Persistent ideas in cycling that make no sense
#76
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,613
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4717 Post(s)
Liked 1,526 Times
in
997 Posts
I'm just curious to see some examples of bikes with what you believe to be poor value/quality mid-tier carbon wheels. I've seen stuff like Treks with their in-house ~$1300 msrp Aeolus wheels, bikes with Reynolds AR41 or similar, etc, and I think that, as a package, they're awesome values. Off the top of my head, I can't recall seeing any bikes with clunker carbon wheels.
#77
Senior Member
1. Weight weenieism. For example, 200g of frame weight doesn't matter, at all. Sacrificing durability to cut 200g off of a frame's weight is dumb. This is how you wind up with ultra expensive, tough to work on and essentially disposable frames like we have today.
2. Manufacturer-provided wind tunnel aero data. Setting aside the fundamental conflict of interest here, such data is essentially irrelevant in the real world with swirling winds and group rides.
3. Aero wheels and frames as the first aero upgrade. Working on your position is free and far more effective. Clothing and helmet next. Frames and wheels are some of the least dollar per watt saved upgrades and yet everyone buys that first.
4. I agree with the above comments on reflexive retro-grouchiness. Just because you don't like tubeless/disc brakes/electronic drivetrains/gravel bikes etc doesn't mean you're right and those who do like such things are wrong.
5. Believing the brand of a bike is the first thing to consider when buying bikes. So many questions here similar to "what do you think about Trek bikes?" etc. These are meaningless questions. Most brands don't make anything themselves. The bigger brands make a huge range of bikes. You need to look at the model itself, not the brand.
6. Buying marketing hype on tiny design differentiations between road frames. Most road frames for sale these days are very similar in terms of geometry, ride characteristics, frame features (dropped chainstays etc). I would focus more on engineering features like bottom bracket type, cable routing, seatpost type etc rather than the design.
7. Believing the frame material is the most important factor in determining the ride characteristic of the bike. People focus on this way too much. This is particularly true of Ti and steel bikes, materials certain advocates believe endow bikes with magical characteristics that are uniquely inherent to the frame material. Frame material matters more for toughness and failure mode than anything else.
2. Manufacturer-provided wind tunnel aero data. Setting aside the fundamental conflict of interest here, such data is essentially irrelevant in the real world with swirling winds and group rides.
3. Aero wheels and frames as the first aero upgrade. Working on your position is free and far more effective. Clothing and helmet next. Frames and wheels are some of the least dollar per watt saved upgrades and yet everyone buys that first.
4. I agree with the above comments on reflexive retro-grouchiness. Just because you don't like tubeless/disc brakes/electronic drivetrains/gravel bikes etc doesn't mean you're right and those who do like such things are wrong.
5. Believing the brand of a bike is the first thing to consider when buying bikes. So many questions here similar to "what do you think about Trek bikes?" etc. These are meaningless questions. Most brands don't make anything themselves. The bigger brands make a huge range of bikes. You need to look at the model itself, not the brand.
6. Buying marketing hype on tiny design differentiations between road frames. Most road frames for sale these days are very similar in terms of geometry, ride characteristics, frame features (dropped chainstays etc). I would focus more on engineering features like bottom bracket type, cable routing, seatpost type etc rather than the design.
7. Believing the frame material is the most important factor in determining the ride characteristic of the bike. People focus on this way too much. This is particularly true of Ti and steel bikes, materials certain advocates believe endow bikes with magical characteristics that are uniquely inherent to the frame material. Frame material matters more for toughness and failure mode than anything else.
Likes For Hiro11:
#78
Trying to keep up
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 2,137
Bikes: Pinarello Prince, Orbea Onix, Ridley Fenix
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked 136 Times
in
79 Posts
Front the same manufacturer? I often see similar claims of horrible upgrade values within a given manufacturer, but whenever I've looked in to them, there have always been gross oversights and the upgrade has been solid for the money (assuming the upgrades are of value to a given buyer).
I like the Fulcrums for the most part. They're on the heavy side for sure - heavier than the 55mm wheels I replaced them with (though it's close). They roll fine, and certainly handle rough roads / light gravel well. In tiers of bikes, though, I think it is safe to say they are normally OEM on bikes a fair bit less than what I paid. The old Ksyriums on my 2007 Orbea are both lighter and have bladed spokes - that bike was in a similar place in the lineup compared to my current bike (a Prince). Had I not made an offhand comment about carbon wheels showing up in my feed all the time that my wife took as a hint to buy me set, I'd probably still be on them. But... the bike looks and feels better with the CF wheels. While it is tough to do a real world test, on a number of local segments, it seems I pick up anywhere from 1/4 to 1 MPH at similar power outputs. On some really fast false flats, similar power appears to buy even more speed. Could all be mental as well.
#79
Senior Member
I'm not sure it's a good example, but an Ultegra Domane SL6 with the $500 MSRP alloy wheelset (bike = $4100) vs Domane SL7 with Di2 Ultegra and the Aeolus Carbon wheels has an MSRP of $6500. Allowing a $1k upcharge for Di2 and $800 for the wheelset, there's another $600 unaccounted for. I think a buyer of the lower level bike could probably do better doing their own upgrades. Unless it's buried somewhere, visiting the Aeolus product page, neither the rim depth or the wheel weights are published.
I went through this dilemma when I bought an Emonda last year. They sell 2 models of the SL6, so I took the one with the 800 msrp wheelset that costs 500 more. I can still get a better wheelset than the one I have if I want, but I don't need to do that right now.
#80
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,613
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4717 Post(s)
Liked 1,526 Times
in
997 Posts
I found the tech specs link :-) Still couldn't find the wheel depth listed for the Aeolus or the Paradigm Comp (the alloy wheelset referenced). Basically a 1600g vs 1800g wheelset difference if only looking at weight. Kinda weird, even looked at the linked BikeRumor and BikeRadar reviews and nobody mentions the depth.
