General Discussion Triathlon Talk » It's not the machine, it's the motor Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 3
 
 
2010-05-21 1:22 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Veteran
812
500100100100
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor

Well... it's about the motor and the fit.

But thanks for this thread.  Indeed there is very little difference in terms of performance between a entry level $1200 tri bike, and a $3000+ bike.



2010-05-21 1:25 PM
in reply to: #2872827

Master
2460
20001001001001002525
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
leftrunner - 2010-05-21 1:23 AM Just had a nice conversation with the fitness director and fellow preschool parent at our local YMCA.  She was 3rd in her AG 30-34 at IM Wisconsin, and did a sub 12 hour IM at KONA in 2009. 

She rides a $1200 aluminum entry level FELT Tri Bike.  All original equipment. 

Just reminded me that you can be very good without the latest and greatest equipment. 

I need to work on my motor for a very long time before I worry about getting new equipment.


I've definitely since fallen in to the camp of minimalizing my triathlon purchases and spending all my energy and resources devoted to carving out more and better training time.

For us nonelites, training means everything. It even trumps talent in most cases.

I too love window shopping at all the latest and greatest stuff, and I definitely won't deny it to any for their own enjoyment of the sport, but I can't help but wonder if some folks need to reprioritize when I show up at the weekend triathlon group ride, and a few new guys with $5000+ aerobikes with $2000 wheels show up, excitedly talking about all the details of their purchase with everyone in the group (I actually love the discussions!) but then can't even average 15mph on a flat for more than 15 minutes. 

I recall doing a holiday group ride last year with another trigroup last year and my road bike was in the shop, so I brought my $100 beater commuter/mtn bike, knobby fat wheels, fronk fork and all. I knew this wasn't an advanced group, so I'd have no problems keeping up, but wow, I've never seen so many $$$$ carbon wheels in my life, even in a competitive road racing group. And our typical speed on the flats that ride - 15mph. Not exactly awe inspiring.

Edited by agarose2000 2010-05-21 1:27 PM
2010-05-21 1:37 PM
in reply to: #2874278

User image

Extreme Veteran
821
500100100100
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 2:15 PM
camaleon - 2010-05-21 11:12 AM
Whizzzzz - 2010-05-21 2:06 PM
a_l_existence - 2010-05-21 10:04 AM I'm at the point right now where why would I spend hundreds of dollars saving a few grams here and there, when I am ~20 pounds overweight.  Just thought I would throw that in there.


That's what I always say... while I would love the carbon pedals and the carbon aerobars and what not... what I really need to worry about is my A$$ and the size of it.

Until someone can provide me with an aerodynamic carbon A$$, I will forgo the pedals and bottle cages... Wink


This too...

why people want to save weight on the bike when they are still over weight, or close to it!


Simple, because weight is weight....no matter where it comes from. So is aerodynamics.

x2 but my reduce my fat a$$ is cheaper, and more efective that 10K bike for now...
2010-05-21 1:54 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
There are a couple assumptions being made that need to be clarified before you can really have this discussion.

1. The most expensive, latest technology, best fitting equipment is going to give the exact same benefits to an elite racer and a BOP'er.
2. No one has ever said they are trading their equipment for training.

Whenever one of these discussions come up, there is always an assumption made by the "engine" people that doesn't make sense. That is that somehow better equipment doesn't work as well for slower people and that people are using the equipment as a crutch or excuse not to train.

First, better equipment has proven, quantifiable benefits that you can look at. Whether or not those benefits are of significance to an individual racer can not be debated. It is solely up to that competitor and their goals and what matters to them. If some one wants to spend $10k for 2 seconds in a 10 hour race and they feel it is worth it...then it is. That's it...you can't say it's not worth it....because in reality, it's not worth it to YOU.....

Second, I don't think I have seen one person EVER say or post, "Got a new tri bike, don't have to train now...weeee"
Everyone knows that these are tools...tools to HELP the engine go faster. Same as a coach, better diet, better recovery...these things flow right into, better wheels, better bike, better shoes...etc etc. They are not mutually exclusive. Why is it funny when a guy going 15mph is riding a $10k+ bike? Maybe if he wasn't, he'd be going 14mph...maybe he won it as a prize, maybe it was a gift, maybe $10k ain't chit to him, maybe he loves that bike more than his wife, etc etc etc on and on.  
2010-05-21 1:57 PM
in reply to: #2874278

User image

Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 9:15 AM
camaleon - 2010-05-21 11:12 AM
Whizzzzz - 2010-05-21 2:06 PM
a_l_existence - 2010-05-21 10:04 AM I'm at the point right now where why would I spend hundreds of dollars saving a few grams here and there, when I am ~20 pounds overweight.  Just thought I would throw that in there.


