# Cost vs. Benefit: Point Of Diminishing Returns?



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Hey Everyone,

Noob here, so bear with me.

I've been pondering this for a long time, but have nevr had the opportunity to find the answer for myself....

After having only ridden 35 lb. department store behemoths when I was a kid, the first time I rode a decent skinny-tired beat-up bottom-rung rented Raleigh as an adult, I could immediately tell the difference, and knew that if I were to buy a bicycle in the future, it would be one like the latter, which glides effortlessly through the streets, as oipposed to the former.

Now, assuming the department store 10-speed is the bottom of the barrel, and a name-brand lighter, skinnier-tired bike like the above-mentioned Raleigh is a rung or two up on the totem-pole....naturally, I'd assume that an even lighter bike would also be a drastic improvement over that.

Lets say we have the department store bike, we'll call a 35lb. bike.
We have the lower-level Raleigh (1980's) we'll call a 27lb bike
Then we have a medium-quality bike, we'll call a 21 lb. bike
Then we have a really good bike- we'll call a 17 lb. bike

As we go from the 21 lb. bike to the 17 pounder, there is a large increase in price- but does the difference in riding experience (assuming a recreational rider) offer enough improvement over the lesser bike to justify that difference?

And then if we compare two 17 lb. bikes- one that cost maybe $1200 with decent components...and one that cost maybe $1800 with top-of-the-line components, does one really get that much more out of the ride to justify the price?

And if we even compare the $1800 top-of-the-line bike to the 21 lb. c.$500 bike- is there even enough difference there to justify paying almost 4 times the price for the better bike? Or when doing such comparisons as these, are we just talking small differences that are mainly of benefit to racers, to gain them a few fractions of a second for the exponentially increased cost?

Basically, I'd like to know why a lot of people ride such expensive bikes.

Like I said, I can see the difference between the 35 pounder and any other better bike- that's glaringly obvious- and if all we had were high-resistance 35 pounders, I would not want to ride.

But, is there as much of a difference between the 21 and 17 pounders? Are people buying $1500 bikes for racing and/or ego/status...or because they really do get that much of a better riding experience day to day, and could not go back to the lesser bike, just as I could not go back to the department store bike?

If I rode a $1500 bike (which I never have) would I then be dissatisfied with my $300 BD 21 pounder with Sora? Or would I just say "It's a nice machine, but it's not THAT much better than my bike for just riding the roads"?

Am I missing something by not having an expensive bike- or is it just mainly a raqcing/ego thing? What would Campagnolo or Dura Ace do for me, when Sora shifts my gears adequately? (If I were in a race, this would be understandable)


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

very curious about the same 
my thoughts so far were to get right frame size, easier geometry and carbon fork. Sora-type shifters on bikes I tried were pretty adequate. also looks like tons of experienced people were just fine with them.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

You asked a lot of questions there and it would take a book to answer you fully but yes, the diminished returns are a big fact. Lots of us buy and use expensive bikes (multi thousand) for a couple of reasons - because we want to and because we can. With me, cycling is all I do (I'm retired so I don't even have a job) so I buy the bike I *want *and I only have to justify it to two people.

As there is no built-in speed in a bike (it's almost all you, the engine) we're buying two things - lightness and quality. Just like a $5000 camera doesn't make us a good photographer, a $5000 bike won't turn us into even a bad pro rider. There are big diminished returns in the lightness thing too as the bike weight is a fraction of our body + bike weight. Anyone can lose 5lbs off their body but to lose it off the bike will cost a few thou.

The most important thing in a bike is "fit". Make sure that is right. A great starter price-point for a "good" bike with "good" equipment is Shimano 105 equipment with Ultegra and DuraAce being the upscale stuff. Yes it works slightly better, weighs slightly less and costs lots more.

So buy the bike you want and can afford, be happy and ride the snot out of it.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

What's important to one rider may not be important for the next because they have different interests and/or goals. For example, I race as a cat 2 and my dad does more touring and donut rides. He's just as happy on his 8 speed down tube shifter 90's technology as he is on his Dura Ace components. He can tell the difference between the two systems but, it doesn't matter one bit as the goal of his ride is to socialize, get some coffee and look at some nature. 

While I love to do the same rides and enjoy them on various levels of equipement, I appreciate the general feel, crispness, reliability and overall performance of the top tier components as my racing demands a different type of performance. To me anything, given the same power, that can generate more speed is looked at and considered for purchase.

To give you some idea of what is important to me in order would be:

1. Quality of training to affect adaptation to generate maximum power.
2. Nutrition to fuel the training and stay lean and light.
3. Rest/recovery. 
4. Frame. Lightweight isn'y everything but considered.
5. Wheels and tires. More aero but weight is considered. Good tires are more important to me fwiw.
6. Group. Campy, SRAM and Shimano are all reliable so I bought what I could afford.

To answer your question about bike weight here are some numbers from analytic cycling. Given the same frontal area, coefficient of air drag, rolling resistance, air density, and components a 150 pound rider on a 17 lbs bike generating 250W will accelerate to approximately 24.8 mph on flat ground and just over 7 mph on a 10% slope. The same rider on a 21 lbs bike generating the same wattage will accelerate up to approximately 24.7 mph on flat ground and 6.8 mph on a 10% slope.

For my dad the difference in speed is meaningless. For me it means a bit more.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Yuris: My thoughts, exactly.- only I went with a cro-moly fork because i was not convinced that paying $50 more for the carbon would make a noticable difference (It well might...but I don't know...).

Mike T.: Thanks for the input. The weight I can definitely understand, as I've experienced it.

I know what you mean by quality, too. It's nice to have something that is just aesthetically pleasing and beautiful, especially when it's something you spend a lot of time with and enjoy. That definitely has value.

I went for a cheap bike right now, because I don't know if I'll like cycling as much in practice as I do thinking about it. I could go out and buy a $2500 bike tomorrow and pay cash for it (I don't make a lot of money..but I live very modestly; have no mortgage or rent and am good at saving) but obviously, that would not be a wise move for me.

If I find myself riding 4 or 5 days a week or more, I could see myself upgrading to maybe an $800 or $1000 bike, as i know there would be some improvement..and for the aesthetics (Yes, a nice bike with finely machined components is a thing of beauty and art), but I doubt under any circumstances I'd ever pay over $1000 for a bike- but I am dying to know what motivates others to do so. 

I may never truly know, until and if I ride such a bike..... It may be one of those things that you really can't quantify in eords and figures...but like art, just has to be something that satisfies you. 

Thank you- your post has been helpful. 

I'd imagine as others respond, we'll hear a lot of different reasons- and that is the purpose of this thread. Not that anyone has to justify their purchase, but rather that I'd like to know what exactly motivates such purchases, and if those motivations are just personal preferences, or if there really is an advantage that anyone can partake of and appreciate if they are willing to spend the money. 

But getting out and riding is the main thing. In the 90's, I found an old piece-of-junk 10 speed in the garbage on the side of the road. I took it home and stripped it down (it had been covered with house paint) and took it apart and repacked everything and put a few new cables on it...and ended up putting many miles on that free bike and had a lot of fun, just taking joyrides at night. Sometimes crappy things are nice, because you don't have to worry about them being stolen or damaged...heck, I'd ride over curbs and down stairs.... and naturally, there was no damaging the old tank. I know my soon-to-arrive $300 Bikesdirect 21 lb. bike will be better than that...so I should be pretty happy.


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

SolitaryRider: read a lot about CF fork absorbing vibration - thats why i am considering it. had some problems with my arms from longer rides on my cheap hybrid bike. so for me this is certainly justified expense, even if thats not true 
just curious which 300 bike you've got from BD @ 21lb?


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

woodys737 said:


> To answer your question about bike weight here are some numbers from analytic cycling. Given the same frontal area, coefficient of air drag, rolling resistance, air density, and components a 150 pound rider on a 17 lbs bike generating 250W will accelerate to approximately 24.8 mph on flat ground and just over 7 mph on a 10% slope. The same rider on a 21 lbs bike generating the same wattage will accelerate up to approximately 24.7 mph on flat ground and 6.8 mph on a 10% slope.
> 
> For my dad the difference in speed is meaningless. For me it means a bit more.


Wow! Thank you! That really says a lot! The differences are even more subtle than I had imagined.

