Originally Posted by
CheGiantForLife
Is a consumer better off riding a 1978 steel road bike that's maintainable with simple tools I bought 40 years ago? Is much of the recent "innovation" is a bad bargain for anyone not pushing a competitive racing edge. Eg, Is carbon anything as an anti-feature. ?
define competitive? Just because your not crit racing doesn't mean cycling isn't personally competitive. Also you don't need to be a dentist to want or to have enthusiast or pro grade bike/parts. People cycle for all sorts of reasons but I think it's human nature to keep pushing forward and that's kind of the underlying reason why people are willing to pay $600 for ceramic RD pullies, even though for $600 the diminishing returns are massive. Listen, a professional cyclist would kill me on a crappiest steel bike, so in the end it truly is your body that matters, what it comes down to is how much you want to indulge money wise. If that means a 1978 steel bike, all the more power to you but as someone who loves tech and loves trying new things, yeah I want to try electronic shifting, different frame types, carbon wheels and bits.