When does it end? The “better bike”

[Kayrehn]

.

[Lelandjt]

The industry obsessing over disc brakes, low gears, electric shifting, and hidden cables has cured me of new bike-itis. I have no desire to own anything newer than my 5 year old Transonic SL (61cm, 6.6kg). If they were pushing aero bikes into the low 5kg territory I'd be tempted to upgrade. As things are the best you can get is only slightly more aero than my old bike, heavier, and really expensive*. And I don't foresee that changing since I can't imagine the industry developing rim brakes farther or shedding significant weight off discs.

*Yes, better brakes, lower gears, and slightly better shifting (my DA9000 is flawless) but those don't seem like helpful improvements for me.

[wheelsONfire]

Frames already come with suspension: tyres/tubes... and to some extent, posts and saddles.

Not what i ment

https://roadcyclinguk.com/gear/eurobike ... ected.html

[robertbb]

Wow! Interesting article. Enjoyed reading it from a tech/geek perspective but would hate to see it become standard.

Seems like it hasn't gone anywhere.... thankfully. IMHO they're slowly killing the purity of the bicycle.

[Alexandrumarian]

I think there is great potential in disc and electric but I also find the current state to be still kinda far from a truly refined level. This summer I rode a bit on 12s Force and Ultegra di2. Sram shifting system was pretty amazing, definitly the easiest thing. Shimano was confusing and a bit hard to fumble with. I found the rear Sram to shift slowly. Maybe an exageration but I felt that next to mech Campa it was like bolt rifle vs machine gun. Ultegra felt better but the motor noise was annoying, a bit like a frigging impact dot printer from the nineties - Bbzzzt bzzzt bzzzzt. Sram drivetrain was insanely noisy overall. Give me laser printing and you'll get my money. In the mean while I wouldn't pay even 1 cent premium for these over mech.

[guyc]

When you realise you're chasing an impossible goal and that you've lost sight of why you started riding in the first place.

[RocketRacing]

This morning, i checked the forum on my mob phone while drinking my Cappuccino (my almost every day rithual)...

And then this AD appear on Tapatalk

Totaly perfect with this topic.. (i guess if u ARE then Neverending Story, If u are NOT some chances for end (happy end )

Sorry for off topic but very funny about this ad

And no, im not Dentist







p.s. I must admit im a bit dissapointed why did not appeared when i was checking Pinarello Dogma F12 threads , but life is not always fair

p.p.s. If someone which have Dating Sites ADS appearing on forum want to to exchange for this one, please txt me.. At least that way i'll know im regular normal person if that kind of ads shown on my profile, vs this one

Maybe i should spend more time on Porn vs BikePorn?

Sent from my Mi A2 using Tapatalk

[FactoryMatt]

can we all just agree that, while progress is good, GCN et al as an industry mouthpiece blindly pushing the latest and greatest without context is bad?

i love new stuff and progress and innovation. i hate ppl hanging their hat on contextless half truths.

[Hellgate]

In a word, it doesn't end. Okay, that's three words...sort of...

[mscullion]

This is a great thread. I have thought all these things since riding my BMX as a kid in the 80s I think aero and weight is a joke for average 100-300 FTP casual riders. Until your winning races just admit your buying it cuz its cool. If you cant look at your bike and it make you want to ride it then give up, because it will turn into a coat rack. This is a hobby for me and I treat it like that. Im not Segan and no one is giving me 75% off my gear so I buy what I want and the manufactures are doing what they do...selling you their stuff duh... If you don't need disk then don't buy them, but if you think they are cool then buy them. If you don't need aero then don't buy the $10k Venge but if you like the shape of the frame and you feel like Segan on the road then buy it. This is pretty simple, if it doesn't sell then manufacture would not sell it. I know plenty of folks that don't need a truck but have a F350 on 22" rims and 12" lift kits cuz they got the money and like their trucks. Life is to short to skimp out so do what you like and don't apologize to anybody!!

[Kazyole]

It never ends.

