Is it mad to fit power meter & Di2 to cheap bike?

RutlandGav

I'm not sold on fitting components four to eight times more expensive Shimano Deore, just to save a few grams in weight or get more carbon.

Those two advances seem like game changers and make me drool however. So, it's got me thinking about the long term upgrade pathway for my bike.

It's a cheap £400 650b hydrid from Halfords, a rigid forks hardtail with disk brakes. The seat hurt my arse so i changed it. I got soaked so i fitted mudguards. It couldn't carry my crap so i fitted panniers. The stock tyres got punctured every 3 days so i put on Schwalbe Super Moto evolution, with slime tubes and Panaracer flataway tyre liners. The handlebars gave me carpal tunnel syndrome so i put on some clip on triathalon bars. These didn't fit so i replaced the handlebars as well. After a month or two, my knees started hurting, so i replaced the chainset with cranks better matched to my height. While i was at it, I replaced the cassette with something with narrower range gearing for the flat road riding i mostly do.

Now i've finally got something i find comfortable and reliable. Would it be crazy to fit a power meter and electronic shifting to my bike next spring? I mean that's expensive components on a cheap frame isn't it?

OTOH if i bought a new bike, i'd probably end up spending a load of cash and man-hours in labour replacing stuff till i got it the way i want again (similar pattern with every other bike i owned).

The biggest doubt is whether i should at least try a cyclocross bike before dropping that sort of coin on my current ride. For the sort of riding i do (commuting across bumpy roads, touring, at night) it might be a good fit. But i've never ridden something with road bike geometry with drop bars.

I've only ever ridden bikes with flat MTB bars . I know these give me carpal tunnel syndrome, if i ride a lot , but with triathalon bars fitted to my flat bar bike, it's really comfortable. Also much faster than any other flat bar bike on the flat, though road bikes still pass me ofc. But i can't brake when on the tri-bars, which limits when i can use them.

Will a cyclo-x machine give me the best of both worlds? Aerodynamic on the drop bars, but still able to brake and change gear. Or will i get the same carpal tunnel issues (tingling hands) i get with flat bars, and throw in back pain to boot?

Ideally I'd buy one and find out. But I've barely got room for one bike in my apartment, unless i put it in the shed , in which case it'll be stolen in a week. Or shall i sleep in the shed and put the bikes in my bedroom like this guy ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-z5T8meC84

markhewitt1978

Power meter, certainly, why not?

Di2 then benefits are going to be negligible, better spending cash on better wheels, frame etc IMO.

veronese68

To my mind that is complete madness, but it's your money. If you know flat bars give you carpal tunnel you should try drops. What makes you think you need a power meter? What advantage would that give you for a hefty outlay.

dgunthor

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Power meter, certainly, why not?

Di2 then benefits are going to be negligible, better spending cash on better wheels, frame etc IMO.

+1

oodboo

Please post a picture of this hybrid with panniers, mud guards and tri bars.

RutlandGav

Power meter -

I try to listen to my body and pedal at constant power, but in practice i start to bonk after 90 minutes going against a wind, because i am actually pedalling at higher effort trying to maintain the same speed. Same route with a tailwind the bonk doesn't set in for longer.

Also with being on a calorie controlled diet, hard to know how to balance stuff when you've had a 4 hour ride. Was i pedalling at 500 or 900 calories per hour? I know from the static bikes at the gym, that's my range, but subjective exertion is so.. subjective. If there's a banging DJ set on a friday night radio station, 900 calories per hour feels extremely easy. If I'm watching a crap game of football, 600 feels harder. HR cannot be relied upon.

Electronic Shifting -

I'm just so fed up of crappy mechanical shifts. Yes, in theory you can get a mechanical setup that shifts half a second after you pull the lever every time without fail. I was an avid rider from 1998 to 2008 and had a bike shop replace the running gear every summer as i wore it out. I experienced that perfect shifting once, after getting a shimano alivio 7 speed setup (unfortunately the shifters kept breaking every couple months). Every other groupset that was fitted, and every new mtb i owned, was hit or miss from new - pull the lever, one to three turns of the crank later (variable) it decides to shift. No good for fast acceleration and tends to disrupt my rhythm when trying to pedal constant power. And after a month or so i've progressed to the usual up two, down one method of getting the bike to shift. Was same with XTR shifters, derailleurs, jagwire cables, new mech hangers etc.

markhewitt1978

You don't need to convince anyone here, only yourself.

cooldad

RutlandGav wrote:

Electronic Shifting -

I'm just so fed up of crappy mechanical shifts. Yes, in theory you can get a mechanical setup that shifts half a second after you pull the lever every time without fail. I was an avid rider from 1998 to 2008 and had a bike shop replace the running gear every summer as i wore it out. I experienced that perfect shifting once, after getting a shimano alivio 7 speed setup (unfortunately the shifters kept breaking every couple months). Every other groupset that was fitted, and every new mtb i owned, was hit or miss from new - pull the lever, one to three turns of the crank later (variable) it decides to shift. No good for fast acceleration and tends to disrupt my rhythm when trying to pedal constant power. And after a month or so i've progressed to the usual up two, down one method of getting the bike to shift. Was same with XTR shifters, derailleurs, jagwire cables, new mech hangers etc.

Or just learn to adjust the indexing....

RutlandGav

Well, maybe i'm overstating the case. The truth is I don't need to spend 2 grand on upgrading my frame and wheels instead, because the existing ones aren't broken. It's more a case of want. To be honest most of the weight issues on my bike exist above the saddle and behind the handlebars. I think a few kilos off the frame or wheels would get a bit lost in all that (I prefer the term, "not tall enough for my weight" or "need to start smoking" to describe my body shape). If electronic shifting means, I can sit at a set of traffic lights, on the smallest chainring and largest cog on the rear cassette, on a flat road, then when the lights go green, go full bore whilst remaining seated and rely on the servo actuated shifts to keep me in the 110-130 rpm sprinting power band, i'll be so happy you wouldn't believe it.

oodboo

You still have to pedal for the shifts to take place.

Ok, I read that the wrong way round. Why not just get the gear right in the first place. The lowest gear isn't going to be the best for pulling away from the lights quickly.

RutlandGav

oodboo wrote:

You still have to pedal for the shifts to take place.

Ok, I read that the wrong way round. Why not just get the gear right in the first place. The lowest gear isn't going to be the best for pulling away from the lights quickly.

It depends on how your bike is geared and how quickly and reliably you can upshift. A 22T chainring and Megarange cassette, ok maybe that is too low, but on my previous MTB I had the largest inner chainring i could find, on my current machine i have a 22T combined with a 12-23 road cassette. If the bike shifts within 200ms of stabbing the button, reliably, then that's the best way to accelerate.

I used to drag race against some work colleagues who had the same route as me, they'd start off on the middle chainring or on the inner but on 3rd cog or something, and stand on the pedals as the lights changed. I'd start in 1/1 and leave them for dead, a bike length or two ahead by the time i'm in 1/4, front wheel coming off the ground from acceleration. But this only works if the damn thing shifts gears fast enough.

oodboo

I cant see electronic shifting being any quicker than a well set up mechanical system. The main advantage I see to it is the front derailleur adjusts to eliminate any chain rub and noise. Other than that I just see it as bling. No doubt it'll be mainstream 10 years from now but for me the benefits currently don't justify the expense. However, as markhewitt1978 said earlier, it's only yourself you need to convince but personally, I think you'll be disappointed.

njee20

dgunthor wrote:

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Power meter, certainly, why not?

Di2 then benefits are going to be negligible, better spending cash on better wheels, frame etc IMO.

+1

+2

Particularly with the current slew of cheap power meters coming to market in the next 6-12 months.

For drop bar bikes di2 isn't so bad, there's Ultegra stuff which is cheaper, and various deals. XTR M9070 is just insanely expensive, and whilst lovely it sure as hell isn't where I'd invest that sort of money first.

The Rookie

Stock SRAM stuff on my commuter, shifts are near instant (well as soon as the gears have turned far enough - which nothing will change), the MTB is just as good at the start of a ride, how long it lasts depends on how much crap gets into the gubbins, on a ride ride the. The whole ride, sometimes when it's really bad it may only last 10 miles before it starts to slow a bit but nothing catastrophic by any means. Di2 is a nice to have but I sure as heck have other places I'd spend the money first like forks or brakes.

RutlandGav

njee20 wrote:

+2

Particularly with the current slew of cheap power meters coming to market in the next 6-12 months.

For drop bar bikes di2 isn't so bad, there's Ultegra stuff which is cheaper, and various deals. XTR M9070 is just insanely expensive, and whilst lovely it sure as hell isn't where I'd invest that sort of money first.

ATM a power meter would be a big investment, it comes built into a carbon dual chainset , designed for 11 speed chains. That'd mean replacing the chainset i only just fitted, along with my chain and cassette and shifters for 11 spd stuff.

Hopefully the cheaper ones hitting the market soon will still be accurate...

