|
|
| *Vultures Knob>>>Sport Bike |
Would a great biker win races with a somewhat inferior bike? $250 bike vs $2500 for example.? |
When reading about the sport cycling one often sees much about the equipment ( carbon frame, good components and so on) but little about the actual biker. My question is how important is the bike compared to the rider. Would a pro beat a semi pro in a race where he was equipped with ''inferior'' eqipment. I commute 20 miles each way to work on a Scott sub 20 and am curious how much faster I would go with an extremely expensive bike... Or would it be better to try to train, lift weights and so on to get down the commute time. Getting fitter will make the most difference. A bicycle and riders speed is determined by Wind resistance rolling resistance and power output. Wind resistance consumes most of the power that a rider puts out (About 80%). The aerodynamic drag of the bike is quite small in comparision to the drag on the rider. A good bike maybe a few percent better. edit Aerodynamic difference between a mountain bike and a road bike is significant (20-30%) as it places the rider in a more aerodynamic position Rolling resistance Weight is the biggest contributer to rolling resistance. That is the weight of the bike plus rider. An expensive bike may save upto 3% of the total weight. That relates to about 3% of 20%(left) of power output. Power output A fit novice rider will output around 200 watts to maintain a speed of around 20mph(32km/h). A seasoned pro can maintain power output of around 500 watts for periods of an hour. Yep a good rider will blow a lesser rider away on average gear. (depending on just how average the gear is and how much lesser the other rider.) The answer really comes down to Power to weight ratio. Often when I hear this I think only about the weight of the rider. In actuality it is the weight of the whole machine, rider and rig. I'm a fit 240 lb rider on a 17 lb bike. My rolling weight is 257 lbs. For me to spend another $1000 bucks to save 1.5 - 2 lbs on a bike is ludicrous. I can improve my power to weight ratio by simply loosing another 10 lbs. By the way, I'm still a respectable class 4 racer. On the flats my weight is not a factor. In the hills,...... It is a whole other story. So, a pro 1/2 racer on a 20lb + rig would probably still beat a cat 3/4 racer on a 16 lb rig because of their power to weight ratio. I'm often complemented on my red, white and blue Tet de Course and I often reply, "A sport car chassis with a diesel engine." Rather than spend your precious $$$ on a really expensive new rig, hit the weights in the off season, loose fat, eat healthy and do intervals to improve your power to weight ratio. You'll be ripping the legs off local riders in no time. Then, once you're tearing up local competition, upgrade rolling components on your bike, WHEELS, cranks and pedals. You'll be surprised. well carbon frames are much lighter then aluminum ones so you can go faster uphill, I would stay with the bike you have, a heavier bike means moor speed downhill but more effort uphill, if you have the money to spare and you want an expensive bike so go ahead and buy one but if you like yours so stay with it, while you are talking about the difference between a 250 vs a 2500 dollar bike, the answers you are getting are the difference between a 1500 and 2500 dollar bike... the differences between a 250 and 2500 dollar bike will include a number of things that will conspire agianst the lesser bike and the longer the ride the more manifested they will be. so on the tour, there is no way the inferior bike will win. on a short day race, especially half century or shorter, the superior rider will win. here's why. as mentioned the difference between me and lance is about 250 continous watts per hour, and 65 lbs or more. the extra wieght of the 250 dollar bike (about 10 lbs) will not hide that. but, the lower quality tires (more rolling resistance), the lower quality bearings (more rolling resistance), poorer geometry (more wind resistance) and fatter frame with wider bars (more wind resistance) will also conspire agains lance. the real problems though in a longer race will be poor geometry and fit (increased chances of injury increase the longer you are on the bike and sap power) and the poor quality frame and components. the chances that the components on the cheap bike survive a tour length race are pretty close to non existant. once lance is pushing and i'm still riding, i'll whip his butt, even in the time trials. i like the red barron's quote "it's not the crate, it's the man flying it." within reason the machine is secondary. when i say in reason, the bike you could buy for 250 couldnt compete between two fit riders. it would be too heavy and too slow. now put two fit riders on racing bikes, ones weighing 18-20lbs, and the rider makes the difference, not what bike he's on. you can compete very well on a 750.00 bike for example. it has alloy rims, aluminum frame, reliable shifting and is within a reasonable weight. i think u can When you get into the expensive end of the bicycle curve, you're spending lots of money to shave seconds. A $250 bike is basically junk, but if you go from $1000 to $5000, you're talking at most a couple minutes over 40k. At the Tour level, everyone is so fast and fit, that any little thing can make the difference. As for commuting, I don't think I'd want to spend a lot of money on something I put that many hard miles on. |
| Tags |
| Pocket Bike Mini Bike Chopper Bike Pit Bike Dirt Bike Sport Bike Street Bike Exercise Bike Stationary Bike Recumbent Bike |
Bike Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster |