Old vs New

[Razors Edge ★]

...is the never ending debate.  I actually remember it at the turn of the century as CF started to come to the forefront (at the top end) and was displacing aluminum race bikes.  The old alu vs steel (or titanium) arguments broadened to alu vs CF with steel being demoted further.  Then, obviously, the return of steel is real in the mid-aughts through today, where we can now even do the CF Di2 11sp disc vs CF mech 9sp rim brakes comparisons.

BikeRumor does one on a modern Ti/CF disc Di2 bike vs a classic 1988 Campy 6-sp steel bike.  

Riding the two bikes back-to-back in the Peak District, there is no argument that the modern bike performed better. Modern wide ranging gearing is much more friendly on your knees and back – not to mention that they just make it possible to climb much steeper gradients. Powerful, low lever pull, and well-modulated hydraulic disc brakes are much more reliable in sketchy conditions, in the wet, and on loose gravel roads with unfamiliar turns. And fatter tires are just inherently more comfortable, with the ability to run lower tire pressures.
The Eroica Brittania course especially has a really steep off-road climb that is difficult to ride with hard gearing (many will walk it, I’m sure.) The Eroica Limburg course had a couple, even steeper paved climbs that were brutal with traditional road gearing.
The little differences are there too. We’ve generally all moved towards handlebars with a much more comfortable shape. Our modern integrated shift/brake levers are also much more ergonomic and don’t require reaching down to the downtube to change gears. And clipless pedals. I am personally fine with riding toe clips on occasion, but they are significantly less safe and nowhere near as efficient as even my mountain bike eggbeaters.
With that all said, there is a special feeling of accomplishment when you finish a ride on an old bike. Whether you are surprised that you made it back without crashing or breaking down, you realize that without all the modern comforts of a new bike you can still have just as much fun on a bike.

But it does get me wondering if Mr Page Turner enters any L'Eroica events with his awesome stable of classic bikes?

Tom

[donkpow]

You would change your gears on the old bikes to whatever you needed. Everything else is:

[Page Turner]

7 hours ago, Razors Edge said:

 

But it does get me wondering if Mr Page Turner enters any L'Eroica events with his awesome stable of classic bikes?

Tom

...all organized rides of the L'Eroica variety share the same basic conceptual flaw.

 

They agglomerate a great number of bicycle riders who have skill levels that differ tremendously, then they turn 'em all loose on the same course at the same time.

IME, that's a good way to end up crashed by someone you never met, and didn't want to meet in the first place.  So the short answer is no. 

 

I ride 'em on my own private course along the American river here, which stretches from the confluence of the American and Sacramento rivers, 40 miles up to Folsom.

Then it's 40 miles back down if you want to go for the full monty.  I do encounter other riders, as well as dog walkers, joggers, and guys on electric skateboards.  I avoid all of them.

[Page Turner]

9 hours ago, Razors Edge said:

d towards handlebars with a much more comfortable shape. Our modern integrated shift/brake levers are also much more ergonomic and don’t require reaching down to the downtube to change gears. And clipless pedals. I am personally fine with riding toe clips on occasion, but they are significantly less safe and nowhere near as efficient as even my mountain bike eggbeaters.

...all of this is, of course, grade A bullshit.  I read stuff like this and just shake my head.

[Razors Edge ★]

11 hours ago, Page Turner said:

...all of this is, of course, grade A bullshit.  I read stuff like this and just shake my head.

There is NO comparison between downtube shifting and integrated brake/shifters. NONE.  Revolutionary is an accurate description and Di2 just makes it insanely better.

Tom

[Page Turner]

17 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

There is NO comparison between downtube shifting and integrated brake/shifters. NONE.  Revolutionary is an accurate description and Di2 just makes it insanely better.

Tom

...why would you need to compare them ?  They serve different purposes for different demographics, much like wider tyres at softer pressures versus their opposite.

And anyone who thinks they're qualified to write about this stuff (like clipless versus toe clips) authoritatively ought to be familiar enough with both to avoid fallacious statements.

[Razors Edge ★]

58 minutes ago, Page Turner said:

...why would you need to compare them ?  They serve different purposes for different demographics, much like wider tyres at softer pressures versus their opposite.

