question for cyling experts

teednab-el

Some guys I know are spending 2000-3000, euro on new road bikes. Yesterday on my spin for a lot of stretches, I was clocking up to 35km/h in my trek 1.1 which I paid 800 euro for. I know my trek isn't as flashy as other bikes out there but, what advantage would one gain by buying such expensive bikes, i.e. over 2000-3000 euro. I honestly don't think I could pedal any faster than 35km/h on any bike without risking hitting a bump and falling off bike. Does better gear changing actually gain much advantage in pedaling faster in the straight? Are they more comfortable and how? I don't want to sound stupid naive or anything but I'm curious to know when upgrading my bike in the future. I'm just a novice on bike knowledge but its something I've got into big time.

Again I am just cycling for fitness and not racing but at the same time Il give it socks when I'm cycling to burn off calories and weight.

feck sake lads

i often wonder this myself, but i suppose it's down to materials and gear used to put a top end bike together, have you ever wondered how on earth they can make a 4000 bike so so light but still as strong or even stronger than say a 1500 bike .but bottom line is they can and you have to pay for that technology.

opti0nal

teednab-el wrote: »

Some guys I know are spending 2000-3000, euro on new road bikes. ...Are they more comfortable and how?

It's like comparing a Ford Fiesta to a Mercedes SLK. Both will get you to the shops, but one will feel better. For both, the maximum speed is 120kph.

Better equipment like a full carbon can have a more performant shape and better vibration dampening. Good wheels will resist buckling and run truer.

You could upgrade your bike with better wheels and don't forget your clothing, it's another factor.

Beasty

A bit more comfortable, a bit more speed, but most importantly a lot more bling, that's what your money gets you;)

teednab-el

opti0nal wrote: »

teednab-el wrote: »

Some guys I know are spending 2000-3000, euro on new road bikes. ...Are they more comfortable and how?

It's like comparing a Ford Fiesta to a Mercedes SLK. Both will get you to the shops, but one will feel better. For both, the maximum speed is 120kph.

Better equipment like a full carbon can have a more performant shape and better vibration dampening. Good wheels will resist buckling and run truer.

You could upgrade your bike with better wheels and don't forget your clothing, it's another factor.

What kind of wheels could one get for my bike?

feck sake lads

teednab-el wrote: »

What kind of wheels could one get for my bike?

wow so many although the wheels are very important think tyres like Grand Bios hard to get but these baby's ride like a tub hand made.
google the name and read all about them.;)

teednab-el

feck sake lads wrote: »

teednab-el wrote: »

What kind of wheels could one get for my bike?

wow so many although the wheels are very important think tyres like Grand Bios hard to get but these baby's ride like a tub hand made.
google the name and read all about them.;)

Is it fair to ask what are the standard wheels on a trek 1.1 quality wise?

petethedrummer

opti0nal wrote: »

It's like comparing a Ford Fiesta to a Mercedes SLK.

If they both had the same engine.

smacl

You could reverse the question a bit and ask are there any things about your existing bike set-up that annoy you, and upgrade on that basis. For me this included a comfier saddle (Brooks B17), longer stem and compact bars (more comfortable positions for longer spins), new wheels (Fulcrum 7), new cassette (28t to make hills easier), new tyres (25mm Durano plus, more comfy than the 23s that were on it, very grippy, and very puncture resistant). About €450 spent, all with the specific goal of making cycling long distances more pleasant.

Tenzor07

As for what enjoyment you extract out of cycling a bike... Well thats up to you, some people like going along on a bike costing a few hundred Euro and are quite happy... Some like the "Pose factor" of having a nice shiny carbon bike...

Though for me when I see A4 riders with Zipp wheels, Dura-Ace and full on carbon frames I don't get it! I could understand A1/2 and top A3 riders wanting all these extras, but sure none of this is important as the engine pedalling the bike!

Lumen

The whole "your bike is too good for you" attitude reeks of inverse snobbery.

Everyone knows that a nice bike doesn't make you win more. Owning nice stuff is nice. F'ck the begrudgers.

Lusk Doyle

Some lad once said "It's not about the bike."

I don't think that he ever amounted to much though so buy the most expensive one you can('t) afford!!!

colm_gti

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Though for me when I see A4 riders with Zipp wheels, Dura-Ace and full on carbon frames I don't get it! I could understand A1/2 and top A3 riders wanting all these extras, but sure none of this is important as the engine pedalling the bike!

