Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Advantages of upgrading from 1980's bike?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Advantages of upgrading from 1980's bike?

Old 03-10-21, 01:33 PM
  #1  
bnot
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Advantages of upgrading from 1980's bike?

I have a Schwinn Traveler made in 1986. It has a butted 4130 chromoly frame. Over the years, I've updated it with a new seat, control cables, some handlebars from Velo Orange, and Schwalbe Marathon tires (27 1/4). Otherwise it's stock. It has Weimann alloy rims made in Belgium, Sun Tour derailleur, Sakae crankset, and Dia Compe brakes. 12-speed (2x6 with shifters on the down-tube). Total weight with the seat, bottle cage and everything is 29 pounds. What am I missing? If I get a new bike, will it be a lot better? If so, what would make it better?
bnot is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 01:37 PM
  #2  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 7,182 Times in 2,905 Posts
You could cut the weight in half and double the number of gears, for a start.
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 03-10-21, 01:41 PM
  #3  
SurferRosa
señor miembro
 
SurferRosa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 8,237

Bikes: '70s - '80s Campagnolo

Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3846 Post(s)
Liked 6,437 Times in 3,183 Posts
You don't have to leave the '80s to shave 7-9 pounds off the total weight.
SurferRosa is offline  
Likes For SurferRosa:
Old 03-10-21, 01:44 PM
  #4  
alcjphil
Senior Member
 
alcjphil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 5,869
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1792 Post(s)
Liked 1,671 Times in 955 Posts
Do you have any idea what sort of price range you are looking at? While it is true that you can double the number of gears and come close to cutting weight in half, you can't do it at a cost that most people can afford. However, 20 gears and 20 pounds can be done at a much more reasonable price
alcjphil is offline  
Likes For alcjphil:
Old 03-10-21, 01:54 PM
  #5  
sloppy12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 478
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked 252 Times in 147 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
You could cut the weight in half and double the number of gears, for a start.
What bike would cut the weight in half that would be comparable? its not like this is a high end ultra light road bike.
sloppy12 is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 01:58 PM
  #6  
bnot
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
What is the advantage of shedding ~9 pounds? How would that be accomplished anyway? Carbon frame and wheels or maybe just carbon spokes? The chromoly frame has some desirable qualities though. It's tough and plush. I can see some advantage getting away from the steel spokes in the reduced rotational inertia, but would that really be noticeable in the seat of my pants or just in measured seconds over several kilometers?

How many gears is enough? I do live right up against 10,000 ft mountains and the bike is not geared for the passes. But I could put a different chainwheel on it and then it would be. How does 24 gears really benefit my riding?

Price is not really an object as much as benefit. How much would I have to spend to make a big difference? I figure if I spend less than some $ amount, it's just a parallel move. If I spend more $$ I may start to see some benefit. If I spend $$$$, there are probably diminishing returns especially if I don't assign value to a slim competitive edge that I'm not able to attain due to my limitations as a rider.
bnot is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 01:59 PM
  #7  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3906 Post(s)
Liked 7,182 Times in 2,905 Posts
Originally Posted by sloppy12
What bike would cut the weight in half that would be comparable? its not like this is a high end ultra light road bike.
The OP didn't ask what a new, comparable bike would be, he asked what would make a new bike better.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 02:00 PM
  #8  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,538

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10902 Post(s)
Liked 7,393 Times in 4,148 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
If I get a new bike, will it be a lot better? If so, what would make it better?
Depends on what bike you are considering.
A new $150 big box bike probably wont be a lot better.
A new $2500 road bike will probably be a lot better.

And as with everything, 'better' is subjective. What matters to some doesnt matter to others.
A new midlevel road bike($1500-3000) will mean a bike that is lighter, shifts more easily, and has a wider range of gears. It may or may not stop better, but that is heavily dependent on how well your current bike's brakes are set up.

