In fairness, 5% is really not a lot, and you clipped the part where he said 4 minutes was a couple of traffic lights.
It's really not goalpost shifting if a person says this much change is too little to matter, then you say what about this change? and the answer is that's bigger but it's still too little. Goalpost shifting would be if someone said "I can see paying for 5%" then when you show 5%, they say "actually, it would have to be 7.5% to be worth it." 5% was never postulated as any kind of goal.

And you do understand that since you're the rider, you have a sample size of 1 here, so this isn't exactly persuasive data.

That's kind of where I fall, too. Based on my recent personal experience, the biggest difference in performance, convenience, etc. is between 40 year old bikes and 20 year old bikes, not between 20 year old bikes and new bikes. In fact, I found that years of riding bikes with brifters made dealing with DT shifters, even the friction kind, much easier.

As an interesting aside- there just wasn't a whole lot of innovations with the bicycle, between saying 1950 to 1980. This was the TdF winning bike from 1947:
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...08e8eb41e1.jpg
Coppi

TdF bikes from 1978:
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...d8f0f6710.jpeg
Hinault

The bikes look really similar - with steel lugged frame, down tube shifted derailleurs, toe strap pedals, tubular tires and side pull caliper brakes. There just wasn't too much in the way of innovations during those years. In a sense, a lot of what we think of as 'classic bikes', are a product of those 30-40 years of stagnation.
In the early 80's there was a big push towards aerodynamics. From there we had an explosion of new technology from the mid 80's to mid 90's- aero brakes, hidden cable routing, dual pivot brakes, brifters, clipless pedals, carbon fiber, aluminum, titanium, etc.... Again from the mid 2000's to the present time we have yet another big wave of innovations with electronic shifting, power meters, tubeless tires, hollow cranks, carbon fiber wheels, aero everything.

So one could think of the circa 1980 'classic bike' as a time tested, timeless, well rounded product, or you could also think of it as a hopeless dinosaur from an era of stagnation.

Newer TV's are larger and have better resolution. FM stereo is higher quality audio. The difference is instant and obvious. However, most people can't tell the difference between a $500 bike and a $5000 bike.

Perhaps, but it's also a whole hell of a lot more than 1%, which was the original postulate. And 5% may not be a day-and-night difference, but people pay a hell of a lot of money for much smaller differences.

Because I felt it was simply trying to paper over having underestimated the difference.

But that's not what happened. It was "This is the change and it's too small to matter", which I rebutted with "Here are some data suggesting the change is much larger".

Of course! And there are tons of confounding variables! But they're the data I have, and while the N is small, actual data are more persuasive than a number pulled out of thin air.

In the end, people ride for different reasons. My reasons are complex, or I wouldn't have 8 fairly disparate bikes. One reason is I like going faster, so 4 minutes over 25 miles is a big difference to me. OTOH, I also really like riding my 40 year old bike, so even though it's slower for the same effort, I will keep riding it, flogging it as hard as I can.

Car is a paradigm shift.
Last paradigm shift in bikes was decades ago.

A time-tested, timeless, hopeless well-rounded dinosaur from a classic era of technological stagnation?

It was a flippant response to a tired topic but my point was more along the lines of personally I like the shiny new fun thing because it's shiny and new and fun, not because I actually need it.

That said I also really like my C&V bike. But I won't pretend that my fancy modern carbon bike isn't an improvement in almost every aspect other than soul.

Whatever he did, it wasn't goalpost shifting. He never laid out a goal, and I didn't read his 1% figure to be any serious kind of estimate. All he did was pick a really small number and then said the number you found was also small. There's nothing unfair about saying 5X a really small number is still a small number.

To be honest, I have no dog in this fight as I think it perfectly rational for one person to say 5% is important for his purposes and another to say it isn't important for his own purposes. I just don't think it's fair to call something that's so obviously not goalpost shifting "goalpost shifting".


You can disagree whether 5% is or isn't a small number. Hell if I have much of an opinion about it either way. I just hate downtube shifters.

Like I said, I don't get the OP at all. I'm not sure if he's saying people who have your preferences don't exist or that they shouldn't.

It's a dumb thread topic.

Most people can't tell the difference between a $5000 McIntosh amplifier and a $500 Yamaha amp. Doesn't mean there isn't a market for high end audio products.

Bikes are no different than any other market where there's a range of financial capacity. Someone is always willing to pay for high quality and/or unique products.

So you are saying I can borrow your tools?

Fair. I just get mildly annoyed at the repeated threads where the OP either implies or declares that you need to be a racer to care about improvements in technology that have made bikes go faster, or stop better, or be lighter, as if the only people who want to go really fast are racers.

i think anyone who follows a culture, or participates in a pastime develops a certain nostalgia for a formative period in time. those who don't lack the affection for the old or the "classic."

i haven't ridden bikes since i was kid until fairly recently, and have since ridden the most modern road bikes and some "classics' from that long era of stagnation. lacking the nostalgia for an allegedly better and simpler time, there's nothing appealing about those butted steel frames and friction shifters whatsoever.

of course the bike manufacturers are in it to make money, but the stuff they change/add has to at least seem better to someone. lighter frames, better ergonomics, suspensions, more gears, indexed shifting, better aerodynamics, less rolling resistance, more powerful brakes, etc etc. these all (or most) seem to improve the cycling experience. it does not seem to be analogous to me to the difference between a minimalist, more "classic" sports car and a new car with 1000000 switches and screens and features and another 1500lb of weight to muscle around.

Put 95% of cyclists today on one of those old TdF bikes from the 70's and I bet they go just as fast as they do on their modern-marvel bike.

Nah. They'd crash into stuff staring down at their shifters trying to find the right gear.

Or crash trying to get their feet into the pedals. Or trying to get them out without loosening the strap.

tl;dr OP claims he doesn't see any difference between his $500 beater and the $5000 bikes he sees in the shop. Seems to say more about OP than the state of bike evolution. Entirely possible he wouldn't recognize or value the improvements even if he was able to spend some time on a current bike. He did get three pages.:rolleyes:

My AGE!!!!!

personally, I would love a 1978 bianchi with modern components. I don't see the problem with that, best of both worlds

not to mention that cars really haven’t changed since 1948 since they have 4 wheels and most have a 4 or 6 cylinder engine.

Well, my point is that the huge majority of cyclists out there are not physically capable of even coming close to maxing out their bike.

same can be said about most homes that people live in. Do you really need 2,400 sqft for a family of three?

Actually they've changed completely and are now as much computer software as machine. We're already seeing the beginning of them not having engines at all.
​​​​​
The difference is, that's necessary - we basically can't even afford to legally permit older cars to be driven (apart from miniscule numbers in limited use collectible registration) due to the missing safety features, emissions, and inefficiency issues.

Sometimes, older technology just gets pushed aside to the point where you have a hard time finding the parts you need to maintain it.
That being said, I recently broke a spoke on my front wheel. Any ideas?
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...21e9e6c616.jpg