How important are looks?

supersonic

For the bike and its parts ;-). Has been mentioned lots in threads lately, so I thought I'd start this one so we can have an in depth argument, erm discussion about the subject.

Myself, well, it used to be very important. Back in the 90s there was a definite shiny, neon culture and I did subscribe to it for a while. Today though, whilst if I get an option of colours, sure, I will pick the best match, but it is more about the bike.

I can see the psycholgical influence of a good looking machine: if it looks good then in your mind you will enjoy riding it more. I have a more of an affinity with this logic with classic cars though as the whole experience tends to be more a labour of love and appreciation of the machine rather than a tool to do a job. I don't get this as much with bikes. Sure I have a 13 year old Zaskar, and I like it, but it has a defined use.

I was having a conversation with soemone once and he simply wouldn't contemplate a bike if it didn't fit into his idea of a good looking frame. Infact he went as far to say that even if he rode a bike that he thought was perfect, if it didn't have a good name or look good he wouldn't own it, even if it was free! Is anyone else like that?

What makes a bike good looking anyway?

llamafarmer

supersonic wrote:

I can see the psycholgical influence of a good looking machine: if it looks good then in your mind you will enjoy riding it more. I have a more of an affinity with this logic with classic cars though as the whole experience tends to be more a labour of love and appreciation of the machine rather than a tool to do a job.

I reckon for a lot of us our bike is a labour of love, we spend a lot of money buying and upgrading it, then invest hours in cleaning and fettling. Looks are important to me, but they're part of the overall equation rather than the be all and end all.

supersonic

That is true - but I tend not to buy stuff that I know isn't very good and want to spend ages servicing it ;-)

fourcrossjohn

i think looks are very important, if it looks good it feels good
if it looks bad it will feel just as bad

a bike has to look good to make you apreciate it, if you apreciate it you perform better, if you perform better you look after it more, with looking after it you upgrade parts and that leads to improved performance

you get a cr@p looking bike and you couldnt be arsed to look after it or spend out on the money

the only reason i'd except a crap looking bike for free would be to sell on
but most high end bikes DO look the dogs balls

delcol

looks are what draw you to a product ect.

weather it be a car a bike a lady or a pair of shoes ect.

the first thing you do is see it you then draw a conclusion as to weather you like it or not, based on shape colour if your a snob brand,,,, everyone has different tastes so will choose different things they like about what they see..

imo we all base our first impressions on something by looking at it...

and me personally if it aint asthetically pleasing to the eye then i probably would not buy it, (oh no whn did i become a snob.)

MarkEo

I agree, if you have a cr@p looking bike then you arn't gonna be bothered about keeping it clean and looking after it but if you have a good looking bike you're more likely to try and kee;p it looking like a brand new bike

Looks arn't everything but they help a lot i think

supersonic

I think maybe because I have worked with bikes for a long time, and research them, looks aren't the first thing that draws me in: value and spec does.

llamafarmer

We should all think like you SS, but I guess we all have that human weakness for shiny things!

MarkEo

Dont get me wrong value and spec are important but i think looks go a long way aswell

The Big Cheese

My name is Adam and I am a bike tart :oops:

Although I want a product to perform very well, if it didn't look good (to me) I wouldn't buy it, sad I know but true.

I think the balance lies between what we think looks good, weighed up to how it performs and makes us feel... it's all part of the same equation.

supersonic

One good thing is that the less fashinionable brands get some hefty reductions - namely Mongoose and GT. Yet they get great reviews!

The Big Cheese

supersonic wrote:

One good thing is that the less fashinionable brands get some hefty reductions - namely Mongoose and GT. Yet they get great reviews!

but I think both the above brands look great in the most part...

Ie the Force, the sanction and the Khyber Elite... and of course the carbon zaskar and marathon 8)

stickygreen

I like to be diifferent from everyone else if i can be,just don't like being the same.I read so many threads from people that thought the lime green core 20 was a disgusting colour my budget was £500-£600 so i bought it I don't really care what gear i've got or who makes it as long as it does it's job.

nicklouse

supersonic
just look at the what Qrs for my hubs topic!

at least one person there has seen the light!

supersonic

Hehe, yep!

'hope skewers to do them justice'

Now that I don't understand!

robertpb

Fit for purpose is my first condition, I want get up and go and keep going, not well it looked pretty but it broke.

My old Dawes Ranger from 84 looked like it was fast and sleek but it just kept braking.

