Shiny bikes & their advocates
Posted: 12 Feb 2019, 12:44am
Here's a bit on Youtube from an amateur racer. It's getting quite a lot of views.
[youtube]EXflmGqJakA[/youtube]
He sets out to show the difference between a '$100 bike', '$1000 bike' and '$7000 bike'.
The $100 bike is some sort of supermarket special, the $1000 bike is actually $1400 and is a Schwinn, probably an open mould frame.
Specs:
Frame Schwinn® N LITENED Black Label® Carbon
Fork Schwinn® Race Carbon with tapered carbon steerer, 1 1/8 to 1.5"
105 5800 11sp drive train/brakes with 50-34 and 11-28 cassette
Alex® R500 doublewall 32 Hole rims
Kenda® Kriterium 700 x 25, wire bead
Weight is around 8.6kg
The $7000 bike is actually $5000, but he's put some new wheels on it, which cost $2000. Apparently he believes this gives him a $7000 bike, even though such a bike is fitted with wheels that already cost $2000+ at retail.
Anyway, full specs:
Canyon ULTIMATE CF SLX 9.0 2018
Frame & fork Canyon carbon
Drivetrain/brakes Dura-Ace R9100, except he replaced the crank for a 50/34 Ultegra
the factory wheels DT SWISS PRC 1400 SPLINE 35. 35mm deep aero wheels https://roadcyclinguk.com/gear/reviews/ ... eview.html 1486 grams, RRP $2580 20/24 spokes
the 'upgraded' wheels 62.5mm deep aero wheels 1545g, RRP $2200. 16/24 spokes
Tyres are not stock, but have been replaced with the Formula Pro Tubeless Light
These are here http://irc-tire.com/en/bc/products/formula/, and weigh 265g each, and are presumed to have an extremely low coefficient of rolling resistance.
Weight is around 6.4kg
Anyway, he does his tests and surprise, the expensive bike is around 3.8% faster on the flat (at a supposed 300W constant), 10% faster downhill, amd 10% faster uphill (note: some, but not all, of this is explainable by the extra weight of the bike).
The commenters are all convinced 'it's the wheels'. This is despite the fact that it's clear that the rider is far more horizontal on the more expensive bike - they don't have the same geometry - and the heavy wired tyres fitted to the '$1000 bike' are designed to be very puncture resistant and clearly going to roll much worse than the fancy ultra-light tubeless jobs. https://bicycle.kendatire.com/en-eu/fin ... endurance/
And the aftermarket wheels aren't necessarily better than the factory ones on the Canyon. I do wonder sometimes the cognitive processes involved with people doing such testing - are they setting out to mislead, and if so in order to validate their 'investment' or is it unconscious?
It would be more interesting to compare two bikes in the same size - one cheap, one pricey - with the same geometry and both with factory wheels, and the same after-market, fast, lightweight tyres.
[youtube]EXflmGqJakA[/youtube]
He sets out to show the difference between a '$100 bike', '$1000 bike' and '$7000 bike'.
The $100 bike is some sort of supermarket special, the $1000 bike is actually $1400 and is a Schwinn, probably an open mould frame.
Specs:
Frame Schwinn® N LITENED Black Label® Carbon
Fork Schwinn® Race Carbon with tapered carbon steerer, 1 1/8 to 1.5"
105 5800 11sp drive train/brakes with 50-34 and 11-28 cassette
Alex® R500 doublewall 32 Hole rims
Kenda® Kriterium 700 x 25, wire bead
Weight is around 8.6kg
The $7000 bike is actually $5000, but he's put some new wheels on it, which cost $2000. Apparently he believes this gives him a $7000 bike, even though such a bike is fitted with wheels that already cost $2000+ at retail.
Anyway, full specs:
Canyon ULTIMATE CF SLX 9.0 2018
Frame & fork Canyon carbon
Drivetrain/brakes Dura-Ace R9100, except he replaced the crank for a 50/34 Ultegra
the factory wheels DT SWISS PRC 1400 SPLINE 35. 35mm deep aero wheels https://roadcyclinguk.com/gear/reviews/ ... eview.html 1486 grams, RRP $2580 20/24 spokes
the 'upgraded' wheels 62.5mm deep aero wheels 1545g, RRP $2200. 16/24 spokes
Tyres are not stock, but have been replaced with the Formula Pro Tubeless Light
These are here http://irc-tire.com/en/bc/products/formula/, and weigh 265g each, and are presumed to have an extremely low coefficient of rolling resistance.
Weight is around 6.4kg
Anyway, he does his tests and surprise, the expensive bike is around 3.8% faster on the flat (at a supposed 300W constant), 10% faster downhill, amd 10% faster uphill (note: some, but not all, of this is explainable by the extra weight of the bike).
The commenters are all convinced 'it's the wheels'. This is despite the fact that it's clear that the rider is far more horizontal on the more expensive bike - they don't have the same geometry - and the heavy wired tyres fitted to the '$1000 bike' are designed to be very puncture resistant and clearly going to roll much worse than the fancy ultra-light tubeless jobs. https://bicycle.kendatire.com/en-eu/fin ... endurance/
And the aftermarket wheels aren't necessarily better than the factory ones on the Canyon. I do wonder sometimes the cognitive processes involved with people doing such testing - are they setting out to mislead, and if so in order to validate their 'investment' or is it unconscious?
It would be more interesting to compare two bikes in the same size - one cheap, one pricey - with the same geometry and both with factory wheels, and the same after-market, fast, lightweight tyres.