We want lighter because it saves us seconds on climbs that are higher grades and 10x longer than we ever ride. Why? To be faster in certain, yet rare situations, while at our current level of fitness. Cost... A lot of $$$$

We want more aero to make us faster (while at our current level of fitness), while we ride in groups, draft, and negate the aero all but when we are on the front pulling. Cost... A lot of $$$$ P.S. the most aero position is the one you rarely see anyone riding in.

Meanwhile riding a heavier, less aero bike would technically make us more fit (for the same speed) as we were forced to squeeze out those few extra watts to keep pace with our group rides.

So the only time any of our "upgrades" make sense is if we are riding solo and want to be faster (presumably for strava that almost no one analyzes), or racing.

All that being said, I cant help but want a bike that's lighter and more aero.

HA! Right there with you! And... '69 was one of Chevrolet's best years!

Meh, I wouldn't mind dropping some grams but an aero bike is the last thing I'd want in my stable.

Even if I was to fork out $12,000 for a new bike, this is still cheaper than other hobbies/interest I've had.

Hah, just the opposite here. I'd love an aero bike...but see no need to lose grams (or ounces...or even pounds).

Speak For Yourself.

Cue Slade:

Like a tiger chasing its tail. Well it gives us all something to strive for I guess.

Don't put me in your box.

I'm just chasing the dragon. (You never catch the dragon.)

Train heavy, race smart. Old school quotes never mentioned aero or lightweight (directly).
Rode the tandem as a single with some climbing, for a good leg workout last Sat.



Nice ride on the paved forest roads.

Not all of us are strong enough to lift heavy bikes

Cue Steely Dan:

Some of us actually race.

And those of us who have raced for awhile have discovered that equipment is only a small (in some cases, very small) part of the equation.

No, it wouldn't.

I wouldn't ride harder because I was on a crappier bike. I'd ride the same and just be slower.

If I feel like I'm not doing enough work in a group ride, I can take longer pulls, or race up climbs, or whatever. Exertion is much more down to how hard I want to work, than to the bike I'm riding.

If I want an easy day but still want a group ride, I don't hop on a fast bike, I ride with a slower and/or steadier group.

I've ridden inexpensive bikes and expensive and if you can't "feel" the difference hen buy the inexpensive.

I can feel a difference and I don't have to be climbing Cat 1 mountains or riding at 50KpH to get an advantage. The feel, handling and shifting is impressive. So if you can afford it... do it. If you can't ... save. And if you can't fell the differance don't buy an expensive bike.

Exactly. I'll play this game where I'll see how many times I can attack, get caught, drift to the back, recover, fight my way to the front, and attack again. Repeat until dropped. That's a lot different ride than one where I just sit in.

My upgrades make the bike function more efficiently and feel better to me. Enjoying the ride (for whatever reason I find valuable) is why I ride.

I did not upgrade to an "aero" bike, but I did spend many dollars (> $1400.00) upgrading the bike I have (which I purchased on sale for around $400.00), and in the process, with the new components, shaved about 3 or 4 pounds from the bike. I now enjoy the bike even more than I did before and I do not feel the need to upgrade to a new one...however, that does not mean I do not look.
I may upgrade n + 1 at some point in the future...but not until I can really afford the "dream" bike. I do not want to upgrade to "just another bike" I will only want to replace in a couple years.

Want > need.

And you can absolutely do both. My Cervelo weighs 8 pounds less than my Ritchey. The lighter Cervelo is inarguably faster-- but I have over double the miles on the Ritchey this year. It's not always about going as fast as possible.

But most of my rides are solo and I spend most of my time in the drops. Hoods are for relaxing or slow climbs.

I also dispute that you'd get fitter with a heavier bike. That only applies if you fail to apply the LeMond principle that it never gets easier, you just go faster. I can only work so much beyond my limits on any bike but a faster bike means that those limits are that much faster. Need to work harder? Just go faster.

As someone else higher up the thread said, speak for yourself. When I was in the market for a new bike, I bought an aero bike as the price was right, it was the right size, and after a 20 mile test ride, I found it extremely comfortable and fun to ride. I'm not really fast enough to make massive gains through aerodynamic advantage. But it brings a smile to my face when I'm riding, so who cares?
However, I am faster on it this year than I was last year. Is it because I spent all winter riding my heavier CX bike with 35mm tyres? Or am I just fitter because I rode my bike all winter? Probably a combination of the two. But, the CX bike is a lot harder work than my aero bike.
On Saturday, I took the winter bike out on a club ride as there was rain in the forecast. I joined group 3 as I'm tapering for a 205 mile ride at the weekend, and didn't want anything too fast or hard work. Group 3 rides are generally a social affair in my club. However, it was a tough ride on the bike. 26 miles, 1600 ft of climbing, 14.6mph average, the usual small hills a struggle, and just a struggle in general through the entire ride. Heart rate was zone 3 and zone 4 for most of the ride.
The prior Sunday, however, I was out on a sociable "ladies ride" with some of the other girls in my club on my aero bike. 80 miles, 4500 ft of climbing, 14.8mph average, 2x categorised climbs (3/4), but a really nice, sociable ride. It wasn't a struggle, and we all had a good natter throughout the ride. Heart rate was zone 2 for a majority, with a small amount in 3 and a few minutes in zone 4. I could have pushed it more, and I still wouldn't have struggled nearly as much as I did on Saturday.
And if I compare my winter bike to my aero bike on a group 2 club run, for a ride that is 15.5mph average pace over mostly the same route (group 2 adds 1 x categorised climb and roughly 1.5 miles to the route), again, my heart rate is mostly in zone 2, with a bit of time in 3 and 4. Again, that ride was not a massive struggle compared with this past weekend's.
ride. And comparing temperature and wind, both were about the same.

I didn't buy the aero bike because it would make me faster. I bought it because it's fun to ride. I didn't buy the CX bike because it would make me stronger when on the aero bike. I bought it because it could take wider tyres and has hydraulic disc brakes, which is what I wanted for winter riding and so I had something a bit more versatile that would be appropriate for a bit of off-road riding. It is also fun to ride, but in a different way.

I don't ride for the sole purpose of seeing how fast I can go, although how far I can go is a completely different story. I ride because it brings a smile to my face, and yeah I get excited if I set a new PB, or on the rare occasion get a QOM. Let's see if I am still smiling come sunset Saturday...

Even if you race unless you are a paid to race, sponsored professional, it makes zero sense to spend thousands on a bike.