That's what I always say... while I would love the carbon pedals and the carbon aerobars and what not... what I really need to worry about is my A$$ and the size of it.

Until someone can provide me with an aerodynamic carbon A$$, I will forgo the pedals and bottle cages... Wink


This too...

why people want to save weight on the bike when they are still over weight, or close to it!


Simple, because weight is weight....no matter where it comes from. So is aerodynamics.


Money is money...no matter where it comes from...=)
2010-05-21 2:01 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
I don't think anyone is arguing the fact that
Highest level training + Highest level bike = Highest level results

Without the highest level bike (that fits you), you will never reach your true potential...even if it's only 10 seconds faster over 112 miles.

But the overall message the OP is trying to make is that 10,000 miles per year training on a $1200 bike will take you much farther than 1,200 miles per year training on a $10,000 bike.


2010-05-21 2:03 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
I can't argue with that if that was the intention of the post.
2010-05-21 2:10 PM
in reply to: #2874437

User image

Champion
5874
50005001001001002525
Milton, GA
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor

Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 2:54 PM There are a couple assumptions being made that need to be clarified before you can really have this discussion.

1. The most expensive, latest technology, best fitting equipment is going to give the exact same benefits to an elite racer and a BOP'er.
2. No one has ever said they are trading their equipment for training.

Whenever one of these discussions come up, there is always an assumption made by the "engine" people that doesn't make sense. That is that somehow better equipment doesn't work as well for slower people and that people are using the equipment as a crutch or excuse not to train.

First, better equipment has proven, quantifiable benefits that you can look at. Whether or not those benefits are of significance to an individual racer can not be debated. It is solely up to that competitor and their goals and what matters to them. If some one wants to spend $10k for 2 seconds in a 10 hour race and they feel it is worth it...then it is. That's it...you can't say it's not worth it....because in reality, it's not worth it to YOU.....

Second, I don't think I have seen one person EVER say or post, "Got a new tri bike, don't have to train now...weeee"
Everyone knows that these are tools...tools to HELP the engine go faster. Same as a coach, better diet, better recovery...these things flow right into, better wheels, better bike, better shoes...etc etc. They are not mutually exclusive. Why is it funny when a guy going 15mph is riding a $10k+ bike? Maybe if he wasn't, he'd be going 14mph...maybe he won it as a prize, maybe it was a gift, maybe $10k ain't chit to him, maybe he loves that bike more than his wife, etc etc etc on and on.  

True but how many posts have we seen that expect more $ spent = more speed... whether it be clipless pedal, aero wheels, carbon frame...  I'm sorry, but these things are only going to give you as much speed as the motor is capable.  That's why my response is nearly almost always 'work on the engine'.

 

ETA:  Let take a personal example... Last week I placed 4th in my AG in a TT.  I got back and talked to my coach and said you know I really wanted a podium spot.  Did my coach say 'Well, go out and buy yourself a set of $2500 race wheels'?  No, she said that I was going to work my a$$ off on the bike and be ready to race harder in the next TT.



Edited by LowcountryTRI 2010-05-21 2:19 PM
2010-05-21 2:15 PM
in reply to: #2874456


92
252525
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor

But the overall message the OP is trying to make is that 10,000 miles per year training on a $1200 bike will take you much farther than 1,200 miles per year training on a $10,000 bike.


bingo
2010-05-21 2:27 PM
in reply to: #2874500

User image

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Well I'm pretty certain all tri bikes put your body, in the most aero position, and your body causes the biggest disruption in aerodynamics.  I really think the difference between a entry level tri bike and a top of the line one (not counting wheels) is probably wouldn't even get you more than 2 seconds over a 40k TT.

I get what the OP is saying, but what else am I going to spend my money on?  I went to college and got a good job so I could get nice equipment and be chastised by all the people faster than me who can't afford said equipment.
2010-05-21 2:28 PM
in reply to: #2874500

User image

Extreme Veteran
821
500100100100
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
trailsnail - 2010-05-21 3:15 PM
But the overall message the OP is trying to make is that 10,000 miles per year training on a $1200 bike will take you much farther than 1,200 miles per year training on a $10,000 bike.


bingo


end thread...


