Newbie with gears to grind (gerrit)

jamieprang

Yo dudes.

Ok I've bought my first road bike. I've got a mountain bike which I love. But I want to get into triathlons. Well... today I bought myself a Viking Giro D'Italia. Now before you all start tearing me to pieces for this, because I have done my research and know that its not well liked by 99% of people. Can I ask why its so hated? I mean who honestly cares what someone else is riding? Personally for me, a man with no skill in the cycling world its perfect. If I was a Tour winner, then ok a super light bike made from carbon this and carbon that would be the way to go. But there's no point in me turning up to my first Triathlon on a £3000k bike only to come mid table at best. Surely I turn up on my "little bike that could" and just enjoy it? Or am I too naïve to believe that is actually how it should be?

Basically I want somebody to tell me I'm not mental. Because after reading all the mince on the web over the past hour its got me in a bit of a rage. And to a point where I wouldn't want to associate with someone looking down their nose at another because of what they ride.

As a keen surfer we have a saying. "who enjoys surfing the most? He who is best at it, or he who is having the most fun"

gethinceri

You are not mental.
Ride it, enjoy it.

jamieprang

Thankyou... I can now go to bed and sleep instead of writhe in fury.

w00dster

Hi Jamie,
Welcome to road cycling. Enjoy your bike, remember most of us start our cycling on similar bikes. Nothing at all wrong with what you ride, its about getting out there and enjoying it.
There may be some snobbery about within the cycling community, but generally as a whole people are very friendly and are happy to add another member to the fraternity regardless of what they ride. I take part in sportives and there is all sorts of riders and bikes there, its a very friendly and welcoming experience.
You will likely notice a lot of friendly banter between roadies and tri-athletes. Most of this is good humoured jesting, personally I have a lot of respect for anyone who invests their time doing a tough physical activity and I couldnt care about their clothes or bike.
Have fun and ride safe.

Moonbiker

Its is very heavy fot a new road bike 11.9kg. :shock:

But my bike weighs nearly as much virtually the same as that, its 11.5kg & I did a 40 mile trialthon bike leg on it last year & managed nearly 20mph average speed.

For a flat course bike weight isn't as important as most people think.


Durability of the low end components might be an issue if doing alot of training miles in the long run

52-14 high gear cassette might be be a slight issue limiting your top speed on downhills.

http://www.bikecalc.com/speed_at_cadence

Have a look at the above i think 80 is about average cadeance

But if you train hard no reason why you won't be overtaking pointy helmeted dentist types on £2000 bikes & that will be very satisfying,

simon_masterson

Moonbiker wrote:

Its is very heavy fot a new road bike 11.9kg. :shock:

But my bike weighs nearly as much virtually the same as that, its 11.5kg & I did a 40 mile trialthon bike leg on it last year & managed nearly 20mph average speed.

For a flat course bike weight isn't as important as most people think.


Durability of the low end components might be an issue if doing alot of training miles in the long run

52-14 high gear cassette might be be a slight issue limiting your top speed on downhills.

http://www.bikecalc.com/speed_at_cadence

Have a look at the above i think 80 is about average cadeance

But if you train hard no reason why you won't be overtaking pointy helmeted dentist types on £2000 bikes & that will be very satisfying,

My main bike currently weighs around 12kg (including 27" touring wheels with 27x1 1/4 wired Gatorskins). Go back 20 years or so and lots of time trial bikes (steel frames, disc wheels) were pretty weighty. Nice to have, but not critical. As bikes get better, they tend to get lighter; road bikes don't really need to be heavy.

But you'll always get snobbish types; many of whom need to validate their more expensive purchases. Ignore them. Some of the comments about bikes in that price range are valid - eg concerns about quality of components for example - but if you're happy with it, have at it...

Initialised

Enjoy it man!

Being "not last" on a heavy/cheap/tatty/old bike is a way better feeling than being "not first" on a £5k superbike (especially when you are "not last" ahead of the guy on the £5k superbike).

