What is the difference between a $5000 CF bike, and a $15,000 bike

[Gillstay]

But if a bike of fifty years ago could be made to weigh the same as the lightest carbon bikes are now the pro peloton would have been be screaming for them - and if they were too expensive for overall team budgets at the time the top contenders would certainly have been given them.

I also fail to see how a steel frame can be made that light and also safe and reliable. Perhaps that is why this was a one off. Steel frames made for competition had wall thicknesses that were already as thin as they dared make them.

Could just be fashion, or peer pressure.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Apparently the Watts saved by using a lighter inner tube would have made the difference between third place and first place in a TdF stage

A $10,000 inner tube 😱

 

[DRM]

$5,000 bike is a nice treat to yourself if you can afford it, $15,000 bike is the one your Pro Team issues you with

 

[Dogtrousers]

According to UCI Reg 1.3.006 Equipment shall be of a type that is sold for use by anyone practicing cycling as a sport.

That means the pro bikes - both track and road - have to be offered for sale. Whether anyone actually buys them apart from pro teams, and whether the pro teams actually pay the manufacturers for them are open questions.

 

[screenman]

According to UCI Reg 1.3.006 Equipment shall be of a type that is sold for use by anyone practicing cycling as a sport.

That means the pro bikes - both track and road - have to be offered for sale. Whether anyone actually buys them apart from pro teams, and whether the pro teams actually pay the manufacturers for them are open questions.

There is a certain Mr Sugar that might have one at each of his houses.

 

[Jameshow]

As a factory trained tech who builds these things I can say that the ”cheap” carbon bikes weight more and are a lot stiffer than their more expensive counterparts. The carbon is of a lower quality and is laid up in a less precise fashion. To make up for the quality difference in both material and assembly, more material is used to assure adequate strength is achieved. The cheaper carbon bikes are not as good as the better aluminum bikes. I know I have a high end “R” model to build when I pick the box up to take it to my shop and it pretty much feels empty. Handling the high end stuff I can feel the lighter build in that I can distort the top frame tube just by squeezing it with my hand. We’ve seen such bikes come back damaged because somebody has been careless securing the bike in a car rack or work stand and has crushed or snapped the frame.

While they are wonderful and fast machines I really wonder if they have a place in the real world, especially as they cannot be recycled when their possibly short lives are over. If the material were banned from competition the world would be a better place for it and since nobody had the advantage of that super light frame, it would be no great loss.

odd… Rene Herse made a complete steel roadbike that weighed in at 6800 grams 50 years ago, so do we really need carbon now?

I agree to HM being different to SM carbon, it's a bit like butted steel Vs non butted plain gauge.

But would I take my focus Izalco pro on lejog no, would I take my Cannondale six yea! (Basically an early super six)

An Alu CAAD (CAAD 7 excepted) is going to feel better than a SM planet x or boardman. Ditto spez allez elite etc.

 

[fritz katzenjammer]

So how come nobody else followed suit?

The other French makers of hand made racing gear, such as Singer, also made them, but these were enthusiast bikes for long non stop races like the Paris to Brest, there just wasn’t much interest outside of France. Let’s face it they’ve always done their own thing… often really well.

I saw an old 1950s ad for a Rene Herse steel framed touring bike, it weighed 25 pounds with alloy fenders, racks at both ends and full dynamo lighting… and not a lick of plastic in sight. We are still not doing much better fully equipped.

 

[Punkawallah]

A $10,000 inner tube 😱

$10 for the inner tube, $9990 for knowing what it does and how to fit it ;-)

 

[berty bassett]

Marginal gains? The nice boys at GCN once summed it up nicely. Apparently the Watts saved by using a lighter inner tube would have made the difference between third place and first place in a TdF stage, assuming the other riders did not have such. The cost of multiple marginal gains in your case would be about $10,000. Which means that unless the competitors ’keep up with the Joneses’, they have a built in disadvantage in races.
The question is, are you competing at a level that would require you to spend that much? If not, the difference between a 15,000 bike and a 5,000 bike would be vanity? Nothing wrong with that, particularly, especially if you have that sort of money as disposable.

Very very well put

 

[Gillstay]

The other French makers of hand made racing gear, such as Singer, also made them, but these were enthusiast bikes for long non stop races like the Paris to Brest, there just wasn’t much interest outside of France. Let’s face it they’ve always done their own thing… often really well.

I saw an old 1950s ad for a Rene Herse steel framed touring bike, it weighed 25 pounds with alloy fenders, racks at both ends and full dynamo lighting… and not a lick of plastic in sight. We are still not doing much better fully equipped.

Or it could be that it was just ignored, noting how few likes this very good post got !

 

[T4tomo]

Inquiring minds would like to know. That is a $15,000 CF bike

Are you in two minds?

The answer is 3.

 

[Time Waster]

Difference is about 5dB when changing gears!

Has anyone else noticed how more expensive looking bikes sound a lot louder when changing gears. I have a theory it's to announce that the rider has more money than you. It's a show off bike.

The more spent on a bike when there's no real advantage that you'd notice is purely about owning better and showing it. It's when the only thing stopping your belly hitting the saddle nose is the fact it's noseless then you're not going to benefit by the extra 10k, it's a show off. Like the guy on Fred Whitton day who had two high end carbon bikes to choose from on his porsche 911. Pure show off!

 

[I like Skol]

Has anyone else noticed how more expensive looking bikes sound a lot louder when changing gears. I have a theory it's to announce that the rider has more money than you. It's a show off bike.

Steady on now. I got shot down in flames when I made a similar suggestion a little while ago!

 

[DogmaStu]

Given I own a $15k road bike, a $10k road bike and a $7.5k road bike plus have previously owned a $5k road bike I guess I can answer your question.

Next to bugger all.

Now, I'm not saying that there are no differences, there are. However, you can get a very good CF race bike for $5k that can win races. Beyond $5k though, the advantages are increasingly marginal.

Take my $15k Pinarello Dogma F, complete with Dura Ace 9200 and Zipp 454 wheels. It's awesome.

But...the difference between it and the F9 with the exact same components is the choice of carbon sheets. The Dogma F uses the top-of-the-range American stuff whereas the F9 a tier down. Real-World difference? Less than 100g. Seriously. Price? $5k cheaper.

Take it down a notch to the F7 with Ultegra and we arrive at $5500. Is it going to be costing a lot more watts? $10k's worth? Nope. Hardly noticeable. You pay for the materials used as much as you do marginal watt saving gains. Are those materials going to be much less durable, less quality? Nope.

So do you 'need' that $15k bike even as a Pro? Well, it depends. At WorldTour level literally every second can count and the level of difference in watt savings are literally down to that at the speeds they can hold.

Why would someone who has to buy one themselves get one then? Simply because we can. It's the Halo model. It is really nice. It just isn't going to make us mere mortals noticeably faster or win us anything.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I can see the way this thread is going. People with more expensive bikes than mine = vain swankpots and general bad eggs.