you and your watches.

When I read that part of your post I thought "How refreshing, bakes1 is right on here". Then it devolved into cf snobs, etc.

I'm in a club of 500 members, I've never heard anyone tell someone a new bike would give them anything more than minor gains of any kind.

As has been asked, what is wrong with people buying stuff that they want? Watches, bikes, cars, who cares?