Numpty Calling!!

Whats the difference....

19 messages
12/10/2005 at 14:19
On average, between the weight of say a £300 bike and a £3000 bike.
cougie    pirate
12/10/2005 at 14:33
Blimey - impossible question really.

Assuming we're talking road bikes - then 3 grand is a 17lb bike.

£300 would prob be 24 lbs or so.

It's not just weight though - durability and quality of everything improves with money spent. (to a point).

Crash Hamster    pirate
12/10/2005 at 14:46
I found kk on the Tri thread...
















:oD bet I know what you're thinking!!!
12/10/2005 at 14:47
Weight isn't the issue with me then.

If I got my *rse into gear I could probably lose a stone!

Which means that what I should be looking for, is a bike that is foremost the correct size to suit me, and secondly that can take my larger frame over a fair period...........
12/10/2005 at 14:48
And Crashie you've got nothing better to do today I see!!
Crash Hamster    pirate
12/10/2005 at 14:53
Nope...shingles...contagious...bored...

So when are you buying this new bike? :o)
12/10/2005 at 14:56
Harumphhh!
Crash Hamster    pirate
12/10/2005 at 15:09
Nope, carry on, don't mind me...

I'm off to watch the snooker <yawn>
Bionic Ironwolf    pirate
12/10/2005 at 16:06
also depends on the components you have on the bike, and what your frame is made of. Steel or aluminium bike frames are very much cheaper than titanium. Steel is heavy, alu is light but prone to cracking. Titanium is expensive but comes with a lifetime guarantee. And it's very light.

I'm dreaming of a titanium Litespeed Bella with Shimano Ultegra components and triple cog.
12/10/2005 at 16:24
I'm no lightweight , I'm never going to be.

But I can lose more weight than I can save by buying a more expensive bike.

However:- I'm no lightweight so I need to buy strength in a bike.

That's my conclusion!
12/10/2005 at 17:47
Strong, light, cheap; pick any 2.
12/10/2005 at 18:04
its a misconception that what you pay for is reduced weight. its also comfort (eg carbon fibre forks etc), reliability (better gears etc) and speed (better wheels etc).

however its an even bigger misconception that all this makes much difference. a good rider on a crap bike will still go fast. a crap rider on the best bike in the world will still go slow.
12/10/2005 at 18:31
kk - you should've grabbed one of those nice shiny bikes in transition on sunday
12/10/2005 at 19:56
Just go and buy the cheap halfords bike, somebody has too and I'd like a review of it:)
debbo    pirate
12/10/2005 at 20:11
Ava - someone's got one, but I can't remember who, sorry. I looked but the small was too big for me.
12/10/2005 at 20:24
I think it's Donald?
debbo    pirate
12/10/2005 at 20:27
I think you're right Norma. Ta.
12/10/2005 at 21:00
Candy's right - a good cyclist can ride off on a crock of **** at 25 mph. For a short time, anyway, as they will throw it in a ditch because it's so uncomfortable.

You have to put it all in context. There's no point in going for ultra lightweight if you are a biffa. I have promised myself that until I lose half a stone, I will never buy a carbon fibre bottle and bottle holder.

It's a bit of a misconception that steel bikes are heavy - pair them with a lightweight groupset, pedals, seat pin, wheels etc. etc. and they can get pretty light. If you can be bothered.

13/10/2005 at 07:46
'Biffa" lol........

Comfort and fit seem to be the watchwords. Anything else, cost allowing, is a bonus.

We'd love you to add a comment! Please login or take half a minute to register as a free member
19 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW competitions

RW Forums