I keep asking myself this, whats the point in spending mega money on gear at A4...in the past week I've done 2 races, in which A4 riders have had fairly expensive machinery of the above description, none of which have been massively faster than me, on my weighty, ~10kg aluminium BMC with fairly bottom of the line mavic aksiums...at the time it baffled me as to why they need to upgrade their gear before improving themselves...but like all things, if you have the money to spend, and you enjoy it, then why not spend it on bike gear, you could be spending it on much worse, I know I'd have no problems going out and buying a pinarello dogma with zipp 808 tubulars and racing at A4 if I had the money....

Lusk Doyle

Tenzor07 wrote: »

As for what enjoyment you extract out of cycling a bike... Well thats up to you, some people like going along on a bike costing a few hundred Euro and are quite happy... Some like the "Pose factor" of having a nice shiny carbon bike...

Though for me when I see A4 riders with Zipp wheels, Dura-Ace and full on carbon frames I don't get it! I could understand A1/2 and top A3 riders wanting all these extras, but sure none of this is important as the engine pedalling the bike!

Why? Because one is "only" an A4 rider? That's pants.

Hanley

If having a nice bike makes you more likely to train and get out on it, it's made you a better rider. It's indirect. But it's happened.

Tenzor07

For the basic reason that A4 is the "entry level" (supposedly) category for racing, where fitness should matter more than having the latest €2000 wheel or groupsets, which is great for guys in A1/2 at the top level of fitness, that's where saving a a few gram's off there wheels or frames will make a difference...

feck sake lads

teednab-el wrote: »

Is it fair to ask what are the standard wheels on a trek 1.1 quality wise?

no idea to be honest should be fine dependind on what trek your talking about.. as i said if you want to go faster get the best tyres.;)

seamus

teednab-el wrote: »

Is it fair to ask what are the standard wheels on a trek 1.1 quality wise?

They're OK, but actually quite heavy rolling. You will notice a bit of a difference on the Trek if you upgrade the wheels to something like Mavic Aksiums. These are performance wheels at the budget price point, generally what people go for when they need new wheels but can't justify spending €400 or more on them.
The difference is largely psychological - the actual performance improvement is probably only a couple of seconds in every KM, if even - but I noticed a big difference in the way my bike handles when I moved from the stock Trek/Bontrager wheels.

The Fiesta/Merc comparison doesn't really add up because there is a significant difference between those two vehicles, from comfort and handling, but also down to the little differences like the stereo and the wipers and all that kind of thing. You will notice the difference in the two vehicles as soon as you sit into them. The same isn't true of bikes.

With the bikes, the aim is not a more luxurious machine, it's one that's lighter, stiffer and more efficient. So lighter (and therefore more expensive) materials are used, and the processes used to produce the components are more finely-tuned and intricate to ensure accuracy down to the micrometre.

Most people would likely find very little difference between a brand new €1,000 bike properly set up and a brand new €5,000 bike properly set up.

route66

teednab-el wrote: »

Some guys I know are spending 2000-3000, euro on new road bikes. Yesterday on my spin for a lot of stretches, I was clocking up to 35km/h in my trek 1.1 which I paid 800 euro for. I know my trek isn't as flashy as other bikes out there but, what advantage would one gain by buying such expensive bikes, i.e. over 2000-3000 euro. I honestly don't think I could pedal any faster than 35km/h on any bike without risking hitting a bump and falling off bike. Does better gear changing actually gain much advantage in pedaling faster in the straight? Are they more comfortable and how? I don't want to sound stupid naive or anything but I'm curious to know when upgrading my bike in the future. I'm just a novice on bike knowledge but its something I've got into big time.

Again I am just cycling for fitness and not racing but at the same time Il give it socks when I'm cycling to burn off calories and weight.

I went from a hybrid to a drop bar bike a few months ago - nothing fancy, Tiagra groupset, alloy frame and carbon fork. It is definitely faster than the hybrid - maybe 10-15% - but if I'm not sure I'd see much improvement if I spent €2k plus on something more fancy.

Sure, the gears might make a nicer clunk when changing, the wheels would be lighter and therefore spin up quicker and everything would look better up close when I would wash it. Which would be often. Dreaming about it now, I can picture myself on the road, persuading myself that the carbon frame combines both ceramic-levels of stiffness with a magic carpet ride, the bearings in the wheels spin better, the internally-routed cables help aerodynamics, the sloping head tube makes the front end much more predictable and allows me to go faster around corners and that when the time comes to upgrade, the bike is Di2-cable compatible; this really is an investment for life

Slowly waking up ...