RutlandGav

The Rookie wrote:

Stock SRAM stuff on my commuter, shifts are near instant (well as soon as the gears have turned far enough - which nothing will change), the MTB is just as good at the start of a ride, how long it lasts depends on how much crap gets into the gubbins, on a ride ride the. The whole ride, sometimes when it's really bad it may only last 10 miles before it starts to slow a bit but nothing catastrophic by any means. Di2 is a nice to have but I sure as heck have other places I'd spend the money first like forks or brakes.

The MTB I had 10 years ago was on 7 speed running gear and super fast shifting, even with fairly cheap shimano alivio shifters. Actually they were one click per shift, you couldn't do multiple changes with one press on the lever like with the newer rapidfire stuff, but i wonder if that's been to the detriment of single gear shift accuracy. Perhaps because i can't just stab the button with all my might, i have to tap it lightly enough to shift only one cog, which makes the change less positive.

Also the internals of the shifters were made of nylon rather than metal. Perhaps this reduced the inertia? It certainly did mean they kept breaking every couple of months unfortunately.

The shop persuaded me to upgrade to 8 speed components the following year as they said the cog spacing was the same i'd just have more of them and fewer spacers on the freehub, it wouldn't affect shifting speed. Unfortunately i've never had an 8 speed as good as that 7. The year after that i went for top of the line components, saved a few grams but didn't make the shifts any better. I suspect it's got more to do with how well the mechanic sets the stuff up than how many letters after the X in the model series.

As for forks , brakes - each to their own Rookie. They're obviously top priority for you but i don't really give a fork about suspension stuff. I used to have a big thing for brakes too, when i commuted across town. Now I am a country member, and only care about gears.

Chunkers1980

Nice one then. Do it

The Rookie

I did say 'I'.

It's your money obviously, but to clarify, you don't need to swap the gearing to 11 speed at the rear just because you go 11 at the front.

njee20

RutlandGav wrote:

njee20 wrote:

+2

Particularly with the current slew of cheap power meters coming to market in the next 6-12 months.

For drop bar bikes di2 isn't so bad, there's Ultegra stuff which is cheaper, and various deals. XTR M9070 is just insanely expensive, and whilst lovely it sure as hell isn't where I'd invest that sort of money first.

ATM a power meter would be a big investment, it comes built into a carbon dual chainset , designed for 11 speed chains. That'd mean replacing the chainset i only just fitted, along with my chain and cassette and shifters for 11 spd stuff.

Hopefully the cheaper ones hitting the market soon will still be accurate...

Firstly there are already plenty of options for MTB power meters, so I dunno which you're thinking of. Off the top of my head you can get Stages, PowerTap, Rotor LT, Rotor INpower, Power2Max and Quarq. Which are you thinking of? No reason to upgrade to 11 just because your chainset is designed for it, but I can't think of any of those options which are designed for 2x11 anyway.

Secondly accurate doesn't really matter unless you're looking to compare across lots of systems. I'd avoid that myself. if you have a power meter on one bike, use that. Simple. what you want is a repeatable number. Pedals will always give a different reading to a hub because of transmission losses etc. then you've got left side only versus double sided, and all sorts of other things.

Antm81

RutlandGav wrote:

As for forks , brakes - each to their own Rookie. They're obviously top priority for you but i don't really give a fork about suspension stuff. I used to have a big thing for brakes too, when i commuted across town. Now I am a country member, and only care about gears.

You seem a bit misguided. Gears are good but better improvements ARE the forks and wheels, you might not care about suspension, well if you've got it, why not get rid and fit some rigid forks? Less weight for a start, then what about lighter wheels with better engagement of the freehub? You'd be surprised what a difference it would make. Changing the gears will only make by small incremental gains, forks and wheels can make a big change in one go.

boblo

This reminds me of those jazzed up Nova's you see da yoof driving around in. They put £25k into a £2k car and revel in the glory. It's still lipstick on a pig.

For the sort of money you're talking about, you could get a very nice secondhand road bike with di2. Road bikes are often bought by people seduced by the image and shocked by the reality. This means there are a lot of very low mileage, high spec machines for not much £££'s on the s/h market. You'd be better off getting one of those and keeping the current bike for commuting.

BTW, you don't need a power meter to train. You don't even need a HRM. Don't forget, Roger Bannister managed quite well without one. You may have convinced yourself you need one but that's a different matter. If you already have a HRM, that a good basic tool until your height /weight proportions equalise then you can worry about elite performance tools. Polar are regarded as one of the most accurate from a calories burnt perspective as their algorithm is supposed to be pretty good. However, for general cycling, I allow 40 cals/mile which seems pretty accurate on average.

