Best, better, and more expensive - my myth busting view...

[Citius]

Is there any connection between Citius and Poster C...?

Any resemblance to actual events, or real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental

 

[jay clock]

I have a bike which (today, to replace, would cost less than £500), and has technology from a while back. It's not the fastest, nor the lightest, and it manages to outshine my abilities.
It can manage 60+ miles without issue, and has remained reliable for 4 years without any issue, except the normal wear and tear which you would expect.
It lives outside, in all weathers, so looks a little old.

It has completed a LEJOG, and a trip to Guernsey, towed a trailer, and continues to provide a large amount of fun and exercise for us (it's a tandem btw!).
We are considering an L2P sometime next year on it.

My view is that there is often a large desire to replace things, or to buy the best/lightest/strongest bike and equipment all the time, and whilst I might agree that the initial bike purchase should be buy the best you can afford, more importantly, take time to consider HOW you will use the bike - marketing, and the opinions of others could provoke more cost than you actually need!

We have Acera 24 speed gearing, it's not modern nor up-to-date, but it works really well for us.... and is still currently available if things need replacing. This is just one example where newer, isn't necessarily the best, certainly not for us!

Please feel free to disagree with me, but this is directed towards those who are considering a purchase, and frequently look to this forum for advice.... new and shiny, bang up-to-date stuff might be your desire, but also can be a false economy!

Am I missing something? "(today, to replace, would cost less than £500)" - where can I buy a decent tandem with Acera gearing for 500 quid? Assumed they would be much pricier

 

[mustang1]

Yes, agreed.

My first bike cost £400 ten years ago. Out of all the bikes I've owned since then (all were low end models of different types such as cx or MTB etc) that has still been my favourite.

Then I bought a bike that cost considerably more. It's definitely a more comfortable and pleasing ride but I don't think it'd spend that much on a bike again.

I prefer lower end stuff from a good brand.

Edit: typo (damn autocorrect).

 

[JMAG]

I'm not sure you understand the problem. 11t to 32t in a 8 or 9 cassette, any difference is hardly notisable.... you only get one more cog in between so maybe you have a .....21, 24, 26,28,30 and 32 with an 8 speed cassete and a 21,24,26,27,28,30,and 32 teeth on a 9 speed.

Thanks for your thoughts. I do understand the differences and the ratios I was having trouble with were higher in the range. In my case the extra spacing on the original casseette came at the worst point.

My original 8 speed cassette was 11-13-15-18-21-24-28-32t and I was often jumping between 15-18t, wishing I had something in between. The 8 speed cassette I changed to was 11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28t and gave me a 16t without a 3t gap to the next cog.

My road bike clearly rides differently to the hybrid, but the spacing at 11-12-13-14-16-18-21-24-28t also suits the riding I do most. The chainset plays its part too.

 

[david k]

OP - but is it shiney?

 

[Spoked Wheels]

Thanks for your thoughts. I do understand the differences and the ratios I was having trouble with were higher in the range. In my case the extra spacing on the original casseette came at the worst point.

My original 8 speed cassette was 11-13-15-18-21-24-28-32t and I was often jumping between 15-18t, wishing I had something in between. The 8 speed cassette I changed to was 11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28t and gave me a 16t without a 3t gap to the next cog.

My road bike clearly rides differently to the hybrid, but the spacing at 11-12-13-14-16-18-21-24-28t also suits the riding I do most. The chainset plays its part too.

The 9 speed cassette gives you a 13T cog that is outside the range you were using, somewhere between 15 and 18t so no advantage there. I feel the change you liked had to do with the bike and not with the 9 speed cassette as I don't see the extra cog made any difference. Something about the road bike made the difference, maybe the crankset but that would be a totally different scenario really

You would expect the two bikes to give a very different ride.

Cheers

 

[Dave7]

I do agree with you..........but with some reservations.........allow me to explain
I have had my Technics music systme for some 20 years and it does everything I want. I remember-when I bought it-the store owner told me that music fanatics will spend vast fortunes updating to the latest/best equipment.
I am 68..........needed a new bike.....and as my OH said (referring to money) "you cant take it with you". So........I indulged and bought a nice shiny carbon 20 speed Giant Defy 2 Advanced which is debateably far more bike than I need. But boy!!!! dont I really enjoy it

 

[stoatsngroats]

Am I missing something? "(today, to replace, would cost less than £500)" - where can I buy a decent tandem with Acera gearing for 500 quid? Assumed they would be much pricier

http://www.winstanleysbikes.co.uk/category/3176/Viking_Tandem_Bikes

amongst others, really, less than £500, actually £399!

 

[stoatsngroats]

OP - but is it shiney?

Mm, that's the dink in the armour, but really, for me, shiny isn't so good.... the top of my head provides shiny...

And I suppose, if you want shine, I mean REALLY want shiny, then I'm afraid, you're going to have to pay!

I do agree with you..........but with some reservations........./.....I indulged and bought a nice shiny carbon 20 speed Giant Defy 2 Advanced which is debateably far more bike than I need. But boy!!!! dont I really enjoy it

Thanks for agreeing in part, I take your point completely, and I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, I just feel that when questions are asked, occasionally, the direction is sometimes against the point that good enough is, well good enough!

