My New Bike!!

katiequinn
katiequinn Posts: 2
edited August 2019 in Road beginners
Thanks for those who replied regarding Ribble Bikes.

I am really looking for a reasonably fast bike for a spin for a few hours at a weekend or in an evening, perhaps the very occasional time trial and the odd 150 - 100k audax. I do go to the Alps twice a year and will be riding some of the Tour climbs. (I do have a circa 1990's 531 touring bike for longer "touring rides)
«1

Comments

  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    planet x?

    #speedyyetverygoodvalue
    #257
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • surfercyclist
    surfercyclist Posts: 894
    257? I thought Aus won by 251.
  • singleton
    singleton Posts: 2,523
    I've not had a Ribble myself, but they seem to offer a few bikes that might fit your requirements at a decent price.

    Not sure what your budget is, but - cube attain or a CAAD12 can be had for some good prices at the moment.
  • step83
    step83 Posts: 4,170
    Would probably go planet X as well, bit bias as I have had a few from them CAAD12 is another solid choice too.
    Titanium Px Spitfire
    Easty commuter
    Tripster AT
  • pilot_pete
    pilot_pete Posts: 2,120
    katiequinn wrote:
    Thanks for those who replied regarding Ribble Bikes.

    I am really looking for a reasonably fast bike for a spin for a few hours at a weekend or in an evening, perhaps the very occasional time trial and the odd 150 - 100k audax. I do go to the Alps twice a year and will be riding some of the Tour climbs. (I do have a circa 1990's 531 touring bike for longer "touring rides)

    Surely any road bike that isn’t too heavy would be fine then? I can’t see what you are getting at - a ‘reasonably fast bike’ is more to do with the rider’s strength. Or do you mean one that won’t unduly slow you up? That will be a road bike with drop handlebars that isn’t too heavy then, although on the flat the weight penalty doesn’t make much difference.

    If you can ride ‘150-100k’ then the fact it is an audax is irrelevant. Again, any road bike that fits you properly would do.

    And you want to ride the occasional TT? Well if you’re not a serious TTer then once again, any road bike would do.

    Going to the Alps twice a year? You’ve guessed it, any road bike that isn’t too heavy would be fine.

    So, in conclusion, you need a road bike. Any will do for the all round riding you want to partake in. Get one that doesn’t weigh a ton and you will be thankful when climbing. Get one that fits you properly and you will be thankful all the time, but especially on longer rides. Get one that encourages you to ride more often as you just love it and you will get stronger and dare I say it slightly faster.

    Set a budget and buy a road bike. That’s all you need to do.

    PP
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    As above. Bikes aren't fast - riders are.
  • alwaystimetotorque
    alwaystimetotorque Posts: 226
    Imposter wrote:
    Bikes aren't fast - riders are.

    is that the new goldie looking chain number? :D
  • cowboyjon
    cowboyjon Posts: 89
    Imposter wrote:
    As above. Bikes aren't fast - riders are.


    As someone who has gone through a £500 bike, an £1800 bike now onto a £3000 bike over the last year I couldn't disagree with you more.
  • fenix
    fenix Posts: 5,437
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?
  • cowboyjon
    cowboyjon Posts: 89
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    jeffbwood wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Bikes aren't fast - riders are.

    is that the new goldie looking chain number? :D

    Should be, I reckon..
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..
  • cowboyjon
    cowboyjon Posts: 89
    Imposter wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..


    I mean, I could but I don't really have to do I?

    Or do we really need to have a debate about if a Trek Madone is a faster bike than a say, a £350 entry level bike from Decathlon?

    Honestly fella, I can't find the motivation to debate the issue.
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    i can't believe you fella'd him so early in the bickering.

    #het
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • joe_totale-2
    joe_totale-2 Posts: 1,333
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..


    I mean, I could but I don't really have to do I?

    Or do we really need to have a debate about if a Trek Madone is a faster bike than a say, a £350 entry level bike from Decathlon?

    Honestly fella, I can't find the motivation to debate the issue.

    In the hands of the same rider the Madone would be quicker than a Decathlon Triban, no one denies that.
    However, a fitter person on a Decathlon Triban beats a less fit rider on a Madone.
    The best way to get faster is not to throw money at it but to work on your fitness.

    I've had my ass kicked by riders on rusting heaps of junk, likewise I've shot past riders on fancy aero things on my pub bike.

    Surely none of this is controversial? That's unless you've been completely brainwashed by the marketing from the big bike brands of course... :wink:
  • craigus89
    craigus89 Posts: 887
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    As above. Bikes aren't fast - riders are.


    As someone who has gone through a £500 bike, an £1800 bike now onto a £3000 bike over the last year I couldn't disagree with you more.

    No chance that you got fitter throughout that progression of bikes then?
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Joe Totale wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..


    I mean, I could but I don't really have to do I?

    Or do we really need to have a debate about if a Trek Madone is a faster bike than a say, a £350 entry level bike from Decathlon?

    Honestly fella, I can't find the motivation to debate the issue.

    In the hands of the same rider the Madone would be quicker than a Decathlon Triban, no one denies that.
    However, a fitter person on a Decathlon Triban beats a less fit rider on a Madone.
    The best way to get faster is not to throw money at it but to work on your fitness.

    I've had my ass kicked by riders on rusting heaps of junk, likewise I've shot past riders on fancy aero things on my pub bike.

    Surely none of this is controversial? That's unless you've been completely brainwashed by the marketing from the big bike brands of course... :wink:

    bet he has discs and tubeless and is in a club as well....