When the cheap bits break, replace them with better bits.

lc1981

I don't think it's hated or that everyone will somehow look down at you, it's just that there are other cheap bikes that have better quality components and specs (proper STI shifters and more sensible gearing), such as the B'Twin Triban, which seems to be the favoured cheap road bike around these parts (although admitedly it's more expensive than the Viking).

diamonddog

As long as you like it ignore what others think, enjoy it.

antfly

If that's all you could afford then fair enough but as you mention a 3 grand bike presumably it isn't, but It doesn't have to be a case of the cheapest bike possible or a 3 grand bike, 7 or 8 hundred would have been a good starting point and could have got you a much better bike that is more enjoyable to ride and worth upgrading.

cougie

My first bike was made out of something like scaffolding tubing with tractor style tyres and brakes that didn't ever work.

Oh and the saddle was just hard plastic. I loved it though and it got me hooked.

Don't worry what other people think - you just get out and enjoy your cycling. Triathlon has all kinds of bikes in it. My bike is OK - but my swim is awful - I still have fun with it.

oblongomaculatus

I agree, you should enjoy your bike and not take any notice of any elitist comments. it is true Vikings are very much at the lower end of the price scale, but this is no bad thing for a first road bike in my view. You don't want to spend a fortune in case it turns out you don't like road cycling. However it is true you get what you pay for. A lighter, higher specced (and inevitably more expensive) bike will be faster. Example: A few years ago I was riding a fairly cheap, heavy hybrid bike, and was perfectly happy with its performance. Then my eye was caught by a road bike (Actually a 2008 Specialized Tricross, to be accurate). It cost almost three times what my hybrid had, but I liked the look of it so I took a deep breath and bought it (keeping the hybrid to begin with). It was instantly obvious that it was a much better bike - smoother gears, sharper brakes etc, which you would expect for the extra money, but what I wasn't expecting was that it was noticeably faster. On my first ride I kept looking down at my speed and found I was always going faster than I felt I was. To begin with I put this down to a sort of placebo effect of riding a new bike, but over time I found I was consistently quicker on it than the hybrid, for the same apparent effort. The difference varied, but was typically 10 to 15 percent. I have since bought two more bikes, paying more each time for higher quality frames and components and have noticed the same thing.
So my advice would be to enjoy the Viking, but when you feel you've got yourself going as fast as you can, look to spend a significant amount more on your next bike, and I'm guessing you'll be rewarded by a noticeable increase in your speed.

ai_1

Agonising over choice of bike is for procrastinators (like me) and mainly those spending a lot on a bike they want to last them for years. If you've bought a bike, you're happy with it and you enjoy riding it, that's all that matters.
The cyclist makes much more difference than the bike.
If you find you're competitive and/or getting serious about your cycling in the future and you think the bike is a limiting factor then you'll be ready to decide exactly what you want and can make a change.
Like others have said - I'd be self-conscious about being at the back of the field with a very fancy expensive bike but I'd never be bothered about riding something fairly cheap, basic and/or heavy.
I've been riding a fairly heavy aluminium cyclocross bike fitted with road tyres in duathlons and sportives for the last couple of years. No one's ever made a negative comment. You'll probably find that all the nastiest comments are confined to the internet!

jamieprang

Thanks for all your replies. I was expecting more of a pasting than that based on all the forum replies I had seen searching through the web. If i wanted I could have gone for a 1000 or 2000 pound bike, BUT, Basically I bought the bike for a few things. Firstly it was bright yellow. Gets me every time. Also and this was the clincher. I looked at all the 400-500 bikes. But I don't even know if road cycling is for me yet. Love mtn biking, love my running. But so far as training for a triathlon, its an unknown for me. So I thought better to have wasted 200 pounds than 500 pounds. With either bike if I get good at it, chances are I would want to get something a bit lighter, better component's etc and ultimately more expensive. So why buy a mid range only to then 1 year down the line buy high end. It makes sense to get rid of a cheap bike in a year than to get rid of a mid ranger in a year.

Anyway. Some positive comments from you all. So that means I don't have to spend the day in a rage that I had possibly joined a community of snobs. Thankfully you all seem like top blokes. Thankyou! As soon as I get home from offshore and get out on my new "little bike that could" I'll be sure to let you know how she goes. Cant be all bad, I have absolutely no frame of reference.