Put another way, if you were to take your frame and put a modern drivetrain, brakes and wheels on it- that would set you back $900ish and get you about 96.83% of the way to a new midlevel bike in terms of performance for a recreational cyclist.
mstateglfr is offline  
Likes For mstateglfr:
Old 03-10-21, 02:05 PM
  #9  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,505

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20791 Post(s)
Liked 9,436 Times in 4,663 Posts
Based on the tone of your posts, I don't think that anyone is going to convince you other than yourself. If you're being earnest about your curiosity, rather than only listening to that which confirms an existing stance, go to a decent shop and take something out for a spin.
WhyFi is offline  
Likes For WhyFi:
Old 03-10-21, 02:12 PM
  #10  
Iride01 
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,811

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6100 Post(s)
Liked 4,732 Times in 3,262 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
What is the advantage of shedding ~9 pounds? How would that be accomplished anyway? Carbon frame and wheels or maybe just carbon spokes? The chromoly frame has some desirable qualities though. It's tough and plush. I can see some advantage getting away from the steel spokes in the reduced rotational inertia, but would that really be noticeable in the seat of my pants or just in measured seconds over several kilometers?

How many gears is enough? I do live right up against 10,000 ft mountains and the bike is not geared for the passes. But I could put a different chainwheel on it and then it would be. How does 24 gears really benefit my riding?

Price is not really an object as much as benefit. How much would I have to spend to make a big difference? I figure if I spend less than some $ amount, it's just a parallel move. If I spend more $$ I may start to see some benefit. If I spend $$$$, there are probably diminishing returns especially if I don't assign value to a slim competitive edge that I'm not able to attain due to my limitations as a rider.
Get yourself a set of 25 pound weights and a set of 15 pound weights. Do curls with each until you can go no further. Which were you able to curl longer?

Whether you know it or not that is a similar thing to what you experience when constantly riding in rolling terrain or when climbing the side of a mountain.

If you are on level ground or going down hill all the time, weight is not such a big deal. Though if you have a 30 pound bike, I'll probably beat you in a short sprint. And I'm not that great a cyclist. Just a legend in my own mind sadly.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 02:24 PM
  #11  
70sSanO
Senior Member
 
70sSanO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,772

Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1935 Post(s)
Liked 2,150 Times in 1,313 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
What is the advantage of shedding ~9 pounds? How would that be accomplished anyway? Carbon frame and wheels or maybe just carbon spokes? The chromoly frame has some desirable qualities though. It's tough and plush. I can see some advantage getting away from the steel spokes in the reduced rotational inertia, but would that really be noticeable in the seat of my pants or just in measured seconds over several kilometers?

How many gears is enough? I do live right up against 10,000 ft mountains and the bike is not geared for the passes. But I could put a different chainwheel on it and then it would be. How does 24 gears really benefit my riding?

Price is not really an object as much as benefit. How much would I have to spend to make a big difference? I figure if I spend less than some $ amount, it's just a parallel move. If I spend more $$ I may start to see some benefit. If I spend $$$$, there are probably diminishing returns especially if I don't assign value to a slim competitive edge that I'm not able to attain due to my limitations as a rider.
Everything you say has "some" merit. Your Schwinn Traveler is on the lower end, kind of like my wife's 1986 Univega Viva Sport. You can upgrade it, but it will probably not worth it unless you really love the bike. The reason to make a change is because you want a better riding or handling bike or want to run a triple with more gears, and you really don't like the friction DT shifters and 52/42 (assuming) chainrings. But your bike is simple to work on and ride with no concerns about indexing, etc. It probably doesn't stop too good either.

There is not one particular thing that makes a new, or newer bike better, but it is a whole bunch of things. I'm riding a 1988 Cannondale with an "upgraded" drivetrain that runs mtb derailleurs and an Ultegra triple as a 3x8. It weighs in at 21.5 lbs. I have 2 steel mtb's that weigh 27lbs with front suspension. While I admire you, I would not ride a 29lb road bike unless I loved it more than life itself.

If I had $$$$ in my thread, I would look for a grail bike, maybe not new, but newer and lighter. I've always wanted a titanium frame, I'm fine with 8/9/10 speeds, I like having a triple so I can ride each ring a bit like a 1x with gearing overlap. If I was willing to spend $$$$ I wouldn't think of going into an LBS, I'd get a custom setup how I wanted it. Then I would put flat bars on the Traveler and use it as a town bike and never look back.

John
70sSanO is online now  
Old 03-10-21, 02:35 PM
  #12  
bnot
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
Get yourself a set of 25 pound weights and a set of 15 pound weights. Do curls with each until you can go no further. Which were you able to curl longer?