    #buttheblokeattheshopsaid.....
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..


    I mean, I could but I don't really have to do I?

    Or do we really need to have a debate about if a Trek Madone is a faster bike than a say, a £350 entry level bike from Decathlon?

    Honestly fella, I can't find the motivation to debate the issue.

    It depends, I suppose. If you feel you should be able to get away with throwing bullsh1t statements out there, without the need to justify them - then no, you don't have to debate it.
  • cowboyjon
    cowboyjon Posts: 89
    Craigus89 wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    As above. Bikes aren't fast - riders are.


    As someone who has gone through a £500 bike, an £1800 bike now onto a £3000 bike over the last year I couldn't disagree with you more.

    No chance that you got fitter throughout that progression of bikes then?

    Yes but that's neither here nor there.

    On all my rides my speeds went up and my times came down immediately after upgrading my bike. You can throw some honeymoon effect in there if you like but if that were the case the times would have went back down again.
  • cowboyjon
    cowboyjon Posts: 89
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    Joe Totale wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..


    I mean, I could but I don't really have to do I?

    Or do we really need to have a debate about if a Trek Madone is a faster bike than a say, a £350 entry level bike from Decathlon?

    Honestly fella, I can't find the motivation to debate the issue.

    In the hands of the same rider the Madone would be quicker than a Decathlon Triban, no one denies that.
    However, a fitter person on a Decathlon Triban beats a less fit rider on a Madone.
    The best way to get faster is not to throw money at it but to work on your fitness.

    I've had my ass kicked by riders on rusting heaps of junk, likewise I've shot past riders on fancy aero things on my pub bike.

    Surely none of this is controversial? That's unless you've been completely brainwashed by the marketing from the big bike brands of course... :wink:

    bet he has discs and tubeless and is in a club as well....

    #buttheblokeattheshopsaid.....

    Yes I have discs and tubeless but sorry no I am not in a club. I fail to see your point but I hope this helps.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    cowboyjon wrote:
    On all my rides my speeds went up and my times came down immediately after upgrading my bike. You can throw some honeymoon effect in there if you like but if that were the case the times would have went back down again.

    Not if you were coming from a low, but improving, fitness base they wouldn't.
  • surfercyclist
    surfercyclist Posts: 894
    cowboyjon - you're wasting your time mate. There's a couple of trolls on here who will swear black is white regardless of anything you say just to be awkward and try and get a rise out of you.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    SurferCyclist wrote:
    cowboyjon - you're wasting your time mate. There's a couple of trolls on here who will swear black is white regardless of anything you say just to be awkward and try and get a rise out of you.

    Feel free to disagree with anything you think any of these 'trolls' are saying, fella. And state your reasons for saying so. Otherwise, it just makes you look like the troll, not them. Now's your chance...
  • surfercyclist
    surfercyclist Posts: 894
    The prosecution rests m'lud, case proven.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    SurferCyclist wrote:
    The prosecution rests m'lud, case proven.

    Indeed. You have two comments on this thread. One is off-topic and the other is a rant about supposed 'trolls'. You can't offer a decent argument in your favour, so it seems you are the disaffected troll here.
  • surfercyclist
    surfercyclist Posts: 894
    Troll bingo card coming along nicely, I've had a fella and a rant.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    SurferCyclist wrote:
    Troll bingo card coming along nicely, I've had a fella and a rant.

    ok - I'll give it one more shot then I'll leave it. If you think anyone is trolling - then say why. If you disagree with anything anyone has said on here - then say why. If you can't or won't - then that tells me you're just a sore loser because you lost the last argument we had on here and you can't get over it.

    You're allowing yourself to be destroyed here. A 'champion surfer' like you really should be better than this...or perhaps this is as good as you get.
  • surfercyclist
    surfercyclist Posts: 894
    :lol::lol::lol: I refer the dishonourable "gentleman" to my previous answers.
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    Joe Totale wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    cowboyjon wrote:
    Fenix wrote:
    Is your £3000 bike twice as fast as the £1800 one ?

    What speed increases are you seeing ? And have you taken out the well recognised 'new product advantage' into consideration ?

    Of course it isn't twice as fast - I never said it was, that would be silly.

    It would also be silly to claim that certain bikes aren't faster than others.

    Simple enough?

    Can you explain how 'certain bikes are faster than others'? Perhaps with specific references to your own experience..


    I mean, I could but I don't really have to do I?

    Or do we really need to have a debate about if a Trek Madone is a faster bike than a say, a £350 entry level bike from Decathlon?

    Honestly fella, I can't find the motivation to debate the issue.

    In the hands of the same rider the Madone would be quicker than a Decathlon Triban, no one denies that.
    However, a fitter person on a Decathlon Triban beats a less fit rider on a Madone.
    The best way to get faster is not to throw money at it but to work on your fitness.

    I've had my ass kicked by riders on rusting heaps of junk, likewise I've shot past riders on fancy aero things on my pub bike.

    Surely none of this is controversial? That's unless you've been completely brainwashed by the marketing from the big bike brands of course... :wink:

    bet he has discs and tubeless and is in a club as well....

    #buttheblokeattheshopsaid.....

    Yes I have discs and tubeless but sorry no I am not in a club. I fail to see your point but I hope this helps.

    #buttheguyintheshopsaid.......
    #theyarethefutureItellyou!thefuture!
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    SurferCyclist wrote:
    :lol::lol::lol: I refer the dishonourable "gentleman" to my previous answers.

    You haven't given any previous answers, 'surf dude'...

Categories