3alarmer 

...labeling some point you specifically requested, as nonsensical, without further discussion, is an essential tactic of the semantic blowhard. It passes for enlightened discussion in these threads though. So enjoy. I'll hope that, at the very least, we've put the whole "(These are serious questions that I’d like you to address, rather than dismiss with some pithy remark)" thing to bed. As already stated:

3alarmer 

...I would like to say I understand the motivation here, but I don't. To me it seems like some sort of personality disorder related to the internet and penis size. But I'm not a disinterested observer. I'm a refugee who feels threatened. *snork*

genejockey 

It's always fun when people who can't let it go accuse other people who can't let it go of not being able to let it go.

Fredo76

This is true!

OTOH, if you crouch down another inch, you have lessened air resistance more already than all the aero a bike can give you, unless you switch to a recumbent.

genejockey 

OYAH*, if you crouch down another inch, and you're already riding a more aerodynamic bike, you're even more aero.

*(On Yet Another Hand.) How many you got?

Trakhak

One of the few posts in this thread I wish I could like multiple times.

BillyD

rsbob 

I can but you can’t. No…. I can’t but you can. No…it could be the other way around or backwards.

mstateglfr 

You do you, as you proudly do, despite your ever growing list of ignorant and incorrect claims. Just figured I would push back a bit on your long winded rant about all the horrors and downsides to modern Shimano.

You don't need to use a bonded crankset to ride shimano 11 and 12sp. So that's an absurd reason to not use Shimano road tech from the last decade.
The cable fray issue is way overblown. Just spend $10 on 2 new shift cables each year and ride. Yes there will be a report of someone chewing a shift cable in 6mo, but there will also be a report of someone riding their 11sp Shimano bike for 3 years with the same cables. You ride steel frames even though there are obviously examples of steel frames failing.

Anyways, just say you prefer something because of emotion and not logic. It's a hobby- it's OK to have preferences that are emotion based.

spclark 

"No, it isn't!"

YES IT IS!!!

....

Atlas Shrugged

First contribution to this thread.
Approximately 50 other argumentative posts in between. Ending with this charmer.

None have anything to do with the actual topic of the thread of why are current high end bikes so expensive.

3alarmer 

...oooh, ooh, I got one !!

If you only ride downhill, you'll be taking full advantage of your new, expensive, CF race bike.

3alarmer 

...I thought the reasoning was they are so expensive, because of all the R+D ? I'm not even the guy who brought that idea into the thread. What am I missing ? Other than that you are counting my posts here. AS I've said several times already (you can for sure find it in one of those argumentative posts you're counting)....I don't see the past 20 years of bicycle tech as some sort of two wheeled moonshot. A lot of that tech either borrows from the past, or from other tech advances in the present.

If bikes are expensive because of all the R+D, a chain drive with servo motor derailleur shifting is not a lot of bang for the buck.

BTW, this one is coincidental from my ride today. I'm standing on the bridge, watching the river and stretching, at the turnaround. There's a guy on the other railing, opposite, with Di 2 equipped Canyon. Another guy rides up to him and asks for some help...he wants to borrow his battery to shift into a get home gear. His is dead. Canyon guy obliges, they exchange some banter about always carrying a spare battery, etc.

I continue to stretch. Then I ride home on the PX-10 I chose today.

3alarmer 

.
...a typical enlightened comment on CF bike frames, made up on the spur of the moment :

genejockey 

Or, only those who can exceed 2000 watts in a sprint, after doing a miles of solo breakaway, and climbing Alpe d'Huez solo, then descending like Pidcock, all over cobbles, are taking full advantage of their new, expensive CF race bikes. Because if they're not doing all of that, they're not getting the full benefit.

3alarmer 

...that's a harsh judgement. I would say anyone who races professionally is probably taking full advantage of the bike. I mean, they mostly get them for free, so how much return benefit do they need to get to take full advantage ?

genejockey 

So, if getting them free means they get great return benefit, what about people with a LOT of disposable income, so that $15,000 for a bike is a trivial expense? Compare that to someone for whom it's a significant expense, but then they both ride exactly the same. Is the rich guy taking more advantage?

Atlas Shrugged

Truth may be stranger than fiction, but fiction can weave tales that captivate the imagination beyond the boundaries of reality. Your story falls apart pretty rapidly, with an estimated 200km emergency mode allowing for the supposed “get home gear” and that the battery is internal resulting in the need for some pretty serious effort to borrow a strangers battery, much less carry a spare. There is absolutely nothing that is even within the realm of believability in that tale.

A modern Di2 battery will last between 2000 and 5000 kilometers per charge. This depends a bit on how often you shift and also your shifting style. The front derailleur has to work harder than the rear derailleur and therefore also consumes more energy.This means that if you use the front derailleur a lot your battery will run out a bit quicker – don’t let this stop you from using the front derailleur though. It takes most people months to ride 2000-5000km and most Di2 users don’t charge their bikes more than three times a year.

Once the battery level reaches 10% the front derailleur will stop working. This way the most battery-hungry operations are disabled and you should be able to finish your ride using just the rear derailleur.

3alarmer 

...I won't go there in General. It's too political when you start talking about income disparity.

3alarmer 

...so are you saying I made up that story ? Coming from the guy who counts my posts, I'm both flattered, and a little worried about stalking.

I guess you had to be there. I remember wondering why the guy couldn't just jerk his rear derailleur into place, and shift the chain by hand. But then I remembered the tiny servo motor. Maybe someone with Di 2 can explain it to me. I don't have it myself.

genejockey 

Truth is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense.

PeteHski

Amateur riders actually get more benefit (time saved over a course) from reduced aero drag than pros. This may not be intuitive at their lower speeds, but it is a fact.

3alarmer 

...yes, it is not intuitive. As I said before, this is not something I ever did for a living. So here's another teaching moment for you. How exactly does that work ? My amateur's understanding tells me that drag increases roughly with the square of speed. What major thing am I missing ? Isn't that the reason for reducing the drag coefficient through wind tunnel testing of different shapes at various speeds ? Feel free to leave out wind as a complicating factor, as I certainly have.

IOW, drag (and design of a bike to minimize it), has dramatically increased at speeds of 25 mph and up. So the faster riders are "getting more advantage" from the design. I don't honestly know how much "time saved over a course" either group is experiencing. It seems you do. What is missing in my thinking on this ?
.
.
.

Jughed

Watts per CDA ratio. Lower watts/slower riders benefit more, in terms of % of the power you are riding at, than a faster rider. Say for example 10w savings at 200w vs 15w savings at 400w. The faster rider saves more watts, but less in terms of % of overall.

Same for rolling resistance, drivetrain resistance... even weight.

PeteHski

In simple terms it is because the reduction in aero drag from the bike is a larger percentage of the amateur rider’s total power output. The absolute aero drag is lower because of the lower speed, but they are exposed to the air for a longer period of time over the same course.

So when all the numbers are crunched it is actually the amateurs who stand to win the most time gain from their aero bikes.