Shame?

I have a nice bike but it's not because I'm a snob - just a bit of gear head is all. I have a job that allows me to afford nice things, so I say what the hell. You'd probably drop me in a heartbeat, but that's ok - I'd like to think I do my bike justice but I'm just an amateur that likes to ride. In addition, my bike (caad9) makes me want to go out and ride it.

I don't think there should be attitude about folks with nice equipment that suck either - look at it this way, when they get bored you get a sweet deal on used equipment.
😉

But armatures with pro equipment isn't unique to cycling - my other hobby is fly fishing and I like nice rods as well - one of my buddies will often out fish me with rods half the price of mine, but if I throw his for only 15 minutes I want mine back. My rod won't catch me fish, but it sure is fun to cast.

It's never about the gear, but I can't deny that having cool gear is fun as well...

lostcause89 said:

Is there any shame in purchasing and racing cheap bikes?
Is there shame when you bring one of the bargain based brand bikes into a bike shop for matinence?
I race, on a Raleigh sport with a sora and 2200 components. It is sub par when stacked up against the competition. Being only a Cat 4 rider it doesn't really seem to matter that most of us are inexperienced, most have several thousands of dollars invested in there bikes.
You very rarely see bargain bikes out racing. Brands such as Scattante, Mongoose, and montebecane are rarities. I was just wondering is there a perceived shame in racing those type of brands. Everyone seems to have the big name distributors such as trek, cannondale, cervelo and what not. My Raleigh sport is more of rarity at bike races than my teammate’s 6,000 dollar stork absolutist, that seems ridiculous to me. When there are two or three of those storks running around and my raleigh sport bike is the only one at the entire race even in the Cat 5s.
Just curious as to whether this is due to shame or something else.

If I was going to race again, I would opt for a cheap frame, a cheap set of components and go race. It's ain't about the bike. If you crash(and if you race enough, you will), you need to be able to replace that rear derailleur, rear wheel, tire, etc without breaking the bank. Non sponsored riders that wander around in the Cat 4 crashfest on $10,000 Scotts, Cervelos, Pinarellos, don't get it. These bikes won't make them 29th instead of 30th, and if they crash, that new Red/SuperRecord/DA7900(or Di2!!) will set them back lot$.

My race bike-Gunnar roadie, Ritchey stuff+ fork, Campagnolo Veloce stuff, Velocity hubset and rims.

I seen no shame in it, however I also resent someone telling me I don't need nice equipment because I don't race as a pro. I have ridden really, really cheap equipment years ago and I prefer the good stuff.
Who is to say where the line should be drawn as far as quality or cost of equipment.
After all a bike feels no shame or pride. Be the best you can be and be proud in your accomplishments.

Once in my life, after years of family and other responsibilities, I finally went irresponsible for a minute and got myself a custom-made bike like I always wanted. By that time, I was 45, and I had ridden many cheaper road bikes since my teens.

But to be really honest, there's not that much difference in the riding. The big difference comes when you need to replace something. You better have some spare arms and legs, because that's what it costs for even some of the simplest items. An additional problem these days is that those high end racing bikes have a very short shelf-life, more like computers than bicycles. Big investment, little return, in my opinion.

longfemur said:

Once in my life, after years of family and other responsibilities, I finally went irresponsible for a minute and got myself a custom-made bike like I always wanted. By that time, I was 45, and I had ridden many cheaper road bikes since my teens.

But to be really honest, there's not that much difference in the riding. The big difference comes when you need to replace something. You better have some spare arms and legs, because that's what it costs for even some of the simplest items. An additional problem these days is that those high end racing bikes have a very short shelf-life, more like computers than bicycles. Big investment, little return, in my opinion.

How is that high end bikes have a short shelf life?

Shame? That's an internal/personal emotion. Do you feel ashamed when you're on the starting line with your inexpensive bike? That's the most important question here. If you don't - then "no", there's no shame in it. If you do, then you need to deal with that.