#81
Junior Member
Another persistent idea: skinny tires (<28mm) make you go faster than wider tires (>32mm). Wider tires are a blessing! More comfortable, can run at a lower pressure, more resistant to punctures, better traction in turns and actually roll faster. The All Road Bike Revolution by Jan Heine is a great read on this.
Likes For okoweq:
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,645 Times
in
6,054 Posts
#83
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Northeastern MA, USA
Posts: 1,678
Bikes: Garmin/Tacx Bike Smart
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times
in
191 Posts
Of course, I may not be able to test it for a while. Kinda dry here in Naples.
#84
Senior Member
I found the tech specs link :-) Still couldn't find the wheel depth listed for the Aeolus or the Paradigm Comp (the alloy wheelset referenced). Basically a 1600g vs 1800g wheelset difference if only looking at weight. Kinda weird, even looked at the linked BikeRumor and BikeRadar reviews and nobody mentions the depth.
With the Emoda sl6 they let you take the paradigms or for 500 bucks up you can get the aeolus elite 35s, which Trek made as a budget carbon wheel set for that bike in particular I think. I would definitely prefer to do my own wheel upgrade but I can't right now.
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 520
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked 327 Times
in
179 Posts
I'm not sure it's a good example, but an Ultegra Domane SL6 with the $500 MSRP alloy wheelset (bike = $4100) vs Domane SL7 with Di2 Ultegra and the Aeolus Carbon wheels has an MSRP of $6500. Allowing a $1k upcharge for Di2 and $800 for the wheelset, there's another $600 unaccounted for. I think a buyer of the lower level bike could probably do better doing their own upgrades. Unless it's buried somewhere, visiting the Aeolus product page, neither the rim depth or the wheel weights are published.
By comparison, the Paradigm Comp 25 alloy wheels on the SL6 weigh 1780g and have a depth of 23mm and the same 25mm internal width.
For further comparison, the Affinity alloy wheels on the SL5 weigh 2160g and have a rim width of 21mm.
I own a 2019 Domane SL5 and if I weren't getting a new SLR7 (arriving in June!) I'd probably upgrade the wheels and relegate the original Affinity wheels to duty as a second wheelset for gravel riding. Except the 2019 SL5 only has a max tire clearance of 32mm.
#86
Senior Member
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
#87
Perceptual Dullard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,395
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 900 Post(s)
Liked 1,122 Times
in
482 Posts
Another persistent idea: skinny tires (<28mm) make you go faster than wider tires (>32mm). Wider tires are a blessing! More comfortable, can run at a lower pressure, more resistant to punctures, better traction in turns and actually roll faster. The All Road Bike Revolution by Jan Heine is a great read on this.
Likes For RChung:
#88
Fat n slow
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Saratoga, NY
Posts: 4,271
Bikes: Cervelo R3, Giant Revolt
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3229 Post(s)
Liked 2,034 Times
in
966 Posts
I'm just curious to see some examples of bikes with what you believe to be poor value/quality mid-tier carbon wheels. I've seen stuff like Treks with their in-house ~$1300 msrp Aeolus wheels, bikes with Reynolds AR41 or similar, etc, and I think that, as a package, they're awesome values. Off the top of my head, I can't recall seeing any bikes with clunker carbon wheels.
#89
Le Crocodile
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Santa Barbara Calif.
Posts: 1,873
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 367 Post(s)
Liked 771 Times
in
311 Posts
Another persistent idea: skinny tires (<28mm) make you go faster than wider tires (>32mm). Wider tires are a blessing! More comfortable, can run at a lower pressure, more resistant to punctures, better traction in turns and actually roll faster. The All Road Bike Revolution by Jan Heine is a great read on this.
Likes For shoota:
#94
Full Member
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 340
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked 150 Times
in
95 Posts
Here's Merriam Webster's definition of sprocket:
2: a cylinder with teeth around the circumference at either end that project through perforations in something (such as motion-picture film) to move it through a mechanism (such as a projector)
Definition of sprocket
1: a toothed wheel whose teeth engage the links of a chain2: a cylinder with teeth around the circumference at either end that project through perforations in something (such as motion-picture film) to move it through a mechanism (such as a projector)
#95
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1814 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times
in
569 Posts
Here's Merriam Webster's definition of sprocket:
2: a cylinder with teeth around the circumference at either end that project through perforations in something (such as motion-picture film) to move it through a mechanism (such as a projector)
Definition of sprocket
1: a toothed wheel whose teeth engage the links of a chain2: a cylinder with teeth around the circumference at either end that project through perforations in something (such as motion-picture film) to move it through a mechanism (such as a projector)
My Webster's says Sprocket:
1 Any of the teeth, as on the rim of a wheel, arranged to fit the links of a chain. 2 A wheel fitted with such teeth: in full 'sprocket wheel'.
But it's a compact desk dictionary- perhaps in this case a compact workbench dictionary would give a better result.
The unabridged also has (among nine definitions) cog as 'a wheel with cogs on it', so there's that...
Back to our overall topic, this doesn't exactly qualify, but there's a lot of fuss over bottom bracket drop, when IME there's little difference in measurement or function.
My current CX & road frames vary by 3mm, but I suppose others are more different and I haven't come across a bike with high BB.
#96
Zoom zoom zoom zoom bonk
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 4,623
Bikes: Giant Defy, Trek 1.7c, BMC GF02, Fuji Tahoe, Scott Sub 35, Kona Rove, Trek Verve+2
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 549 Post(s)
Liked 721 Times
in
365 Posts