But as has been said above, for normal road riding, I doubt it would really make much difference because the engine - me - would stay the same.

So why do I want to spend €2199 (plus shipping) on something like THIS when it will make no difference to my performance?

smacl

Lumen wrote: »

The whole "your bike is too good for you" attitude reeks of inverse snobbery.

As opposed to the "my bike is better than yours" attitude, which is just normal old fashioned snobbery?

Everyone knows that a nice bike doesn't make you win more. Owning nice stuff is nice. F'ck the begrudgers.

If that's the sum functional difference between a €1k bike and a €3k bike, for gods sake don't let my wife know. It rather kills the argument for spending the ever dwindling household budget of bikes versus shoes and handbags. You might at least put spoiler tags on that kind of stuff.

seamus

route66 wrote: »

So why do I want to spend €2199 (plus shipping) on something like THIS when it will make no difference to my performance?

For the same reason I would love to blow money on a Ducati 999 or a Tesla Roadster, even though they won't (legally) get me to my destination any quicker than a bog standard bike/car.

Lusk Doyle

colm_gti wrote: »

I keep asking myself this, whats the point in spending mega money on gear at A4...in the past week I've done 2 races, in which A4 riders have had fairly expensive machinery of the above description, none of which have been massively faster than me, on my weighty, ~10kg aluminium BMC with fairly bottom of the line mavic aksiums...at the time it baffled me as to why they need to upgrade their gear before improving themselves...but like all things, if you have the money to spend, and you enjoy it, then why not spend it on bike gear, you could be spending it on much worse, I know I'd have no problems going out and buying a pinarello dogma with zipp 808 tubulars and racing at A4 if I had the money....

How do you know that they have not done this already and have reached their plateau?

Lusk Doyle

Tenzor07 wrote: »

For the basic reason that A4 is the "entry level" (supposedly) category for racing, where fitness should matter more than having the latest €2000 wheel or groupsets, which is great for guys in A1/2 at the top level of fitness, that's where saving a a few gram's off there wheels or frames will make a difference...

For racing sure. One can ride in a club or solo and/or not race at all for years and then take out an A4 licence. They may be a good strong rider when entering at A4 level but don't know as they haven't competed before.

An A4 rider can easily be of the same standard as an A1/A2 but you might not be aware of that so a generalisation serves no purpose here IMO.

Lumen

smacl wrote: »

As opposed to the "my bike is better than yours" attitude, which is just normal old fashioned snobbery?

I don't know a single person with a nice bike who is "snobbish" about other people's bikes. They just enjoy what they have.

smacl wrote: »

If that's the sum functional difference between a €1k bike and a €3k bike, for gods sake don't let my wife know. It rather kills the argument for spending the ever dwindling household budget of bikes versus shoes and handbags. You might at least put spoiler tags on that kind of stuff.

There are small but obvious functional differences between a 1k, 3k and 5k bikes. They probably make no difference to "performance", but then if we only cared about pure "performance" we'd all be racing time trials.

The inverse snob psychology goes like this:

- Establish what level the rider is at.
- Pick some higher level which seems unattainable.
- Tell them they shouldn't be riding their bike until they get to that level.

"Random commuter bloke, you really don't need 24 gears. I rode the Ras 18 times on a ten speed racer!"
"A4 bloke. Those Zipps are a bit try-hard. Don't you worry about smashing them up when you crash your bike whilst taking a drink?"
"David McCann, you really shouldn't be riding full carbon until you go ProTour"

etc

el Bastardo

teednab-el wrote: »

Some guys I know are spending 2000-3000, euro on new road bikes. Yesterday on my spin for a lot of stretches, I was clocking up to 35km/h in my trek 1.1 which I paid 800 euro for. I know my trek isn't as flashy as other bikes out there but, what advantage would one gain by buying such expensive bikes, i.e. over 2000-3000 euro. I honestly don't think I could pedal any faster than 35km/h on any bike without risking hitting a bump and falling off bike. Does better gear changing actually gain much advantage in pedaling faster in the straight? Are they more comfortable and how? I don't want to sound stupid naive or anything but I'm curious to know when upgrading my bike in the future. I'm just a novice on bike knowledge but its something I've got into big time.

Again I am just cycling for fitness and not racing but at the same time Il give it socks when I'm cycling to burn off calories and weight.

