Bicycle science

[Mosquito]

I am thinking about buying a bicycle for exercise purposes, and have found that there are a huge number of different parts and qualities out there, I have however not been able to find much real value information. So I was wondering if anybody here have any information on what different parts actually and objectively give me.

The reason I ask is of course that I do not want to spend a huge amount of dough buying the very best of everything in order to secure that bike I'll enjoy riding for the next many years.

There are many parts on a bike that comes in different price/quality/performance categories, but I have not seen any vendor/producer that gives objective information (except weight&price) on the parts. But how much better is the $3000 frame than the $800 frame? And the gears, breaks, wheels, etc? How much REAL performance do they give?

Is this world as full of woo as the audio world (I suspect it is...)? How can I get the knowledge and tools to maneuver safely when buying the bike?

I do not want to buy an expensive bike, as I am on a bit of a budget, and need to feed the offspring as well. Actually, feeding the offspring is somewhat more important to me than getting the ultimate in bikes.

Nor do I want to buy a bike that I will sell the next year because it just isn't good enough to give me the joy I think I deserve from it


I am thinking of road/racing-bike. I already have a mountain-bike that I will use for the time being, but the next bike will be for long trips of nice clean exercise Maybe I'll buy it this autumn, when I'm in better shape to enjoy it.


Mosquito - In need of less fat

 

[Abooga]

GIANT bikes are probably the best deal you can get.

SPECIALIZED bikes are nicer though, but more expensive.

CANNONDALEs very nice but overpriced.

After a barrier of about 400 $ the only noticeable difference between differently priced bikes is weight (and durability, if you ride more than 3000 miles a year you´ll need good components). Taking a kg. off the bike doubles its price more or less. Under 400$ bikes are usually too crap to ride them more than once a month.

Buying the parts and putting them together is much more expensive than buying the whole bike, but it´s fun and very easy.

 

[Cuddles]

I don't think this area is anywhere near as bad as audiophoolery. Generally you really do get what you pay for, although at the high end it is up to you if you feel the extra cost is worth the improvement. For example, a £3000 frame will be much lighter, stronger and better made than a £100 frame, and will almost certainly be better than a £2000 frame. However, while the jump from hundreds to thousands is significant, the jump from thousands to more thousands will be much smaller and most people probably won't consider it worth it.

Gears, brakes, etc. you certainly don't want to buy cheap, but again, how expensive you go is really up to you. A decent set of v-brakes is all some people need, but hydraulic disc brakes are far more effective and reliable, just much more expensive. I have to admit I don't know that much about really high-end stuff, but I think you generally really do get what you pay for. The best places to go for parts and advice are usually the smaller, independant shops rather than chains. No doubt some places will give worse advice than others, but the shops I have use have often recommended cheaper parts than they could, or even recommended other shops, which is generally a good sign that they are trying to help rather than just trying to get your money.

Edit : Unless you are really serious about wanting to build your own bike I would recommend buying one ready made rather than buying parts. I second Abooga's point about Giant. I used to have one and it was easily the best bike I've ever had, and was only £400 ($800), far less than anything else of similar quality.

Edit2 : Also, try looking at display models or shop-soiled bikes. They are usually in perfect condition, but because they have been on display in the open you can get them for as little as half price.

 

[Mosquito]

GIANT bikes are probably the best deal you can get.

SPECIALIZED bikes are nicer though, but more expensive.

CANNONDALEs very nice but overpriced.

After a barrier of about 400 $ the only noticeable difference between differently priced bikes is weight (and durability, if you ride more than 3000 miles a year you´ll need good components). Taking a kg. off the bike doubles its price more or less. Under 400$ bikes are usually too crap to ride them more than once a month.

Buying the parts and putting them together is much more expensive than buying the whole bike, but it´s fun and very easy.

$400??? Really? The cheapest I've been able to find around here have been in the $900-$1000 range, and the salespeople generally recommends me something in the ~$2000-3000 range. (I had a nice bike some 15-20 years ago, but it got "lost", so they say that the cheaper models wouldn't be "satisfactory" for me.)

