Jinkster

Gosh!...why is it that in all these polls there's never a voting option that fits me!...makes me feel like a weirdo!

That said?...I guess I have to type in my absentee ballot of...."BOTH OR BUST"

I haven't seen a bike geometry yet that can't be made to look popp'in with the proper paint and hardware....and money only spends once....so if it doesn't look as good as it preforms or it doesn't preform as good as it looks?....my cash and I are moving along because there's way too many bikes being made in this world than to waste my hard earned on anything that doesn't look as good as it rides and ride as good as it looks...so if it offends my eyes OR falls short in my functional requirements department?...I have a word for that...

"NEXXXTTTT!"

JohnDThompson 

Bikes with oversize tubes, deep profile rims and billboard graphics everywhere don't appeal to me at all.

OldTryGuy

Guess I'm delusional.

chasm54

Which just goes to show how tastes differ. Nice enough bike, but those wheels? No thanks. They'd be OK without the lettering.

OldsCOOL

Reynolds 531, investment cast lugs.....

trekmogul 

Just for the color..

FamilyMan007

Not sure I have bought enough bikes to know exactly what influences me, but I voted 'somewhat'.

I found that across the various manufacturers there was sufficient selection of bikes that certain stylistic features (eg matte black paint jobs) only needed to be a small factor in my subconscious considerations to put them lower in the ranking.

In fact the particular bike I bought was on deep discount, and I fell in love with riding it - partly due to the tactile pleasure of operating the primarily-105 groupset. Now as to whether this was really noticeable by me (an inexperienced rider) or whether I was guilty of being influenced by internet-research that 105 was 'better' than lower-cost alternatives is a different discussion.

Gerryattrick

Style would not be enough alone to make me choose a bike, but the style of something like the fugly carbon bikes often seen on this site would certainly stop me choosing one. Now if I was a racer and it would improve my speed that would be a different matter.

This is just my opinion, and I'm not renowned for my good taste, and I agree with the member who wrote recently about opinions being like a***holes.

rydabent

As an engineer, function is everything. That said, I probably wouldnt buy a pink bike. Flashy graphics do not make a bike go faster, or ride better.

Pamestique 

Unfortunately looks are inportant to me which is why I nowadays always build a bike from the ground up. The ultimate was the Landshark which has custom paint and I searched high and low to get the right "retro" look components. I wanted a new bike that looked "old skool".

With the mountain bikes, 2 frames I bought because of the color choice (although I would have brought the frames anyway - I just had the ability to choose the color as well. both of these bikes have custom CK wheels -colored hubs - colored headsets, seat post collars, even tube stem covers). With the latest bike, my option was white so I built it up with purple Chris King and other blingy stuff to get the bike where I wanted it. While function is very important to me and definitely influences my choices, style and color are equally as important...

Maybe that's a "girly" thing...

bruised

This is all good stuff.

I wasn't sure how it was going to play out.

I had a suspicion that given the 'intimate' nature of cycling, there would be less emphasis on aesthetic and more on the practical. (less than has been indicated by the poll and comments).

But it seems we pick our rides to reflect our tastes, our personalities and maybe even how we 'wish' we looked and performed in the saddle.

I've seen a lot of bikes, including some posted in this thread, that look very nice but I couldn't own. For example, the bikes with aero wheels and large lettering....I think these bikes look nice but I couldn't see myself owning one. The bike's image would create a standard in the mind of the observer that my riding could never live up to. We would look out of place together, like me dating a super-model.

In a similar way I see some more utilitarian bikes which would probably be a better reflection of who I am, but I also wouldn't own one. Perhaps I'm a frustrated playboy trying to give out a more upscale image....hmmm...I'll have to think more about this one.

Anyway, it's really interesting to see all the different reactions to this thread. It's no biggy - but enlightening nevertheless.

Cheers for being good sports and chiming in! (and for keeping it all very civil)

Keep 'em coming.

fietsbob

Steel .. lugs look nice (RB1), but Tig welding is OK too.. or Fillet brazing (Brompton) ..

Barrettscv 

As you ride more and try different bikes, it becomes easier to understand what makes a bike function and what doesn't. For most recreational cyclist it simply a matter of finding the right fit, tires and gearing. Beyond those key factors, is does become a matter of taste and style. The details only become important with extreme uses or expectations.

Fit involves the geometry of the frame, the shape and firmness of the saddle, and the ergonomics of the handlebar and controls. If these items are right for you, the bike can be made to fit with a few adjustments. Pedals need to fit your expectations and shoes need to be comfortable and supportive.

Tires are an underappreciated component. The right tire, in the right size, can improve both safety and performance.

Gearing also needs to work as dictated by the cadence and power of the rider and the contours of the terrain.

These basics are overlooked by many cyclist. However, get these elements right and the rest is a matter of budget, special needs and taste. My 1986ish Serotta is 98% as fast and comfortable as my 2012 carbon bike. These bikes couldn't look more diverse, but they both follow a similar formula with similar results.

Remember that it's the motor, and not the bike, that determines performance.

Bandera

Requirements planning and available technology often yield similar designs with minor aesthetic efforts to set the mfg apart in every era.

The steel frames adorned w/ Campagnolo components that were ubiquitous "back when" were 6 of 1 and a half dozen of the other in actual performance despite the loud protestations of loyal adherents of the British or Italian frame camps. That being said one chose and cherished the 531 or SL machine for qualities beyond seatstay attachment methods or BB threading. Bicycles are intensely personal machines, we literally put a lot into making them go and a well chosen bike should "speak" to the owner.

Here's a pic of my Vitus which worked better for me than the steel frames of the 70's. I still enjoy just looking at it many years on:



The CF Merckx has replaced it for long challenging rides, still getting used to how it looks but it does go very well indeed.



-Bandera

jon c. 

I feel the same way. I ride vintage, but if I had to buy a new bike style would matter a good bit. I think many of them are ugly.

JanMM

Best thing about our tandem is that the paint sparkles in sunlight. And all the cool kids ride bikes with mismatched wheels.

Barrettscv 

Both the Merckx and the Vetus are really great bikes.

SparkyBeacon 

Syling influence me? No way I am influenced by what others perceive as cool or fashionable. I am totally into function over form.

Well, I might I have said that last week. I just bought this bike on Ebay. I totally don't need it, but I think it is so cool for a folding bike that it should be a collector's item. N + 1

bicyclridr4life

I like lugged steel frames and the 80's "garish" paint jobs, so I look for bikes with those features. My favorite bike to ride right now is a 1989 KHS Montana Summit in the (then) KHS Team Racing colors of Raspberry and Blue. (Yes, "Raspberry" is also known as "Hot Pink") The KHS has a lugged steel frame, too.

MikeD1

This must be the over 50 forum, not one comment about how pretty that young lady is! Oh, and yep that BMC is a good looking machine.

RideMyWheel

My next bike will be white even if I have to dismantle and paint the damn thing myself. I have no idea why it must be this way, but it must.

NOS88

I'd never buy a bike that I thought was ugly. However, an interesting thing seems to happen. If bikes are a great ride, perform in the way I want them to, and do so without beating me up, they always seem to start looking better. At the same time, if eye candy doesn't perform up to my expectations, it always starts to look less attractive. But, if it's blue.... then I can't be anywhere near objective about these things.

David Bierbaum

It is aesthetic though, at least in my eyes. That is definitely classic beauty right there!

Barrettscv 

In an Military Hummer is both aesthetic & beautiful kind of way!

Wildwood 

Style is very important to me - it has to have round tubes, no flashy graphics on the wheels and Campy components. That rules out about 99+% of all bicycles being assembled today. Call me picky. BTW, my definition of stylish may not be mainstream.