Whether you know it or not that is a similar thing to what you experience when constantly riding in rolling terrain or when climbing the side of a mountain.

If you are on level ground or going down hill all the time, weight is not such a big deal. Though if you have a 30 pound bike, I'll probably beat you in a short sprint. And I'm not that great a cyclist. Just a legend in my own mind sadly.
I'm not sure I buy your analogy. If I put on a 9 pound pack versus not having a 9 pound pack for a ride, I don't feel incredibly burdened or liberated. When the weight is on the bike instead of my body, it seems to matter even less. Also, supposing that I could lose some bike weight, where would it come off? Is the steel frame the big penalty? Bike tourers seem content with them even in this day and age.

Contrary to some other accusations, I am not arguing for the sake of justifying my convictions. I am genuinely curious. If I defend status quo it is because I want to be persuaded convincingly. I don't simply lust after novelty or want to buy a new thing without even understanding what is critical to obtaining a benefit from progress. So far, what I'm understanding is that I need to avoid steel frames and get lots of gears to experience progress. I'm not sure I have it right yet.
bnot is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 02:45 PM
  #13  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,505

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 353 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20791 Post(s)
Liked 9,436 Times in 4,663 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
If I defend status quo it is because I want to be persuaded convincingly.
That's not what you're doing.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 02:53 PM
  #14  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,801

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4839 Post(s)
Liked 7,830 Times in 3,710 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
When the weight is on the bike instead of my body, it seems to matter even less.
This has not ben my experience at all.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is online now  
Old 03-10-21, 02:56 PM
  #15  
Iride01 
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,811

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6100 Post(s)
Liked 4,732 Times in 3,262 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
I'm not sure I buy your analogy. If I put on a 9 pound pack versus not having a 9 pound pack for a ride, I don't feel incredibly burdened or liberated. When the weight is on the bike instead of my body, it seems to matter even less. Also, supposing that I could lose some bike weight, where would it come off? Is the steel frame the big penalty? Bike tourers seem content with them even in this day and age.

Contrary to some other accusations, I am not arguing for the sake of justifying my convictions. I am genuinely curious. If I defend status quo it is because I want to be persuaded convincingly. I don't simply lust after novelty or want to buy a new thing without even understanding what is critical to obtaining a benefit from progress. So far, what I'm understanding is that I need to avoid steel frames and get lots of gears to experience progress. I'm not sure I have it right yet.
Do you not understand that it takes more energy to move 200 pounds as opposed to 170 pounds of weight a certain distance? Particularly up inclines.

Depending on a lot of things, one of them just being your own personal preferences there may or may not be any reason to look for a lighter bike.

If you like to ride long distances over varied terrain, or do a lot of climbing, or have to accelerate quite rapidly, then you'll tend to want less weight. Whether that's bike weight, your body weight or stuff that you carry with you, you'll find with experience that weight does matter. Whether it's important enough for you to care to do anything about it is a personal thing.

Getting back to one of your original questions. Upgrade old bike or get new. I'd get new.

I've upgraded old vintage bikes with very new components. In my case I enjoyed the experience of upgrading them and the bikes were much more enjoyable to ride. None of the bikes I upgraded were materially lighter than as originally equipped. I might have bought high dollar wheels and gone with DuraAce instead of Shimano 105 and maybe had a bike that was 2 pounds less. But I would have spent much more than the new bike I have now that is much lighter than I ever possibly could have made those old bikes.

So it's up to you... no one is really going to think you wrong for any way you go. Just as long as you don't say that everyone else is wrong if they don't do the same or make statements defending your decision that sound asinine to us.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 03:13 PM
  #16  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,801

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4839 Post(s)
Liked 7,830 Times in 3,710 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
Contrary to some other accusations, I am not arguing for the sake of justifying my convictions. I am genuinely curious. If I defend status quo it is because I want to be persuaded convincingly. I don't simply lust after novelty or want to buy a new thing without even understanding what is critical to obtaining a benefit from progress. So far, what I'm understanding is that I need to avoid steel frames and get lots of gears to experience progress. I'm not sure I have it right yet.
This is really one of those things where you should try it for yourself before you reach a conclusion, rather than demand that the BF community try to convince you with words. That said, I feel up to playing your game...