My Swallow one off hand built for me, looks a little strange to some people, bmx bars, 14" frame 24" wheels, tank built Swallow tandem hubs.

It didn't break and 23 years later the hubs are still all original including the bearings.

There's nothing in the book that says function should be ugly, but function in my book comes first.

Northwind

I don't care much... If I've got a choice of colours etc I pick something that will look right, but I've never got a part or not got a part just because of colour (frexample, I got my white truvativ stem to match my white forks, but I got it because it was the right shape, weight, and price- it just happened to come in white).

Don't get me wrong, my bike looks ****ing awesome, and I'm glad it does but it works better than it looks.

GHill

Looks draw my attention first, then I think about value and performance before actually purchasing.

So, while the value and performance are ultimately the most important, if a product looks naff I probably won't take the time to research it.

And there's no accounting for taste... :twisted:

canada16

You got to see my bike.

TBH I think its the pimpest bike I have ever seen.

Focus superbud 2008 all white and black and bits of hope blue.

Full XT kit inc. wheels from shimano.

Rictchey wcs carbon bars and the wet black 116gr stem.

Its so so sweet.

Looks are everything, as it gives you more confidence.

Its like having an ugly wife that can cook clean and does your lunch, but do you really want to take her out?

EVERYONE WANTS ARM CANDY

Oh and I am sure that no one would say... well you bought that piece for bling, or that is cr@p

All the parts are top.

I buy things from what I sell around the house from my ebay, and when I get paid and shares from work.

I love my bike. :oops:

supersonic

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

But if you like it ;-)

canada16

I agree.

I also love :

http://www.trekbikes.com/ca/en/bikes/mo ... y/remedy8/

supersonic

Yes, it does look nice - clean lines, not too much bloated hydroforming.

This however is (IMHO), a dog:



That is not what is putting me off: it is the cost for that spec. And in aint light.

paul.skibum

I dont buy bling stuff because I cant afford it but I also dont knowingly go and buy ugly stuff.

I think these days most products have enough design in them to make them appealing to the eye anyway.

My mates rides on a pair of old french trapezoid carbon fork things (sorry cant recall name and cant be bothered to search) that are light, apparently very good at absorbing small and medium hits because of the way they move but my argument against them is, they can be a bit noisy, they need constant fiddling to keep bolts tight, I am not certain they work as well as they are supposed to (and no one makes them anymore so...) but most of all I think they make the bike look an abortion! They only cost him £50 but I'd rather ride rigid I think.

canada16

supersonic wrote:

Yes, it does look nice - clean lines, not too much bloated hydroforming.

This however is (IMHO), a dog:



That is not what is putting me off: it is the cost for that spec. And in aint light.

Sweet looking frame 8)

canada16

What do you think about the new spech frame.

It was in the latest MTB mag.

Looked like it was in the shape of an X on the top tube black and white.

It was just a proto though I think.

Where are my stabilisers?

I'm a proper sucker for looks, but I'll always read reviews and get opinions before purchasing something. Sometimes I really really want something because it looks good, but have to resist because I know there is better stuff out there!

supersonic

I think Spesh like to change things around a lot to differentiate them from the previous frames. They do seem to be getting lighter, but they can't seem to make up their mind how to drive the shock!

This I think is lovely looking:

SDK2007

I buy based on looks.
I try and match the colours of new clothing and bike components to the frame etc.

The fork on my Enduro SL receives bad press for reliability, mine has been bullet proof so far but if it was unreliable I wouldn’t change it because it looks good. I’ve yet to see a good looking SL with a single crown fork.

GHill

supersonic wrote:

This however is (IMHO), a dog:

Let me guess, the designer sneezed when drawing the top tube?

lawman

i definitly buy a bike for looks, but it5 always comes equal to performance and spec but looks are really important. its difficult to say why i value looks so much, but a bike is a thing i spend all my money on, and all my effort goes into it, except cleaning , so having a nice looking bike is a way for me to feel good about my riding and its always nice to be complemented by others on the looks of your bike

but saying this if a bike looks good but rides crap im not interested, but 9 times out of 10 a good looking bike rides well

rwalworth

Looks are important, i'm one to go through phases and at the moment I am a fan of thin steel tubing and straight clean lines, which is why I built my on-one. In my opinion the big hydroformed aluminium tubes aren't pretty, and I really dislkike (and this is ironic because I own one of these aswell) the boardman top tubes with that ugly as sin diamond shape running along it.

However I do like some chunkier frames like the orange 5, and kona stinky. I also love the intense slopestyle bike