But I think we're well beyond the point where you'll ever see significant gains generation to generation in terms of aerodynamics or weight, pending rule changes from the UCI. I think we're getting reasonably close to the "perfect" 6.8kg bike, with it being now possible to build most aero frames to approximately the weight minimum without making significant aero sacrifices. If we see that weight limit drop, or the UCI's restrictions on tube shape loosen, you'll see another round of innovation, followed by convergence around the "best" designs.

As-is under the current rules, there's no incentive really for frame manufacturers to push weight again.

What makes a bike "better" is a difficult value judgment to make. Because it's pretty personal. For me it's a couple criteria. I spend a lot of time on my bike. I want it to be comfortable to ride. And I'm a lightweight guy. I want a bike that accentuates what I'm best at. And that's climbing. Yes, an aero bike would be faster overall on about every ride I do. But I'm not racing so who cares? I like going uphill fast. I want the bike that lets me go uphill the fastest. Which is why I'm here.

I don't need any of this stuff. No one does. But right now I'm riding an RCA that's a couple years old, built up with electronic shifting, 2x11 gears, a clincher wheelset, etc, and is around 3lbs lighter than what the pros are allowed to ride. No real sacrifices to practicality, and it's an insane bike to ride. It's a rocketship uphill, and is super comfortable to ride all day. And while the weenie in me thinks it would be really cool to see the industry start pushing weight again, I also acknowledge that I don't really need a bike that's lighter than ~5.5kg.

But at the same time, I know who I am. I'll never be done. I'll be tinkering with my setup every offseason until I die. And for me that's as big a part of the hobby as the actual riding is. I love bike tech. I love trying to find a way to make my bike that little bit lighter/better for the way I ride. Which is why the latest crop of aero bikes doesn't really do it for me. Not that they're not sexy. They look very nice and all the integration makes them very clean, but it takes some of the joy out of it for me. I like choosing every part of my build down to the tiniest detail, and the level of integration we see today just doesn't make that possible. I'm also a bit oddly proportioned which means I need a small frame (48cm) with a long stem (120mm) and narrow bars (38cm). Which for whatever reason is difficult to find in an integrated setup. If the industry keeps moving the direction they're moving, I'll have to be happy with my RCA for a while. Which is not a terrible problem to have.

I also have no issues with GCN pushing tech. If we want faster, lighter bikes, people need to keep buying bikes. And occasionally they'll shine a light on a company that does really great work that most cyclists aren't familiar with (like Darimo).

[chris8382]

My C50 on mechanical super record is all the bike a man could ever need

Of course this is all you need......until you'll ride a newer bike. At that moment, you'll feel the difference and the C50 becomes 'old', 'outdated',....

Wondering if this opinion is based on personal test Colnago C50 vs newer bike (if it's personal test hope same wheelset/tires), or just prediction that if it's newer bike it have to be better?

I just need a bicycle that while being performant, is still comfortable. I have gone through many frames, groupsets and wheels.

The Colnago C50 on mechanical Super Record 11 speed 52/36 12-29 and that condenses for me the most balanced bike, it is performant, light, comfortable, beautiful, elegant, a mix of classic and modern technology, enough gears to go up the Alps or go fast on the flat lake shores.

I set it up with 50mm Carbon Tubulars on Powertap hubs to be more aero and fast, or with a set of Open Pro clinchers on Powertap hubs for long endurance rides.

Can it be "better", sure it could be lighter, more aero, stiffer, prettier, have disc brakes, electric shifters, more cogs on the rear, etc etc, etc, but I don't need that.

My bike rides, climbs, descends and stops perfectly well, in comfort and style, the numbers in my computer says I am doing well, and it looks pretty to me ( and many others ) , I have 6 other bikes including an aero Frame that rides surely faster on flat terrain, and a modern Colnago C64, that is just marginally better in all dimensions, and I am pretty sure if I hadn't the C50 that C64 would be the one ticking all the boxes. however the C50 feels nicer.

If one was competing at any level, a better bike could help to better results. but for most of us those improvements are unnecessary.

Some people draw pleasure and joy on the constant search for better, so well maybe that is a good way to spend your money into.

