Kindaslow

Anyone older than me is elderly.

And, I am still young, just ask me, a couple hours after getting up in the morning though...

Phil_gretz

^ Ah, gotcha. No, not racing Cat3. I can see how a rider in his mid-50s in that group might be viewed as a relic to be dispatched or simply an oddity. PG

OldsCOOL

I dont feel like I'm 58 but I do feel that MTB ride from yesterday.

Wildwood 

[QUOTE=HBCruiser1;18408526] My crappy bike is much better today than a high end bike was years ago, .../QUOTE]

A common myth, typically shared by folks that have only a few years of bicycling experience, or never rode a quality bike from the past.

edit: my comment relative to road bicycles, mtn bikes have evolved hugely for their off-road purposes with suspension systems, disc brakes, and specialization (downhill, cross-country, trials, etc).

OnyxTiger

This sounds a lot like the Scottsdale/PHX area

chasm54

The interesting thing (maybe the reassuring thing, for us old farts) is that it's usually much easier to be competitive in a non age-related Cat 3/4 pack than with the Masters/Veterans 54-59 age group. There are some ferociously fit old guys out there and they have 35-40 years experience in how to race, often gained in much higher categories.

And with regard to the subject of this thread, very very few of them are racing vintage equipment.

Doug64

[QUOTE=Wildwood;18410605]True!

Doug64

There was a relatively wide range of bikes (cost)here. It did not seem to slow them down.

Kindaslow

[QUOTE=Wildwood;18410605]For discussion, not argument, how do we know this as fact. For example, take a CF road bike from a reputable maker, built with 105 groupset. Put that against an elite race bike from the 70's or early 80's, why would one outperform the other? Put a racer on both, on a set course, and let them try to set fast laps with both. Which would be faster? Put an average guy on both and do they same? Put a non-enthusiast on both, which would they like better and why?

RomansFiveEight

[QUOTE=Kindaslow;18410658]Keeping the theme of discussion, I'm not sure I'd think of a 105 equipped carbon bike as a "crappy bike". I'm thinking the poster meant something like a Claris/Sora equipped aluminum bike is comparable to the high end bikes of yester-year; which I'm not sure passes muster. In your example though, that's probably true. A mid-range bike of today performs as well or better than a high-end bike of yesteryear. But a low-end bike is probably always going to be a low end bike.

Kindaslow

[QUOTE=RomansFiveEight;18410671]I did not re-read the post that started this thought. So, I picked a build that would be a nice bike, but well under the level a lot of people would think of as a race or elite bike. The 105 groupset is a very functional and good groupset, but bikes built at this level are in the middle somewhere in today's hierarchy. So, I agree with you that this build level would outperform elite bikes of the past.


please note, I am not saying good, bad or other about bikes in this range. I certainly do not want to take time arguing 105 versus Ultegra versus Dura Ace....

Bandera

I have two bikes that were considered fairly "expensive" when new, 41 and 38 years ago.
Both have been in continuous service since, originally as race bikes and are still ridden every week.
Lesser machines would not have been as nice to ride for the last many thousands of miles and decades since, far less durable and certainly not as aesthetic.

A good quality bike, properly fitted and maintained can have an extremely long service life.
Chosen carefully "expensive" bikes amortized over time is $$$$ very well/wisely spent.

-Bandera

chasm54

No, it wouldn't. A couple of thousand extra dollars buys you only very marginal gains.

With regard to @Wildwood's contention about the quality of top-end bikes from the past, I have some sympathy for his view. A really good 80s roadbike is still a really great bike. But there's no point in pretending that the innovations of the last thirty years haven't produced competitive advantages. I'd be significantly quicker (not miles per hour quicker, but definitely enough to make a competitive difference) on modern equipment than on vintage. A lot of that is in the groupsets. Were you able to cram 11-speed Di2 (or even the mechanical version with brifters) onto a top 80s frame the difference would be substantially eroded. Carbon forks help, too. A lot of the weight difference is in the steel fork crown.

Wildwood 

The person who made the statement = 'today's crap bikes are better than high end bikes of a few years ago',
lists their bike as a beach cruiser.