2010-05-21 2:44 PM
in reply to: #2874546

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
camaleon - 2010-05-21 12:28 PM
trailsnail - 2010-05-21 3:15 PM
But the overall message the OP is trying to make is that 10,000 miles per year training on a $1200 bike will take you much farther than 1,200 miles per year training on a $10,000 bike.


bingo


end thread...


Again, just pointing out the assumption that I didn't get in the OP, that people who spend a ton on equipment don't train as much as people that don't.

In order to discuss equipment you have to start from an all points being equal standpoint, otherwise the discussion is useless.
2010-05-21 2:54 PM
in reply to: #2874486

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
LowcountryTRI - 2010-05-21 12:10 PM

True but how many posts have we seen that expect more $ spent = more speed... whether it be clipless pedal, aero wheels, carbon frame...  I'm sorry, but these things are only going to give you as much speed as the motor is capable.  That's why my response is nearly almost always 'work on the engine'.



I just don't think that is true.

Let's look at race cars for example. Everyone gets the same crate motor...everyone's motor makes X Horsepower. So theoretically, everyone should go the same speed....

But, there are unlimited rules as to the body, frame, suspension that someone can use. So who is going to win the race? The person that makes the lightest, most aero, best handling car....coupled with the best driving skills.

Now take the example with all different HP motors....Just because someone has a 100 HP motor as opposed to a 1000 HP motor doesn't mean their car will not benefit from better aero, lighter weight, better handling, better driver etc.

Nothing has changed...all the factors are still the same. Now it is true that the 1000 HP (Elite) car is probably going to smoke the 100 HP (BOP'er) no matter what the smaller engine car does. But, fortunately for the smaller HP car, 100 competitors also showed up with 100 HP motors....but our racer invested in lighter body, better suspension, driving lessons and is now at a significant advantage to those who have relatively similar power levels.

Now if your goal is to take your car out and just drive around the track and have fun, why would you invest in all those things? You wouldn't....but if your goal is to move up from 50th place last time to 45th place...well then, you probably would. It's the same thing in ANY form of racing.
2010-05-21 2:59 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Master
2855
20005001001001002525
Kailua, Hawaii
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
yeah, but I'm more stoked to train on my P2C than my old aluminum road bike. I can't wait to jump on that thing and ride it anytime...
2010-05-21 3:03 PM
in reply to: #2874623

User image

Champion
5874
50005001001001002525
Milton, GA
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor

Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 3:54 PM
LowcountryTRI - 2010-05-21 12:10 PM

True but how many posts have we seen that expect more $ spent = more speed... whether it be clipless pedal, aero wheels, carbon frame...  I'm sorry, but these things are only going to give you as much speed as the motor is capable.  That's why my response is nearly almost always 'work on the engine'.



I just don't think that is true.

Let's look at race cars for example. Everyone gets the same crate motor...everyone's motor makes X Horsepower. So theoretically, everyone should go the same speed....

But, there are unlimited rules as to the body, frame, suspension that someone can use. So who is going to win the race? The person that makes the lightest, most aero, best handling car....coupled with the best driving skills.

Now take the example with all different HP motors....Just because someone has a 100 HP motor as opposed to a 1000 HP motor doesn't mean their car will not benefit from better aero, lighter weight, better handling, better driver etc.

Nothing has changed...all the factors are still the same. Now it is true that the 1000 HP (Elite) car is probably going to smoke the 100 HP (BOP'er) no matter what the smaller engine car does. But, fortunately for the smaller HP car, 100 competitors also showed up with 100 HP motors....but our racer invested in lighter body, better suspension, driving lessons and is now at a significant advantage to those who have relatively similar power levels.

Now if your goal is to take your car out and just drive around the track and have fun, why would you invest in all those things? You wouldn't....but if your goal is to move up from 50th place last time to 45th place...well then, you probably would. It's the same thing in ANY form of racing.

Ok... I'll take your auto racing analogy and say this.

Even if driver "A" got all of the upgrades I would bet that driver "B" with a 'similar' (minus the upgrades) car but has had more track time (training) would have just as good of a chance as finishing with a similar or better time than driver 'A'. 