I'll be riding solo on country roads- and my goal at the moment is to be able to ride 17 miles to the town in the next county and back (just for fun and exercise). Now if I can do 20MPH on my bike, and someone were to tell me that a bike that cost 3 times as much would enable me to do 25MPH for the same effort expended and with the same level of comfort...that would be something to shoot for. But obviously, to gain a fraction of a MPH or even 1 MPH, would be pretty much meaningless to me. Although I might appreciate the better handling, etc. 

This is all eye-opening. I've been curious about this subject for years- if not decades....and you guys are the ones to ask. 

Keep it coming! This is fascinating.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

yuris said:


> SolitaryRider: read a lot about CF fork absorbing vibration - thats why i am considering it. had some problems with my arms from longer rides on my cheap hybrid bike. so for me this is certainly justified expense, even if thats not true
> just curious which 300 bike you've got from BD @ 21lb?


Ah...I see. I know we wouldn't want an aluminum fork...that's for sure :shocked: If I still lived in New york, I think I would have been more concerned...but here in KY the roads are quie smooth...so hopefully my Cr-mo will be O-K. 

Here's the bike:
Road Bikes, Roadbikes - Mercier Galaxy AL

They have the same bike with the carbon fork for $50 more.

I've read in 2 places, unofficially, that it weighs around 21 pounds...whether that's true or not...I dunno. UPS tracking says the box weighs 29 lbs. So will I have 8 lbs of cardboard and 21 lbs. of bike? I hope so!!


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

SolitaryRider said:


> Wow! Thank you! That really says a lot! The differences are even more subtle than I had imagined.
> 
> I'll be riding solo on country roads- and my goal at the moment is to be able to ride 17 miles to the town in the next county and back (just for fun and exercise). Now if I can do 20MPH on my bike, and someone were to tell me that a bike that cost 3 times as much would enable me to do 25MPH for the same effort expended and with the same level of comfort...that would be something to shoot for. But obviously, to gain a fraction of a MPH or even 1 MPH, would be pretty much meaningless to me. Although I might appreciate the better handling, etc.
> 
> ...


Keep in mind the only difference I plugged into the program was the difference in weight of the bike itself. It gets really hard to quantify different frames, wheels, etc...IMO, an entry level bike with stock shallow wheels and cheap tires v. a top tier bike with aero wheels etc, the speed difference might be 1 mph at the most. This is while holding around 250W with my position relative to the wind. This assumes the fit of the two bikes puts me in the same relative position considering aerodynamics. 

The main point that many of us learn the expensive way is that all the latest and greatest gear while technically faster, just doesn't buy the rider the kind of gains they think they will see. There are so many other qualities to consider than just speed however.


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

thanks, I like your model colors a lot better then mercier with CF fork. did you get silver or green?
Please post your review once you get your bike!

one more thing which I very agree with OP on: I just got into idea of road bike, after doing longer trips on a hybrid bike. Not really sure were this will lead me too, being mostly ensuring longer rides as 40cm tires arent exactly made for racing  
So maybe I will be enjoying long rides even more (thinking of doing century next spring) - then I need comfort more. Or maybe racing will spark my interest - then speed will be more important. 
Given that, I'd like to get cheaper bike just to see how/where it goes. Otherwise one might end up with 1K+ piece just to realise thats not really what he needs. 
Of course budget is also a factor...


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

yuris said:


> SolitaryRider: read a lot about CF fork absorbing vibration - thats why i am considering it. had some problems with my arms from longer rides on my cheap hybrid bike. so for me this is certainly justified expense, even if thats not true
> just curious which 300 bike you've got from BD @ 21lb?


Everybody's read a lot about how CF absorbs vibration, softens the ride, dampens the shocks, etc. I have steel bikes & a CF bike & I'll be darned if I can tell the difference in ride quality. I put a CF fork on a steel bike & noticed no difference. I took it off, sold it, & put the steel fork back on. I like the ride quality of th steel just as well. If the fork was aluminum, IME, just about anything would ride better. Naturally, the steel is heavier, but it also have a smooth ride comparable, I think, to CF.


----------



## cycmike (May 12, 2011)

I started with a used Fuji Roubaix aluminum framed bicycle I got for $800.. I still love that bike (my son rides it now). The friends I ride with purchased late model Trek Madones and they started leaving me behind. I couldn't just let that happen, so I escalated my own arsenal and matched equipment (and surpassed in style) with a Wilier Gran Turismo Ultegra. Yeah, its a lot of bicycle for me, and I figure I'll grow into it and I love riding it. 

The difference in the weight, about 7 lbs. is noticeable even to a relatively inexperienced rider like me (1 year..about 1500 miles). The difference in the equipment group, Shimano105 vs Ultegra, is not really as noticeable. They both worked well. Climbing performance is very noticeably improved and the ride quality is better. I feel better when I get off the Wilier than the Fuji.

Was it worth the money to me? Yes, it was. The bike is a pleasure to ride and I can keep up with my buds' equipment. I'll probably not spend more on my next bike but I don't regret the expense on this one.


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

very interesting, thanks!
how big was difference in weight between steel/CF?
also my other concern was rust - any insights on this?


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

woodys737 said:


> .
> 
> The main point that many of us learn the expensive way is that all the latest and greatest gear while technically faster, just doesn't buy the rider the kind of gains they think they will see. .


That is exactly what had always assumed to be the case- but of course, I didn't know if I was correct or not. 

This info was the next best thing to actually personally trying out many different tiers of bikes...which I'll likely never have the opportunity to do. 

Thanks so much- that is PRECISELY what I wanted to know. Granted, the aesthetics and "feel" have value....but it's nice to know that I wouldn't be increasing my speed or comfort substantially if i had a bike that cost $1000 more. 

But of course, in racing, 0.2 MPH can mean the difference between winning and losing. While the 0.2 MPH to me would be un-noticeable and utterly meaningless.



yuris said:


> thanks, I like your model colors a lot better then mercier with CF fork. did you get silver or green?
> Please post your review once you get your bike!
> 
> .


I went for the green. I don't know why it is, but all these off-brand bikes seem to come in mostly crappy colors! I can't see buying a new bike, no matter how good of a deal it seems to be, if one doesn't like the color. There are so many nice colors in the world...greens and blues and maroon and gold and pewter.....but half the bikes (and cars, for that matter) that ya see are black or white!

Maybe that's another reason people are willing to buy $1500 bikes?- tyhey come with nicer paint jobs.....


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Mr. Versatile: Great info! Plus...I never heard of anyone cracking a steel fork...

CycMike: You make a great case for buying a nice bike. As long as you can feel the difference and enjoy and appreciate it, then it's well worth it. It makes me feel good just to know that you enjoy the bike so much. 

Yuris: I believe the difference in weight bewtween the carbon fork and steel is <6 oz. 

Thanks all!


----------



## cycmike (May 12, 2011)

I saw a guy at the LBS recently picking up a fixie with a basket and a big fat seat; he said the spokes on the rear wheel kept breaking. Yeah, he was a fairly large fellow. Pretty cool looking bike overall and it definitely had some mileage on it. I asked him about his riding and he told me that he commutes 20 miles one way from far Northwest Houston(FM1960) to far west Houston (Galleria) every day (he has no car! In Houston!). Dude didn't look it, but he was definitely Rule V compliant!

Anyway, the point of this I guess would be, if you want to ride a bicycle, get one you like and just ride it. Maybe one day you'll find a reason to change or upgrade. Or not.


----------



## twodownzero (Oct 9, 2011)

No way that bike weighs 21 lbs. A higher-end aluminum bike with a carbon fork and lighter wheels is in the 21 lb range. I suspect that one is in the 25+ lb range. Forget the ship weight.

It takes a while to tell the difference, but like anything else, once you know what good quality feels like, you'll be able to decide if it was worth the money. For me, I spend so much time on my bike that I can't resist having something decent under me. If I only rode once a month, I'd feel differently.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

cycmike said:


> I saw a guy at the LBS recently picking up a fixie with a basket and a big fat seat; he said the spokes on the rear wheel kept breaking. Yeah, he was a fairly large fellow. Pretty cool looking bike overall and it definitely had some mileage on it. I asked him about his riding and he told me that he commutes 20 miles one way from far Northwest Houston(FM1960) to far west Houston (Galleria) every day (he has no car! In Houston!). Dude didn't look it, but he was definitely Rule V compliant!
> 
> Anyway, the point of this I guess would be, if you want to ride a bicycle, get one you like and just ride it. Maybe one day you'll find a reason to change or upgrade. Or not.


