How does ageing affects your purchasing prospects?

[Slick]

It's important to the extent that it reduces tyre scrub or brake rub.

He reckoned flex on the wheel and frame reduced the effectiveness of effort.

 

[Slick]

according to the blurb pro teams fork out aero is everything these days

Very true, my discussion was more the importance of weight compared to rigidity.

 

[youngoldbloke]

Why do I find my 8.5Kg carbon bike easier to ride than my 12kg alloy one?
When I bought the carbon bike I couldn't really justify it in terms of need or performance enhancement - though I need all the help I can get. What convinced me was my wife's comment "Go on, get it, it might well be last bike you'll buy..."

 

[Stompier]

There comes a point when you start to expose yourself to ridicule. I've seen overweight septuagenarians turning up for an evening "10" on £6000 TT bikes, which might enable them to go round in 28 minutes 30 instead of 29 minutes. To be brutally honest, no-one over about 35 has a hope in hell of winning a major stage race, so those MAMILs - or, as the Americans would have it, "dentists on Pinarellos" - are fooling themselves if they think they need such a machine. It doesn't do any real harm, though.

I'll go further than that - it doesn't do any harm at all. Seeing an overweight septegen..whatever suggests that the old fella is still keen on the sport and is happy to invest, so good on him for that. Most Porsche 911s I ever see are driven by bald blokes with beards in their 60s, but I doubt if they are aiming to become F1 drivers.

 

[ColinJ]

To me even a relatively expensive bike is good value. The frame on my bike is guaranteed for 10 years so if I divide cost by 10 it's very little cost per year. Hopefully it will last more than 10 years.

My CAAD5 from the early 2000s is still going strong. I have upgraded a few parts but the frame/fork are original.

 

[roadrash]

as the Americans would have it, "dentists on Pinarellos" - are fooling themselves if they think they need such a machine. It doesn't do any real harm, though
[/QUOTE
perhaps it is something they WANT rather than need, nowt wrong with that if they can afford it

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

To me even a relatively expensive bike is good value. The frame on my bike is guaranteed for 10 years so if I divide cost by 10 it's very little cost per year. Hopefully it will last more than 10 years.

I haven't got anything less than 10 years old, in fact the average age of my bikes is about 25 years. My oldest bike is the lowest quality one, which would have been the cheapest of the bunch new. In other words, there is not much relation between price and longevity where frames are concerned, and all mechanicals are wearing parts.

 

[lane]

Yes true all mechanicals are wearing parts. I have found on some less expensive bikes I have purchased that I have had issues with some parts failing. And I am not saying that my frame will last longer because it costs more I am saying that even if it lasts ten years the cost per year is peanuts really in the scheme of things. I can also tell the difference on parts such as wheels and hubs compared to cheaper bikes. I am happy that I am achieving value for money over the longer term which I suppose is how I justify the cost to myself.

 

[Dogtrousers]

If you want it, and you can afford it - buy it. Performance or otherwise be hanged.

 

[rogerzilla]

He reckoned flex on the wheel and frame reduced the effectiveness of effort.

Frame materials are usually pretty good springs, for the small strains they see when riding. If you lock the brakes and stand hard on one pedal, you can see the frame twist. However, virtually all of the stored energy is returned to the crank when you stop pushing. What you don't get back is tyre scrub, which is significant in a frame with a very flexible back end, and quite audible when riding out of the saddle. A very stiff frame reduces this somewhat.

The old corollary to "frames must be stiff" is Sean Kelly winning sprints on his Vitus, which was about as noodly as you could get; aluminium tubes in a similar gauge to steel ones.

 

[youngoldbloke]

Nope - well not the weight of the bike and its bits; and not your body weight either.

You've still not answered why not? How come I find my 8.5Kg carbon bike easier to ride than my 12kg alloy one? I think it becomes more and more important the older one becomes, and I would certainly pay more to get a lighter bike, all other things (groupset, wheels, tyres etc) being equal.

 

[Stompier]

You've still not answered why not? How come I find my 8.5Kg carbon bike easier to ride than my 12kg alloy one? I think it becomes more and more important the older one becomes, and I would certainly pay more to get a lighter bike, all other things (groupset, wheels, tyres etc) being equal.

How are you measuring 'easier to ride'? 3.5kg may well be detectable - especially uphill - but I'd be interested to know how 'easier' is being defined.

 

[youngoldbloke]

How are you measuring 'easier to ride'? 3.5kg may well be detectable - especially uphill - but I'd be interested to know how 'easier' is being defined.

Yes, uphill it's very detectable! Easier = less energy expended. Basically the heavier bike requires more effort to ride at the same speed, and up hills - and no, I don't have figures to prove it but it is very obvious to my leg muscles.

 

[Stompier]

Basically the heavier bike requires more effort to ride at the same speed

I think there's more to it than that. Once up to speed, on the flat, the heavier bike should require no more effort to maintain speed than any other, lighter or otherwise. Uphill, you will be carrying 3.5kg more, which might have a marginal impact on your climbing speed for the same effort. You'll probably get it back on the downhills though.

 

[Blue Hills]

I think there's more to it than that. Once up to speed, on the flat, the heavier bike should require no more effort to maintain speed than any other, lighter or otherwise. Uphill, you will be carrying 3.5kg more, which might have a marginal impact on your climbing speed for the same effort. You'll probably get it back on the downhills though.

yep, I'm no physicist but can't see it making much difference if not going uphill or carrying it.