A few advantages of a modern bike, especially considering that you live near the mountains:
- Lighter weight - Gravity is a significant factor in cycling, especially going up hill.
- Stiffer frame - More efficient transfer of power to forward movement.
- Wider range and more gears - Not only lower gears for rides in the mountains, but also more options in between high and low for riding at an efficient cadence in all conditions.
- Better shifting - Having quick access to shifting integrated with your brake levers means shifting is not only quicker, but you're more likely to spend more time in the most efficient gear for the terrain.
- Better braking - Even rim brakes for current mid-level components are better performing than high-level brakes of 35 years ago. Disc brakes are at a whole different level. On a steep and long mountain descent, you might really appreciate the improvement.

Do you NEED a new bike to get down the road? No. A big part of this is the kind of experience you want for yourself. If improved efficiency of your self-propelled machine is not at all a consideration, then much of what I listed probably doesn't matter to you. What matters most is whether your machine suits your needs. A Porsche Carrera is an excellent car by most standards, but it's a terrible choice for hauling lumber and concrete,
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is online now  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 03-10-21, 03:23 PM
  #17  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1971 Post(s)
Liked 1,297 Times in 629 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
Get yourself a set of 25 pound weights and a set of 15 pound weights. Do curls with each until you can go no further. Which were you able to curl longer?

Whether you know it or not that is a similar thing to what you experience when constantly riding in rolling terrain or when climbing the side of a mountain.
No it isn't.

When you're doing curls, the weight you're using is pretty much the entire load. Doing a curl with a 25-pound weight requires applying 67% more force than doing a curl with a 15-pound weight.

When you're cycling up a hill, you're carrying yourself in addition to the bicycle. If you're a 170lb rider, then a 25-pound bicycle versus a 15-pound bicycle is really 195lbs versus 185lbs, which is more like a 5% difference. (And that's if we're only looking at gravity. Rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag don't disappear on hills.)
Does it matter? Sure. Does it have a measurable effect? Sure. But if we're comparing it to curls, it's more like using a 19-pound weight versus a 20-pound weight.

Originally Posted by bnot
I have a Schwinn Traveler made in 1986. It has a butted 4130 chromoly frame. Over the years, I've updated it with a new seat, control cables, some handlebars from Velo Orange, and Schwalbe Marathon tires (27 1/4). Otherwise it's stock. It has Weimann alloy rims made in Belgium, Sun Tour derailleur, Sakae crankset, and Dia Compe brakes. 12-speed (2x6 with shifters on the down-tube). Total weight with the seat, bottle cage and everything is 29 pounds. What am I missing? If I get a new bike, will it be a lot better? If so, what would make it better?
This is a little bit complex to answer, because if you're looking for extra performance, most of the low-hanging fruit wouldn't really require modernization. The biggest thing slowing you down is probably those Marathons; they're tough, but they have very high rolling resistance. If you're living next to mountains, you could probably make a big quality-of-life improvement by switching to a triple crankset with a small inner ring, regardless of drivetrain modernization.

But a modern bike would immediately address a lot of things. You could save 8+ pounds with a price point <$2000. Modern road bikes generally come with lower gears than what your Traveler has. Modern bikes use 700c wheels which offer better tire selection. Modern road bikes come stock with brakes that are more powerful and stiff than the Dia-Compe single-pivots on the Traveler, and the brake hoods on modern bikes are easier to actuate the brakes from. Modern road bikes generally come with the shifters integrated into the brake levers, which most people find makes shifting more convenient, and which makes it easy to shift while riding out of the saddle.
HTupolev is offline  
Likes For HTupolev:
Old 03-10-21, 03:23 PM
  #18  
70sSanO
Senior Member
 
70sSanO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,772

Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1935 Post(s)
Liked 2,150 Times in 1,313 Posts
Any decent bike can get you from point A to point B. I don't ride as fast and as far as I used to, but boy do I like the thrill of diving into corners, or hitting a downhill, or making a climb and feeling great. Even peddling along with a nice tailwind, down in the drops, and just sucking up the pavement before me feels great. The benefit of a better bike is all about the ride. If you finish a ride and never look back and cherish those moments, or worse yet never want to cherish those moments on a ride, then there is no benefit to getting a better bike.

One of these days I will buy a new bike and I'll be like everyone else who says, why didn't I do this years ago. Of course at my age, and by the time I actually do it, it will hopefully be a 20lb e-assist road bike.