Note that all such bikes sold in these here parts have the gearing system where you flip the break-handles. I believe this system in itself is rather expensive, and could make up for most of the difference in prices we see.


Mosquito - still a bit confused, but it does help to see that not all think that the $5000+bike is a necessity in order to enjoy some hours on the road.

- Couldn't afford a $5000 bike unless it was given to me without the tax-authorities finding out

 

[Mosquito]

I don't think this area is anywhere near as bad as audiophoolery. Generally you really do get what you pay for, although at the high end it is up to you if you feel the extra cost is worth the improvement. For example, a £3000 frame will be much lighter, stronger and better made than a £100 frame, and will almost certainly be better than a £2000 frame. However, while the jump from hundreds to thousands is significant, the jump from thousands to more thousands will be much smaller and most people probably won't consider it worth it.

Gears, brakes, etc. you certainly don't want to buy cheap, but again, how expensive you go is really up to you. A decent set of v-brakes is all some people need, but hydraulic disc brakes are far more effective and reliable, just much more expensive. I have to admit I don't know that much about really high-end stuff, but I think you generally really do get what you pay for. The best places to go for parts and advice are usually the smaller, independant shops rather than chains. No doubt some places will give worse advice than others, but the shops I have use have often recommended cheaper parts than they could, or even recommended other shops, which is generally a good sign that they are trying to help rather than just trying to get your money.

Edit : Unless you are really serious about wanting to build your own bike I would recommend buying one ready made rather than buying parts. I second Abooga's point about Giant. I used to have one and it was easily the best bike I've ever had, and was only £400 ($800), far less than anything else of similar quality.

Edit2 : Also, try looking at display models or shop-soiled bikes. They are usually in perfect condition, but because they have been on display in the open you can get them for as little as half price.

I haven't seen any Giant-bikes around here. I think I saw some when I was a kid, I guess they don't sell much around here. Could be that the smaller shops have them though. I'll look for them when window-shopping

Shop-soiled would be good for me, as it provides a lot of bike for the money, but then I loose out on the fit, there is not much chance that the bikes available like that will be my sizes. Could get lucky though...


On my previous location, I guess I could have gotten bikes much cheaper, but to get them from there now would require sending by plane, which would add to cost (and I'd have to be trusting them to give what I pay for). Now I have to deal with being where I am, which can be a pain, cost-wise.


Mosquito - not swimming in enough money

 

[EHocking]

I am thinking about buying a bicycle for exercise purposes, and have found that there are a huge number of different parts and qualities out there, I have however not been able to find much real value information. So I was wondering if anybody here have any information on what different parts actually and objectively give me....
Mosquito - In need of less fat

If you're just doing it for exercise, you really don't need a flash bike.

Last year I rode from London to Paris (300 miles) for charity on a 15 year old, steel-framed bike (AU$400 then). Though the gear range was much narrower to the newer bikes, I managed the 4 days quite easily. In fact quite a number of keen cyclists with bikes that (literally) cost 1000's of pounds complemented me on the smooth change of my ancient Shimano derailler system. Yes, I was pushing a few more kilos down the road as them - but if you're doing this for the exercise, what does that matter?

Keep the gadgets to a minimum - a simple 3 function speedometer/odometer is all you need. Laughably, a number of the keener cyclists had computer cadence systems that drove off the crank. Because of the hills, and the fact that the computers' cadences had been set for hard training, the low crank rate didn't trigger the computers and none of these guys had ANY idea how far or how long they had ridden that day. My £10 wireless odometer never missed a beat.

Buy what you can afford. 2nd hand for starters, perhaps.

If you are after a road bike, I DO recommend getting cleat pedal/shoe system. It's actually easier on your legs by, paradoxically, using the muscles on both the down stroke and the up stroke.

Have fun, it won't take long to get in reasonable shape. I went from not riding the bike for 5 years, to 25 miles easily in 90 minutes without pushing.