Whatever, get cycling, get the weight down and if you really must, get the di2. There's no law against it though some people might question the choice that's all.

njee20

Of course you don't need a power meter, you don't need anything, but it does mean you can make the most of limited time to train. What people did in years gone by is pretty irrelevant frankly.

I'm not convinced it's a worthwhile purchase for the OP, it won't make you better/fitter/lose weight just by sticking one on the bike, you need to actually use it.

asdfhjkl

RutlandGav wrote:

Also with being on a calorie controlled diet, hard to know how to balance stuff when you've had a 4 hour ride. Was i pedalling at 500 or 900 calories per hour? I know from the static bikes at the gym, that's my range, but subjective exertion is so.. subjective. If there's a banging DJ set on a friday night radio station, 900 calories per hour feels extremely easy. If I'm watching a crap game of football, 600 feels harder. HR cannot be relied upon.

I'm not sure I agree. Sounds like a decent HR monitor would answer your questions. You'll know your training needs more than anyone here but if it's just for accurate calorie expenditure then that would be more than sufficient.

njee20

Well, sort of. Most HRMs give wildly inaccurate calorie consumption values.

boblo

But that doesn't matter does it? It's the relative measurement you're after really rather than absolute. They're all really made up to a degree even the power meters. Most are measured single side and interpolated to give a total for both legs.

What you need is repeatable measurement if you need any at all. The point about bringing up past deeds is an illustration that most still cannot break the 4 min mile now regardless of technology but it was done by a bloke in plimsolls and a vest who had lots of talent and zero tech. You don't need tech to be good and you can get a bit ATGANI about it whilst wobbling around at 10mph.

oodboo

A little OT but interesting anyway. Are athletes are actually getting faster:
https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein ... anguage=en

njee20

boblo wrote:

But that doesn't matter does it? It's the relative measurement you're after really rather than absolute.
.

HRMs giving woefully inaccurate calorie numbers? Kinda does matter if you're using it to gauge your intake... :?

They're all really made up to a degree even the power meters. Most are measured single side and interpolated to give a total for both legs

No they're not. Stages started the single sided thing a couple of years ago, and upon seeing the market thought that acceptible a few others have come along. Notably Rotor LT and Vector S, both offered as cheap alternatives to a proven dual-sided power meter. Admittedly there are some more on the horizon, I reckon they're a short term thing though until prices fall further. I'd say that most measure a combined total and give an estimated L/R split - SRM, Quarq, PowerTap, Rotor, Power2Max etc. The only ones that really measure both sides that spring to mind are Polar, Vector and Pioneer.

The point about bringing up past deeds is an illustration that most still cannot break the 4 min mile now regardless of technology but it was done by a bloke in plimsolls and a vest who had lots of talent and zero tech.

So are you not allowed proper running kit until you're quicker than Roger Bannister? Or is there a bit of a window? 4:30? People rode the TdF on rigid 50lb steel bikes with a fixed gear. Does that mean until you've done that you're not allowed gears or suspension? What if people don't aspire to that, or just don't have time?

I used a power meter for 6 years, as soon as the market settles a little I'll definitely be replacing it. I'm a very mediocre expert category racer, but a power meter still facilitates more efficient training.

asdfhjkl

njee20 wrote:

Well, sort of. Most HRMs give wildly inaccurate calorie consumption values.

Indeed, although the error margin in a decent one is probably comparable, if not lower than, the error margin found in calorie counting - by both the counter and the food labelling. The software's getting better too. Polar (at least; the only one I've used) can factor in lab measurements (MHR, VO2) for more accurate calorie estimates.

njee20

Polar definitely have the best guesstimate algorithm. Garmins are a joke, and don't factor in any of the information you give them - it's purely speed based, even if you have HR and or power data.

boblo

Think we need to get back to context. The OP was asking about di2 and a power meter for a £400 Halfords hardtail. Njee in your desperation to self justify, you've lost sight of this. It's not about you unless you had a £400 Halfords hardtail 6 years ago and fitted di2 and a power meter to it? Otherwise, you just starting to sound a bit silly.

So OP, it's your money, spend it how you like. If it were me, I'd change the bike first that's all. So in answer to the OP's question, yes, in my view you'd be mad.

njee20

Eh? You posted something which is absolutely wrong, I corrected you, as it was misleading. No power meter is guessing, aside from an assumed absolute power being double your LH output on a few power meters.

The OP is looking at power meters, so it's very relevant that what you wrote is wrong. I'm not trying to justify myself in any way. Fact is that a power meter can facilitate more additional speed than spending the same amount on any single other part! Even starting from a £400 bike.