If a person feels ashamed about their inexpensive bike, IMO, they're on the starting line for the wrong reason to begin with. Personally, I'm not seeking any kind of affirmation when I got to the start line - I'm there because I love the competition, the training to improve, the feeling of exhiliration when rubbing elbows at 40k, etc...damn what other people thinking about me and my cheap bike being there.

Further, if a bike shop mechanic gave me any attitude about working on my cheap bikes, I'd have no issue taking my "cheap money" elsewhere. In my area, there's a bike shop every 5 minutes so the competition amongst them for customers is fierce.

On a personal level, I race/ride a $250 2005 aluminum frame with 9sp 105 cranks, a groupset that's at least 5yo tech, $20 Panaracer tires, and 97% of my bike was sourced off Ebay. For the most part, you don't buy speed WRT mass start races - TT's are another story. I do very well against my competition (Cat. 3) such that I can't justify more expensive equipment. Did I lose a race this year because of my cheap equipment - definitely not.

I also need to add that I don't begrude anyone spending their hard-earned money on anything they damn well please - it's their money afterall and how they spend it is none of my business - more power to 'em. Besides, someone has to keep the LBS's in business as they'd go out of business if they relied on guys like me...

p.s. If I had unlimited discretionary income I'd be on an Isaac...

alienator said:

How is that high end bikes have a short shelf life?

In the sense that they are technological gadgetry that is quickly superseded by a new version 6 months later. You buy an expensive model of racing bike this year, next year it's junk... one reason why there is a resurgence of interest in more timeless machines like the traditional randonneuse and even the traditional English and Dutch-style bicycles.

But if racing is your interest and reason for riding, you pretty much have to have similar equipment as the other racers, at least if you want to be competitive with them... like the swimmers who wear the new buoyant swimsuits. On the other hand, if you're riding because you love to ride, even an entry-level road bike will do anything you need it to. It just won't be as impressive when leaning against a wall of your living room, as most super high-end racing bikes being sold end up spending most of their time.

I think you're overstating technology obsolescence in high end racing bikes. It really isn't about the bike and most folks race on high end bikes because they want to, not because they need to.

Up until last year I raced on a production steel frame that I've owned since '86. I've upgraded parts over time, but never really had the latest or greatest. I went to a full CF frame and newer gruppo last season. I love the ride, but my frame was bought used and is now 4 years old and the parts are a generation or two behind the current cutting edge. I have no intention of upgrading until something wears out and I've raced that setup to a handful of wins and podium finishes this season.

New bikes are great fun and modern bikes sure feel good out on the road. But they don't become 'junk' over the course of a season or even multiple years and you don't need the latest trick gruppo to stay competitive regardless of what the other folks are racing.

But in a sense you're validating the OPs point. There's a perception by many that the bike really makes the difference and that technology is so important and so dynamic that you need this year's trick machine to have a hope of competing. But it aint so.

Maybe shame is too strong a word, but there will always be folks who feel they need to buy their way to the starting line.. bummer when they find out it doesn't translate to success at the finish line.

Having said all that I love old bikes and still race a thirty five year old steel track bike which continues to serve me well. Nothing wrong with old bikes, but new high end bikes don't have a short shelf life either.

-Dave

longfemur said:

In the sense that they are technological gadgetry that is quickly superseded by a new version 6 months later. You buy an expensive model of racing bike this year, next year it's junk... one reason why there is a resurgence of interest in more timeless machines like the traditional randonneuse and even the traditional English and Dutch-style bicycles.

But if racing is your interest and reason for riding, you pretty much have to have similar equipment as the other racers, at least if you want to be competitive with them... like the swimmers who wear the new buoyant swimsuits. On the other hand, if you're riding because you love to ride, even an entry-level road bike will do anything you need it to. It just won't be as impressive when leaning against a wall of your living room, as most super high-end racing bikes being sold end up spending most of their time.