 

[Mashuna]

I second the cleats - I was amazed at how much more effective I was when wearing them. Just remember you've got them on, otherwise you do a very pathetic-looking tumble from your bike when you stop at a junction and try and put one foot down.

For the bike, I've got a Trek 1200 triple, which has been great. Cost me about £700, so $1400 equivalent. For general exercise / sprint triathlon purposes, it's ideal for me.

 

[Gravy]

$400??? Really? The cheapest I've been able to find around here have been in the $900-$1000 range, and the salespeople generally recommends me something in the ~$2000-3000 range. (I had a nice bike some 15-20 years ago, but it got "lost", so they say that the cheaper models wouldn't be "satisfactory" for me.)

Hard to believe, but the salespeople aren't telling you the truth. Unless you are going to use it for serious racing or unless money is simply no object to you, spending $2000 or $3000 for a bike is nuts, IMHO. And remember that your last "nice" bike got "lost?" That will always be a worry with an expensive bike. And the cost of replacements for worn parts can be quite high.

Less expensive bikes have much better components and come in much greater varieties than they did 15-20 years ago. Mid-range components may be a bit heavier and less aerodynamic than the priciest, but they are often just as good in terms of functionality and reliability. A properly-fitted less-expensive bike may be more comfortable than a pricey racing bike, which can be harsh, twitchy, and can put numbing pressure on ass and hands.

Good fit is important if you're going to ride a lot. One option is to pay a respected shop for a session on their fitting machine, making sure the mechanic knows what kind of riding you want to do, then take the recorded figures and order a bike with those dimensions (or parts to build one) online. You could save hundreds of dollars over buying locally.

A budget option is to put narrower, lighter wheels and road tires on your mountain bike. Then you'd have a comfortable bike that goes pretty fast. I've done that in the past and been very pleased with the results.

You'll get the most exercise on a bike that you want to use. Racing bikes aren't for everyone. And remember, a less efficient bike will give you more exercise per mile. As Lance Armstrong said, "It's not about the bike." When I returned from a trans-America loaded tour, I was so strong that I could beat the local racers on my heavy touring bike with fenders and mountain bike gearing.

 

[roger]

The heavier the bike, the better the exercise. Go inexpensive, but not cheap.


Some math:

lose 5lbs from the bike: $2K+
lose 5lbs from your butt: priceless

net effect is the same: 5lbs less.

 

[Cuddles]

If you are after a road bike, I DO recommend getting cleat pedal/shoe system. It's actually easier on your legs by, paradoxically, using the muscles on both the down stroke and the up stroke.

Personally I'd recommend just a pedal with baskets rather than actually attatching your feet to the bike. They do not give as much benefit, but they are far more user friendly and you don't need to worry about wearing the right shoes. Also, not so much of an issue if you're sticking to roads, but if you plan on going over any bumps having your feet attatched to the pedals can get very uncomfotable.

 

[Myriad]

My bicycle cost $110 at a local Benny's home-supply store.

I push on the pedals, and it goes. I squeeze the brake levers, and it stops. I turn the little handles, and the gears shift, making it go slower (with easier pedaling) up hills and faster down hills.

It's much faster than walking, and it's great exercise.

I'm not sure what I'm missing out on.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Mosquito]

If you're just doing it for exercise, you really don't need a flash bike.

Last year I rode from London to Paris (300 miles) for charity on a 15 year old, steel-framed bike (AU$400 then). Though the gear range was much narrower to the newer bikes, I managed the 4 days quite easily. In fact quite a number of keen cyclists with bikes that (literally) cost 1000's of pounds complemented me on the smooth change of my ancient Shimano derailler system. Yes, I was pushing a few more kilos down the road as them - but if you're doing this for the exercise, what does that matter?

I do it for the exersice, but in order to keep motivation up, I'd like the use of the bike to be as fun as possible. This will (I think) be helped with a better bike. Of course, there comes a point where adding more dough to the bike does not give that much value in riding. I have no idea where that point is, though, and I suspect that it depends on which parts I put the money in. Not that I have any real idea as to where and how much...

Also I'd like to be able to participate in some races (on a completely amateur/excersicer level) maybe similar to the London-Paris thingie you did. And, it would be good if it was my physique (or lack thereof) that was the real limiting factor, not some low quality parts in the bike.

Keep the gadgets to a minimum - a simple 3 function speedometer/odometer is all you need. Laughably, a number of the keener cyclists had computer cadence systems that drove off the crank. Because of the hills, and the fact that the computers' cadences had been set for hard training, the low crank rate didn't trigger the computers and none of these guys had ANY idea how far or how long they had ridden that day. My £10 wireless odometer never missed a beat.

The speedometer++ gadgets are so cheap that they hardly matters cost-wise. I wouldn't buy one that had 200 functions though, as current speed, total time and total distance are the most important. Max speed and some others are nice to have and may be included in a ~£10 system now.

Buy what you can afford. 2nd hand for starters, perhaps.

My previous bike was second hand. I loved that bike. But not enough to still have it Maybe one of the bigger mistakes of my life... (What a boring life that must have been....)

If you are after a road bike, I DO recommend getting cleat pedal/shoe system. It's actually easier on your legs by, paradoxically, using the muscles on both the down stroke and the up stroke.

That, is obligatory. A bike without such a pedal/shoe system is only half a bike. I paid good money to get that on my mountainbike. Besides a road bike without such a system isn't, is it?

Have fun, it won't take long to get in reasonable shape. I went from not riding the bike for 5 years, to 25 miles easily in 90 minutes without pushing.

I used to be able to do around 20+mph for maybe 3+ hours, that is a loooong time ago. With some serious exersice I might be able to regain that in a few years. Then I can try the longer runs This summer I will focus on the mountain bike, as I need to conserve money (it only needs fixing up a little and I can use it for building some strength/constitution). I'll try to get the road bike in the autumn so that I can set it up in the basement and build a better body for next summer


Mosquito - Thankful for the advice so far, it seems to me that I could most likely get a very enjoyable bike at the cost the salespeople are recommending (around $2000), which I think is around what I am willing to pay. This would get me a full bike with all the accessories I need (speedometer & bottleholder & maybe some clothing).

 

[Mosquito]

Hard to believe, but the salespeople aren't telling you the truth. Unless you are going to use it for serious racing or unless money is simply no object to you, spending $2000 or $3000 for a bike is nuts, IMHO. And remember that your last "nice" bike got "lost?" That will always be a worry with an expensive bike. And the cost of replacements for worn parts can be quite high.

Now this is where I was prior to starting this thread. With a healthy dose of scepticism about what salespeople tell me, but without the knowledge to deal with it in a reasonable manner.

Are you saying that I should go for a $1000 bike (cheapest I've seen around here so far) rather than a $2000 one as there isn't any real value for me in the difference?

I'd really like to se a table of effects for bikes/parts. Something OBJECTIVE to base my decision on.

Less expensive bikes have much better components and come in much greater varieties than they did 15-20 years ago. Mid-range components may be a bit heavier and less aerodynamic than the priciest, but they are often just as good in terms of functionality and reliability. A properly-fitted less-expensive bike may be more comfortable than a pricey racing bike, which can be harsh, twitchy, and can put numbing pressure on ass and hands.

I suspected as much, that what cost $2000 some years ago and was a good bike for your usage is now sold for around $1000 but is now for less experienced/demanding folks, You should have the $2000 one.

But there are no real objective data in this business, are there? So that I could compare such bikes and know before I have spent $$$ and time that a certain bike is either not good enough or way to pricey for its performance.

Good fit is important if you're going to ride a lot. One option is to pay a respected shop for a session on their fitting machine, making sure the mechanic knows what kind of riding you want to do, then take the recorded figures and order a bike with those dimensions (or parts to build one) online. You could save hundreds of dollars over buying locally.

Good fit I've gotten (as advice, not yet physically ). I guess I'll have to talk more roughly with these people, so that maybe they can provide better info.

A budget option is to put narrower, lighter wheels and road tires on your mountain bike. Then you'd have a comfortable bike that goes pretty fast. I've done that in the past and been very pleased with the results.

You'll get the most exercise on a bike that you want to use. Racing bikes aren't for everyone. And remember, a less efficient bike will give you more exercise per mile. As Lance Armstrong said, "It's not about the bike." When I returned from a trans-America loaded tour, I was so strong that I could beat the local racers on my heavy touring bike with fenders and mountain bike gearing.

Good execise in heavy, slow and far-from-optimum-configuration bikes. They are just a tad bit less FUN, so the overall effect could easily be that they are not used anywhere near as much. Which would be detrimentory.


Mosquito - Probably changing my mind again to press the salespeople for hard numbers

 

[Mosquito]

And remember that your last "nice" bike got "lost?"

Just for the record: The last bike was given to a fleemarket by my parents. I agree with the general gist of your response though, an expensive bike IS attractive to people who like to "loose" other peoples bikes.

Mosquito - carried a 7' chain to chain that bike down, didn't bother me then, so I guess weight is a minor issue

 

[Mosquito]

Personally I'd recommend just a pedal with baskets rather than actually attatching your feet to the bike. They do not give as much benefit, but they are far more user friendly and you don't need to worry about wearing the right shoes. Also, not so much of an issue if you're sticking to roads, but if you plan on going over any bumps having your feet attatched to the pedals can get very uncomfotable.

I don't know about these baskets, but locking my feet to the pedals has been how I ride bikes since I had my nicey. And modern pedals allow you to unclasp by wriggling your foot. With that bike I had to plan for it and open some straps to get my foot out.

Didn't bother me much then, and now, if I find myself on a bike where my feet are flapping freely, I find it uncomfortable and annoying.

It is purely a "get used to it" thing. And once you are used to it, you don't want to go back.

Mosquito - Scared the first few times, but the feeling of POWER disabused me of that rather soon

 

[flimflam_machine]

I wish I could remember the ref: someone did the calculations a few years ago about how much faster you would go on a lighter bike compared to a heavier one. The difference was really pretty trivial even up long hills, so unless you're racing I'd stay in the moderate price range since I suspect that the law of diminishing marginal returns applies to this just as much as everything else.

One piece of advice that I did hear was to buy the bike with the best frame that you could afford since the other components will wear out and can be upgraded when they do.

 

[Orangutan]

My bicycle cost $110 at a local Benny's home-supply store.

I push on the pedals, and it goes. I squeeze the brake levers, and it stops. I turn the little handles, and the gears shift, making it go slower (with easier pedaling) up hills and faster down hills.

It's much faster than walking, and it's great exercise.

I'm not sure what I'm missing out on.

Respectfully,
Myriad

What He said! Think about it, the cheaper the bike, the heavier it will be, the less efficient the bearings etc. All this leads to more exercise!

If you were planing a cycling trip you might have different requirements!

 

[The Don]

If you do buy a nice bike, paint it to look cr@ppy as soon as you can. It may reduce the likelihood that it'll get nicked

 

[flimflam_machine]

What He said! Think about it, the cheaper the bike, the heavier it will be, the less efficient the bearings etc. All this leads to more exercise!

Of course, a large portion of that exercise will be from throwing the bike in a ditch and walking home. I've always found that if you ride a nice bike, in addition to putting a huge smile on your face, it just induces you to go further and faster. If you want inefficiency you can buy little spoilers to put on your spokes that radically increase wind resistance.

 

[Gravy]

Some resources:

A good article on bicycle fit by Peter White (he's a good source for specialty parts and is a good wheelbuilder)

Revisionist frame sizing by Sheldon Brown (his other articles are filled with good sense.)

The product reviews at roadbikereview.com are highly subjective, but may be helpful.

The forums at bicycling.com may also be helpful

Bikepro.com parts comparison tables

Shimano parts specs
Campagnolo parts

Cycling news tech section (high end reviews)

Unless you're a professional cyclist, if you're fascinated by the listings section of Weight Weenies, you may be insane.