Darn! All that distance on a fixie?! I guess sometimes things are just "right" though, even though to an observer they technically shouldn't be. Like the old bike I resurrected from the garbage- it was just a worn-out department store POS that wasn't of any account when it was brand new, but darned if that bike didn't serve me well. It was comfortable, and while it didn't ride _really nice_, it rode nice enough that I didn't have to think about it....it was comfortable; and it didn't leave me thinking "I could use a new bike"- it just served it's purpose admirably- and I now wonder, if i had been in the market for a bike then, how much I would have had to pay to find a bike that could do what that POS did so well. 

I guess too, when ya pay a lot for something, you expect a lot from it- and if it doesn't live up to those expectations, it's very frustrating. On the other hand, when something is free or cheap and it surpasses the expectations one has for it- then it's a pleasant surprise- and I guess since one's expectations are already low, one is more easily pleased.

I'm hoping I'll be as pleased with this BD bike as much as I was with the one from the garbage! (Ultimately, the one from the garbage ended up needing some rehab- like an axle and a few other little things...and not wanting to put any money into an old POS, I simply threw it out)- I have a picture of it somewhere....now I'll have to see if I can dig it out one day, just for craps & grins! 



twodownzero said:


> No way that bike weighs 21 lbs. A higher-end aluminum bike with a carbon fork and lighter wheels is in the 21 lb range. I suspect that one is in the 25+ lb range. Forget the ship weight.
> 
> It takes a while to tell the difference, but like anything else, once you know what good quality feels like, you'll be able to decide if it was worth the money. For me, I spend so much time on my bike that I can't resist having something decent under me. If I only rode once a month, I'd feel differently.


You may be right- 8lbs. of cardboard does seem like a lot- even though cardboard is pretty heavy. But UPS weights are usually right on the money (rounded to the pound)- and I'm thinking there's gotta be at least 4 or 5 lbs. of cardboard....so even if it weighs in at 24 lbs. I'll be happy, because I'm sure that's still a good deal lighter than that old 1970's Raleigh I liked so much. We shall see. If it does turn out to be 21 lbs., I'll be very pleasantly surprised. 

There sure is something to be said for that feeling of quality, like you say. If I end up riding a lot, I may just end up getting me to anFABS (Far-away bike shop...since there are no LBS's here) and trying out some "good" bikes. Even with all the great info youse guys have been providing here, I likely will never truly know the deal until I experience it myself.

I can't afford the best of everything, but I'm certainly to the point where I can splurge on one or two nice things for a hobby that I enjoy. 

I do wish there were more user reviews of these Bikesdirect bikes out there......

Yuris: I will indeed do a review of the bike when I get it. I don't know of how much value my opinion will be, since I'm not an experienced cyclist, but at least I can try and document some the actual specs, like weight. 

Funny thing is, it may be a whike before I actually get to RIDE the bike, because I will need a presta valve adapter to air the tires...and Wal*Mart didn't have them...and there are no LBS's here, so I'll have to get one via mail order......darn! (I'd better get busy and order one, along with some other accessories I'll need)


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I have too many bikes. The three relevant to this discussion are my commuter, a mid-80s Raleigh with a 2x6 drivetrain and downtube shifters, a 2009 Kona Jake, with a mostly Tiagra build, and my nicest bike, a '99 LeMond with some of the stock 105 components and some new 105 and Ultegra components.

The performance differences between the three bikes have much more to do with my setup choices than the components themselves. Weights, at least if I stripped the rack, fenders and insanely heavy lock off the Raleigh, are pretty close. There are some other aspects of the Raleigh that I find annoying, and consider adequate justification to want a post-1990 bicycle for recreational and training rides. But it's a great bike to leave locked outside.

The things that make my LeMond my highest-performing bicycle are more that it has nice tires, closer gear spacing, clipless pedals, and the contact points are such that as long as I'm not wearing a backpack, I'm both more comfortable and more aero. I like the STI shifters because I can shift in a climb or a sprint. It happens to have a carbon fork, but I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference if someone stuck a steel or aluminum fork on it and didn't tell me. If I change the pressure in my tires, I do notice. I'm not going to say I wouldn't buy a more expensive bike if I had the money to spend on it. I get some pleasure from owning nice things. But the performance differences between two bikes set up for the same purpose, with well-maintained components from the last twenty years, and that fit their rider well, are going to be pretty small.


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

SolitaryRider: your review would be very welcome and useful. Too few review on BD bikes indeed. 
I doubt bike like this will be reviewed by an experienced cyclist as they more likely to get more high-end stuff - from BD or elsewhere. All the more interest for people new to this in reviews from people in the same shoes - like you.
Good luck with your riding - hope you'll get enough time to enjoy your time in KY this season.


----------



## Guest (Oct 24, 2011)

SolitaryRider said:


> Ah...I see. I know we wouldn't want an aluminum fork...that's for sure :shocked: If I still lived in New york, I think I would have been more concerned...but here in KY the roads are quie smooth...so hopefully my Cr-mo will be O-K.
> 
> Here's the bike:
> Road Bikes, Roadbikes - Mercier Galaxy AL
> ...


For most package I've ordered from Amazon, the UPS nominal "shipping weight" is significantly higher than the actual weight -- this is because "shipping weight" is just a proxy for the price UPS charges to ship an item. If you ship a lightweight item in a big box (like a bike), UPS will say that every 140 cubic inches of volume = "one pound" of effective shipping weight and charge accordingly. If you ship dense items like books, they'll charge the actual weight...



> SolitaryRider: your review would be very welcome and useful. Too few review on BD bikes indeed.
> I doubt bike like this will be reviewed by an experienced cyclist as they more likely to get more high-end stuff - from BD or elsewhere. All the more interest for people new to this in reviews from people in the same shoes - like you.
> Good luck with your riding - hope you'll get enough time to enjoy your time in KY this season.


I've actually seen a fair number of the cheap bikes direct bikes-- such as the Windsor Wellington 1-- locked up at the college campus where I work. Weight wise they didn't seem noticeably different than any other entry level road bike (based on an unscientific test of gently lifting the bike a few inches). A while back when I was shopping around for road bikes I actually hunted for various bikes direct bikes around campus, to check the weight and sizing.... anyone who saw me must have assumed I was trying to steal something, lol

For new bikes at the $300 price point I think Bikes Direct is a very good deal. While you could arguably find a nicer bike used for $300, I've seen lots of friends get burned with unanticipated/undisclosed maintenance problems dealing with used bikes they got from craigslist etc.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

PhotonFreak said:


> For new bikes at the $300 price point I think Bikes Direct is a very good deal. While you could arguably find a nicer bike used for $300, I've seen lots of friends get burned with unanticipated/undisclosed maintenance problems dealing with used bikes they got from craigslist etc.


If BD would simply state the weight of the bikes in the specs tables, they'd save us all a lot of trouble :mad2: and probably increase their sales. When I first saw their website (never having heard of BD before) I laughed and said to myself that the bikes are probably 35 lb. department store-esque behemoths. After looking at the specs and doing some research though, the bikes seemed pretty respectable and quite a good value for the price- especially the SC2, which was among the lowest-priced, but yet has rather decent components for such a low price, and what looks to be a fairly light frame. My thinking is that the price on that one model might be artificially lo, as the bend in the seat stays may be scaring people off of it??? (I would imagine though, that that bend accomplishes the same thing that other frames accomplish by having straight stays which are attached to the seat tube a few inches lower than the top tube?)

All I know is that I couldn't find anything remotely comparable for $300, so I tooks[sic] a chance. 

I was trying to find something used, around the $200 range. Really wanted a Schwinn Tempo (with Shimano 105 stuff) but the only one I could find "locally"[200 miles away] was WAY too big for me, and the ones on Ebay are going for ridiculous money.... Pretty much all you see on the local CL are Huffys and the like.....

My thinking too, on the UPS. The carton that the bikes come in is definitely oversize by their standards......

The bike is set to arrive tomorrow.....so I'll let youse know how much it weighs..... (and add it to the BD bike-weight thread too).

Last night, I saw a pair of the STI 2300 shifters being sold on some website for $150!  [I know they can probably be had for half of that- but that's still pretty good for a $300 bike!]:thumbsup:

The real proof will be in the ride though.... I'm hoping that I can use my air compressor's blow gun to inflate the tires through the presta valve....??? -otherwise, it'll be a while before I get to ride it!


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

PS: I see that Mike from BD posts on here occasionally.

