Price? MTB vs Road
Comments
-
njee20 wrote:Was more in response to the suggestion you build a bike with slicks, bar ends etc for the commute. You'll get a decent road bike which will be faster and more comfortable.
Ah, OK. If I was going to do it I'd bite the bullet and get a proper road bike, I wouldn't mess about with the HT swapping tyres, etc, as I couldn't be arsed with the hassle. It'd be less hassle to get a road bike past the missus.0 -
What's best on the road for commuting is rather subjective, as is comfort. I have 'hybridised' a 1996 Zaskar LE which is cost around £300 in total. As standard it has 28mm slicks, old Crossmax wheels, V brakes, triple butted project 2 forks, bar ends, a 580mm bar (though currently is 635mm) but crucially bar ends and clip on aero bars.
This set up suits me perfectly, the wider bar improves the handling, the bar ends extra hand positions, and the aero bars lets me cruise at high efficiency on the straighter bits. Also highly adaptable - if I fancy a bit of a trek to the trails and some light xc, then put on my old SIDS, and some bigger tyres. Lots of choice of gearing, can even fit full hydraulic discs if I want.
Light, fast, efficent and cheap. And comfortable!0 -
To be fair, there is a helluva lot of engineering going into mtb products these days, carbon frames, complicated damper circuits etc. I don't mind paying what I do. If you're sensible (like myself), you can get a really well performing bike for a lot less than what you'd pay for one off the shelf if you're happy to buy old stock or just go with kit that's functional and reliable. Like the gears on both my bikes are a mix of X7 and X9, yeah it's not the best, but aside from feeling a little less nice than full X0, it's not really going to make any difference to the actual performance of the bike. That leaves me more money to spend on a decent fork, brakes etc (stuff that DOES make difference to the performance)0
-
njee20 wrote:Was more in response to the suggestion you build a bike with slicks, bar ends etc for the commute. You'll get a decent road bike which will be faster and more comfortable.
It might be faster but who says it will be more comfortable, what is one mans sofa is another mans cheesewire. If your a roadie lycra wearer who can just about lift a bottle out of the cage then a road bike might suit you. Personally as someone who looks like a 6 foot badly shaved Gorilla with a 75" wingspan and a barrel chest I aint going to be comfortable on anything resembling a bike with titchy drop bars. Racers are skinny little uns though I bump into Bradley Wiggins occasionally and I could use him as a snooker cue
Fig rolls: proof that god loves cyclists and that she wants us to do another lap0 -
Road bars come in different widths. It is completely subjective of course, again, comment was aimed at the notion that riding on drop bars will give you back ache. I'd choose my road bike to ride on the road if it was more than about 100 yards. I find my MTB pretty bloody uncomfy on the road frankly, have done 12 hour off road rides in perfect comfort though.0
-
Completely subjective but I sold my road bike for exactly that reason, the next plan is a 29er with slick tyres for my commute.0
-
Hang on... so people only buy nice bikes to have something akin to what the pros ride? Can't remember the last time I saw much 105 in the pro-tour, even with the 6.8kg rule.
Expensive road bikes are nicer to ride than cheap ones, just like MTBs. Dura Ace feels better than 105, and it lasts so long it's easier to justify than XTR on the MTB IMO. There are 'actual' performance increases on the road, they're just different.0 -
My commuter is a Hybrid frame on flat bars, pretty similar in concept to SS's in that it could be an MTB frame rather than a Hybrid one and it would make no real difference, however unlike my MTB the commuter runs flat bars, no spacers and a flipped stem putting the bars well below the saddle, in fact at about the same height as the hoodz would be on drops, as my commute is 6.7 miles, it's likely if I were on a road bike I'd do most on the Hoodz anyway, when it's windy or downhill I move my hands inboard of the controls so get a postion somehwere between tri-bars and drops but at reduced weight and cost.
Admittedly my commuter is very much set up for me on my commute, 1x9, gearing so I use the full spread but need no more, rack and panniers, mudguards, crosstop levers and twist shifter (de-clutter the bars) and disc brakes (I want to stop NOW!).
Admittedly its a way off 6.8Kg, but the rack and load add over 5Kg so there is a limit to the benfits.
If you look at a tour bike it will often change every few stages as they move the weight to different places to optimise the bike for a particular stage, flat fast stages tend to use deeper (more aerodynamic) rims (which weigh more) and they then reduce weight over the rest of the bike, mountainous stages they use lighter wheels and tyres and add weight elsewhere - remember a good article comparing Wiggo's bike spec on 2 such stages, was very interesting!Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
They don't tend to change tyres that much, but yes wheels do change as you say, some of the riders will change entire bikes, others are ridiculously picky about their set up. Bit like 'normal' riders really! Cancellara has 3 identical Trek Domane bikes (complete with slammed 140mm -7 degree stems!) and rides them all regularly to make sure they're all the same - he doesn't want to feel uncomfortable if he has to swap to a 'spare' on the road.