You're not necessarily getting much 'bang for buck' at the upper level, but at the right price point, what you get is a more comfortable/stable bike on the road, maybe with a geometry that better suits you, with gearing that shifts more precisely and faster than entry level stuff. All in all, it's better engineering design and a nicer ride whether you 'need' it or not.

07Lapierre

route66 wrote: »

So why do I want to spend €2199 (plus shipping) on something like THIS when it will make no difference to my performance?

I suspect its because like me, you can't afford this!

colm_gti

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

How do you know that they have not done this already and have reached their plateau?

I don't

Tenzor07

Getting off topic here a bit, the OP asked what advantages could be gained by having a bike costing 4 times as much as his...and my point was that the fitter you are (e.g. an A2 rider) the more advantage can be gained by having wheels which are a few grams lighter or gears that change a slight bit quicker/smoother...

Beasty

Tenzor07 wrote: »

As for what enjoyment you extract out of cycling a bike... Well thats up to you, some people like going along on a bike costing a few hundred Euro and are quite happy... Some like the "Pose factor" of having a nice shiny carbon bike...

Though for me when I see A4 riders with Zipp wheels, Dura-Ace and full on carbon frames I don't get it! I could understand A1/2 and top A3 riders wanting all these extras, but sure none of this is important as the engine pedalling the bike!

Last year I took the view, what the hell, I can afford it - I'll go out and buy the best racing bike I can, as by the time I buy another I may be "retired". So I did exactly that and spend an amount that some may consider obscene on my "bling" racing bike.

I'll do the same when I upgrade my TT bike, probably over the winter - hopefully I'll have the picture in time for my 10,000th post;)

I've worked long and hard to bring up a family and set myself up for retirement - I'm going to continue enjoying life, and this is part of it.

(Oh and my "engine" is stronger now than it was last year - indeed stronger than it has ever been - hopefully it will last long enough for me to go and do the same thing again before I head off to that great velodrome in the Sky)

Lumen

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Getting off topic here a bit, the OP asked what advantages could be gained by having a bike costing 4 times as much as his...and my point was that the fitter you are (e.g. an A2 rider) the more advantage can be gained by having wheels which are a few grams lighter or gears that change a slight bit quicker/smoother...

I agree that people shouldn't feel obliged to spend money on crap that they don't need, but directly addressing your point, both lighter wheels and more gears make more difference to a slower rider than a faster one.

Lighter wheels because slower riders expend relatively less effort overcoming air resistance whilst climbing.

And more gears because your average recreational rider would genuinely benefit from a 11sp 12-29 cassette that wasn't horrendously gappy. Of course they could just buy a 9sp triple instead...

Crippens1

07Lapierre wrote: »

I suspect its because like me, you can't afford this!

But it's got a discount !!

SAVE 12% = €1,889.28

07Lapierre

Crippens1 wrote: »

But it's got a discount !!

SAVE 12% = €1,889.28

yes but I'm not even an A4 rider!.....I''m obviously not worthy of such a bike

petethedrummer

I have no issue with anyone spending any amount of money on a bike. My only gripe is with people buying bling bikes or components in the belief that this is the magic pill to solve all cycling woes.

I'm not immune to it. At the minute I'm wrestling with myself over whether to buy aero wheels or not. For someone who spends most of his time out of the wind they are probably not justified.

07Lapierre

petethedrummer wrote: »

I have no issue with anyone spending any amount of money on a bike. My only gripe is with people buying bling bikes or components in the belief that this is the magic pill to solve all cycling woes.

I'm not immune to it. At the minute I'm wrestling with myself over whether to buy aero wheels or not. For someone who spends most of his time out of the wind they are probably not justified.

Yes they are go for it! (you know you want to!);)

Beasty

07Lapierre wrote: »

Yes they are go for it! (you know you want to!);)

TBH as soon as you reach the "wresting with myself" stage, there's only going to be one winner

route66

07Lapierre wrote: »

I suspect its because like me, you can't afford this!

7 times more than my modest aspirations :eek:

You must be good

seamus

petethedrummer wrote: »

I'm not immune to it.

I don't think anyone is. My Dad's a big golfer, and I can remember years ago him telling me that he couldn't grasp how some guys spent upwards of 2,000 punts on their clubs in the belief that they would make them better golfers. They'd make claims that they were hitting straighter or further, even though their scorecard didn't seem to show any improvement.

Yet when the time comes to replace a club or a bag, or whatever, he goes up a notch on the scale and upgrades. Just like I do with the bike (like we all probably do). Even though we're totally aware that beyond a certain point, the upgrades will provide little if any improvement to our cycling, we do it anyway.

