A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Good quality bikes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 25th 21, 06:38 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,196
Default Good quality bikes

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.
Ads
  #2  
Old May 26th 21, 05:12 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Good quality bikes

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.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #3  
Old May 26th 21, 07:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,196
Default Good quality bikes

On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 9:12:30 AM UTC-7, 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.


We were talking about the road coming apart on the edges of it. Last night it occurred to me that you might mean in the countryside where they don't have curbs. If that is what you meant you should have been more clear since I am well aware that the road bed under country roads erodes at the edges breaking pieces of road off.

Quite clearly the disorders are yours since it is none of your business what people buy bicycles for. I guess it is your belief that anyone that doesn't have the same disorderly thought patterns as you do is simply not worth saving.
  #4  
Old May 26th 21, 10:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Lou Holtman[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 826
Default Good quality bikes

On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, 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.


- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,
- special bike for bad weather ,
- just a spare bike,
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike

snip snotty remarks

I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.


No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on. Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?

Lou

  #5  
Old May 26th 21, 11:45 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Good quality bikes

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.

  #6  
Old May 27th 21, 12:29 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Good quality bikes

On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, 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.


- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,


?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??

- special bike for bad weather ,


Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.

- just a spare bike,


You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)

- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike


Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks


That was a snotty remark, Lou.

I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.


No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.


Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.

Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?


I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #7  
Old May 27th 21, 12:43 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Good quality bikes

On 5/26/2021 7:29 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:


I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades.


* Forgot to add: A friend recently gave me another guitar, a
small-bodied one most appropriate for a child. Its neck has separated
from the body, which is a pretty complex repair. I had hoped to get into
it this winter, then pass it on to some young kids in the family; but
other projects plus inertia interfered.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #8  
Old May 27th 21, 12:58 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Good quality bikes

On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 4:29:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, 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.


- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,

?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??
- special bike for bad weather ,

Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.
- just a spare bike,

You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike

Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks


That was a snotty remark, Lou.
I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.


No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.

Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.
Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?

I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.


Not really. I don't think Lou has ruined his life or his marriage by hoarding high-end bikes. We're talking a half-dozen bikes that get ridden, apparently a lot -- and that are maintained in a hospital setting. You would be lucky to be one of Lou's bikes. What is the possible harm in that?

I don't understand a lot of Tom's purchases, but if he decides to spend his dividends on bicycles -- who cares. I don't want a bunch of racing bikes from the last century, but since when am I the arbiter of want or need.

-- Jay Beattie.
  #9  
Old May 27th 21, 07:26 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Good quality bikes

On Wed, 26 May 2021 19:29:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, 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.


- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,


?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??

- special bike for bad weather ,


Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.

- just a spare bike,


You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)

- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike


Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks


That was a snotty remark, Lou.

I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.


No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.


Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.

Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?


I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.


And, it might be mentioned that on can make fairly good music on a
guitar made from a shovel.
(and two spoons for the rhythm section :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9-ltPsbw9g
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #10  
Old May 27th 21, 12:25 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Lou Holtman[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 826
Default Good quality bikes

On Thursday, May 27, 2021 at 1:58:13 AM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 4:29:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2021 5:56 PM, Lou Holtman wrote:
On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 6:12:30 PM UTC+2, 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.

- not everyone gave up because he getting a little older or slower,

?? I haven't given up. What gave you that idea??
- special bike for bad weather ,

Good point. Add that to the list of extra bikes I can understand.
- just a spare bike,

You're duplicating. The spare bike can be one of the ones already
mentioned. (Last night I was very busy before the night ride to which a
friend had invited me. So instead of switching bikes, I did the ride on
the "spare" folding bike I already had in the car.)
- other set up for instance for time trial,
- climbing bike

Those are good examples of multiple bikes just for fast riding. Is your
"climbing bike" really so much slower in a time trial that it will
prevent you from winning, um, whatever you might otherwise win? (Maybe a
Powerbar? Or for first place, maybe a cycling cap?)

snip snotty remarks


That was a snotty remark, Lou.
I guess I'm just an inefficient consumer.

No you just narrow minded or cheap. I often wonder where you spend your pension on.

Honestly, I don't seem to spend it on enough stuff. Despite being
retired, my account totals keep increasing. They would even if the stock
market stopped rising.

I long ago realized that accumulating more possessions isn't going to
make me any happier. That applies to lots of things, and certainly to
bikes.
Maybe we can comment on that. You advised Mark to buy another guitar instead of a power meter. How is owning multiple guitars different from owning more than 1 bike for going fast?

I remember the conversation, but I don't remember the details.

I have only one guitar*, which I bought very carefully and played daily
for decades. I've now mostly moved on to other instruments, but if I
were to consider another guitar, it would probably be because I had
developed an interest in another type of music - e.g. an electric guitar
for hard rock, perhaps a dobro for some types of blues, maybe a
classical guitar if I decided to return to that style.

True story: I once had a friend who suddenly came into a _very_ large
amount of money. Among other toys, he began splurging on expensive
guitars, ones costing up to $10,000 apiece. He ended up with over 50 of
them when his wife divorced him.

Odd thing was, he was a terrible, terrible musician, literally unable to
consistently count to four while playing. The extra fancy (and
extra-fancy) guitars didn't help a bit.

I hope the analogy is clear.

Not really. I don't think Lou has ruined his life or his marriage by hoarding high-end bikes. We're talking a half-dozen bikes that get ridden, apparently a lot -- and that are maintained in a hospital setting. You would be lucky to be one of Lou's bikes. What is the possible harm in that?

I don't understand a lot of Tom's purchases, but if he decides to spend his dividends on bicycles -- who cares. I don't want a bunch of racing bikes from the last century, but since when am I the arbiter of want or need.

-- Jay Beattie.


For the record I have 4 bikes for going fast and one boring utility bike
- an aero bike assigned to ride most on the flats,
- a very light bike which I assigned to be used in the mountains/hills,
- a gravel bike as my bad weather bike and for gravel rides,
- a cross bike which I use in the winter to ride off road where other people use a ATB.

Before I bought the gravel bike I sold 4 bikes; 2 road bikes and 2 ATB. If I had to reduce my stable even more I could sell a my cross bike and my very light bike but I don't need the money and I have enough storage room and they are used for their assigned purpose. These bikes I already had when I bought my aero bike and gravel bike but for me the aero bike and gravel bike have added value. Most enthusiastic cyclists here have at least 3 bikes: an off road bike (ATB, gravel or cross bike), a road bike and a utility bike. Two extra isn't too bad and I realise that I am privileged. Personally I don't see the fun in riding a folding bike, loaded touring hauling all that stuff over Stelvio Pass or riding a tandem, but I don't have to do that.

Lou
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where do i buy good QUALITY juggling balls? Unisykolist Unicycling 19 April 13th 08 10:01 AM
Quality feedback on these bikes duh[_2_] Recumbent Biking 29 May 24th 07 01:13 AM
Cheap/good quality cranks. Pagey Mountain Biking 8 February 18th 05 09:16 PM
good quality 26" folding bike? Ric UK 13 November 19th 03 10:59 AM
What's a good quality carbon fork? NS> Techniques 17 August 19th 03 10:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.