Plus, I am, at heart, a skinflint, and begrudge paying over the odds for something I don't need, and maybe, cannot see the perceived benefit of lighter/stronger/faster/ more shiny! when I look at how I might use a bike, and if the person receiving this direction also hasn't considered their own use of a bike, or components.

 

[CopperCyclist]

I'm a gadget whore. I once bought an iron solely because it had written on the box "can shoot steam 10 feet" with a photo of someone holding the iron vertically doing just that. I was sold, despite the fact I clearly didn't need it, as the only things I ever had to iron was the sleeves of my white police shirts.

 

[bozmandb9]

Is there any connection between Citius and Poster C...?



The point though is quite succinct, and that's a little where my point in the first post comes from... it's great to say why the Range Rover may be a little extreme, when compared to the Astra, and obviously, personal choice dictates, but if the question was pre-range rover purchase, it could have saved a few quid, particularly if this was a newbie, saying that their choice was to just manage a few mile every couple of weeks, maybe taking their kid to school, and a little local shopping, and asking for advice on which to buy.

My bike is a Viking, and it's equipment isn't groundbreaking, but the quality is sufficient for mild adventure. Viking road bikes (I would imagine - mine is!) are more than satisfactory, as are Carrera ( I had one, and I loved it!). Apollo and the lower end of the market wouldn't be my choice, because in my experience (I had one, it was ok for a couple of miles, but not much farther) the quality of the components is lower, requiring much more maintenance, and providing less reliability without it, and much less 'feel'.

Tyres - Continental V Schwalbe (a general view of recent experience) Continental, great for road, and cinder tracks, and pretty reliable regarding the P* word. Ok for many miles. Schwalbe - more twitchy due to the 'U' shape when compared to the Continental but much comfier ride, and as fast. Unsure at this early stage about P*s and longevity. Price comparison, almost equal, certainly within a few £s.

These therefore are the kind of comments people might need, and I'm happy to offer.

I highly recommend the Range Rover Supercharged for shopping! Very easy to park, with high driving position and parking sensors all round, superb turning circle, and on the S/C, reversing camera.

Plus the boot is cavernous! Fits much more in than an Astra. Get it LPG converted as I did, and running costs not much more than aforesaid Astra. Buy ten years old though, so somebody else has kindly taken £90k of depreciation for you!

Top tip though, get a rear mounted bike carrier, it's a pig trying to get heavy bikes up to a roof mounted one!

Oh, and if you get an S/C, don't sell it, or you'll get sad and start rambling on when people remind you of it!

 

[Drago]

Aha - you've hit the nail on the head right here. This is how all the disagreements start. A £100k Range Rover would, as you say, do the weekly shop at Tescos perfectly well. But then so would the £5k Astra - and so would a 20 year-old Range Rover costing £1500.

Poster A: "I've just bought a £100k Range Rover to go shopping - was that a good choice?"
Poster B: "Dunno, but a £5k Astra would do the same job for less - did you not consider one of those?"
Poster C: "Poster A is perfectly entitled to buy whatever he likes - leave him alone you nazi..!"

And so the fun begins again...and continues to escalate like that until the thread gets closed..

If someone feels happier in a phat bling Range Rooney instead of a Poxhaul Ashtray, then fair enough. If someone is doing it as a willy 1wagging exercise, for the fleeting moment that they own something more hip, trendy and up to date than their equally shallow neighbours, then they're chumps.

 

[outlash]

I highly recommend the Range Rover Supercharged for shopping! Very easy to park, with high driving position and parking sensors all round, superb turning circle, and on the S/C, reversing camera.

Plus the boot is cavernous! Fits much more in than an Astra. Get it LPG converted as I did, and running costs not much more than aforesaid Astra. Buy ten years old though, so somebody else has kindly taken £90k of depreciation for you!

Top tip though, get a rear mounted bike carrier, it's a pig trying to get heavy bikes up to a roof mounted one!

Oh, and if you get an S/C, don't sell it, or you'll get sad and start rambling on when people remind you of it!

Right, so buy a 10 year old range rover so it's seen the best of it's days. Spend well into four figures to make it run on LPG so it's lost even more power and use more fuel which has lost most of it's subsidy so it doesn't even make economical sense. Plus there's the extra costs of servicing the LPG fuel system and planning out your journeys so you can fill it up as not many petrol stations have LPG. Clever.
Plus there's the joy of looking like a total cock sat up there in a vehicle bigger than some commercial vehicles doing your shopping.

Tony.

 

[raleighnut]

Also why bother with a Range Rover (tarts car) when these are available

 

[bozmandb9]

Right, so buy a 10 year old range rover so it's seen the best of it's days. Spend well into four figures to make it run on LPG so it's lost even more power and use more fuel which has lost most of it's subsidy so it doesn't even make economical sense. Plus there's the extra costs of servicing the LPG fuel system and planning out your journeys so you can fill it up as not many petrol stations have LPG. Clever.
Plus there's the joy of looking like a total cock sat up there in a vehicle bigger than some commercial vehicles doing your shopping.

Tony.

I think the only cock would be the person judging somebody based on their choice of car. Oh and assuming they know the figures better than somebody who's owned one. Oh and not knowing the real use its been put to, or perhaps failing to detect the irony in describing it as a shopping car.

Oh biggest cock of all? Taking a light hearted post, and posting stupid insults