Vélo

For someone who doesn't race and doesn't think ever will...how much am I allowed spend on a bike?

Plastik

Vélo wrote: »

For someone who doesn't race and doesn't think ever will...how much am I allowed spend on a bike?

Rothar in Phibsboro for you, sir.

Tenzor07

Vélo wrote: »

For someone who doesn't race and doesn't think ever will...how much am I allowed spend on a bike?

Spend as much as you like, but for getting out on spins with this one for €849 then you can't go far wrong, will hold much of its resale value if you decide to upgrade in the future.. LINK

Hungrycol

It's funny cos I'm always going on at home about my next bike super dooper upgrade and then when I come home from a race I sheepishly say "my bike is actually brilliant the way it is"!

Society makes it hard to be happy with your lot.

rflynnr

I'm currently in the "upgrade existing bike/buy a new one" zone so I've been giving a lot of thought to questions of what spending northwards of €2k would mean. (My current bike cost about €1300 about three years ago although I subsequently spent €500 replacing the wheels.) Having done so I've decided to basically replace the existing Ultegra drivetrain (cranks, cassette, bottom bracket, chainrings and chain).

And here's where I address the original question: with regard to groupsets and wheels, in my experience, spending more won't necessarily result in an instant improvement in your times (actually that's not entirely true with regard to wheels but let it pass) but you will benefit over a longer period of time because the parts tend to last longer and require less adjustment. Through three years of road cycling, I've barely ever had to adjust the indexing on the Ultegra derailleurs whereas the Tiagra groupset (itself only two years old) on my hybrid requires a full-on service every six months or so. Maybe that's just my experience but that's why I'm spending money getting new Ultegra parts rather than "upgrading" to a new carbon bike where I might have to tolerate a downgrade to "105". I'm just not that careful with my bike so I want one that will perform reliably every time I take it out of the shed: I get that with Ultegra, but not with Tiagra.

route66

rflynnr wrote: »

I'm currently in the "upgrade existing bike/buy a new one" zone so I've been giving a lot of thought to questions of what spending northwards of €2k would mean. (My current bike cost about €1300 about three years ago although I subsequently spent €500 replacing the wheels.) Having done so I've decided to basically replace the existing Ultegra drivetrain (cranks, cassette, bottom bracket, chainrings and chain).

And here's where I address the original question: with regard to groupsets and wheels, in my experience, spending more won't necessarily result in an instant improvement in your times (actually that's not entirely true with regard to wheels but let it pass) but you will benefit over a longer period of time because the parts tend to last longer and require less adjustment. Through three years of road cycling, I've barely ever had to adjust the indexing on the Ultegra derailleurs whereas the Tiagra groupset (itself only two years old) on my hybrid requires a full-on service every six months or so. Maybe that's just my experience but that's why I'm spending money getting new Ultegra parts rather than "upgrading" to a new carbon bike where I might have to tolerate a downgrade to "105". I'm just not that careful with my bike so I want one that will perform reliably every time I take it out of the shed: I get that with Ultegra, but not with Tiagra.

In the Shimano world, each groupset tends to get passed down as new models are introduced. So a new 105 groupset would probably match your 3 year-old Ultegra.

There's that excuse gone - off you go and buy your new carbon bike

Hungrycol

route66 wrote: »

In the Shimano world, each groupset tends to get passed down as new models are introduced. So a new 105 groupset would probably match your 3 year-old Ultegra.

There's that excuse gone - off you go and buy your new carbon bike

That's what I expected too but from experience of currently using 6600 (Cannondale) and 5700 (Canyon), the 6600 is a lot sweeter than the 105.

The 105 5700 is one clunky mofo and takes quite a push to change gears. The inner lever on the 105 has a lot of travel before engaging to change down. If this is what happens to handlebar tape routed gear cables I'll take my clothes lines thanks!

Vélo

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Spend as much as you like, but for getting out on spins with this one for €849 then you can't go far wrong, will hold much of its resale value if you decide to upgrade in the future.. LINK

But this one is much prettier

petethedrummer

Hungrycol wrote: »

The 105 5700 is one clunky mofo and takes quite a push to change gears.

Routing the gear cables under the bar tape on the 5700 sharpens the turns in the cables and increases friction.

petethedrummer

Beasty wrote: »

TBH as soon as you reach the "wresting with myself" stage, there's only going to be one winner

I'll reward myself if I get upgraded. But I haven't raced in 3 months, so that may never happen.