Originally Posted by
I-Like-To-Bike
I don't have the numbers, and am willing to be educated about the "market", but I suspect that the market for expensive "enthusiast approved" lightweight racing bikes has always been a small fraction of the total number of bicycles sold in the U.S. when "the market" includes ALL bicycle sales outlets, and not just LBS and online sales of bicycles to adult enthusiasts, and does not weight the count based on the retail price of the units. Bikes that ape the looks of the racing bikes ,with dropped handlebars, extreme geometry, narrow high pressure tires, pedal /shoe systems, no clearance or fittings for fenders or racks, etc. and not really designed for any bicycling purpose other than posing always seemed much more popular on Bike Forums and perhaps on club rides and at locations where enthusiasts congregate, than seen elsewhere in the wild.
Well, if that's true, Grant Peterson never had much of a point. What exactly was being driven out of bicycling by racing bike mentality?
I ride two 1990s racing bikes for fun. I never race, and they're plenty comfortable for 100-150 mile rides. Your statement that they're suitable only for posing is absurd. They're not for everyone, but the notion that me riding them is ruining cycling is stupid. Frankly, I think you're pulling the same "I'm a real bicyclist and you're not" bit, just in reverse.
I think it's great to talk about the market as a whole, but it's clear Grant was talking about the high end stuff, he just wasn't explicit about it. And that high end stuff is a lot less racing oriented now than when he wrote the book.
Not sure why you need to complain so much about other people's preferences and talk so little about yours, but that's not where I want this thread to go so I'm bowing out of this conversation unless you start actually discussing what you'd like to advocate for instead of railing against.