They have to be a bit more careful now, as the weight has to be functional. BITD on mountain stages they used to run 1000g wheelsets, and stick some weights on the BB shell to get to the 6.8kg. They can't do that now, so there's more alu finishing kit, cheaper cassettes etc to get back up to the weight. It's a stupid rule anyway!0 -
Example I read stated they did, but there you go....njee20 wrote:They don't tend to change tyres that much
Yes the rules are outdated and need improving, maybe a sliding min weight reduction to encourage innovation, also the now redundant weight thing is silly, they could for example just produce cranksets with different weight axles and chop and change..... a similar rule was used in the world rally championship and the teams just went to marked weight sump gaurds and other under body protection!Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
It's definitely pushed innovation in a different direction, which isn't all bad - the proliferation of power meters on pros bikes now, and the increase in aero designs; wheels, frames, components is good. They could do with lopping a kilo off it or something though, see what happens! I sort of appreciate the need to not have a complete free for all for safety reasons (not that bikes were spontaneously combusting before they introduced the weight limit), but in the days of 700g frames and 900g wheels it's pretty archaic.0
-
Agreed...I think they need to agree a new min weight and a 'ramp' from the current to new weight over a (shortish) period of time.
AX Lighness built a complete road bike at 4.9Kg, so something like 5.5Kg as a new minimum should work just fine.Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
2.7kg, with 2x10 gears, although friction shifters would be a pain. Still, it's designed to be used, quite impressive really! IIRC the wheels are 700g.
It'd be interesting to see what would happen in the short term if they abolished it. Would riders revert to ultralight wheels and what not for everything, or would the stiffer, aero stuff continue to proliferate.0 -
Would depend on the stage I think...
Long flat stage - aero
Mountians, lightweight but frame/wheels/crank assy stiff enough to take the abuse
Sprinters will sacrifice as little stiffness as they can but still ensure they can be in the hunt approaching the finish!
That bike is mental, I can admire the workmanship while still seeing it as mental! You would need to add a fair bit of weight (by proportion) to make it a sensible pro tour proposition though....the pedals and friction shifters for example would cost more time than they save through lightweight. Not sure of the comfort of the saddle/seatpost with no rails for a full 8-12 hours either!Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
To be fair even the longer Classics like Paris Roubaix are generally <7 hours, a lot of Tour stages are 'only' 4, but yes you're right, you'd want to be making some changes for sure.
Those pedals are a little scary, no one's tested whether they release in a crash or not, and they don't use a conventional 'heel out' to release, (you slide the cleat onto the body) so I'd definitely change those, and stick some STIs on as you say.Would depend on the stage I think...
Long flat stage - aero
Mountians, lightweight but frame/wheels/crank assy stiff enough to take the abuse
That's my point though - I wonder if all riders would do that, or if some would still push weight to the max (or min) in all situations, as they did before. Ie I wonder if they've all learnt about the aero benefits, or if some still rebuff it.0 -
You see just as much, if not more, custom stuff on the road, the bike just don't weigh less than 6.8kg...0
-
Really?
That's rediculous0 -
cyd190468 wrote:
Agreed but the custom stuff isn't as important. It's virtually impossible to buy an XC bike off the shelf that comes within 1kg of the bikes at the world champs. If you look at the team bikes in a protour team most of them are available in a shop and are the same except for testing next years stuff in races. If you look at scott swisspower for example their team bikes are based around frames that aren't even available to the public. I can't buy a 650B spark or scale.njee20 wrote:You see just as much, if not more, custom stuff on the road, the bike just don't weigh less than 6.8kg...
No. Custom stuff is important as it forms the very basis of your (pretty flawed) arguement.
Every team out there will be trying to get the edge over their rivals and the edge in marketing and will do non-standard things to achieve this. You might not be able to get a current Klackibonka Starwrangle in an off-standard wheel size, or with a 44mm head tube, or with the next generation of damping cartridge (because it's 'custom'), but there's a chance it'll be on a future bike iteration. Can you get a roadie carbon framed with a custom lay-up, or with an extended head tube, or with lengthened seat stays? No (because it's 'custom') - unless you're, like, Goldfinger levels of wealthy. Either way, road or mountain, Average Jack can't buy it because it's custom - its proprietary to the team and/or manufacturer. The issue is you can't recognise it ona road bike, but you can on an MTB.
So there's a number of solutions:
1) Get over it and just get out and ride. Enjoy what you've got - don't mourn what you can't have.
2) Go protest to the UCI that you demand a 'Production class' in pro-racing (let me know how that works out for you).
3) Get good enough that teams want you to have what they can provide (let me know how that works out for you).
4) Build it yourself (ditto).How would I write my own epitaph? With a crayon - I'm not allowed anything I can sharpen to a sustainable point.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed herein are worth exactly what you paid for them.0 -
Agree with Clank, racing is a hotbed of prototype technology, and it's more rife in road than MTB because there's more money in it. Look at tyre and wheel technology, about half the teams are riding on wheels/tyres with fake decals, or no decals, to cover up what they're really using. As said, custom lay ups, custom geometry etc, plenty of differences.
Yeah ok you can't get a 650b Scale yet, but you can replicate many of the bikes more accurately than on the road I'd say.0 -
-
That is quite pricey for only a frame! 899g and 'the lightest' despite being heavier than Trek claim......Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0
-
Not too bad really, an S-Works hardtail in 2006 was £1200, as was a Trek 9.8, and IIRC the first Scale RC frames were £1600 about the same time, considering how much lighter they are now... In fact I had a Trek 9.8 that was £1100 in 2001, at the same time a full S-Works FSR bike was only £2600!
It's about the going rate for ultra light hardtail frames. Don't think Spesh do the S-Works as a frame these days, but the complete bike is £6k, as is the Superfly SL Pro.0