Mike, why not tell us what your bikes weigh? If they truly are competitive with the name brands (which they seem to be) it would be to your advantage, and would help us all out...and definitely would sway more people to buy. (Even if the bikes are a tad heavier than the name brands you compare them to, at least if we knew the specs, many of us would say "Gee, it's 6oz heavier than the XYZ, but for the few hundred bucks I'd save buying it, it's well worth it". Then we might actually believe the "Compare to the $1500 Trek" stuff....)

I do appreciate that you do list all the components for each model. I had taken a look at the roadbikeoutlet site, and they tell p[recious little about their bikes, so I hit the back button. I went with BD because I had enough info to make an informed decision....but I almost didn't order because I couldn't determine the weight [I did ultimately order from you though, because I was only buying a $300 bike- had I been looking at a more expensive bike, I would not have ordered without knowing the weight]


----------



## LongIslandTom (Apr 20, 2011)

I think it might be impractical for BD to list how much a bike weighs because of so many different frame sizes and component mixes, all of which will affect how much a bike weighs.

You can get a pretty good ballpark figure if you do a little detective work though. When I was shopping for my new bike back in March 2011 and I was looking through the upper-end bikes on BD, I noticed they did mention how much some of the upper-end frames weigh for a particular frame size, like the LeChamp CF, LeChamp Ti, Immortal, Century, Century Ti, etc. Then you look up the weights for the various components on the specific trim for that bike you are looking for (Aksium wheels, SRAM Rival group set, Ritchey seatpost, handlebar, etc.).

I made the decision to buy a LeChamp Ti, and determined the 56cm frame would fit me best. I went with the Heat trim (SRAM Rival-equipped) for that model. My pre-purchase detective work determined the bike would weigh a bit over 17 pounds without pedals. After receiving it from UPS and putting it together, I weighed it stock, and it came out to 17 pounds 10 ounces. Within the ballpark I think.

Personally I don't think it matters that much. The weight of the bike changed by almost 2 pounds once I put onto the bike components that I like (my particular preferred saddle and seatpost, bottle cages, pedals that I like, saddle bag, etc.).


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Wow, Tom, that's a LOT of work- adding up the weight of all those components! (I picture you working for BNL!)

Yeah, the weight might not be too critical- but a ballpark figure would be nice for comparison's sake. I mean, I don't think you would have shelled out for that nice bike and gone with high-end components if it weighed 25 lbs., right? (That's a nice bike! And the weight is definitely sweet)


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

Not sure how much hassle is it to weight each model, and post it alongside with other data. IMO its is useful, to compare vs. other brands as well as making a choice between BD models. 
After all, they are not coming up with 5 new models every week.

In fact same applies to bike manufacturers in general - i think only few brand will post weight, while majority will say either "it does not matter since this bike is great" or "it varies"


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

I was just looking at a Fuji 3.0 - which looks to have the same frame as the Galaxy SC2/3 (with the carbon fork, like the SC3)...and it weighs 25 lbs. so I don't know about the SC2 weighing 21- it does seem doubtful....but even if it ends up weighing 25-26 lbs. it'll still be the lightest bike I've ever ridden...and I know I wouldn't be able to find anything lighter for $300. 

The Fuji 3.0 costs more than double the SC2/3...and has lower-quality components. (The fact that the BD bikes have better components, just might mean they weigh less than the Fuji- so maybe there's a chance my SC2 will come in around 24-24.5 lbs? (Can't weigh much more than that and still have a UPS weight of 29 lbs...)

We shall see....


----------



## LongIslandTom (Apr 20, 2011)

SolitaryRider said:


> Wow, Tom, that's a LOT of work- adding up the weight of all those components! (I picture you working for BNL!)
> 
> Yeah, the weight might not be too critical- but a ballpark figure would be nice for comparison's sake. I mean, I don't think you would have shelled out for that nice bike and gone with high-end components if it weighed 25 lbs., right? (That's a nice bike! And the weight is definitely sweet)


You should check out the Weight Weenies forum. They make entire spreadsheets with component and frame weights that were assiduously researched. 

I didn't have to go that far. The bike that I was looking to buy (Moto LeChamp Ti Heat) had SRAM, Mavic and Ritchie components, and they all post weight of the components on their websites.

To Yuris: When you see that they got something like 5 different frame sizes and up to 7 (or more) different componentry mixes for each frame, plus they sometimes swap different components depending on what's available, it is impractical to publish weight for all of those different permutations of frame sizes and component configs.


----------



## Guest (Oct 24, 2011)

SolitaryRider said:


> I was just looking at a Fuji 3.0 - which looks to have the same frame as the Galaxy SC2/3 (with the carbon fork, like the SC3)...and it weighs 25 lbs. so I don't know about the SC2 weighing 21- it does seem doubtful....but even if it ends up weighing 25-26 lbs. it'll still be the lightest bike I've ever ridden...and I know I wouldn't be able to find anything lighter for $300.
> 
> The Fuji 3.0 costs more than double the SC2/3...and has lower-quality components. (The fact that the BD bikes have better components, just might mean they weigh less than the Fuji- so maybe there's a chance my SC2 will come in around 24-24.5 lbs? (Can't weigh much more than that and still have a UPS weight of 29 lbs...)
> 
> We shall see....


Most of the weight on a bike _is_ the groupset/components, Followed by the wheels and tires, followed by the frame/fork, then ancillary stuff like the saddle, handlebars, etc. So two bikes having the same frame as each other doesn't reveal much about the weight of the complete bike.

With the bikes direct bikes, they don't really have control over which exact components on the bike. Lots of their bikes will say "wheelset x or wheelset y, no choice", or "tires x or y" in the description. This is true with most cheaper bikes in shops too. Those kinds of random changes will make significant differences in the total weight, which means even same model, same year, same size, weight will fluctuate a lot. 

I think that having a disclaimer about how the UPS shipping weight works (which could definitely scare people off), as well as a centralized "table" piecemeal descriptions of the weight -- say for various frames, and wheels -- would give people a better ballpark idea of the weight they'd be getting. They don't want to quote a number for total weight though in case someone gets something slightly heavier (say due to a change in brand of tires) it could be a liability for them and justify customers demanding refund/chargebacks.


----------



## Tommy Walker (Aug 14, 2009)

SolitaryRider, you are getting a lot of great comments and advice here. It is hard to measure the Point of Diminishing return, because a lot of it depends on satisfaction of the individual. I spent a lot on my bike, but very happy with it. Primarily, the fit and geometry is incredible, so I ride lengths and have no pain. My wife opted for an aluminum frame with a carbon fork (cost 1/3 of my bike), we rode the Colonial Parkway a few weeks ago and it is composed of a cobble aggregate pavement; she complained about it being bumpy and the ride was rahter smooth to me.

I've had my bike for 2 years and have 5,000 miles on it; that's a lot for me (as I also am an avid golfer and try to do a lot of family things). I look forward to getting on the bike. My previous steed was a hybrid, very nice Bianchi, but I don't look forward to riding it any more because the Cervelo is such a great ride.

Groupsets are another thing; they are constantly improving, so much that I think the 2012 Tiagra is a great value, but I personally think Ultegra is the way to go. What can Dura Ace or Campy do for you? I made my decision to go Ultegra because I can have a quality groupset, but only have to spend $60 for a chain or a cassette versus $180 with Dura Ace. Additionally, Ultegra won't wear out as fast as DA.

I often think I would like other bikes that cost more (Pinerello Dogma, Colnago, or a Titanium Seven), but not sure why because I completed the Seagull Century last week with absolutely no pain, but my partner with his BD bike (no offense Mike) complained of back pain and is now looking for a new bike.

There are benefits to lighter weight componants, but probably more prelevant to racers. I think the value is the cyclist defining his or her needs and meeting them, that along with the fit, justifies the expense.


----------



## tystevens (Jul 10, 2008)

People have written entire textbooks trying to answer the OP's question as far as diminishing returns, value of goods and services, and so forth. The answer is, it depends! Because the value of a dollar, the value of higher end stuff, the value of image and prestige, and so forth, is different for each of us, it is hard to pinpoint.

Applied to my own personal bike "wants," I'm currently riding an '08 Jamis Ventura, which is a $1k aluminum bike w/ carbon fork seat stays, 105 components, entry wheels, and a name plate without a lot of prestige or brand recognition. I do want to upgrade for the following reasons -- I think a more "plush" bike would be more comfortable for my riding (I don't race), and I'd like to go carbon to reduce vibration. So what am I willing to pay extra for? Well, I'll pay more for a good carbon frame with geometry I like and that feels right to me -- I'd be willing to spend an extra $1k for this. I've found my 105 components to work great, both functionally and from a durability standpoint, so I don't really need to spend more money there. I don't really care about component weight, either, so the benefits of Ultegra and higher would be lost on me. I'd like a better wheelset, but not a big issue. I don't care much about branding or prestige based on the name on the side of the bike, so I'm not willing to pay additional for that. So, I'm looking for bikes in the $2k price range that are 105 equipped. I'm not willing to spend in to the $2600+ range to get Ultegra components, and I'm not willing to spend extra for a name that I can't pronounce! That's where my returns diminish beyond the point which I'm willing to spend.

