Are bicycles which require proprietary parts an unwise purchase?
06-13-22, 04:03 AM
#51
Junior Member
Thread Starter
It's not a scam. There is simply more choice of bike today. Obviously buying a full-on carbon aero race bike is a very bad idea if what you really want to do is go touring! I doubt any of the bike manufacturers are marketing their aero race bikes for that kind of use are they?
I just look at myself when I was very new to cycling and how in some ways I think I was maybe slightly misled thinking that if I got a frame 1/2kg lighter I would suddenly be putting out vastly higher speeds. 2 years later my posture on the bike was so much flatter and less tense, I understood fit a bit better, was stronger and much faster as a result. But for some reason, I believed all of this as a noob. I do honestly think those who are inexperienced are definitely being swayed or having the wool pulled over their eyes by 'marketing wank'.
Yes, maybe now I could see an advantage from kit, but at the cost is it really worth it? especially in the case of proprietary bits... nobody is sponsoring me, nor will they ever, so if I break something or componentry fails out of warranty it is totally on me - time for a whole new bike! Not to say the aero options aren't lovely and don't still offer massive appeal to me.
Is cutting edge kit good? Yes. Is proprietary kit good? Not necessarily, but it is a potential risk you take if it is worth it to you, which to me I don't think it would be.
Last edited by dja1; 06-13-22 at 04:10 AM.
06-13-22, 04:29 AM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,375
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4385 Post(s)
Liked 4,826 Times
in
2,982 Posts
No, not a scam. There is clearly a point in a rider's experience where they can make gains in terms of kit otherwise TT riders and triathletes for example would not be investing in gains like the best skinsuits, disc wheels, fairings, and aero bottles just to name a few.
I just look at myself when I was very new to cycling and how in some ways I think I was maybe slightly misled thinking that if I got a frame 1/2kg lighter I would suddenly be putting out vastly higher speeds. 2 years later my posture on the bike was so much flatter and less tense, I understood fit a bit better, was stronger and much faster as a result. But for some reason, I believed all of this as a noob. I do honestly think those who are inexperienced are definitely being swayed or having the wool pulled over their eyes by 'marketing wank'.
Yes, maybe now I could see an advantage from kit, but at the cost is it really worth it? especially in the case of proprietary bits... nobody is sponsoring me, nor will they ever, so if I break something or componentry fails out of warranty it is totally on me - time for a whole new bike! Not to say the aero options aren't lovely and don't still offer massive appeal to me.
Is cutting edge kit good? Yes. Is proprietary kit good? Not necessarily, but it is a potential risk you take if it is worth it to you, which to me I don't think it would be.
I just look at myself when I was very new to cycling and how in some ways I think I was maybe slightly misled thinking that if I got a frame 1/2kg lighter I would suddenly be putting out vastly higher speeds. 2 years later my posture on the bike was so much flatter and less tense, I understood fit a bit better, was stronger and much faster as a result. But for some reason, I believed all of this as a noob. I do honestly think those who are inexperienced are definitely being swayed or having the wool pulled over their eyes by 'marketing wank'.
Yes, maybe now I could see an advantage from kit, but at the cost is it really worth it? especially in the case of proprietary bits... nobody is sponsoring me, nor will they ever, so if I break something or componentry fails out of warranty it is totally on me - time for a whole new bike! Not to say the aero options aren't lovely and don't still offer massive appeal to me.
Is cutting edge kit good? Yes. Is proprietary kit good? Not necessarily, but it is a potential risk you take if it is worth it to you, which to me I don't think it would be.
"Aeroroad - the fastest bike on the road. Raced by the top talent in pro-cycling. Pure speed."
"Aeroroad CFR - Our lightest aero bikes. Fully integrated cockpits. Incredible adjustability. World Tour level components. The choice of MVDP. In short: the fastest road bike out there."
"Aeroroad CF SLX - Sculpted in the wind tunnel, lightning fast on the road. Balanced geometry, agile handling, tool-free cockpit adjustment. When speed counts, count on the Aeroad CF SLX."
"Aeroroad CF SL - "Aero made accessible. Inheriting the design DNA of the flagship CFR, the CF SL makes Aeroad speed, integrated design, carbon engineering, and incredible fit available to more riders than ever."
"From just 14 km/h, aerodynamic drag is the greatest force working against you. And the faster you ride, the greater that force increases. Long the preserve of the pros, our mission is to ensure every rider benefits from the aero advantage."
