DMC707

I am more overweight than that and full retail of my recent yeti build Would probably come close to that number

I previously had a DI2 s works tarmac And a couple of track bikes that would be in that neighborhood as well

Nothing hilarious about it. I just like nice bikes

Shadco 

Sheesh, and I thought boating forums were bad in the winter…

.

genejockey 

Surprising, but if you're at all mechanically inclined and can do a lot of your own work, very nice! The way I look at it is, if a bike was a Really Good Bike 10 or 20 years ago, it's still a Really Good Bike if brought back to good condition, even if there are newer bikes that are lighter, or faster. They don't become Bad Bikes. You just have to be okay with their relative limitations. The difference between my fastest modern CF bike and my oldest, 40 year old steel bikes boils down to about 4% difference in average speed over the same course. And I enjoy riding each of them.

tomato coupe

... the?

DMC707

Not all of us want or need to fit pseudo gravel tires on our bikes. 23s and 25s are fine

Have a 2017 tarmac and the 26c tires are close to the limit, - Not even specialized cares about running 32’s On a race bike

tomato coupe

... f***?

genejockey 

Already did that one, two days ago.

Funny you should mention that. I collect vintage American wrist and pocket watches. My Millennial nephew was visiting and we were talking about the fact that his generation don't wear wrist watches. He pulls out his phone and says, "Why do I need a watch when I have this thing in my pocket I can pull out that has the time?"

So I pulled out my pocket watch and said, "Congratulations! You've reinvented the pocket watch!"

Funny thing is, the wrist watch became popular about 100 years ago, because it was more convenient than pulling out a pocket watch.

tomato coupe

Apparently they do, because Tarmacs have been built to accommodate 32 mm tires for a few years.

DMC707

Must’ve started in 18 then, as that is the year mine was superseded

caving in to marketing and a gravel centric mindset But whatever it takes to get people to keep buying new bikes every three or four years

tomato coupe

I think this is a euphemism for scoring some weed.

tomato coupe

So, Specialized has caved in to marketing? I thought they were the creators of the marketing? Big Bike is so devious, they're even manipulating themselves!

DMC707

If I ever buy another new road bike again, I want it to be as up-to-date as possible whether I believe the hype or not, I was amazed at the resell value of the tarmac when I offloaded it

Since my main winter ride right now is a new Turbo Levo, It’s obvious that I drink heavily from Big S’s Kool-Aid even if I question it at the same time

tomato coupe

Wrist watches replaced pocket watches because they performed the same function and were more convenient, but a wrist watch can't replace a smart phone because it lacks most of the functions of a smart phone.

genejockey 

Counterpoint: I have a lot of bikes, 10 of them going back to 40 years ago. Those "improvements"? They're really improvements. They make the bikes faster, more efficient, and, I find, a lot easier to achieve the symbiosis of rider and bike where it responds like an extension of your own body.

Counterpoint: Going faster is of value to any rider who wants to go faster. One might as well say that improving your own speed and endurance is of no value to anyone who isn't a pro racer.

Counterpoint: The differences between the best and worst bikes ridden by World Tour pros boil down to incremental differences, not day-and-night, which funnily enough is the whole point of this thread - that what you gain in speed for the extra $9K that separate a $5K bike from a $14K bike. So, in the end, it comes down to the rider anyway.

You also directly contradicts your earlier assertion that all the improvements aren't really improvements. Can't keep a story straight.

Counterpoint: Wait. So it's the rider, not the bike?

And of course, you not only have fun on your $3 bike, but you also get that warm feeling of smarmy superiority over people you don't know.

genejockey 

True, but you give up the convenience of looking at your wrist, which is much more convenient. Plus, one keeps a pocket watch on a chain generally, so you always have it, versus "Where's my phone? Could you call it so I can find it?"

tomato coupe

It doesn't change the fact that a wristwatch is redundant if you have a phone. I'm with your nephew on this one. (And, not everyone loses their phone.)

LesterOfPuppets

I'd probably notice on the hills. My BA was a little over 22 lbs stock. Add cheap slightly lighter wheels, stem, seatpost, saddle and it's down to a hair over 20 lbs but it's still 5 lbs heavier than a $14k UCI legal bike, and maybe 7 pounds heavier than a $14k weight weenie bike.

LesterOfPuppets

That's why they came up with smart watches!

Well that and Dick Tracy

tomato coupe

I'd bet Greg LeMond would say there's a noticeable difference.

genejockey 

Well, I don't know about you, but when I'm out on a ride, I find it WAY easier to sneak a quick peak at my wrist than to take a hand off the bar, reach back into my jersey pocket, pull out my phone in its little plastic bag, switch it on, look at the time, and then stuff it back in, without pulling out the empty food wrappers I stuff in there.

tomato coupe

My Garmin displays the time, so a watch is still redundant.

Kontact 

There is no performance difference. Maybe I pulled less or had to get out of the saddle earlier, but it was undectable. The entire cost of his bike provided no obvious advantage, and my nearly free bike did 99.9% what his did.

Which makes the Timex vs Rolex case. But it also makes the Hamilton Swiss Automatic vs. Rolex case. If two items are essentially similar in construction, origin and performance - how did their prices become so different? The answer seems to be luxury buying.

elcruxio

It kinda isn't though. There's a lot of situations where taking a quick peek at your wrist is more convenient than digging out a phone. None of those may apply to you though.

If I want to know the time when cycling it's a lot easier to check the wristwatch. All the more so when riding in inclement weather and especially when it's raining cats and dogs and I don't want to expose the phone to all that. Also typically the phone is in an inconvenient location if I'm riding in rain so fishing it out would in many cases require stopping and in some cases seeking shelter so I don't douse the insides of a handlebar bag etc.

Taking a hand off the bars when riding, digging for the phone, dropping it, stopping, picking it up, seeing if my glass insurance covers such things etc... Easier to use a wristwatch.

tomato coupe

Redundancy is a different issue than convenience. I know a guy that wears a wrist watch on each wrist, because it's sometimes more convenient to look at one rather than the other. Despite adding some convenience, the second watch is still redundant.

Kontact 

You can use a phone instead of a watch - no one absolutely needs a watch.

But you can use running shoes or a bus instead of a bike - no one absolutely needs a bike.