Mamil bikes

[atoz]

Or maybe called "sportive bikes". Either way, there seems to be a definite trend here:

1. Fast frames with racing pretensions but slightly modified eg more relaxed geometry for sportive riders.
2. All carbon
3. Clearance for wider tyres only possible without mudguards- but in any case no mudguard eyes.
4. On the lastest- disc brakes.
5, Any colour you like as long as it's black.

Spotted a few of this variant at a local cafe- largely Ribble. All black with black lettering. But interesting that they were sporting wider tyres, and in one case a Vittoria Randonneur 32mm- not the obvious choice for a sportive bike (I use these on my ancient CB touring bike which serves as a commuter iron).

If you need as wide covers as this on a performance bike, it begs questions as to the ride quality. In the days of steel frames, 23mm for a performance bike was pretty much de rigeur. I still have a bike of this type (Reynolds 531C tubing) and you can ride comfortably all day on 23mm. Even by modern standards this bike is no tractor. On my more modern bike I use 25mm which is quite adequate.

So basically you get a fast bike with a harsh ride that you need to use fatter tyres with- in a dismal black colour. Great. Not interested..

[amediasatex]

This thread will go well...

[PH]

So basically you get a fast bike with a harsh ride that you need to use fatter tyres with- in a dismal black colour. Great. Not interested..

So it's simple - don't buy one.
But who says you need the fatter tyres? Tech has moved on, there's plenty of evidence that for most riders there's no disadvantage to wider tyres, so why not have them?
Have a read of this
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... sizeweight

And - people on bikes is good, why do you have to be so tribal? They don't have to make the same choices as you, doesn't make them in any way inferior, just different.

[e20rod]

That's the great thing about bikes, there's so much choice! Each to their own....

Regards,

Rod.

[Brucey]

these bikes have some of the attributes -an obvious exception being practicality- of some touring bikes. Their target market wouldn't buy anything that looked like a touring bike in million years and arguably doesn't need practicality (eg mudguards, carrier etc), because they wouldn't choose to be riding in bad weather (or carrying anything) anyway....

As for 'needing fatter tyres' yes you might if the frames and forks are built too stiff. But as for them 'having no drawback' they are always heavier and they are also always (like for like) less aerodynamic. You might even save a couple of watts on Crr but this is soon taken away if tractive effort is wasted (no one has really measured this....) and/or the fatter tyres/wheels impose more aero drag.

cheers

[mig]

you have an ancient chris boardman touring bike?

[atoz]

So basically you get a fast bike with a harsh ride that you need to use fatter tyres with- in a dismal black colour. Great. Not interested..

So it's simple - don't buy one.
But who says you need the fatter tyres? Tech has moved on, there's plenty of evidence that for most riders there's no disadvantage to wider tyres, so why not have them?
Have a read of this
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.co ... sizeweight

And - people on bikes is good, why do you have to be so tribal? They don't have to make the same choices as you, doesn't make them in any way inferior, just different.

Dont' worry, I won't be buying one. As for being tribal- not really. Just that the days of fast tourers that had practical attributes seem to be numbered. I don't think less of people who buy this sort of bike- just that they're being ripped off.

As for fat tyres. Not all are comfortable- I use Randonneurs myself, and they are quite a hard ride even on a steel frame- I use them because they are very rugged and cope well with crap urban road surfaces when riding to work/shopping.

Those sportive frames, being carbon, will have a limited lifespan. So not only are they less comfortable to ride, you'll be replacing them quite frequently. I think people are being "done up like a kipper"

[iandriver]

In the days of steel frames

That would be the mid 1800s and still available today then.

[scottg]

This thread will go well...

Maybe the CTC can come with some "Not Approved for CTC use" stickers
we can put on such bikes ?

wpfe550d4f_05_06.jpg (62.09 KiB) Viewed 755 times

[roubaixtuesday]

Those sportive frames, being carbon, will have a limited lifespan. So not only are they less comfortable to ride, you'll be replacing them quite frequently. I think people are being "done up like a kipper"

Fascinating.

I have a specialised Roubaix not dissimilar to these contemptible machines. I've had it nearly 10 years, done 10s of 1000s of miles. It's a joy to ride, never had any issue with the frame, so not sure what you think of as "frequently".

I'm not feeling done up like anything.

These bikes can be terrific value for what they are compared to what was traditionally available 30+ years ago.

Just be pleased that so many people are out riding them - if you prefer a different type of machine great, vive la difference!

[whoof]

Or maybe called "sportive bikes". Either way, there seems to be a definite trend here:

1. Fast frames with racing pretensions but slightly modified eg more relaxed geometry for sportive riders.
2. All carbon
3. Clearance for wider tyres only possible without mudguards- but in any case no mudguard eyes.
4. On the lastest- disc brakes.
5, Any colour you like as long as it's black.

Spotted a few of this variant at a local cafe- largely Ribble. All black with black lettering.

Where have you been for the past few years?

[PH]

Maybe the CTC can come with some "Not Approved for CTC use" stickers
we can put on such bikes ?

All bikes are welcome on the CTC Member Group rides I do.

[peetee]

A lot of MAMILs have moved to two wheels having previously parked their four wheels in the golf club car park where the boot badge reigns supreme. For them having the right motor was dictated by social convention not personal suitability. I suspect they have made the same choice with their bikes.

[rmurphy195]

A lot of MAMILs have moved to two wheels having previously parked their four wheels in the golf club car park where the boot badge reigns supreme. For them having the right motor was dictated by social convention not personal suitability. I suspect they have made the same choice with their bikes.

There's another type of MAMIL on two wheels - watch some of Henry Cole's programs! (Middle Aged Men In Leather)

[Jamesh]

Those sportive frames, being carbon, will have a limited lifespan. So not only are they less comfortable to ride, you'll be replacing them quite frequently. I think people are being "done up like a kipper"

Fascinating.

I have a specialised Roubaix not dissimilar to these contemptible machines. I've had it nearly 10 years, done 10s of 1000s of miles. It's a joy to ride, never had any issue with the frame, so not sure what you think of as "frequently".

I'm not feeling done up like anything.


These bikes can be terrific value for what they are compared to what was traditionally available 30+ years ago.

Just be pleased that so many people are out riding them - if you prefer a different type of machine great, vive la difference!

I too have a ten year old Cannondale.
Bullet proof bike, a bit heavy for a carbon bike much like a Boardman carbon tbh

Rides nice and solid descends on rails.

Has more scratches than is presentable to the cafe crew.

I have often thought to swap it with a new supersix but then could I treat it with such punishment as I regularly do?

Cheers James