I don't see any misleading claims about 1/2 kg in weight making you vastly quicker. It basically just says if you want an aero bike just like the pros are racing then here you go. You may well have misled yourself into believing a pro level aero bike makes you vastly quicker, but that's not really the manufacturer's fault is it? What are they supposed to say? This is a bike designed specifically for racing.
06-13-22, 05:18 AM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Yamaguchi City, Japan
Posts: 1,091
Bikes: Trek Madone 5.2 SL 2007, Look KG386, R022 Re-framed Azzurri Primo, Felt Z5, Trek F7.3 FX
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times
in
73 Posts
Why have pro-tour riders moved from long and low (low head tube) bikes to bikes with taller head tubes? Why has the style of cycling changed from heel-drop, push-pull, horizontal, rearward offset to a high time trial, toes down, more vertical position/pedalling? I thought at first it might be just because the pros were being forced to use the bikes that the main, overweight, mamil market wants. John Cobb seems to be a proponent of that theory with his A type back and B type back riding position. He says that head tubes are long to cater for those with "B type backs" (or rather bellies).
I think that may also be to do with the way that the pro-tour riders are so team orientated these days. They wear radios, take instructions, and more than 80% never come in the top ten places being life long domestiques. This means that even more of the pro-tour takes place in the peloton and not in the break. And in the peloton, the trade-off between being aerodynamic and being able to use your muscles forcefully is swayed towards the latter. Aerodynamic body position matters less when you spend more of your time riding in a big mass of riders, or at least in a line.
The vast majority of amateur cyclists that I see on the road however are riding on their own. I see the occasional group of two or three very rarely more. They exist, and many forum members take part in such group rides, but I doubt that group rides, make up more than a few percent of the total of amateur road bike miles ridden.
Other than those team, group riders, the vast majority of us are in riding a break or time trial, unlike pro-tour riders. We should therefore be using different bikes, unless we enjoy looking like pro-tour riders.
To be honest, I got into cycling partly motivated by Lance Armstrong and I am super pleased to be riding a bike like his. I am so in love with my latest, long-longed-after bike I take the liberty of posting a picture of it again.
Metalic Chili by Timothy Takemoto, on Flickr
Last edited by timtak; 06-13-22 at 05:52 AM.
06-13-22, 05:47 AM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,375
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4385 Post(s)
Liked 4,826 Times
in
2,982 Posts
I have thought a lot about this.
Why have pro-tour riders moved from long and low (low head tube) bikes to bikes with taller head tubes? Why has the style of cycling changed from heel-drop, push-pull, horizontal, rearward offset to a high time trial, toes down, more vertical position/pedalling? I thought at first it might be just because the pros were being forced to use the bikes that the main, overweight, mamil market wants. John Cobb seems to be a proponent of that theory with his A type back and B type back riding position. He says that head tubes are long to cater for those with "B type backs" (or rather bellies).
I think that may also be to do with the way that the pro-tour riders are so team orientated these days. They wear radios, take instructions, and more than 80% never come in the top ten places being life long domestiques. This means that even more of the pro-tour takes place in the peloton and not in the break. And in the peloton, the trade-off between being aerodynamic and being able to use your muscles forcefully is swayed towards the latter. Aerodynamic body position matters less when you spend more of your time riding in a big mass of riders, or at least in a line.
The vast majority of amateur cyclists that I see on the road however are riding on their own. I see the occasional group of two or three very rarely more. They exist, and many forum members take part in such group rides, but I doubt it makes up more than a few percent of the total of road bike miles ridden.
Other than those team, group riders, the vast majority of us are in riding a break or time trial, unlike pro-tour riders. We should therefore be using different bikes, unless we enjoy looking like pro-tour riders.
To be honest, I got into cycling partly motivated by Lance Armstrong and I am super pleased to be riding a bike like his. I am so in love with my latest, long-longed-after bike I take the liberty of posting a picture of it again.
Metalic Chili by Timothy Takemoto, on Flickr
Why have pro-tour riders moved from long and low (low head tube) bikes to bikes with taller head tubes? Why has the style of cycling changed from heel-drop, push-pull, horizontal, rearward offset to a high time trial, toes down, more vertical position/pedalling? I thought at first it might be just because the pros were being forced to use the bikes that the main, overweight, mamil market wants. John Cobb seems to be a proponent of that theory with his A type back and B type back riding position. He says that head tubes are long to cater for those with "B type backs" (or rather bellies).