John
70sSanO is online now  
Likes For 70sSanO:
Old 03-10-21, 03:33 PM
  #19  
Iride01 
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,811

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6100 Post(s)
Liked 4,732 Times in 3,262 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev
No it isn't.

When you're doing curls, the weight you're using is pretty much the entire load. Doing a curl with a 25-pound weight requires applying 67% more force than doing a curl with a 15-pound weight.

When you're cycling up a hill, you're carrying yourself in addition to the bicycle. If you're a 170lb rider, then a 25-pound bicycle versus a 15-pound bicycle is really 195lbs versus 185lbs, which is more like a 5% difference. (And that's if we're only looking at gravity. Rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag don't disappear on hills.)
Does it matter? Sure. Does it have a measurable effect? Sure. But if we're comparing it to curls, it's more like using a 19-pound weight versus a 20-pound weight.


This is a little bit complex to answer, because if you're looking for extra performance, most of the low-hanging fruit wouldn't really require modernization. The biggest thing slowing you down is probably those Marathons; they're tough, but they have very high rolling resistance. If you're living next to mountains, you could probably make a big quality-of-life improvement by switching to a triple crankset with a small inner ring, regardless of drivetrain modernization.

But a modern bike would immediately address a lot of things. You could save 8+ pounds with a price point <$2000. Modern road bikes generally come with lower gears than what your Traveler has. Modern bikes use 700c wheels which offer better tire selection. Modern road bikes come stock with brakes that are more powerful and stiff than the Dia-Compe single-pivots on the Traveler, and the brake hoods on modern bikes are easier to actuate the brakes from. Modern road bikes generally come with the shifters integrated into the brake levers, which most people find makes shifting more convenient, and which makes it easy to shift while riding out of the saddle.
Do you worry about whether alcohol content is measured by weight as opposed to volume when you drink? <grin> It was just an exaggerated sample. I didn't think I had to make proportional examples. Especially since the OP hasn't disclosed their body weight or bike weight. <grin>

Your other stuff it pretty much in line with my thinking.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 03:38 PM
  #20  
Cougrrcj
Senior Member
 
Cougrrcj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 3,891

Bikes: A few...

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 620 Post(s)
Liked 370 Times in 256 Posts
My '86 Miyata 710 is just under 22 pounds now. I cut well over a pound with a new wheelset and lighter tires/tubes. lesser rotating weight makes it feel like more weight was taken off than really was.
Cougrrcj is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 03:41 PM
  #21  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1971 Post(s)
Liked 1,297 Times in 629 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
Do you worry about whether alcohol content is measured by weight as opposed to volume when you drink? <grin>
No, but I don't see how that's analogous or has anything to do with what we're talking about. It certainly doesn't result in the same degree of error: water is about 25% denser than ethanol, while your curling example was exaggerated by 1000%+ over the actual impact that the bicycle weight discrepancy being discussed will have on most cyclists' climbing.

It was just an exaggerated sample. I didn't think I had to make proportional examples. Especially since the OP hasn't disclosed their body weight or bike weight. <grin>
It's a huge exaggeration regardless of disclosure of body weight. Even if the OP is only 80 pounds, it would be a roughly 10% difference: still very small compared with the 67% of your curling example.

When operating within a context where the other person obviously isn't familiar with the physics, I view such exaggeration as very dishonest.
HTupolev is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 04:17 PM
  #22  
bnot
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev
No it isn't.

When you're doing curls, the weight you're using is pretty much the entire load. Doing a curl with a 25-pound weight requires applying 67% more force than doing a curl with a 15-pound weight.

When you're cycling up a hill, you're carrying yourself in addition to the bicycle. If you're a 170lb rider, then a 25-pound bicycle versus a 15-pound bicycle is really 195lbs versus 185lbs, which is more like a 5% difference. (And that's if we're only looking at gravity. Rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag don't disappear on hills.)
Does it matter? Sure. Does it have a measurable effect? Sure. But if we're comparing it to curls, it's more like using a 19-pound weight versus a 20-pound weight.


This is a little bit complex to answer, because if you're looking for extra performance, most of the low-hanging fruit wouldn't really require modernization. The biggest thing slowing you down is probably those Marathons; they're tough, but they have very high rolling resistance. If you're living next to mountains, you could probably make a big quality-of-life improvement by switching to a triple crankset with a small inner ring, regardless of drivetrain modernization.