It probably also depends what you are used to spending. Coming in to road biking, I had already purchased 3 MTBs that cost $900, $1400 and $2100, respectively, so a $1k road bike didn't seem very expensive compared to what I'd been used to spending. But for someone just coming into biking, I can see how there could be a bit of sticker shock.


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

i guess its all very relative. here is review from someone who did 100 miles on BD bike (different one but also cheap), and was pretty happy with comfort:

BikesDirect Dawes SST-AL century ride report


----------



## IBOHUNT (Oct 10, 2011)

tystevens said:


> People have written entire textbooks trying to answer the OP's question as far as diminishing returns, value of goods and services, and so forth. The answer is, it depends! Because the value of a dollar, the value of higher end stuff, the value of image and prestige, and so forth, is different for each of us, it is hard to pinpoint.
> 
> Applied to my own personal bike "wants," I'm currently riding an '08 Jamis Ventura, which is a $1k aluminum bike w/ carbon fork seat stays, 105 components, entry wheels, and a name plate without a lot of prestige or brand recognition. I do want to upgrade for the following reasons -- I think a more "plush" bike would be more comfortable for my riding (I don't race), and I'd like to go carbon to reduce vibration. So what am I willing to pay extra for? Well, I'll pay more for a good carbon frame with geometry I like and that feels right to me -- I'd be willing to spend an extra $1k for this. I've found my 105 components to work great, both functionally and from a durability standpoint, so I don't really need to spend more money there. I don't really care about component weight, either, so the benefits of Ultegra and higher would be lost on me. I'd like a better wheelset, but not a big issue. I don't care much about branding or prestige based on the name on the side of the bike, so I'm not willing to pay additional for that. So, I'm looking for bikes in the $2k price range that are 105 equipped. I'm not willing to spend in to the $2600+ range to get Ultegra components, and I'm not willing to spend extra for a name that I can't pronounce! That's where my returns diminish beyond the point which I'm willing to spend.
> 
> It probably also depends what you are used to spending. Coming in to road biking, I had already purchased 3 MTBs that cost $900, $1400 and $2100, respectively, so a $1k road bike didn't seem very expensive compared to what I'd been used to spending. But for someone just coming into biking, I can see how there could be a bit of sticker shock.


Thanks for this one and thanks to everybody else that posted their insights. I too am looking for a road bike and have test ridden a few. What amazes me is that at a given price point ( $1800-$2100) it seems that all of the bikes are about the same.

Felt Z5 - $2K Carbon frame, fork w/ 105 kit
Fuji Fondo 4.0 and 3.0 ~2K, Carbon and Taigra/105 respectively kit
Giant Defy Composite 2 - ~$1850 Carbon wiith SRAM Apex
Cannondale Synapse 5 - $2K Carbon with 105 kit
Trek 3.1 - ~1900 Carbon with 105/Tiagra mix.

Whats the better choice? Mayhaps wheels which I couldn't tell the difference about. Perhaps as a 200 lb person I should look at a less expensive aluminum frame/CF fork combo?

I know for me it wouldn't be weight as I can stand to lose quite a bit more (I'm down 4 stone since July by ridding my Fisher Tarpon 1500 miles) 

I suspect that it comes down to the LBS service that one might get if he/she is mechanically challenged about adjusting derailieurs or truing wheels - which I am.

I rode the trek and Synapse last weekend. After being on a 30 lb Tarpon it was a definite "WOW!" moment. 

I'm in Western Maryland so it's rolling hills and at times, not the best roads. I would typically ride ~10-15 miles at lunch and then a 40-70 mile ride on a Saturday or Sunday.

Any thoughts would be appreciated. The spousal unit will be getting me a bike for Christmas and I'd like to tell her which one would be nice to see under the tree.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Definitely some great insights here! Thanks to all who posted- I will be responding with comments as soon as I have the time! This thread has surpassed my expectations!

*"My previous steed was a hybrid, very nice Bianchi, but I don't look forward to riding it any more because the Cervelo is such a great ride."*

THAT pretty much sums it up! THAT describes a quality that one may not be able to quantify and measure...but which adds 1000-fold more to one's pleasure and comfort. Both bikes could perform exactly alike...but just that unquantifiable feeling you get from the one you prefer is the magic that makes one pay the price for a quality bike, and not regret it.

Which begs another question: I wonder how many people buy such bikes, looking for increased performance, rather than that "magic", and end up missing out on the magic, because they weren't looking for the right thing when comparing and choosing bikes?

More later...keep the great comments coming!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I was thinking about getting a new road bike. But I've had the LeMond since it was new, and whatever quibbles I may have with it, it has the magic.  If I ever do get around to replacing it as my main road training/occasional appearance at a crit. ride, the frame is going on my wall.

I'd like to repurchase my first MTB for similar reasons. As a wise man once said, "Sometimes you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone."


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Zee bike has arrived! 25 lbs. not bad for a $300 bike! And one could probably knock a pound or a pound and a half off if they were to change the pedals, crank and seat post.

Managed to inflate the tires by using a piece of rubber hose and a blow gun! (I don't have a presta adapter or pump with a presta head)

The finish on the bike is very nice! Haven't ridden it on pavement yet, as I haven't adjusted the brakes and deraileurs yet....but a review will be forthcoming. Seems very nice for $300- and is definitely the lightest bike I've ever ridden (which isn't saying much...)

Stay tuned!

I doubt there are any other $300 bikes around that weigh less!


----------



## MySpokeIsABroke (Sep 24, 2011)

Sol, I had the same questions and position as you. Haven't ridden much in 25 years. Seeking Recreation and conditioning bike. No delusions about anything else. I threw an xtra $100 and bought the Windsor Wellington 3.0. Different frame. Kinesis frame same as Giant, Felt and Fuji. In addition to the carbon fork it has threadless 1-1/8 inch headstem. The Galaxy has a quill type 1-inch. This simply means it's harder to upgrade to quality lightweight components. The Windsor in 53cm weighs 24.3 lbs. Your right on in that the cheap steel pedals etc and with other OEM parts will go and shave at least a few pounds. You can wear that bike out or the replaceable parts out and then move on in either upgrades or a newer rig. Taking it in to the local Mountaineering shop to have the wheel bearings loosened and the deraileurs adjusted. They said they would look it over and let me know if the wheels need truing but they seem and ride fine as is. Other than that I got it ready myself and put 50 miles on it since last week. Best I have felt in years. Congrats on your new bike.

Post your pic in the Manufactuer's section.


----------



## malanb (Oct 26, 2009)

Mr. Versatile said:


> Everybody's read a lot about how CF absorbs vibration, softens the ride, dampens the shocks, etc. I have steel bikes & a CF bike & I'll be darned if I can tell the difference in ride quality. I put a CF fork on a steel bike & noticed no difference. I took it off, sold it, & put the steel fork back on. I like the ride quality of th steel just as well. If the fork was aluminum, IME, just about anything would ride better. Naturally, the steel is heavier, but it also have a smooth ride comparable, I think, to CF.


I can tell the difference on mine


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MySpokeIsABroke said:


> Post your pic in the Manufactuer's section.


Good idea. 

Not to be snarky, but this being a beginner's forum and since this thread has evolved into (essentially) a BD bike thread, I suggest continuing (or starting new) in the proper area - that being, the Moto/ Mercier (et al) forum.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

MySpokeIsABroke said:


> Sol, I had the same questions and position as you. Haven't ridden much in 25 years. Seeking Recreation and conditioning bike. No delusions about anything else. I threw an xtra $100 and bought the Windsor Wellington 3.0. Different frame. Kinesis frame same as Giant, Felt and Fuji. In addition to the carbon fork it has threadless 1-1/8 inch headstem. The Galaxy has a quill type 1-inch. This simply means it's harder to upgrade to quality lightweight components. The Windsor in 53cm weighs 24.3 lbs. Your right on in that the cheap steel pedals etc and with other OEM parts will go and shave at least a few pounds. You can wear that bike out or the replaceable parts out and then move on in either upgrades or a newer rig. Taking it in to the local Mountaineering shop to have the wheel bearings loosened and the deraileurs adjusted. They said they would look it over and let me know if the wheels need truing but they seem and ride fine as is. Other than that I got it ready myself and put 50 miles on it since last week. Best I have felt in years. Congrats on your new bike.
> 
> Post your pic in the Manufactuer's section.