I completely understand this. I went from C40 to C50 (getting the right size) then to C60 (wanting the newest). Now, based on ride and realizing the C50 is more than enough bike (almost perfect?), I have gone back to the same C50 from the C60. I don't imagine much else will tempt me away from the C50. Even now I am thinking that a C50 Cross would make a good gravel bike (since why would I use my CX bike on gravel....that would be ridiculous).

[synchronicity]

Interesting topic. I felt much this way with Pro Bike Hire / Tenerife Training. First people wanted carbon rental bikes. So I obliged. Then compact cranks and/or triples. Okay. Then came loads of different BB standards. Sure. But when 29" wheels started to come in, and integrated seaposts, I thought to myself "I don't think so". Not the best fit for short riders, so I didn't buy any. People were even saying "no" to two year old rental bikes (some people anyway). And I thought "enough is enough". Others were turning their noses up at $2000+ bikes (some of them). I just did not want to spend any more of my money on bike kit. And so I got out. After that it was 27.5" wheels and e-bikes and 1x speed drivetrains. Now it would be disc brakes on road bikes and electronic shifting.

I lost count of how many bikes I have bought. So I think for me it has mostly ended. One of the factors is that I simply don't like the look of modern bikes anymore. My MTBs are all 9 speed. My lightest light bike is now 20 years old (well the frame is). It has a 1" fork, a 27.2mm seatpost and 25.4mm handlebar diameter. I see no reason to upgrade.

The last time I bought a bike frame/wheels for myself was in 2008. I am saying a big fat "no" to disc brakes and electronic shifting. I just don't want to have to recharge yet another electronic device. I'm over it. I do need to buy shifters, a cassette and a RD for that most recent bike, so I figure it might as well be 12 speed. But if I was a shimano/sram man I would be saying another no to the XDR hubs as none of my old wheels are compatible. But believe me I am not happy about the 11-29, 11-32 and 11-34T cassette options. The size of the cassettes these days are huge!! My 90's MTB had a 12-28T cassette. Right? And I was happy on that (for a MTB).

I think good parts should be designed to last. I thought that was the whole point of buying quality merchandise in the firstplace. And this is a philosophy I am carrying over to vertebrae (only the materials are going to get upgraded; I have a passion for materials).

[mattsurf]

Duplicate, delete post

[mattsurf]

Am I unusual? I am nearly 48, and a competitive cyclist; now my kids are older, I have more time to train, and I am now fitter and faster than ever. My passion is also building bikes, and trying to build a better bike, my mid life crisis is not women or sports cars, it is bikes and cycling. I love the latest, newest and fastest tech, but I also love classic bikes. I own top end racing bikes from the 1980's, 1990's, and 2000's and 2020's (I am missing a bike from 2007-2012 vintage). I am highly analytical, with the advent of power meter pedals, Strava, Garmins etc I can compare really accurately how performance has of bikes has improved. I also love to take my older bikes on club bike rides

Without doubt, my latest bike, a Cervelo R5, 5.5kg with rim brakes, is the best, it is lighter, stiffer faster. Disc brakes are a better trade off, but for ultimate no compromise performance, rim brakes are still king for now..... in the future, i'm not so sure

Most all round bike: 2017 Canyon Ultimate Disc, 6.9kg. Does everything well, its my go to bike without having to think about it. It's scratched, crashed (nothing serious), well worn in, I am not worried about doing anything with this bike

Favouite bike 1987 Hubli, Columbus SLX tubes, Shimano 600 tricolor 7 speed groupset. timewarp bike, looks like it was built last year, gears are tight and accurate. This bike feels so well sorted, its a joy to ride, with that lovely ride that a high quality steel frame gives

Most disappointing bike, 1991/92 Colnago Carbitubo, 8 speed Camp Record Titanium Groupset. Bike looks fantastic, groupset works perfectly, however, early carbon frames are harsh, bike is heavy, just can't get into riding it. My Aluminum 1999 Specialized Festina S-works is a much, much better bike.

In terms of speed, there is not a massive difference between bike, the Canyon and R5 are faster, maybe 2-3 mph at 250w, this is mainly down to the wheels. On a big climb the Canyon and R5 would be first to the top, however, I would still be faster on the 30 year old Hubli than another rider pushing 230w on a modern bike... the rider makes a much bigger difference than the bike