2010-05-21 3:12 PM
in reply to: #2874660

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
LowcountryTRI - 2010-05-21 1:03 PM

Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 3:54 PM
LowcountryTRI - 2010-05-21 12:10 PM

True but how many posts have we seen that expect more $ spent = more speed... whether it be clipless pedal, aero wheels, carbon frame...  I'm sorry, but these things are only going to give you as much speed as the motor is capable.  That's why my response is nearly almost always 'work on the engine'.



I just don't think that is true.

Let's look at race cars for example. Everyone gets the same crate motor...everyone's motor makes X Horsepower. So theoretically, everyone should go the same speed....

But, there are unlimited rules as to the body, frame, suspension that someone can use. So who is going to win the race? The person that makes the lightest, most aero, best handling car....coupled with the best driving skills.

Now take the example with all different HP motors....Just because someone has a 100 HP motor as opposed to a 1000 HP motor doesn't mean their car will not benefit from better aero, lighter weight, better handling, better driver etc.

Nothing has changed...all the factors are still the same. Now it is true that the 1000 HP (Elite) car is probably going to smoke the 100 HP (BOP'er) no matter what the smaller engine car does. But, fortunately for the smaller HP car, 100 competitors also showed up with 100 HP motors....but our racer invested in lighter body, better suspension, driving lessons and is now at a significant advantage to those who have relatively similar power levels.

Now if your goal is to take your car out and just drive around the track and have fun, why would you invest in all those things? You wouldn't....but if your goal is to move up from 50th place last time to 45th place...well then, you probably would. It's the same thing in ANY form of racing.

Ok... I'll take your auto racing analogy and say this.

Even if driver "A" got all of the upgrades I would bet that driver "B" with a 'similar' (minus the upgrades) car but has had more track time (training) would have just as good of a chance as finishing with a similar or better time than driver 'A'. 



Perfect example...but again, you are starting from a point where all things are not equal. Driver B has more track time (Training) than Driver A. So again, you are making the assumption that the person with less in the equipment area trains more and the person with better equipment, trains less.

My point is we all have our own personal horsepower. We all are going to train the same amount no matter how good our equipment is. ie, if I have a 1200 bike I'm going to ride the same amount as I would with a 10k bike. Getting a more expensive bike doesn't mean I'm going to now slack on my training. I don't think it means that to anyone, so I don't understand the argument.

Let's look at the other example....the guy who rides 1200 miles a year with a 10k bike...is he going to train more with a less expensive bike? No...he will still only ride 1200 miles. But the benefit from the better equipment is still there. It doesn't disappear because he doesn't train a lot.


2010-05-21 3:21 PM
in reply to: #2873437

User image

Extreme Veteran
417
100100100100
Davidson
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 10:41 AM When Chrissie Wellington won her first Kona, she did it on a Cervelo P2C. She just said that it was the bike she felt most comfortable on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9P-QYzn5S4&feature=related

But, that doesn't mean anything. All it proves was that she was most comfortable on THAT bike...not that it's all about the engine. Obviously if the OP's fitness director rode a Felt DA-DI2 at $10K and it was a 58cm and fit her like chit, she would do worse than a well fitting aluminum bike.

The way I look at it is from an all things equal standpoint. There is undoubtedly going to be someone with an engine VERY similar to yours....and if you can best THAT person or people with better equipment, then more power to you.

Look back at your last results and see how much it would have taken to get that next position in AG or in the overall. My last race was 3 seconds for the next spot....I guess it just comes down to how much that spot means to you. To me, in any form of racing, it means everything.


Dude, you need to take some of your own advice and replace that trike you are riding in your avatar.  I guarantee you that you will get that 'next spot'. Laughing

Greg
2010-05-21 3:22 PM
in reply to: #2874685

User image

Champion
5874
50005001001001002525
Milton, GA
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor

Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 4:12 PM

I am not saying that the person with the more expensive equipment is going to train less.  What I am saying is that at this level, it would benefit most people to train more in order to become faster rather than spending money on it. 

So, rider X goes out and spends money on something that is going to make him/her a few seconds faster.  So are they now satisfied or do you think they'll still want to go faster?  How does he/she get faster from there?  Buy more stuff or train more?  There's a point where buying more speed really isn't going to make that much more of a difference without putting in more training time.



