UT_Dude

So I found a steal on a frame that's identical to the bike I have now, except for it's a different, and much better looking paint design.

That said, I realized that when I get started racing in the Spring, i'm going to have close to 4000 training miles on my bike. Sooo, does it make sense to keep both bikes and use one just for racing so it's always in top shape, whereas if I only had one, i'd be having to do a lot of work to keep it up for races. I know the n + 1 rule applies, but i'm really not sure if it makes sense or not.

Thanks!

Mentor58

Since my very few trials at racing showed to me that "My Fast is Their Slow", I'm not racer, but that seems like a very logical way to go. Heck, you could even take the 'training bike' to races as a backup just in case something happened to the primary ride. It could also be useful as a test mule for equipment changes, etc.

Sounds like a Win-Win to me

Steve W
Who is slightly awed by racers

drdhsimon

as has been said elsewhere, the optimum # of bikes is n+1, with n being however many you have!

munkyv22

You can never have too many bikes.

WCroadie

I just started racing this past season and went down this same road. Some say yes and some say no. Many say just get a 2nd pair of racing wheels. Some say you should train on the bike you race with so you are familiar and comfortable on it. I thought about it for a while then found a great deal on a frame and over time bought all the components to build up my race bike. You can save tons on ebay and online stores but you have to know what you are buying.

I mostly ride my race bike but will ride my "other" bike once or twice a week. 4000 miles is not that much for a decent bike. This topic has been covered a lot here so do a search and see what others have to say if you don;t get a lot of replies to this thread.

branman1986

the logic is good enough for me to consider doing the same now anyways...

merlinextraligh

2 bikes for racing is really nice. Particularly if you don't do all your own wrenching. You can't afford to miss training because the bike is in the shop.

Although, I wouldn't necessarily go with 2 of the same. You might consider a TT bike in addition to your road bike. Or one bike set up for long rides and road races, the other for Crits.

aballas

always n+1 rule

UT_Dude

Yeah, I already have my road bike, and a decent TT bike. I'm hesitant to use the n + 1 rule, because 3 is a lot of road bikes . I just can't make up my mind.

merlinextraligh

1) set up the 3rd bike with light wheels and low gears as your climbing bike.

2) fixed gear, for base training and a change of pace.

3) beater, for crap days.

However I don't really see a whole lot of payback injust duplicating what you have.

Bob Ross

That's 4, assuming there's still a non-climbing race bike w/ high gears in the picture.

I'm not complaining, mind you, just trying to do the math.

Were it not for the dearth of space in my apartment, I think I'd succumb to the (N+1)*X rule, where X is the "type" of bike. So even if you have 3 (or 4, or 5, etc.) road bikes, you still need 1 more...but in addition to those road bikes if you also have 1 (or 2, or 10) fixies, or beaters, or MTBs, or 'bents, or touring bikes, you still need 1 more of each of those also!

merlinextraligh

So your suggesting I need a back up for my TT bike, my fixed gear, my MTB, and the Tandem? This opens up a whole new universe

caloso

Okay, here's the deal. You need:

1) The Race Bike
2) The Training Bike
3) The Rain and Mud Training Bike (and if you like this so much that you want to start Cyclocross, then you'll need:
5) The Cyclocross Race Bike
6) The Fixed Gear Training Bike, (and if you like this so much that you want to start track racing, then you'll need:
7) The Track Race Bike
8) The Beater
9) The Commuter
10) The Vintage Sunday-Morning Only Bike
etc, etc, etc.

nobrainer440

This is a pretty good start, but you forgot the n+1 rule.