Cheers
Jamie

Tjgoodhew

jamieprang wrote:

Thanks for all your replies. I was expecting more of a pasting than that based on all the forum replies I had seen searching through the web. If i wanted I could have gone for a 1000 or 2000 pound bike, BUT, Basically I bought the bike for a few things. Firstly it was bright yellow. Gets me every time. Also and this was the clincher. I looked at all the 400-500 bikes. But I don't even know if road cycling is for me yet. Love mtn biking, love my running. But so far as training for a triathlon, its an unknown for me. So I thought better to have wasted 200 pounds than 500 pounds. With either bike if I get good at it, chances are I would want to get something a bit lighter, better component's etc and ultimately more expensive. So why buy a mid range only to then 1 year down the line buy high end. It makes sense to get rid of a cheap bike in a year than to get rid of a mid ranger in a year.

Anyway. Some positive comments from you all. So that means I don't have to spend the day in a rage that I had possibly joined a community of snobs. Thankfully you all seem like top blokes. Thankyou! As soon as I get home from offshore and get out on my new "little bike that could" I'll be sure to let you know how she goes. Cant be all bad, I have absolutely no frame of reference.

Cheers
Jamie

You have pretty much described my exact thought process about 18 months ago. I wasnt sure about road biking and altho had the cash to spend on a proper bike i decided to buy a Viking Phantom for £130 and some VERY cheap cycling clothing from sports direct and just give it a go.

Looking back now the bike was absolutely awful. The gears were dreadful, the brakes didnt work, it was heavy and the wheels were far from being true.

However I rode it for three months as much as i could and fell in love with cycling. I cant think of a time on the Viking that i didnt enjoy.

It was only when i rode my current bike (Caad8 i bought for £850 so by no means a top of the line carbon bike) that i realised how much more enjoyable cycling can be.

jamieprang

I'm not the only one then. That's good to know.

PLUS, thinking about it, if your first bike hadn't been so terrible (maybe a strong word, but for lack of a better one right now, it will do) would your second bike have felt so good? If I ride my Viking for a year, and like I think I will, fall in love with the sport. The next bike will be so much sweeter at first than it would if I buy a mid ranger. I think its vindication for anyone to start off on a cheap bike. Like going from a Fiesta to a Ferrari rather than a BMW M3 to a new Ferrari.

In fact, we should all buy a cheap bike, just to make the expensive ones even better.

slowbike

I've ridden since before I can remember - mostly just as transport though and till a couple of years ago, never very far (1 exception that I recall).
I got my first road bike because although I had a bike (Halfords hybrid), my wife could out spin me on descents ... and changing the gearing on the hybrid wasn't a cheap option ...
I looked at a couple of bikes and ended up with an Allez - just entry level spec, so 2300 gear - 16 speed setup and flat pedals ... rode that for a year before replacing the pedals with SPDs ... then rode that for a bit before getting a new wheelset ... each change gave the bike a different feel ...
then last year I bought the carbon equivalent - wow, that was a big change - immediately felt faster ... pleased I got it ... still got the Allez though, it's now my winter trainer/damp commute bike ... it's nearly as quick, but doesn't feel as nice.

It is a nice feeling, turning up to an event on a "cheap" bike and overtaking the wannabes on bikes that would cost the whole of my garage plus a bit ... But it's also nice getting on the carbon bike (the most expensive in my garage but still not a patch on some!) and being able to "fly" around the lanes ...

I still believe it's better to start low and build up rather than entering the sport with "the best that money can buy" and not having a clue as to how to ride ..

bianchimoon

I was at the Brownlee brothers triathlon at Fountains abbey and there were all kinds of bikes, from full on tri-bikes, basic road bikes, hybrids with panniers and even a couple of mountain bikes, just enjoy yourself!

Southgate

Ride what you want to ride, and upgrade the bike or components when you have know what you want and can afford it.

When I got back into cycling after 10 years off with a persistent knee injury I got a great deal on a Spesh Roubaix with chipped paintwork. 30,000 miles later it's now my winter training bike, and my new bling bike only comes out for races and good weather. I've also recently spent a hundred quid on a second hand Claud Butler Classic commute bike with a rack at the back, so now I can blend in with recreational cyclists, go shopping, cycle down the canal towpath, lock it up outside the pub, and occasionally teach a lesson to a boy racer up a hill! Never judge a rider by his bike, for there will always be greater and lesser cyclists than yourself.

mcnultycop

My mate got beaten at the Capesthorne Tri last year on his Carbon On One by a guy in a borrowed wetsuit that was too big who did the bike section on a BMX.

