So how much does the bike matter?

[arendoog]

Bike makes a major difference - to a point.

 

Changing from a 15 kg entry level HT to a 13.5 kg DS made me much faster, and the comfort allowed me to ride much further, and survive many a poor line choice while I gained some technical abilities.

 

Changing from a 13.5 kg low to mid-level HT to a 11 odd kg XC DS made it possible for my wife to ride with me, and  I was able to do the same 40 km race with her bike in almost 20 minutes faster than my own. 

 

But, while more capable bikes will flatter ability (or lack thereof) legs cannot be bought, and going from SLX to XT or XTR will make such a small difference that it's not really worth the potential seconds you will save.

 

Most riders don't use their equipment optimally. For example, at my last sprint triathlon I overtook quite a number of weaker riders on full-on TT bikes with my 9.85 kg road bike simply because I was a little stronger, but was myself overtaken by riders on old and basic road bikes pedaled by stronger legs. Running a TT bike myself would have saved seconds for sure, but it's not like I would have podiumed as a result.

 

Us Saffas seem obsessed with having the best, just ask a VW salesman how many Golf Gti's they sell versus lower end models, or check your local trail for the number of S-Works Epics versus the alloy version, while in the rest of the world the ratios are very different. 

In Spain i asked a shop if they had any bikes with spec higher than shimano XT .His reply was that he does not recognize me ,so i am probably not a pro 

[DrRichard]

Sounds like you know your *** .

rotational weight= wheels - 2 kg of belly and 2kg of frame weight has no impact on rotational weight - 2kg lighter wheels = rotational - raising a 15kg watermelon up a mountain requires more force than a 8 kg one - no rotational weight.  both at play on a bicycle

[Headshot]

rotational weight= wheels - 2 kg of belly and 2kg of frame weight has no impact on rotational weight - 2kg lighter wheels = rotational - raising a 15kg watermelon up a mountain requires more force than a 8 kg one - no rotational weight.  both at play on a bicycle

Doc, thanks for that repeat. You sound like you know your *** too. That's two badges handed out today!  

[Hairy]

rotational weight= wheels - 2 kg of belly and 2kg of frame weight has no impact on rotational weight - 2kg lighter wheels = rotational - raising a 15kg watermelon up a mountain requires more force than a 8 kg one - no rotational weight.  both at play on a bicycle

why would you take a watermelon up a mountain ... some people hey!

[eddy]

- Let me inform you, and remember this. There is a huge difference between body weight and rotational weight, so 2 riders exact same weight, one loses 2kg’s of belly fat and the other one loses 2kg’s on his bike, wheels ect ect.. Do I need to explain to you who will see the biggest improvement?

 

Good of you to post and seeing as you have all the answers, I have  2  questions :

 

1) How do you lose 2kg off a pair of 2003 Ksyrium SL SSCs that weigh 1530g a pair?

 

2) If you can't lose 2kg off the wheels, you must lose the 2kg off the rest of the bike. How does that reduce your rotational weight ? 

 

And I have a bonus question:

 

How does the changed body composition after losing 2kg of belly fat affect the body's response to exercise ?

[Headshot]

Best snack ever. I usually carry a half watermelon instead of bars on a ride. Nothing quite like it when you are at the top of a mountain. 

Perfect, and you can drink it.

[Hairy]

Is it not lighter to carry a few lemons, then you can make lemonade at the top of the mountain for a light refreshing drink?

[eddy]

Is it not lighter to carry a few lemons, then you can make lemonade at the top of the mountain for a light refreshing drink?

 

Tea leaves are even lighter, and if you shoo the cow ahead of you,  you don't even have to carry the milk...

[Hairy]

I tried once. Got some in my eye by mistake. Crashed on the way down because I was only using one eye to see. 

if you riding single track you only need a single eye ... so you must have been riding twee spoor trails.

[Headshot]

I tried once. Got some in my eye by mistake. Crashed on the way down because I was only using one eye to see. 

As long as you had your half melon shell on your head for protection?

[DrRichard]

As long as you had your half melon shell on your head for protection?

the only problem is that you just have pips and not MIPS protection if using half!

[coppi]

I think the correct application of the bike to a race should make a difference. For instance, I did the race to the sun ( 100 miler gravel grind with odd single track and here and there ) last year on my dual suspension mtb. I will ride it this year on my carbon gravel bike that weighs half the weight and is specifically designed for gravel roads, I think and hope it will make a big difference....................

