What percentage the bike & what percentage the rider ?
Ezy Rider
Posts: 415
On a 50 mile ride tonight , I was completely blown away by another rider. I am a 3 times per week recreational rider who doesnt have time to join a club and who usually puts out about 150 miles per week on the bike. Im assuming the other rider probably was a member of a club, he rode a gorgeous looking bike and was riding at a ferocious pace. I was riding along at around 19 - 20 mph enoying radio 5 through my headphones when this guy blitzed past me from behind and rode at such a pace it didnt take long before I couldnt see him. I smiled to myself and thought imagine 2 miles up the road and he is leaning over his bike gasping for air 
It didnt happen and he appeared to be a great rider. My bike does the job for me, it cost me about £750 and aint no carbon lightweight knocking on the door of 16 lbs weight, mine is more like 20 lbs in weight. It got me thinking , how much of that guys sustained lightning pace was to do with his physical make up and fitness and how much could you attribute to having a real nice bike ?
It didnt happen and he appeared to be a great rider. My bike does the job for me, it cost me about £750 and aint no carbon lightweight knocking on the door of 16 lbs weight, mine is more like 20 lbs in weight. It got me thinking , how much of that guys sustained lightning pace was to do with his physical make up and fitness and how much could you attribute to having a real nice bike ?
0
Comments
-
Good question, I have thought this myself.
When I do big rides people often say its because of the bike, yet I still have to peddle it. Interesting to see others views.Sirrus Comp 2010 (commuting)
Roubaix Pro SL Sram red (Weekend sportives)
Certini Campagnolo Mirage (Turbo trainer)0 -
99.9%rider 0.1%bike
A certain man once said, It's not about the bike.
It does make more of a difference uphill however
If you raced schleck up the Port de baeles, you had his bike, he had yours, he would woop your ass. Only could the chain would drop on his bike though, when you were attacking him.
No, it wouldn't make much of a difference0 -
Depends on what you define as a bike. If you mean 'a modern road racer - priced anywhere between £500 and £5000, then its probably less than 1%. Bung in MTBs and old steel touring bikes and the difference is more marked. Even so, I'm less than 5 minutes an hour slower on my old tourer than on my carbon Ribble.
So, in answer to your question - you need to pedal more rather than spend more Faster than a tent.......0 -
It's 50/50.
Neither will go well without the other.0 -
nakita222 wrote:99.9%rider 0.1%bike
A certain man once said, It's not about the bike.
It does make more of a difference uphill however
If you raced schleck up the Port de baeles, you had his bike, he had yours, he would woop your ass. Only could the chain would drop on his bike though, when you were attacking him.
No, it wouldn't make much of a difference
Agreed. A pro or very high level rider would be able to annihilate other normal riders, even if they were using a 30 year old 50lb steel bike without clipless pedals.
And while there are differences between the bikes pros use, their bikes are rarely the determining factor for who wins. Its all about training and having the legs to be there at the end.
Cycling isn't quite like Formula 1 where having the best car can have a massive difference. The best bike in the world won't make you fast compared to someone who is in better condition.0 -
-
0
-
I went on a club ride last summer and one guy was 5'2" on a bike that weighed less than my morning movements...
Needless to say he was like greased lightning, compounded by the fact that he was a european TT rider!
Physics dictate that me being twice his weight on twice the bike means I will move slower than him!!
0 -
Ezy Rider wrote:aint no carbon lightweight knocking on the door of 16 lbs weight, mine is more like 20 lbs in weight.
20lbs is still very light.
i find theres very little difference my training bike (22ish Lbs) and my ridley helium (14.13 Lbs). the ridley accelerates faster and climbs a little better but this is due to lighter wheels more than anything.
i would say its 85% rider 8% wheels and 7% rest of the bike
Stuy0 -
lighter bike doesn't make you faster.
why are TT bikes heavy, because it doesn't make much of a difference unless you're going uphill. Acceleration may be slower, but you'll get there in the end0 -
I'd rather my TT bike was lighter than it is though...0
-
The difference between a Cervelo S3 with 50mm Zipps and a £300 road bike with box-section hoops is at best 40 watts saved, the difference being significantly less in a close pack.
The difference between a keen recreational cyclist and a good cat-1 or below-average pro is well in excess of 150w at a decent pace.
For someone doing your amount of training to beat a pro or a decent cat-1 rider purely by merit of a better bike, he'd need to be on a full-sus bike with knobblies and you'd need to be on a TT bike. Even then it'd be a close call. To take things out of the hypothetical, a couple of years ago I saw Cammish do a 10 miler in well under 22 minutes on a steel-framed road bike that's older than I am. Fast cyclists are really, amazingly fast regardless of what they're riding.0 -
uphillbothways wrote:The difference between a Cervelo S3 with 50mm Zipps and a £300 road bike with box-section hoops is at best 40 watts saved, the difference being significantly less in a close pack.
Hmmmnnn..... you've just mentioned my race set-up!
40 watts is a LOT at the lower levels! And yes - if you're IN the pack those watts don't mean as much, but as someone who is usually right on the limit (even in the pack), I'll take those 40 watts any day!
To the OP - you do a lot of riding and averaging good speeds. Why don;t you have time to join a club? (And for the record, you don't actually have to spend ANY time with the club you join if you don't want to!)0 -
The proportion of performance the bike contributes to is so small compared to fitness and talent that it might as well be irrelevant at any level an amateur is at.
As long as it's a proper, well set up road bike with gears.
I'd imagine in TTs a TT position would make a noticable difference, but it's never going to turn you into Indurain.0 -
i would say its 85% rider 8% wheels and 7% rest of the bike
Yes, but as we all know, 95% of statistics are made up, and the other 10% are a lie"Get a bicycle. You won't regret it if you live"
Mark Twain0 -
As mentioned earlier, even with the depressingly small contribution the bike makes, there's also the point that some parts of the bike have a vastly disproportionate impact: the wheels but more so the tyres. In the "bang for your buck" stakes, these are where it's at.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0
-
If a 20 min 10TT guy rode my bike, he'd probably do a 21, if I rode a 20 min 10TT guys bike, I certainly wouldn't!!!!!0
-
Ok my take is on low end bikes from 200 quid to the start of the high end bikes at 2000 quid there is pretty much a linear relationship with cost and improved performance
For example, brakes. If the bike has terrible brakes you cannot corner as fast
Most the other differences are subtle and as other people have said above the difference in "power transmission" is not a lot.
If you are not a talented rider then having a good bike can make a small but useful contribution to your short comings. If OTOH you are already a powerhouse, any bike will do
The two cheapest and easiest ways to make your lowend bike go better are:
1) better tyres. Michelin Pro Race, Continental 4000, Schwalbe Ultremo ZX something like that instead of Ultragator skins
2) track pump. Having your tyres at the correct pressure is a easy win0
