On Wed, 26 May 2021 12:12:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 5/25/2021 1:38 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
The Airborne looks like it will be about a half lb less weight than the Trek Emonda in the same size. One might suppose that the Trek might be more Aero but like the Airborne, it has large diameter tubes that had no attempt at being aero in design. Also one would have to question whether small diameter round steel tubes are less aero than the much larger diameter of, say, the Pinarello frameset. I can't say that I ever noticed any difference between the late Basso Loto I had and the Trek Madone which was supposedly quite aero.

Of course I'm not a pro rider and I very seldom even approach the speeds that the pros commonly get in the peloton.

But isn't that the entire point of Aero? To give you that very small gain when you ride at those sorts of speeds all day long? You sure as hell aren't going to put out these sorts of power and my entire reason for posting this is to tell you that you sure as hell aren't going to gain enough to even consider spending large amounts of money on a fantasy bike to make it worth your while.

Another point - Components are now more expensive than good frames. But China is invading that space as well. You can get a Sensah 11 speed group complete for $200. They have been working their way up from not very reliable and seem to have now hit a high enough reliability standard that I will give them a test. The failure points seem to be the levers on the previous versions but that supposedly has been reengineered to be reliable. And if it weren't so you could always buy SRAM levers which have the same pull ratio and we know that those levers are reliable. And you would still save a pile of money. I'll see after I get rid of all of my extraneous bikes.

Regarding minor differences between road (i.e. racing) bikes, slight
differences in component performance, new manufacturers or even nations
producing frames and parts... Well, I just don't get it.

I can understand owning different bikes with greatly different purposes,
e.g. a bike for loaded touring, a bike for trails in the woods, a bike
for getting groceries, a folding bike for traveling.

But I don't understand owning several bikes for "fast" riding,
especially if a person is too old or two slow to compete in actual races.

"This one is 400 grams lighter, this one has 9% extra cogs in back (but
only one chainring in front), this one might be a little more aero, this
one's components are made in Uzbekistan..."

I guess I don't understand Bicycle Acquisition Disorder. That's why I
rarely read _Buycycling_ magazine. ("The bib shorts YOU need this
year!!!" "Best cell phone holder for your handlebars!")

I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.


Good Lord! What will the neighbors say? Only one bike? One just have
to feel sorry for them. After all, even people on the dole have at
least two bicycles.
--
Cheers,

John B.