And anyone who thinks they're qualified to write about this stuff (like clipless versus toe clips) authoritatively ought to be familiar enough with both to avoid fallacious statements.

To write an article, so I could get paid, so I could afford to eat!  Jeebus! 

Interestingly enough, and I am not sure if Heine has covered it (or will cover it), is the whole "clipless is soooo much better" MYTH.  I think when actual performance gain is measured, it is not something that makes a difference in anything but the edge cases like a pro-racing situation. 

Seriously, though, do the two bikes mentioned serve different demographics?  They both seem to be - for the time period they were born - high performance road bikes with the ability to be all-around bikes.  So folks could race them on a weekend, throw fenders on them for training and simple touring, and then race them again the next weekend.

Tom

[Page Turner]

47 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

 

Seriously, though, do the two bikes mentioned serve different demographics?  They both seem to be - for the time period they were born - high performance road bikes with the ability to be all-around bikes.  So folks could race them on a weekend, throw fenders on them for training and simple touring, and then race them again the next weekend.

Tom

...now you're just trolling, man. That's OK if you want, but don't expect me to take it seriously.  If you've ever tried to make both sorts go fast, you'd already understand.

The difference in demographics are that the guys who were riding the 1988 bike in class racing are about 30 years older now.  The 2017 bike racers, not so much.

[Razors Edge ★]

2 hours ago, Page Turner said:

...now you're just trolling, man. That's OK if you want, but don't expect me to take it seriously.  If you've ever tried to make both sorts go fast, you'd already understand.

The difference in demographics are that the guys who were riding the 1988 bike in class racing are about 30 years older now.  The 2017 bike racers, not so much.

I'm being completely straight wondering what your "demographics" comments mean.  I feel like the comparison story the author wrote was fairly straightforward, but like you, it lacks a bit of the "truth" like the pedal thing.  

But I still don't get the demographics.  The 1988 bike seems like it would be purchased by a pretty similar person who would buy the 2018 bike.  Probably your garden variety MAMIL with a bit of discretionary income looking for a bike that could go fast but also has some measure of daily utility.  With that in mind, it would seem a reasonable comparison between two period pieces of tech.

Keep in mind, though, that I haven't ridden a 1980's road bike fast since the 1980's! 

Tom

[Page Turner]

20 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I'm being completely straight wondering what your "demographics" comments mean.  I feel like the comparison story the author wrote was fairly straightforward, but like you, it lacks a bit of the "truth" like the pedal thing.  

But I still don't get the demographics.  The 1988 bike seems like it would be purchased by a pretty similar person who would buy the 2018 bike.  Probably your garden variety MAMIL with a bit of discretionary income looking for a bike that could go fast but also has some measure of daily utility.  With that in mind, it would seem a reasonable comparison between two period pieces of tech.

Keep in mind, though, that I haven't ridden a 1980's road bike fast since the 1980's! 

Tom

...I know there are guys in my age group who buy Ti bikes with dics breaks.  I just think they maybe are not really thinking about why they are out there on a bicycle for the most part.

 

But your comment about not having ridden a 1980's road bike fast since the 1980's is what I'm getting at here.  There's a lot of accepted puffery out there in the world of bicycle journalism that has as its basis nothing other than something someone read somewhere, in another puff piece of bicycle journalism.  Whether it's tyres (their preferred  width and pressure), shifters (OMG, if I take my hands off the bar to shift I'll crash and die !!), wheels (Aero is the only thing I ride man, I can't believe you still use round spokes), or bicycle weight and frame material (I only ride plastic, because that's what all the racers ride on now.)

 

None of it has much basis in personal experience or bicycling science.  On a good day, I can still do a double shift with DT shifters on a friction setup without even looking down.

I have bikes with ergo brifters, but I rarely ride with my hands on them because much of my riding is done with my hands closer in near the stem or on the curve above the brakes/brifters. It's just ethe way I set things up, and am comfortable on a bicycle.  If I were trying to ride with others in a pack, of course I'd have brifters.  If I didn't, someone would probably push me over onto the side of the road as a danger to the other riders.  But I ride alone, mostly........so how I get into a particular gear (or if I have more than one gear at all) is not at issue.