[GuyKilfoil]

My 2.c or even less:

 

A bike does make a difference both on the positive and negative especially with weight. One would tend to think a lighter bike - if going uphill for example - is better. Sometimes its not and testing we have done proves this time and time again. A small example is:

 

In December we tested wheels - rim depth etc, tyre, pressure, tubes, clinchers, width of tyres, chain tension, chain lubrication and rolling resistance on a certain frame to name a few.

 

The lightiest combo wasn't the best. By a bit. The heavier tube for example created less rolling resistance than some of those really light tubes on the market. 

 

Frames are the same with drag and weight for example.

 

All these things need to be taken into account when you go for a "light bike" 

 

The same goes for TT - been in Aigle now for a intense week of testing equipment and rider for a possible project coming up. Again, light or "more aero position" isn't the best or most optimal when you look at CDA, Power, Lactate at power, rolling resistance, distance traveled. 

 

Same goes for MTB, tyre combo's, suspension set up even when it is not the best fork or shock is better than a top of the line fork set up wrong. 

 

Technology is great and so advanced but the best isn't always the best option. 

 

 

 

The stats above would make for interesting reading. However, I've got some very simple anecdotal stats of my own. 

 

For the past 2 years I've been lucky enough to spend my time on the road on a R150k Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL5 ETap (our company sponsored a bike retailer and this was the quid pro quo). With pedals, garmin mount, bottle cages the bike weighed in at 7.25kg in a size 58cm, running SRAM Red wireless and carbon everything including 40mm carbon clinchers. 

 

However, our contract has come to an end, the bike has had to go back and I've had to go out and buy something I can actually afford. Enter the 2019 Cannondale SuperSix EVO Ultegra Disc. Yes, it also has carbon wheels (35mm clinchers) but it weighs almost 1.25kg more in the same trim as the Tarmac. 

 

Do I feel short-changed riding the heavier, cheaper bike? So far, apart from "brand appeal" and bling/snob factor not in the least. Is the Tarmac faster than the EVO over certain segments and in certain conditions? Hell yes - but I would expect so. I knew it intimately having ridden almost 5000km on the bike. But has the Cannondale already smashed a Tarmac PR or two? Considering I've only done 120km on it so far? Again, hell yes - including one of the signature climbs in our area and I honestly wasn't even pushing; despite the weight penalty.

 

So, the OP is right. The bike matters. And it doesn't. It depends more on what suits the rider best. And suits best, doesn't mean costs most.

Edited February 17, 2020 by GuyKilfoil

[Hairy]

The stats above would make for interesting reading. However, I've got some very simple anecdotal stats of my own. 

 

For the past 2 years I've been lucky enough to spend my time on the road on a R150k Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL5 ETap (our company sponsored a bike retailer and this was the quid pro quo). With pedals, garmin mount, bottle cages the bike weighed in at 7.25kg in a size 58cm, running SRAM Red wireless and carbon everything including 40mm carbon clinchers. 

 

However, our contract has come to an end, the bike has had to go back and I've had to go out and buy something I can actually afford. Enter the 2019 Cannondale SuperSix EVO Ultegra Disc. Yes, it also has carbon wheels (35mm clinchers) but it weighs almost 1.25kg more in the same trim as the Tarmac. 

 

Do I feel short-changed riding the heavier, cheaper bike? So far, apart from "brand appeal" and bling/snob factor not in the least. Is the Tarmac faster than the EVO over certain segments and in certain conditions? Hell yes - but I would expect so. I knew it intimately having ridden almost 5000km on the bike. But has the Cannondale already smashed a Tarmac PR or two? Considering I've only done 120km on it so far? Again, hell yes - including one of the signature climbs in our area and I honestly wasn't even pushing; despite the weight penalty.

 

So, the OP is right. The bike matters. And it doesn't. It depends more on what suits the rider best. And suits best, doesn't mean costs most.

5000km over 2 years = 

 

2500 per year

208.33 km per month

52.08km per week

 

You really need to do more mileage than that per week dear sir

[GuyKilfoil]

5000km over 2 years = 

 

2500 per year

208.33 km per month

52.08km per week

 

You really need to do more mileage than that per week dear sir

 

Right you are!

 

But I only ride the bike on Sundays. And she has to compete with my MTB for attention.

 

I have an aluminium Allez linked up to my trainer for the rides during the week. 

 

My total mileage over the past two years (road, MTB, indoor) is around 12,000km.

 

But nobody ever needed to ride less!!

[GuyKilfoil]

But you are fitter now.

 

Sure I am. But I'm comparing segments on both bikes ridden within the last 4 weeks. My fitness, according to Strava Summit is exacty the same over the past 3 months (in fact down by 1%).