That's hardly the case at all. I know very few people who buy frames/bikes every year, and there are loads of bikes that have been out for a while that people clamor for: Time VXR series, Look 595's and 585's, Colnago C-50's, Pinarello Princes and older Dogmas. Hell the Cannondale CAAD series is nearly as old as dirt, yet CAAD's are very much sought after.

As for English and Dutch bikes, Tucson is a very bike intensive city, and I've seen all of maybe 2 English style bikes. No Dutch have been spied.

daveryanwyoming said:

I think you're overstating technology obsolescence in high end racing bikes. It really isn't about the bike and most folks race on high end bikes because they want to, not because they need to.
....blah.....blah.....blah

Having said all that I love old bikes and still race a thirty five year old steel track bike which continues to serve me well. Nothing wrong with old bikes, but new high end bikes don't have a short shelf life either.

-Dave

Do I have to get rid of my 595 because it's now technological junk? Damn, that sucks. I really like that bike. 😄

Quoted post said:

...Do I have to get rid of my 595 because it's now technological junk?...

Yep, it's gotta go. Send it my way...

trahan said:

I have a nice bike but it's not because I'm a snob - just a bit of gear head is all. I have a job that allows me to afford nice things, so I say what the hell. You'd probably drop me in a heartbeat, but that's ok - I'd like to think I do my bike justice but I'm just an amateur that likes to ride. In addition, my bike (caad9) makes me want to go out and ride it.

I don't think there should be attitude about folks with nice equipment that suck either - look at it this way, when they get bored you get a sweet deal on used equipment.
😉

But armatures with pro equipment isn't unique to cycling - my other hobby is fly fishing and I like nice rods as well - one of my buddies will often out fish me with rods half the price of mine, but if I throw his for only 15 minutes I want mine back. My rod won't catch me fish, but it sure is fun to cast.

It's never about the gear, but I can't deny that having cool gear is fun as well...

**** that when someone shows up with cheap gear you got to rag on them the whole trip. We usually just call them a cheap no good basatard for 500 miles and they go get a good bike.

Ride and enjoy your bike.

Whatever floats your boat (not someone elses boat) !! I would love to (and plan to) get a nice "up-to-date" ride, and I am such a rookie at cycling that I don't even know what CAT 3 or 4 mean (category??), and I wouldn't even try to attend a race (yet), but I just love to go out there and push myself to the max. Also like to have and use nice things for my own self, not to impress others.

-Greg

gman0482 said:

Whatever floats your boat (not someone elses boat) !! I would love to (and plan to) get a nice "up-to-date" ride, and I am such a rookie at cycling that I don't even know what CAT 3 or 4 mean (category??), and I wouldn't even try to attend a race (yet), but I just love to go out there and push myself to the max. Also like to have and use nice things for my own self, not to impress others.

-Greg

i know what cat 4 and 3 means, nothing at all to me.

uh oh, i interrupted what gives you the right to give a phuck why you ride, didn't i? oh well and too bad.

roadhouse said:

uh oh, i interrupted what gives you the right to give a phuck why you ride, didn't i? oh well and too bad.

That's a Grade A jerk response.

sad as to this type of unanimous discrimination in cycling. i expected more of it but my fault for expecting that much from the human race as it stands, my terrible fault indeed. i guess you europeans have it much better than i do here in the divided cycling states of stupidity.

too bad too cause it's not some fantasy world i ride in, it's just mine and you all give me the proof i need to disrespect cycling as a whole and if you all don't like it, well and again, too phucking bad cause i just can't stand it.

rethink the road you wanna take next time cause if it's against me you won't win, you're too transparent and that is just that.

goodbye for now ladies, i've got some respective riding to do and that eliminates you.

it was fun,

Preston.

alienator said:

That's a Grade A jerk response.

sorry you feel that way alienator but from what i have heard of you, you are to be ignored and i think i'll take that advice to heart as it seems to be evident that that is the only relation anyone will ever be capable of having with you, try as they might.

it's a two way street, respect is earned and so far...just sayin.