I think that may also be to do with the way that the pro-tour riders are so team orientated these days. They wear radios, take instructions, and more than 80% never come in the top ten places being life long domestiques. This means that even more of the pro-tour takes place in the peloton and not in the break. And in the peloton, the trade-off between being aerodynamic and being able to use your muscles forcefully is swayed towards the latter. Aerodynamic body position matters less when you spend more of your time riding in a big mass of riders, or at least in a line.
The vast majority of amateur cyclists that I see on the road however are riding on their own. I see the occasional group of two or three very rarely more. They exist, and many forum members take part in such group rides, but I doubt it makes up more than a few percent of the total of road bike miles ridden.
Other than those team, group riders, the vast majority of us are in riding a break or time trial, unlike pro-tour riders. We should therefore be using different bikes, unless we enjoy looking like pro-tour riders.
To be honest, I got into cycling partly motivated by Lance Armstrong and I am super pleased to be riding a bike like his. I am so in love with my latest, long-longed-after bike I take the liberty of posting a picture of it again.
Metalic Chili by Timothy Takemoto, on Flickr
06-13-22, 10:11 AM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,385
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1557 Post(s)
Liked 1,732 Times
in
972 Posts
While I love my Look Kg386 it comes with a 25mm instead of a 25.4mm seatpost. 25mm Look Ergo posts are good but pricey and increasingly difficult to find
https://www.bellatisport.com/shop/pr..._diameter.html
I have ground down a 25.4mm post but heard a cracking sound. I now ride with a steel post inside my ground down seatpost.
https://www.bellatisport.com/shop/pr..._diameter.html
I have ground down a 25.4mm post but heard a cracking sound. I now ride with a steel post inside my ground down seatpost.
Likes For icemilkcoffee:
06-13-22, 12:42 PM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 8,895
Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked 1,923 Times
in
1,207 Posts
Yes, maybe now I could see an advantage from kit, but at the cost is it really worth it? especially in the case of proprietary bits... nobody is sponsoring me, nor will they ever, so if I break something or componentry fails out of warranty it is totally on me - time for a whole new bike!
Just to pick one (expensive?) example, why would I want to spend a couple thousand dollars for a new bike, when a high-end seatpost cost $100 (plus S&H)?
As always, YMMV.
06-13-22, 10:13 PM
#57
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Yamaguchi City, Japan
Posts: 1,091
Bikes: Trek Madone 5.2 SL 2007, Look KG386, R022 Re-framed Azzurri Primo, Felt Z5, Trek F7.3 FX
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times
in
73 Posts
Thank you very much.Ｉthink I found it.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/17508945568...8AAOSwh0xhzzZz
It is now 24 USD and the postage is 20 USD and I am looking for carbon.
The cheapest carbon one appears to be a Look Ergopost
https://www.ebay.com/itm/17531266545...0AAOSwbKxioeq9
which is 124 USD second hand including shipping and import duty to Japan.
Carbon posts with a 25.4mm diameter are about 25USD from aliexpress.
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32800919087.html
I am using the latter, sanded, and now with a steel insert because I think I head a cracking noise. It could be because I did not tighten it up enough, and then my weight forced the seatpost further into the hole, where the wider diameter of the un-sanded part caused over torquing. I have another with a carbon pole (25 ; 20 USD = 44USD in total) which I plan to use soonish but I have not got around to it.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/17508945568...8AAOSwh0xhzzZz
It is now 24 USD and the postage is 20 USD and I am looking for carbon.
The cheapest carbon one appears to be a Look Ergopost
https://www.ebay.com/itm/17531266545...0AAOSwbKxioeq9
which is 124 USD second hand including shipping and import duty to Japan.
Carbon posts with a 25.4mm diameter are about 25USD from aliexpress.
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32800919087.html
I am using the latter, sanded, and now with a steel insert because I think I head a cracking noise. It could be because I did not tighten it up enough, and then my weight forced the seatpost further into the hole, where the wider diameter of the un-sanded part caused over torquing. I have another with a carbon pole (25 ; 20 USD = 44USD in total) which I plan to use soonish but I have not got around to it.
Last edited by timtak; 06-13-22 at 10:27 PM. Reason: current situation
