Moderator: Moderator Team
If you had to estimate as a percentage - how much do you think the bike matters in terms of overall performance of the rider?
Lets say the mimimum bike we are talking about is something like a ~£500 entry level specialized road bike with basic shimano or similar (so no old ladies bikes etc). All the way up to the most weenied high-spec carbon frames kitted out with top-end wheels.
Difference between a poor bike aerodynamically and a very aero bike is a couple percent. Rider position from upright to a low tuck is huge. Weight, well weight only greatly affects changes of speed, the bike, like with aerodynamics, is a small part of the mass of the whole system.
Rolling and mechanical resistance- the worst tires can dissipate more than twice the energy that the best tires do. Bearings, more so. Not so much from bearing material, or even smoothness of surfaces, I'm referring to alignment and preload as the dominant factors there. Chain and other drivetrain parts, as long as we're talking about a chain drive system, I don't see much of anything gained from best to worst. chain drive systems are inherently very low drag.
comparing the entry level Allez with an SWorks Tarmac, positioning and such being equal, it turns out that from point A to point B, times will be very, very close. in a race, the better bike will likely shft smoother for a longer period of time, in key tactical moments the cheaper bike's shifting may let you down. The cheap no-name brake pads may require earlier braking into a corner, and the hard compound, stiff casing tires won't grip as hard when you start leaning it over. So time is more likely to start adding up.
note that the inexpensive stuff, tires, brake pads, (and good pedals and shoes and a dialled fitting) would make the biggest difference.
To equipment geeks like me, the bike is pretty important. However for some people it could well be a negligible element and I wouldn't be surprised.
If we have to assume the typical Cat 3/4 amateur racer, I'd say 25%-30%. The rest is training, neutrition, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, NATURAL TALENT.
Crap bike can get you dropped, in which case it makes a big difference. Rolling along in the pack - not much difference unless tyres are rubbish.
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!!
elviento wrote:... A sprinter will be pretty pissed on a noodly bike...
What feels noodly, and what actually is robbing power are two different things. Track sprinters of old still went exceptionally fast on "noodly" bikes.
"I'm not a real doctor; But I am a real worm; I am an actual worm." - TMBG
I'd say that should speak for itself really.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, NATURAL TALENT
Disagree, for the most part.
The rest is training
Agreed, for the most part.
aerozy wrote:A more expensive bike will function better for longer (less maintainence).
I have to disagree with this. I don't have to maintain my Sram Apex group any more than I have to maintain my Sram Red group.
I would say that as long as it fits and everything works like it should, the bike matters very little and falls into the negligible gains category (which is important for pros, but not so much for the rest of us).
More expensive bike - very fragile frame and parts, tyres waer faster, so does drivetrain parts Probably shifters and derailleurs will function longer, but what are we comparing Dura-Ace vs Sora or Ultegra? Ultegra is more or less the same, just a tad heavier, Sora shifters will wear out faster.
Aero advantage is huge, can save lots of watts, but only if you are alone, busting wind and going fast.
- Similar Topics
- Last post
- 2 Replies
- 306 Views
Last post by BdaGhisallo
Wed Jan 24, 2018 11:52 pm
- 24 Replies
- 2591 Views
Last post by Marin
Thu Jul 06, 2017 8:50 am
- 2 Replies
- 397 Views
Last post by Allen254
Wed May 02, 2018 8:51 am
- 17 Replies
- 2697 Views
Last post by bllx
Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:30 am
- 1 Replies
- 418 Views
Last post by topflightpro
Tue Apr 24, 2018 4:26 pm