I'll be posting a complete review [Well...as complete a review as a noob can muster...] in a day or two, after I get it adjusted and actually ride it on the pavement. I just basically threw it together this afternoon, because i was like a kid with a new toy...but I really need to take it back apart and do it right, now (i.e. grease or anti-seize where applicable, etc.)- no biggie, as it took all of ten minutes to assemble. 

I need to loosen my wheel bearings too [Maybe I'll wait till I ride it a tad first- as they may loosen up themselves???]...I didn't even clean and lube the chain yet. [Can I use regular 80W90 gear oil? Or tractor grease?]

I saw your post about the Wellington 3.0 last night- nice bike! Had I seen that info sooner, I too likely would have gone with the Welly.

In keeping with the subject of this thread, I can now see what some have mentioned! While I'm sure this bike will be a good performer and a nice ride, the aesthetics of it just don't compare to a more expensive bike. The crankset, headset (it's actually a 1.25" quill- does that make a difference?), bars, pedals and brifters seem a little cheesy. Well...cheesy compared to a $1000 bike maybe...NOT comparing it to a sub $500 bike. I mean, compare this to a current Schwinn Prelude, and it weighs at least 4 lbs less and hass much higher quality components, for about the same price. No contest. I wouldn't even want to ride the Schwinn. 

But comparing this to the Raleigh I rode in the 80's....while this bike is lighter, it just lacks something that Raleigh had...both in the ride and in the aesthetics. If it turns out that I like cycling and stick with it, I can see myself upgrading to a better bike in a year or so- knowing that doing so will not improve my riding one iota, but just to have some higher quality metal parts in my hand. [Although- I do tend to prefer bare aluminum.....but I noticed that black aluminum seems to be very common now, even on the expensive bikes- and to me, the black stuff will always seem kind of cheesy. Sheesh, haven't even gone for my first ride yet, and I'm getting finicky! ]

This bike will suit my purposes, and I feel it is unbeatable for the price- and there were NO disappointments with it [the wheels even appear to be true].....but I see myself desiring better aesthetics- which is only natural, as I wasn't expecting beautifully machined and etched stems, etc. for $300. I think I would just purchase a better bike if I stay with cycling, rather than upgrading....as it would probably be cheaper to get the upgrades as a complete package and sell this bike when the time comes, than to put several hundred bucks in upgrades into a $300 bike. Bet if I decide to sell this bike a year from now, I can get at least $250 for it! 

And congrats on your Welly, as well! I really like it!


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2011)

SolitaryRider said:


> This bike will suit my purposes, and I feel it is unbeatable for the price- and there were NO disappointments with it [the wheels even appear to be true].....but I see myself desiring better aesthetics- which is only natural, as I wasn't expecting beautifully machined and etched stems, etc. for $300. I think I would just purchase a better bike if I stay with cycling, rather than upgrading....as it would probably be cheaper to get the upgrades as a complete package and sell this bike when the time comes, than to put several hundred bucks in upgrades into a $300 bike. Bet if I decide to sell this bike a year from now, I can get at least $250 for it!
> 
> And congrats on your Welly, as well! I really like it!


IMO buying a nicer complete bike -- even a nicer Bikes Direct for that matter -- would be a better idea than buying components piecemeal to "improve" your current $300 bike. As you said you can sell the old complete bike, or keep it around as a working spare bike. If you go the "upgrade" route (beyond replacing outright broken/non-usable parts with nicer ones) you'll be left with one sub-optimal bike and a pile of crappy orphaned components. 

If you get a second bike in a year or two, it may be worth it to you to keep the old bike as a spare rather than sell it. IMO it's always handy to have bike that's cheap but still far more functional than a wal-mart bike -- something you wouldn't be afraid to leave locked up outside, but at the same time something that's still somewhat pleasant to actually _use_. I don't know what the geography is like where you live, but if it's someplace where riding bikes for transportation makes sense (say to go to a restaurant downtown where regular parking is scarce), a spare for that purpose is good to have. 

Having a spare bike is also nice when out of town friends come over and want to go on a casual bike ride with you to check out a sunset or get in some exercise. Also, if you get more serious with cycling for sport, you can always park the cheap spare bike on a trainer instead of having to swap tires/skewers/etc on your nice bike.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Ah! Great advice, Photon! If I stick with cyclin, of course it would be a good idea toi have a spare. 

T'was just thinking, what I'll likely do, is look for a retro bike (I like steel from the 80's, even if it is heavier)- I had initially wanted a Schwinn Tempo or a higher-end Raleigh (I know..they're not the best..but I just like 'em)- and now that I have this bike, I can take my time and wait for something like that to come along and at the right price..then just upgrade that to a triple chain ring (This is my first triple, and I like it already...and I NEED it!)- and having 2 bikes, I can always do mods and maintenance and not have to worry about not being able to ride. I have two vehicles...why not two bikes?! If I did go with a new bike, I would order from BD again....but I do tend to prefer the aesthetics and ride characteristics of the older bikes. (Funny how I can tell, after riding a bike today for the first time in 15 years...and only for a few hundred feet on grass!)

I'm really anxious to see how this bike will do on pavement! Likely won't get the chance to re-assemble/adjust/do the review/ride for a few days though.....


----------



## LongIslandTom (Apr 20, 2011)

Buying a second bike is definitely a better idea than upgrading your first bike piecemeal.

Not only is it more financially sound to just buy a new bike with better components, you can also use the opportunity to improve on things you can't change on the first bike, like fit and geometry. As you ride your Mercier Galaxy over time and learn about riding posture, if you feel that you want to go to a more aggressive geometry (the Galaxy is relatively upright) or if you feel the frame on your Galaxy is too big or too small, those are things you can get different on a new bike.

Plus if you got a chance to test-ride say a carbon or a titanium bike and like the ride feel better than your Galaxy, a new bike is the chance to upgrade to one of those frames.

The way I see it, the first bike is what you use to learn about what you really want in a bike.


----------



## yuris (Oct 4, 2011)

congrats on your bike! have fun riding!


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2011)

SolitaryRider said:


> Ah! Great advice, Photon! If I stick with cyclin, of course it would be a good idea toi have a spare.
> 
> T'was just thinking, what I'll likely do, is look for a retro bike (I like steel from the 80's, even if it is heavier)- I had initially wanted a Schwinn Tempo or a higher-end Raleigh (I know..they're not the best..but I just like 'em)- and now that I have this bike, I can take my time and wait for something like that to come along and at the right price..then just upgrade that to a triple chain ring (This is my first triple, and I like it already...and I NEED it!)- and having 2 bikes, I can always do mods and maintenance and not have to worry about not being able to ride. I have two vehicles...why not two bikes?!


Bicycles -- like British cars (Jaguar, Aston Martin etc) -- you have to own two so you can use one while the other is in the shop 

as for the point about having triple chainrings, even though they're "out of fashion" nowadays I still greatly prefer triples over running a compact double with a really big rear cassettes (with big jumps between rear shifts) to give similar climbing ratios. Most of the bikes I tried out in shops were the latter. 

Just when I was kicking myself for not HTFU and opting for a standard double (since I rarely use the "30" ring on my 52/39/30), today I decided to go for an "easy ride" up a road with >10% grade stretches into a headwind--which according to weather.com for my zip code at that time was 20mph sustained with gusts of up to 30mph  (until I read those numbers I though I just sucked balls today, lol...) I will admit I must have looked petty comical wearing spandex hunched over in the drops in an aero position w/ clinched teeth riding <7mph, lol. 

On a completely unrelated note, on the way _back_ from my ride today, I spun out my 52/12 top gear multiple times... definitive _proof_ of amazing fitness gains. I can't afford _not_ to HTFU and increase my top gear to a 55/11; a 42/23 "granny gear" should be more than enough, you know, just in case. WTF was I thinking buying a bike with a _triple!1_


----------



## MySpokeIsABroke (Sep 24, 2011)

*1-1/8 inch Quill head*

The OP has a 1-1/8 inch head set. The actual diameter of the tube or the ID, doesn't really matter. It is a quill type, so it uses an expander internally. To upgrade his fork to carbon and let's say his bars to something else, lighter..... Is he readily adaptable to threadless and compatible carbon fork or is SOL ??? Thanks BTW.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

If it's a 1-1/8" threaded, yeah - the head tube of his bike will accept a new headset and fork. It requires replacing the fork, headset and stem. Replacing the handlebars is optional.