I stated this before - it's from your personal perspective - some people think that a bike that goes from A to B without a problem is a quality bike. That's the way I feel about cars - any car that gets me from A to B without a problem is a quality car. From that perspective my 15 yo Saturn with 200K+ mi is as high quality as any car on the road. And I don't want any auto elitist proving their Corvette or BMW or Tesla is any better.

chasm54

LOL. I'm largely with you. In general, my attitude to cars is similar to my attitude to bikes in that I'll pay enough to get a decent standard but not for what I regard as overpriced luxuries. However, my smug rationality doesn't bear very close examination. There's only one car in my garage, but there are five bikes...

Barrettscv 

I have very little concern what my collection cost. I usually spend a little more than thier resale price, but the results are a personalized ride that nobody else has. It's my way of escaping the rat-race. Some examples;

Started with this and the matching fork;






This 1972 Paramount got new rims, tires and chainrings;



Started with this 1972 PX10 frameset that came with the stem, handlebar, levers and brakes. Had it repainted and then slowly built it up with new just-about-everything.





This complete but neglected Grand Record was totally torn-down and rebuilt with a 700c wheelset from the inventory.





Something for the daughter. 2x5 converted to 3x7. 27 inch converted to 700c. Drop bars converted to trekking bars. Centerpulls converted to long-reach sidepulls. Stem shifters to MTB integrated shifters...

Ajenkins

I just finished building the bike of my dreams. It is a bike that I've thought about many times over the years, and now that I'm in spitting distance of 60, I decided the hell with it, and built it. I found a stock frame that was exactly what I wanted, and built it using components that I chose individually for function and aesthetics. It's not the most expensive bike I've ever bought, but if I hadn't done the work myself, it would have been, even paying retail (I found some massively good deals).

It may well be the last bike I buy, which is fine. I have a stable of 6, for every riding need I might have. So I'm perfectly ok with splurging. Haters can hate on me all they want; like I said, I'm pretty close to IDGAF territory.

Wildwood 

I wasn't talking about racing, but as others are, I pose the question - why hasn't the average speed of pro racers increased more with all the advances in technology?

There was an article in Bicycling magazine (I think) comparing a modern race bike with an older race bike. I can't find it, nor the subsequent thread in C&V. That might be as definitive as we can hope for.

And for the record I wouldn't call a 105 equipped, mid-range bike "crap".

chasm54

How much of an increase would you expect? In a racing context, a difference of one mile per hour is absolutely huge.

OldTryGuy

Fashion, societal norms, commercials, advertisements.... have had no part in my decision making since high school. Logic and wallet rules. My grocery grabber is a 2002 Target Magna with 10,000+ miles on it and cost a whopping $100.00!

chasm54

Almost everyone believes that about themselves. Every time it's tested, we find that almost everyone is wrong.

Kindaslow

I must be an overachiever, I found IDGAF at an earlier age.

On topic, I just built my SS MTB. I could have spent more, but some decisions did not make sense for me. For example, CF rims would have only saved me a tiny bit of weight, but would have cost about 4 times as much. I think bikes like this are awesome, and some current high end bikes would do nothing for me. But, someone else might choke on how much this bike cost me.

70sSanO

After reading through a lot of the pages here as it has meandered along different paths, in my opinion I think the answer is pretty simple.

People "generally" root for the underdog and it is probably human nature for those without the means to criticize those with the means. And, at least "secretly," hope the rich guy bonks, or is left at the side of the road with his $200K sports car. There are thousands of movies that follow the same theme. There will always be the cutters overcoming economic and social obstacles against the well-to-do college kids, and people line up to watch a new rendition of that theme year after year. In this world, it has always been us against them, so why would it be any different here.

And... there are more people who cannot afford an expensive bike than those who can, so it doesn't take much to move the discussion in a critical direction. There will always be someone out there who wants show the hotshot that it takes more than a checkbook to be king of the mountain. And those that have the means will probably never be able to convince the other side of the effort and hard work it takes to be able to afford the more expensive stuff... and the threads continue to roll along.

John

OldTryGuy

Family and friends will back me up and especially the guys I ride with.

Wildwood 

Totally agree with you. If I were racing competitively in any category, I would not be riding a friction shifting, 20-ish pound bike.
But we have swerved from 'crap bikes of today are better than a few years ago'.
And I stick by my assertion that 'where you're coming from' is the only answer.

Back to expensive $$$ bikes - I say, ride what you like and keep the rubber side down. But keep a thick skin for the comments of others. It's a brutal internet at times, not so in person or on a group ride.