Is it me or the bike?

[Fab Foodie]

Practice!
Find the technique that works for you. Relaxing the upper body is important if sitting, tension and gripping the bars for grim death is just a waste of energy, be effective and efficient.

 

[JasonHolder]

Get a nice trek for 2k. Will improve performance compared to a 1.2.

Riding more is the cheapest way. Try 20-50 miles a DAY!

 

[Joshua Plumtree]

Shock! Horror! I agree with Jason!

Of course go out and practice hill climbing as much as possible, but I think everyone's under-estimating just how much difference a brand new stiff,light weight plastic bike with good acceleration can make to your hill climbing ability.

Spend all winter dragging a big lump of a Carrera TdF uphill so that, come spring, when my Madone 4.9 is brought out of retirement, it feels like I'm being blown uphill by a phalanx of cupids!

Don't listen to them! The only people who want you to believe it's only about the engine are the ones riding around on £6000 Cannondales who don't want you to catch up!

 

[jowwy]

I cannot believe i have just read a thread about a bike and no-one and i mean no-one said n+1

What a crazy thread

 

[sreten]

Hi,

Buying a new bike every two months is going to be a serious
drain on your wallet, nevermind two months on a bike is nothing.

Club rides on known routes, the riders will know how to pace
themselves, (I do on my solo routes), and will save something
for the hills. A flash bike won't make you any faster really.

A Pro on a Trek 1.5 would slaughter club riders on anything.

After 12 months riding you'd probably on a Trek 1.5
slaughter you riding anything flash right now too.

If your really fit, you don't want a great bike for club rides.

I'd guess most serious cyclists would do club rides on the trainer.

rgds, sreten.

 

[Joshua Plumtree]

Of course a pro would slaughter most of us on a Trek 1.5. That's not the point.

A better bike would improve your performance instantaneously; 12 months of training down the line you'd be even better. In both scenarios the better bike would give you a better outcome!

 

[Matthames]

Of course a pro would slaughter most of us on a Trek 1.5. That's not the point.

A better bike would improve your performance instantaneously; 12 months of training down the line you'd be even better. In both scenarios the better bike would give you a better outcome!

I am in the camp that a better bike would improve performance; however I see it more in a psychological sense. In archery, it is known that some people have shot personal bests just by doing nothing more than just buying themselves a new quiver.

To get better performance up hills, it is a case of power to weight ratio, judging by the weight, that doesn't seem to be the issue. The next thing to do is increase the power and the length of time you can sustain maximum power output. Probably instead of buying a new bike, a power meter if you haven't got one would be a better purchase. Also something I find useful as a training aid is dragging 30kg of stuff in a trailer gives you a good work out.

 

[cyberknight]

As others said its mostly you, a better bike would help but not as much as you would like.
Kept up with the fast club run average 20 mph + over 70 miles on my boardman alloy road comp worth less than £1k when it was new and they had a lot of kit untill my legs died a few miles from home.

 

[sreten]

Of course a pro would slaughter most of us on a Trek 1.5. That's not the point.

A better bike would improve your performance instantaneously;
12 months of training down the line you'd be even better.
In both scenarios the better bike would give you a better outcome!

Hi,

My point is he has had a decent bike for only two months, by the time it
is n+1 time and the Trek 1.5 is relegated to a (winter) training bike he
simply won't need the better bike for club runs, which are not a race.

How much weight could a new bike save over the 9.25Kg Trek 1.5 ?

For sure a new bike might have a more aggressive attitude, the
H2 1.5 is a bit more relaxed than the H1 competition attitude,
But I don't think that H1 will be better after only two months,
or offer in any real way instantaneously more performance.

YMMV but buying another bike after just two months for
dubious perceived failings of an £800 bike is not sensible.

Took me months to settle into my cheap bikes final setup,
and the OP might be a little embarrassed turning up for
a club run on a full on tri-bike in the longer term.

Whatever, riding a less than perfect bike reduces the
performance, not your performance in any real terms,
until you can utilise a more aggressive bike effectively.

rgds, sreten.

 

[Road_Runner]

I agree that better equipment with allow you to appear like your performing better but it's only a superficial leap in ability. If the club rides cruise at 18mph, what will you do with your new superficial ability to keep with the pack? Cruise and not train as hard, resulting in you not getting fitter/better as quickly? Surely that would defeat the point.

There is nothing wrong with being a noob or not very good at something with your fresh to an activity. It doesn't matter what activity you partake in, noobs are expected to be rubbish and old dogs in the acitivity are expected to be as good as semi-pros.

 

[sreten]

Hi,

FWIW though its been said in a roundabout way in the other posts I guess
I should try and state the obvious (to some) regarding the fastest average
speed over a course (for a tri) or a loop (typical training).

You don't expend constant effort, if you do, you will be barely faster downhill,
(or with a good tailwind), but a lot slower uphill (or into a head wind), and you
need to work on that it the solo training rides, attack the the slowest parts,
and go a little slower elsewhere to recover is the way to achieve the fastest.

You will never be fast if you don't have something in the tank for hills,
conversely, if so, you are also generally going a little too fast for
your ability, easy to do in a group that may be a little better.

However that you managed it after two months is commendable.

Hills on a loop look very different after 12 months than 2 months,
I can vouch for that, but you may get there a lot quicker than me.

Going faster is much more about not going slow than anything else.*

rgds, sreten.

* Except kamikaze descending techniques - for the specialists,
and not part of a typical tri - far too technical a challenge.

 

[CopperCyclist]

An average of 19mph that you quote is a good speed. I may well be doing you a disservice here but it could also suggest the routes you tend to go on yourself are on the flat side of things. I'd suggest simply finding the routes near you with the longest, hardest hills and doing them instead!

 

[JasonHolder]

@sreten you're wrong.

If* you expend constant effort for a ride. Your speed will not be the same going downhill. Unless you're on the brakes to keep the speed constant so you are confusing speed with effort.

If you have the energy one day, and the capacity, ride a solid 2 hour tempo effort with no dips and your average will amaze you!