FWIW, I wouldn't bother. I switched one of my own bikes to an adapter in order to use a threadless headset stem and new handlebars with a 31.8mm clamp. While doing the fork too would have saved me some weight, meh. I have a perfectly functional fork. It's even painted to match my bike.  I doubt that the extra little bit of weight has moved me down one spot on any of the Strava leader boards, and that's the closest I've come to racing that bike all year.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

LOL. If I started replacing a bunch of components on a $300 bike with ones that would likely collectively cost as much as the bike itself while offering no real gain in performance, THEN I'd be SOL 

I'm SOL in a different way right now. I made the mistake of buying a frame pump in Wal*Mart today. Went to use the cheesy thing to further inflate my ties, and it wrecked my presta valve! Now I'll need a new tube! (Shoulda stuck with my original idea and ordered a pump on Amazon for $2 more...that one was aluminum and likely had a half-way decent quality head, instead of this cheap plastic thing!)

Gotta change my handle to SOLitaryRider....it's the perfect name for me!


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

twodownzero said:


> No way that bike weighs 21 lbs. A higher-end aluminum bike with a carbon fork and lighter wheels is in the 21 lb range. I suspect that one is in the 25+ lb range. Forget the ship weight.
> 
> It takes a while to tell the difference, but like anything else, once you know what good quality feels like, you'll be able to decide if it was worth the money. For me, I spend so much time on my bike that I can't resist having something decent under me. If I only rode once a month, I'd feel differently.


I would suspect that the bike weighs about 23 lbs.- not 25 lbs. Also a higher-end aluminum bike would weigh between 18-20 lbs. 21-22 would be the weight of a bike similar to that with a carbon fork. Do you realize that back in the 80's an entry level steel bike (Bianchi, Trek, etc.) was around 25 lbs? I'm sure this one is at least a lb. or so lighter. Aluminum bikes tend to fall in at around the same weight as carbon bikes that are similarly equipped.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

terbennett said:


> Aluminum bikes tend to fall in at around the same weight as carbon bikes that are similarly equipped.


I know you're speaking in general terms, but IME that doesn't hold true. My 4 year old 'low end' Spec Tarmac Comp equipped with Shimano 105 and (heavy) RS-10's weighs in at 18.5 lbs. Only a couple of higher end alu bikes would match that.

That said (and FWIW) IME ~2 lb. difference in bike weight makes zero difference in performance, and I suspect the same is true with slightly larger weight differences.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> I know you're speaking in general terms, but IME that doesn't hold true. My 4 year old 'low end' Spec Tarmac Comp equipped with Shimano 105 and (heavy) RS-10's weighs in at 18.5 lbs. Only a couple of higher end alu bikes would match that.
> 
> That said (and FWIW) IME ~2 lb. difference in bike weight makes zero difference in performance, and I suspect the same is true with slightly larger weight differences.


Most probably can't tell the difference. There's about a 6lb difference between my every day road bike and my sub14lb race only road bike. I'm sure some of that has to do with light and aero carbon tubulars, as well as only weighing 120lbs.  Very similar geometry between the two. The race bike just feels amazingly fast and it's a treat to ride it. 

My TT bike isn't terribly light, but the aero benefits are also very easy to notice. Mmmmmm, no wonder I spend so much time on that bike. :thumbsup:


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

I do believe the 25 lb. weight is correct. Although I weighed it by first weighing myself on a digital bathroom scale, and then weighing myself holding the bike; I used to weigh parcels that way to ship via UPS on a regular basis, and I was always spot-on.

If the bike had the carbon fork and lighter seat post, headset and crank, it would probably get down to near 23 lbs. (It is advertised as having aluminum crank arms...but these sure look like steel to me- I'll get the old magnet out later and see for sure)

Not that I care though- I don't see myself turning into a weight weenie- as long as it's not a 35 lb. department store behemoth, I'm happy. (I think even they're down to around 30 lbs. these days).

Keep in mind that a Fuji 3.0 weighs 25.05 lbs.- and that's an $800 bike. So if this bike weighed 23 lbs.,....I think they'd be screaming it from the roof-top. (The fact that it weighs the same as a bike that costs more than double is pretty impressive in itself...)

Tuesday night I actually rode it briefly on the pavement just in front of my place [Bear in mind I have 1000' of road frontage...  ]- You had to see this- it's pitch dark around here...I live on a two-land country highway with no shoulders/place to get out of the way; I can't see squat at night....the tires were not inflated to their proper pressure...no brakes to speak of, and holding a flashlight in my mouth. I was impressed. It was comfortable, and seemed to glide pretty far on a pedal stroke...even though I need to free up the wheel bearings a bit.

It did lack something though which that Raleigh I rode in the 80's had.....


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

spade2you said:


> The race bike just feels amazingly fast and it's a treat to ride it.


I don't disagree. My 16.4 lb. race bike_ feels_ faster and is a treat to ride as well, but the numbers say I'm no faster.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Bike computers and GPS units can be such killjoys.


----------



## cleon (Jul 19, 2011)

SolitaryRider said:


> Basically, I'd like to know why a lot of people ride such expensive bikes.


Do you know many hobbies where the people that are really into it DON'T want the nicer gear?


----------



## martinrjensen (Sep 23, 2007)

You've got to be kidding me with all these questions. Just read the friggin forum for a couple weeks and you will get all your answers. Actual answers posted in bold below


SolitaryRider said:


> Hey Everyone,
> 
> Noob here, so bear with me.
> 
> ...


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

cleon said:


> Do you know many hobbies where the people that are really into it DON'T want the nicer gear?


I don't think it's so much the hobby, as it is the type of people involved in that hobby. I think certain hobbies are more prone to attracting people who are into "gear" more so than others. 

Even with bicycling, it's probably only a relatively small percentage of riders who are into the "really good" bikes, and I'd be willing to bet that you see those bikes mainly among people who either ride competitively or in groups; because, I know whether here in BFE, or back in NYC, it is/was pretty rare to see somebody on a $2500 bike, unless we're talking about an organized "bike event". It seems far more common to see the average rider on the street pedaling a department store behemoth or lower-end bike. I would estimate that on forums like this, you tend to get more of the people who are seriously into cycling, and thus a higher percentage of them will have the nicer equipment. 

Sometimes, I think the casual enthusiast can have more fun at a particular hobby/sport, than the more serious participants.... I mean, I'm thinking: When I was a kid, I had a heavy old single-speed coaster-brake bike, and rode the hell out of it and enjoyed it.... And that was it. 

Now, as an adult getting back into cycling, I have a $300 bike [waits for laughter to subside] and I've just spent another $150 on accessories (spare tubes; helmet; lights; frame pump...) and hopefully I'll have as much fun as I did when I was a kid....but sometimes I think I'm doing something wrong; maybe as adults we think too much; maybe we'd be better off adopting the "Just get a bike and ride the damn thing" attitude?

I wonder if a lot of the "need" for high-end bikes isn't more of a psychological/image thing? -necessary to distinguish us as adults, from children or grown nuts who are riding on "children's toys"? (i.e. if you spend $2500 and wear spandex, it's not a toy...if you spend $99 and wear jeans, you don't get the same respect...)

I have learned a great deal from this thread and from contemplating my own experiences, but I still wonder. I mean, O-K, naturally we all want nice things, and there are certain levels of quality that we don't want to sink below.....but still, certain things seem out of proportion. How many owners of $2500 bikes also drive Mercedes?; Wear Rolex's?; Get my drift? Why single out one particular facet of one's life- bicycling- as being the one area where we must have "the best" ? 

I do know, that in a lot of sports and hobbies, some people do tend to be more obsessed with the equipment than anything else- but even that is more justifiable in cycling, because in this pursuit, the equipment is integral....but yet it seems that many are past the point where the benefits justify the cost. But I guess that would vary greatly from person to person. 

It's a miore complex subject than it would appear... 



martinrjensen said:


> You've got to be kidding me with all these questions. Just read the friggin forum for a couple weeks and you will get all your answers. Actual answers posted in bold below


I was reading the forum for several weeks. I really didn't see this question addressed- formally or informally. It seems [and this is true of many hobbies/sports] that newcomers come along, and see what the gurus/hardcore enthusiasts do, and try and copy them. Many ask "how?", but few seem to ask "Why?". I'm asking why.