I wouldn't worry.

jamieprang

HA! I genuinely laughed at that. I would love to be THAT guy. Although chances of that are slim. Besides, I don't have a BMX.

Hats off tho, the bike section on a BMX... that must have been brutal.

markhewitt1978

There is a lot of snobbery in cycling! IME in both directions.

Initialised wrote:

Being "not last" on a heavy/cheap/tatty/old bike is a way better feeling than being "not first" on a £5k superbike (especially when you are "not last" ahead of the guy on the £5k superbike).

Which is why I think that even if I had the money, I wouldn't put Dura-Ace on my bike, as to my mind that makes a statement about your ability, so you look silly when you inevitably get dropped by the guy running Sora.

ai_1

Less impressive than the BMX story but half way through a sportive last year I got overtaken by a guy in his 60s on an ancient steel frame with most of the paint worn off, somewhat rusty drivechain that looked like it came straight off a scrapheap, a plastic bag of tools and a pump sellotaped to the underside of the saddle and he had no waterbottle. And he was wearing a woollen jersey from the pre-lycra era. The overall impression (and maybe the truth) was that he'd been riding for decades and just never maintained, updated or prettied anything up so long as he could make it work.
It was a bit de-moralising but you've got to respect a guy like that! It wasn't about appearances or what anyone else thought. He was just there to ride.

There's definitely a fair amount of snobbery in cycling online. I'm not in a club so I can't speak for that side of things but if you ride alone or with friends and are interested mostly in doing sportives or multisport races then it's not a problem.

g00se

Starting off at the 'budget' end is the best bet - either the Viking/Btwin/Carerra route or second hand. It's kind of 'paying your dues' if you know what I mean

But I'd disagree with folks saying upgrade it as parts wear. A bike is worth upgrading if parts of it are worth keeping in the long run. In your case, I would save up, and if it turns out to be your thing, just in with a new bike and keep the Viking for commutes and winter training (bar a decent set of summer tyres in a few months - that's always worth the upgrade).

I'm not taking a pot shot at your bike choice by saying that - it's just a lot of mid-range bikes will have good frames or groupsets - but will be keeping in a competitive price-range by supplying lower spec wheels, bars etc. A wheel upgrade is a good option in this case. It'll probably be cheaper in the long run to get a new bike later (keeping the value of the Viking as a second bike) - rather than replace the bike bit by bit.

ai_1

Agreed^^^

Upgrade to replace lesser components on a bike with a good frame, not to try and compensate for weaknesses you can't eliminate. Make the best of the Viking but don't spend much on it except for items that can be transferred later (e.g. a good saddle). When it's time to change buy a new bike and sell the Viking or keep it for trips to the shop, as a backup or as a turbo-trainer bike.

markhewitt1978

Totally, the Viking is a starter bike but not something I would spend any money on, except perhaps safety issues such as tyres and brake pads.

jamieprang

I'm actually glad I've got the little Viking now. An underdog in a big big world. 2 wheels, pedals, Saddle, chain and brakes. Good enough for me. I'm not Bradley or Mr Hoy anyway.

On an cycling unrelated note. Your story of the old guy on a bike reminded me of an old running story. I thought it was somewhat relevant so I'll share. Its well worth a read.

http://www.badassoftheweek.com/young.html

markhewitt1978

jamieprang wrote:

I'm actually glad I've got the little Viking now. An underdog in a big big world. 2 wheels, pedals, Saddle, chain and brakes. Good enough for me. I'm not Bradley or Mr Hoy anyway.

On an cycling unrelated note. Your story of the old guy on a bike reminded me of an old running story. I thought it was somewhat relevant so I'll share. Its well worth a read.

http://www.badassoftheweek.com/young.html

Brilliant story, thanks for sharing!

mcnultycop

jamieprang wrote:

HA! I genuinely laughed at that. I would love to be THAT guy. Although chances of that are slim. Besides, I don't have a BMX.

Hats off tho, the bike section on a BMX... that must have been brutal.

He just got on with it, no dramas. Everyone was cheering him on.