Entry Level v More advanced bike

[fastpedaller]

Why not try your current bike, having made your position as aero as possible. Then see if you are losing out on the cycle, or maybe the swimming, running or transitions? If you aren't much of a swimmer then you are probably not going to make up minutes on the bike (and so on for running). If the courses are failrly flat then a lesser weight won't help much. You could look for a TT frame and transfer your groupset? You can always flog it on.

^^ good advice

[Mike_Ayling]

The bike is just the decorations, on the icing, on the cake. It’s mostly about the engine, a bit about the attitude, and a bit about technique. Unless you’re going from a 100 pound BSO, changing bikes will be a ‘marginal gain’.

Agree 100%

[[XAP]Bob]

That’s not entry level, it’s already well down the scale of diminishing returns.

[mattsccm]

The above comment (which is absolutely correct to some respect) is another example of the issue. Entry level to some is top end to another person. Each to their own. I would be with the OP here. 1k wouldnt buy what I want in a new bike. It is way more than most of my bikes are worth but if I was buying new I would want something more flashy. Apart from my commuter bike, a bike is for fun and should be enjoyable.
OP, go and ride a few.

[Jamesh]

Giant propel ticks the boxes for a tri complete with aero wheels.

https://www.cyclesurgery.com/p/giant-pr ... bQQAvD_BwE

Great value too.

Cheers James

[dim]

the bike does make a difference ...

I am a lot faster on my carbon Trek Emonda SL6 than on my steel Miyata 1000 touring bike ...

meaningless statement without figures, and even then you need the same riding conditions, air temp, humidity etc to get a true comparison.

try for yourself .... assuming that the 2 bikes have the same geometry and the wind is the same .....

100km route, 1100 meters of elevation .... which bike will you be faster on, a carbon roadbike that weighs 6.4Kg or a steel bike that weights 14 Kg?

[PH]

the bike does make a difference ...

I am a lot faster on my carbon Trek Emonda SL6 than on my steel Miyata 1000 touring bike ...

meaningless statement without figures, and even then you need the same riding conditions, air temp, humidity etc to get a true comparison.

try for yourself .... assuming that the 2 bikes have the same geometry and the wind is the same .....

100km route, 1100 meters of elevation .... which bike will you be faster on, a carbon roadbike that weighs 6.4Kg or a steel bike that weights 14 Kg?

OK, leaving aside the impracticality for most of us of having the same geometry and set up on a touring and road bike:
There's a toy for playing with that, it can't take into account all particulars, but it seems pretty good at making comparisons. With various parameters - 80kg rider, 5% climb, 180 watts... the difference between a 6.4 kg bike and a 14 kg one is 0.95kph (17.53 Vs 16.58). Increase the power to 200 watts and it's still less than 1 kph.
http://bikecalculator.com/
But the OP isn't talking about such extremes, the bikes under consideration are unlikely to be more than 2kg different, probably not even half of that. So, at 200 watts and 2kg difference on a flattish 20 km course the speed difference would be 0.23 kph and the time difference less than a minute. If you're an elite level athlete, I can see why spending thousands to save seconds would be good value, for the rest of us the big gains come from effort rather than expense.

[mattheus]

the bike does make a difference ...

I am a lot faster on my carbon Trek Emonda SL6 than on my steel Miyata 1000 touring bike ...

meaningless statement without figures, and even then you need the same riding conditions, air temp, humidity etc to get a true comparison.

try for yourself .... assuming that the 2 bikes have the same geometry and the wind is the same .....

100km route, 1100 meters of elevation .... which bike will you be faster on, a carbon roadbike that weighs 6.4Kg or a steel bike that weights 14 Kg?

I'm happy to belive the Emonda is faster.


But the reason is *not* that it cost more! It's because the touring bike is optimised for touring - the clue's in the name

[[XAP]Bob]

meaningless statement without figures, and even then you need the same riding conditions, air temp, humidity etc to get a true comparison.

try for yourself .... assuming that the 2 bikes have the same geometry and the wind is the same .....

100km route, 1100 meters of elevation .... which bike will you be faster on, a carbon roadbike that weighs 6.4Kg or a steel bike that weights 14 Kg?

OK, leaving aside the impracticality for most of us of having the same geometry and set up on a touring and road bike:
There's a toy for playing with that, it can't take into account all particulars, but it seems pretty good at making comparisons. With various parameters - 80kg rider, 5% climb, 180 watts... the difference between a 6.4 kg bike and a 14 kg one is 0.95kph (17.53 Vs 16.58). Increase the power to 200 watts and it's still less than 1 kph.
http://bikecalculator.com/
But the OP isn't talking about such extremes, the bikes under consideration are unlikely to be more than 2kg different, probably not even half of that. So, at 200 watts and 2kg difference on a flattish 20 km course the speed difference would be 0.23 kph and the time difference less than a minute. If you're an elite level athlete, I can see why spending thousands to save seconds would be good value, for the rest of us the big gains come from effort rather than expense.

Complicating factor being that some bikes seem to “ask” for more power input.
When I was commuting on the rapto I used to go faster partly because of the position, but also because the bike is designed to encourage the effort. I don’t know if the same differences apply once in high end road/Tri bikes already though.

[mattheus]

If you are genuinely racing seriously - especially in a non-drafting event, and outside of non-aerobic events - then your effort should be a carefully rationed commodity; you should not be affected by how much power your steed "asks" you to input!

[jb]

So many people these days go straight for the best and therefore never know why the premium bike they bought is any different from a lesser model. And, the law of diminishing returns means you can probably go quite a lot lower than the top end and not notice the difference.

[iandriver]

A couple of years ago Specialized were claiming their S-works frame set it saves you 45 seconds over 40 kilometers compared to their Tarmac frame.
This assumes you are travelling at the speed of a professional rider. The speed differences will only really show on a stop watch, or some other factor is in play between bikes.

[flat tyre]

Perceived speed is directly proportional to the cost of the bike in my experience.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Perceived speed is directly proportional to the cost of the bike in my experience.

[Marcus Aurelius]

A couple of years ago Specialized were claiming their S-works frame set it saves you 45 seconds over 40 kilometers compared to their Tarmac frame.
This assumes you are travelling at the speed of a professional rider. The speed differences will only really show on a stop watch, or some other factor is in play between bikes.

The ‘Tarmac’ is the road racing bike. ‘S-works’ is the level of frame material and kit. There are S-works versions of most ( if not all ) of the Spesh bikes. I think the claim is that the S-works Venge, was quicker than the S-works Tarmac. In the hands of a particular rider, on a particular ride, in particular conditions. They were probably not far wrong, given I suspect the rider they were basing it on was Sagan.