But a modern bike would immediately address a lot of things. You could save 8+ pounds with a price point <$2000. Modern road bikes generally come with lower gears than what your Traveler has. Modern bikes use 700c wheels which offer better tire selection. Modern road bikes come stock with brakes that are more powerful and stiff than the Dia-Compe single-pivots on the Traveler, and the brake hoods on modern bikes are easier to actuate the brakes from. Modern road bikes generally come with the shifters integrated into the brake levers, which most people find makes shifting more convenient, and which makes it easy to shift while riding out of the saddle.
Thanks for taking some time to write out a meaningful answer.

So the Marathons. I kind of like them, but can't say I've tried anything higher-end. There isn't a lot of selection in 27.25. I had some Vittoria's on there before and they were junk. What I've appreciated about the Marathons is I've had no flats in many, many miles. I ride them on pavement and hard dirt and gravel. On my wife's bike, I put the Schwalbe Big Ben balloon tires. It's just a comfort, hybrid type bike (a 2020 Cannondale). Those tires seem pretty tough too, though understandably pretty darn heavy. Schwalbe rates their rolling resistance as remarkably low. What should I look for in tires that will make the most of a new bike? I realize I may need two sets. With my current bike, I'm riding road, gravel, heck I even ride the beginner slope-style course with my adolescent kids (they have 24" MTB's that they've just about grown out of and they're not into bikes enough to upgrade yet). Obviously, I'm not into slope style with the Schwinn, but it's not fragile.

Guy on Craigslist has a S-works "Epic" hardtail with lots of gears, carbon everything and two sets of wheels (Roval). It must not be the lightest because of the fork, but he says its 19 pounds. I could use one set of wheels for road tires and the other for offroad climbs. It's a 29er or 700c.

Just like I'm not into slopestyle, I'm not into downhill single-track racing. My current bike is obviously not a cutting edge road racer either. On the other hand, I can do modest bike touring, road riding, gravel tracks, dirt roads... I can definitely see lower gearing or more gears opening up some climbs in the mountains both on-road and off.
bnot is offline  
Old 03-10-21, 04:20 PM
  #23  
genejockey 
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
 
genejockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,662

Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace

Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10247 Post(s)
Liked 11,600 Times in 5,946 Posts
Advantages of upgrading from an 80s bike? You'll go uphill better and stop better.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."

"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
genejockey is offline  
Likes For genejockey:
Old 03-10-21, 04:27 PM
  #24  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,801

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4839 Post(s)
Liked 7,830 Times in 3,710 Posts
Originally Posted by HTupolev
No, but I don't see how that's analogous or has anything to do with what we're talking about. It certainly doesn't result in the same degree of error: water is about 25% denser than ethanol, while your curling example was exaggerated by 1000%+ over the actual impact that the bicycle weight discrepancy being discussed will have on most cyclists' climbing.

It's a huge exaggeration regardless of disclosure of body weight. Even if the OP is only 80 pounds, it would be a roughly 10% difference: still very small compared with the 67% of your curling example.

When operating within a context where the other person obviously isn't familiar with the physics, I view such exaggeration as very dishonest.
The numbers in the exaggeration don't really matter to the point Iride01 was trying to make, and I find nothing dishonest in it at all. A lighter weight can be curled more times than a heavy weight before we reach our physical limits. Likewise, a lighter bike takes less energy to move down the road, and we can therefore do it longer/farther/faster than a heavier bike before we reach our physical limits. If we want to quantify exactly how much difference between Bike A and Bike B, then the math starts getting more complicated, but that still doesn't invalidate the intent of the exaggerated example.

bnot not understanding the intent of the example is a totally different issue.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is online now  
Old 03-10-21, 04:30 PM
  #25  
Eric F 
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,801

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4839 Post(s)
Liked 7,830 Times in 3,710 Posts
Originally Posted by bnot
I can do modest bike touring, road riding, gravel tracks, dirt roads... I can definitely see lower gearing or more gears opening up some climbs in the mountains both on-road and off.
Sounds to me like a modern "gravel" bike would be a great fit for your needs.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is online now  
Likes For Eric F:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.