Edited by LowcountryTRI 2010-05-21 3:23 PM
2010-05-21 3:25 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
We are just not going to see eye to eye on this.

Basically I'm coming from the assumption that the athlete is training as much and as hard as they can...no matter the equipment.
2010-05-21 3:51 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Expert
1053
10002525
Culpeper, VA
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Yes and no... I will toss out some scenarios to support my thought process.

1. Equal motors... the better machine/tool wins
2. Better motor with lesser machine... the lesser machine/tool may win

I out ride people all the time on my Fuji Roubaix Pro I scored for less that $1K.  I ride with and pass people that have more invested in their wheels than my whole bike.  I've passed aero bikes with wooshing rear carbon disks.  While that's all fine and dandy.... ideally you have a good engine and the best machine possible.

I get your point though, people can be reasonably competitive in this sport with a decent entry level bike.   




    
2010-05-21 4:21 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Pro
4828
2000200050010010010025
The Land of Ice and Snow
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Rob....don't look now but your thread exploded!

 


2010-05-21 4:51 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Expert
1116
1000100
Thornton, CO
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Take two people with MOP fitness levels...(lets say they are clones... literally, same genetic code... just one day they split like a single celled organism and there was two of them)... same engine, same entry level tri bike, same everything. It would be a great battle to watch on race day, either one may win in that race.

Now, hand both of them $10k and say, invest this to make your race times faster.

Person 1 takes it and buys the newest fanciest stuff, $8k tri bike, aero helmet, wetsuit, etc.

Person 2 takes it and gets some coaches, nutritionists, personal trainers, etc (ie. invests in the engine).

In one week they race again.  I think we'd all agree person 1 is favored to win. 

But what about a year later?  Still think Person 1 would win?
   Yes, it's possible Person 1 could have self-trained and now has a better engine than Person 2, but I think that would be the exception, not the rule.

I'd venture to say MOST people would benefit more in the long run by taking the approach of Person 1.  
2010-05-21 5:10 PM
in reply to: #2874924

User image

Master
2356
20001001001002525
Westlake Village , Ca.
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
zionvier - 2010-05-21 2:51 PM Take two people with MOP fitness levels...(lets say they are clones... literally, same genetic code... just one day they split like a single celled organism and there was two of them)... same engine, same entry level tri bike, same everything. It would be a great battle to watch on race day, either one may win in that race.

Now, hand both of them $10k and say, invest this to make your race times faster.

Person 1 takes it and buys the newest fanciest stuff, $8k tri bike, aero helmet, wetsuit, etc.

Person 2 takes it and gets some coaches, nutritionists, personal trainers, etc (ie. invests in the engine).

In one week they race again.  I think we'd all agree person 1 is favored to win. 

But what about a year later?  Still think Person 1 would win?
   Yes, it's possible Person 1 could have self-trained and now has a better engine than Person 2, but I think that would be the exception, not the rule.

I'd venture to say MOST people would benefit more in the long run by taking the approach of Person 1.  


I don't disagree with that analogy ONE BIT...I'm in total agreement.

But I also think most would agree that the best option is to combine 1 & 2.

I'm still not sure why people think that slower folks with bad a$$ equipment for some reason are not training as much as they can or are willing to?????
2010-05-21 9:20 PM
in reply to: #2874249

User image

Coach
9167
5000200020001002525
Stairway to Seven
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Fastyellow - 2010-05-21 12:02 PM

tvmendoza - 2010-05-21 10:58 AM then that would not be the point of this tread.


Ah, ok....so at what point in the engine's development does equipment become a factor? If ever?

And at what point is the equipment overkill? Is there a price point? Is a $2k bike ok but a $3K bike ridiculous? Or is it $5K?



When you start your own thread and stop hijacking this one

Edited by AdventureBear 2010-05-21 9:21 PM
2010-05-21 9:49 PM
in reply to: #2872827

User image

Champion
5376
5000100100100252525
PA
Subject: RE: It's not the machine, it's the motor
Wow!  Triathletes have their own 9mm vs. 45 ACP threads.  LOL

I found this thread entertaining.  I was at the LBS today and I told one of the guys that if I make it through Savageman on my $250 Schwinn, I will reward myself with a better bike.  ;-)
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » It's not the machine, it's the motor Rss Feed  
 
 
of 3