The info that you all have provided in response to my questions has been invaluable.....but I still suspect that the real answer lies more in psychology (Past a certain point, that is. Everyone wants an aesthetically nice machine; everyone wants a comfortable and efficient machine- but many seem to go beyond those things after they've attained them....and THAT is the intriguing thing) and varies from person to person.

But without specifically questioning this, one just sees what is....but not why it is. Capeesh? [Then again, maybe it's just me- as I am what they classify as an "INTJ" personality, so I like to sort things like this out, and find the rationale or lack thereof behind such behaviors...]


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

PS: BTW, Martin, I just now noticed your "answers" to my questions..... ROTFL!! I enjoyed that.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Cycling is tricky. It can be a hobby, a sport, a mode of transportation, or any combination of the three. It's important not to confuse them.

Some of the strongest cyclists I know barely know what they're riding.

Some people just go riding because it's an excuse to buy more bikes.

I think most of us probably fall somewhere in between those extremes. I put a certain amount of thought and effort into part selection, tuning and maintenance of my race bikes. I also put a certain amount of thought and effort into trying to become a stronger cyclist. The place I'm in in my life means I'm more likely to be the annoying guy showing off the chainstays of his cheap hardtail (I mostly compete in XC MTB) than the guy who shows up with a $6000 race bike stuck to the back of his Escalade. But I also know that should my life stabilize and give me some more disposable income to play with, I'll probably cycle out my current competition bikes for more expensive models. Much as I'd prefer to think of myself as being about the sport, and not the gear, I have to admit that I like owning nice things. For now, I'm glad that they don't actually effect race results or the ability to complete a challenging goal very much, within reason. It would be depressing to race Escalade Dude if his money and his fancier bike actually gave him a significant advantage over me. The efficiency that bikes had already achieved by the mid-80s has a very democratizing effect on the sport. I think it's good to avoid the ostentation of some contemporary cheap bikes - imitations of expensive parts sometimes don't perform as well as the simpler versions that preceded them, and there's a huge fleet of perfectly good older bikes out there.

My transportation bike cost $95.  I would say that a lot of people I know who use bikes as transportation are really not into bikes. They're just not into having their time wasted by the bus, or paying a parking space an hour's pay every day to lie around.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Well-said, Andrw (Geez, buy a vowel, will ya? That's hard to pronounce! )

I have to agree about the bikes of the 80's- I'm still going to be keeping my eyes open for a few certain bikes that I was originally looking for before I bought my BD bike. These modern bikes just seem to lack something that even those heavier, mediocre bikes from the 80's had. 

I like to buy quality when I can, too- especially when it comes to machines. Funny thing is, with bikes, there is such a huge range- from <$99 to >$6000 -I guess one just has to find what they like, and what fits their budget. 

One thing's for sure, no matter what I'd spend on a bike, I'll never have the energy I had when I was 10! If could have that energy again, I'd likely be just as happy with that old 35 lb. single-speed banana seat Ross that I rode then!


----------



## MySpokeIsABroke (Sep 24, 2011)

martinrjensen said:


> You've got to be kidding me with all these questions. Just read the friggin forum for a couple weeks and you will get all your answers. Actual answers posted in bold below


I don't think you are qualified to make that assertion. Because you already know. So it seems obvious to you. Thank you for the answers and taking the time however. 

This forum is a bewildering wilderness of misleading and conflicting information for one not knowledgeable enough to sort it out. Trust me. 

I don't have the qualifications or time or ambition, and I am grateful for this existing resource, but there could be a true beginner's section with basic answers to basic questions, a true time saving FAQ, and yes a Glossary to translate from gobbledygook to English. Any attempt to eliminate repetitious redundant newbie posts.

Thank you any and all that take the time to answer simple basic questions. :thumbsup:


----------



## squiddy (Oct 30, 2011)

you know--I've pondered this question many times myself. I asked a hard-core cyclist at work this question, and his answer was simple, "Because we can." It has little to do with actual performance gains. It has everything to do with _wanting_. In reality a 15lb bike and a 17lb bike isn't going to make much of a difference, despite one being 3 times as expensive as the other. People just want to satisfy their urge to have great gear. 

100% of performance comes from that which performs. Last I checked, bikes don't ride themselves.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

The way I see it: I'm happy with my $299 bike. Whether it offers better performance than a $99 bike, is hard to say- but it does offer better reliability and aesthetics. If I had a bike that cost ten times as much, I don't think it would be any easier to peddle, nor any faster with me riding it. I see that the one thing that can stand the most improvement and make the biggest difference in performance.....is the rider. 

And remember folks...the general public can not tell the difference between a $99 bike and a $299 and a $3000 bike.....they're all "just bikes".

Another newbie question, if I may: Why are stem shifters not taken seriously? Quite frankly, I don't like these STI brifters. Down-tube shifters are a pain....but it seems to me that a set of indexed stem shifters would be just the ticket- but I doubt they make such, since one only sees stem-shifters on low quality department store bikes, and they aren't taken seriously by the "bike community" from what I hear. Seems to me, that stem shifters allow for the quickest gear changes.

I guarantee you, when the fad wears off and the price of brifters come down,* they *will be the province of department store bikes and laughed at by serious cyclists.

PS: Review of my Bikesdirect Galaxy SC2 coming soon! I didn't forget!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Integrated shifters are a fad that has lasted for 21 years, and shows no sign of slowing.

Shimano Total Integration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm quite fond of them myself. My nicer road and my 'cross bike both have them, and I find it's easier for me to shift from more riding positions, including out of the saddle.

I've had bikes with stem shifters. I actually find them more awkward to use than downtube shifters, and much more awkward than STI shifters, which I've found to be the easiest of all. The shifter itself is actually no different from a bar end or downtube shifter, so if you want indexed stem shifters, you can have them. You just need a set of indexed downtube shifters and a stem mount. FWIW, my commuter has indexed downtube shifters, (EDIT: mounted on the downtube) and I do think that's a pretty good setup. I'd still prefer integrated shifters, but since they cost more than the value of that bike and I leave it locked outside, meh.

The late, great Sheldon Brown had some comments about stem shifters on his site. sheldonbrown.com. It's worth a look. He brought a little different perspective and an incredible depth of knowledge to cycling and bikes.


----------



## Chris-X (Aug 4, 2011)

squiddy said:


> you know--I've pondered this question many times myself. I asked a hard-core cyclist at work this question, and his answer was simple, "Because we can." It has little to do with actual performance gains. It has everything to do with _wanting_. In reality a 15lb bike and a 17lb bike isn't going to make much of a difference, despite one being 3 times as expensive as the other. People just want to satisfy their urge to have great gear.
> 
> 100% of performance comes from that which performs. Last I checked, bikes don't ride themselves.


Well, you nailed it.:thumbsup:

See how far you get convincing the WW's though. Good luck.


----------



## SolitaryRider (Oct 20, 2011)

Andrw: It's definitely a matter of personal preference. I tend to spend a large percentage of my riding time with my hands on the tops of the bars...so naturally the stem shifters are more convenient for me. I also find stem/downtube shifters much more responsive and faster...especially when wanting to change multiple gears. I was just curious as to why they are generally denigrated in the bicycle community.

Hey...those stem shifters did endure for several decades too. "Fads" in the bile world seem to have a longer lifespan.

Maybe I'll get me a set of suicide levers, too! [JUST KIDDING!!]


----------



## mgringle (May 20, 2011)

I have downtube shifters on my 1986 Schwinn Voyaguer I got on Craigs List for $200. I am used to them and can shift without thinking now. As for the OP's original question, I ride this bike with an eye towards getting a new CF rig. My thought is to spend as much as I can afford to get something that will last me a long time without needing a ton of upgrades. When I bought my Schwinn, entry price was low, but I have already upgraded the seat, tires, stem, cables, and tape. But now it fits and rides well and is in perfect mechanical condition. It's a heavy steel bike, but I like the idea of training on a heavy bike and when I get a new bike that's 20 lbs or less, I'll fly. When I first started riding 6 months ago after a long hiatus, I was lookning at the $4k bike. I am a gadget addict, and I was lured into thinking I needed all the cool, light, expensive stuff. After riding a while, I'm now thinking a 105 equipped bike will be more than enough ro my recreational riding I do, doing an occasional century. That's not to say a Ultegra Di2 bike is not on the radar, but I can't seem to REALLY justify it, other than electronic shifting seems soooo cool.


----------

