GamblerGORD53

It has welded pegs sticking out both sides about 8 mm. So lots of thread for a screw. There will be a sort of ugly 1/4" gap to the frame. I had another brand that had unsuitable skinny pegs.
I'll use my DIY CF holder with it. For the seat tube I drilled it and put a bolt thru from the inside. I needed a broken golf shaft to hold the bolt and washer, then the sanded down socket.

smd4

Hose clamps would be stronger.

ofajen

Probably so. I put one on this bike with four black cable ties about three years ago and haven’t had any issues or had to replace them.

Otto

PeteHski

It's not going to rattle if you think about how it works for maybe 10 seconds. You make it sound a lot harder than it is in reality.

Kapusta

So…. you don’t understand how a through axle works…. but that won’t stop you from calling the technology garbage.

FWIW, I’ve got a 17 year old TA MTB fork with 14 years of regular, hard use. Zero play, nothing rattling, nothing worn out.

mschwett 

a mystery to you … not to those who ride them, or, thankfully, the mechanical engineers who design them! even the cheapest ones i’ve ridden are rock solid, in a good way.

DMC707

True -- The tires on the Specialized are house brand, but they are an open tubular type similar to a Vittoria Open Corsa

prj71

I think you missed it. If we were talking people all riding bikes that are 10 years old or less...I would agree with you.

However....We've had people show up on an old bike (from the 80's or 90's) and they couldn't keep up on the group ride pace at 18-23 mph. Then those same people return a week or two later with a new bike and then they can keep up. Something about the older bikes holding them back.

prj71

Lots of curmudgeon going on here. Next you'll be yelling at people to get off your lawn.

Truth is...What you stated holds true for any product manufactured. It's not just bikes. It's literally everything

And if you don't fully understand or realize the benefits of thru axles and carbon parts then there is no changing your mind.

Fredo76

All these years I thought "It's not the bike; it's the rider!", but it turns out I've been wrong all along! It's not the rider, after all! It's the bike! Must be his heavy wheels, then. Or maybe he doesn't pull up on the pedals? Maybe he's got 10 lbs. too much air in his too-skinny tires and that's why he got dropped...

Thankfully, 2022 is supplying knowledge that we didn't even know we needed! All hail the Know-It-All!

Don't get me started on curmudgeon - next thing you know I'll be advocating violence, and breaking some rule.

genejockey 

Exactly. As we discussed above - same rider, same time of day, same route, similar weather conditions, 4 minutes over 25 miles. But some folks will still deny the observation.

Listen, it don't really matter to me, baby
You believe what you want to believe...

Mojo31

It's hard to get past the fact that we can't buy cars these days with hand cranks in the front and wooden wheels.

DMC707

You need to go to P&R to talk violence -- they get very frisky over there

PeteHski

While it's mainly about the rider, there are enough marginal bike gains available over the last 30 years to make a MAMIL on a new bike significantly faster than a very similar MAMIL on an old bike. I think that's what the point was.
The alternative reality is that bike technology has not moved forward an inch over 30 years.

livedarklions

The problem with that is it's entirely untestable as one can't really know if any given MAMIL is significantly different from his 30 years ago counterpart. Also, UCI has basically put a kibosh on the things that dramatically change the speed by banning certain postures, etc., so the types of improvements that have been allowed are really of the marginal sort. Carbon fiber had the potential to completely revolutionize bike design, but if designers aren't allowed to fully investigate the range between fully recumbent and double diamond upright, that really constrains how much the field can progress.

I think it's safe to say that there's a much wider range of bike technologies available than there was 30 years ago so people are more likely to find a bike that suits their tastes, preferences and skills, but that objectively "better" is very hard if not impossible to quantify.

PeteHski

I was talking about a current MAMIL riding a new vs old bike, which is easily tested.

I was also talking about conventional road bikes, not hour record TT specials, bents etc.

livedarklions

Oops, apparently my brain farted.

PeteHski

LOL, it happens!

genejockey 

(quietly raises hand)
I've actually done the experiment.

t2p

the riders passing you might be on electric / battery powered bikes lol
.

PeteHski

Perfect. What was the result again? 4 mins slower over 25 miles. Not a big deal, but enough to make it harder work if riding with a bunch of guys on newer bikes.

GhostRider62

4 minutes in 25 miles is a lot, it could be 30-50 watt difference in power depending on speed and assumptions made.

I have all my old bikes except the broken one, I could run an experiment

I sort of did that experiment 8 years ago. I was so much faster on standard training routes using my Felt AR1 compared to a round tubed, endurance geometry metal bike. I was 2 hours faster on a 400K. I thought it might have been fit, except the metal bike was custom built for me. I never figured it out but I was always a lot faster on the new carbon aero frame with aero wheels. I just was.

AlgarveCycling

Very true.

35 years ago I was racing on a 10kg+ bike as a junior. I then moved onto 9kg+ bikes and in the late 90's, 8.5kg. Zero aero to be found.

Stopped cycling, returned in 2019 and my bike was/is 6kg! My 'heavy' aero bike is 7.5kg. Lighter weight, aerodynamics, disc brakes for shorter braking distances, faster gear changing - significant advancement.

When I was in Belgium last month I borrowed an 18yr+ aluminium Bianchi. It was entry-level for its time, 10kg and zero aero - heavier than the Cannonade w/Dura ace I raced in the 1990's. It rode ok, no problems but wow, did it feel like a brick compared to my 2019 Wilier! It felt heavy, much less agile and just didn't carry speed very well relative to what I am now used to.

Same rider vs bikes from different era's and I'm noticeably faster on the lighter, more aero machines. The marginal bikes gains over time have added up to being quite significant when we are talking about speed and course times.

Pootling about in recreational mode, then the differences are much less noticeable, of course. Agility will be noticed but unless going up a steep or long incline, then it could be argued the older bike 'does the job'. That old Bianchi was fun to ride, did the job for my trip but is a long way from being fast by modern bike standards.

GhostRider62

good point.

You have to be riding fast enough to see the aero difference.

PeteHski

What I notice as much as anything else is how comfortable and quiet modern fast road bikes are.

My Canyon Endurace is the most comfortable road bike I've ever owned and no doubt the fastest even though it's not specifically an aero frame. The combination of modern wider tyres, carbon frame, carbon wheels, compliant carbon seatpost, integrated carbon bar/stem and electronic shifting all add up to a sublime rattle/creak free ride even on some pretty rough local roads. Even my 2019 Giant Defy is a little behind the curve in this respect, I think due to narrower wheel rims and an alloy bar/stem which transfers a LOT more vibration through to my hands despite thick cushioned bar tape. I also notice a bit of internal gear cable rattle on this bike. But both are more comfortable to ride than anything I owned prior.

But having said all that I still enjoyed road riding back in the 80s and 90s just as much as today. But had these modern bikes been available back then I certainly would have chosen them over what was actually available in the day!