What is the point of fancy wheels and tri bikes (Page 2)

Yeah, this is a good summary of how I think

I have been told it is a disease, not even curable with vast amounts of spare cash.

For 99% of us here, this is a hobby, a recreational activity.  Something we derive pleasure from.  There is no economic equation that will tell you if race wheels are "worth" it.  What's it "worth" to make the podium in your AG, or to move from the BOP to MOP, or to improve your bike split by XX minutes?

It comes down individual choice and your level of disposable income.  How much can you  responsibly spend on your hobby while still paying the mortgage and feeding the kids? 

At the end of the day most of the hi-tech stuff is window dressing anyway.  Most of us are going to derive the greatest benefit on the bike by just riding more and by losing weight.

Mark

My thoughts exactly.

What is the point of the gear?  Simple, it makes you faster. Now, the question of if all the gear is "worth it" is an entirely individual question.  For me it's worth it, as I have a custom tri bike, several sets of race wheels, power meter, etc...YMMV.

I go to work every single day to a miserable job in order to bring home a paycheck.  I sure as heck am going to spend my disposable income on things that I enjoy.  For me the enjoyment is seeing my finish times drop, not from seeing how fast I go for dollars spent. 

Unfortunately, there seem to be quite a few people around who:

a) feel they're superior because they have super expensive equipment
or
b) feel they're superior because they do better with less expensive equipment.

*"Cheater" here refers to super-expensive bikes in a hypothetical world where rules have been made against them.  I understand that they are fully legit at most triathlons right now.  No offense intended against owners of good bikes, as I just re-read that I thought it might come off wrong.

There's more to it than just "spend $4k and get $4k worth of speed from it".  Spending money is not the same thing as spending money wisely.  I know a lot of folks who might buy expensive gear or get set up with something that doesn't make them faster.  Taking the time to do research and choose a fast combination of equipment is part of the sport.  We shouldn't start over regulating the equipment choices in order to create a supposed level playing field unless we want progress to come to a screeching halt. 

I enjoy placing in my AG and how I finish relative to others is important, but I also just enjoy going faster.  Seeing my splits increase is enjoyable, so for me, spending the money is worth it, even if the other guys I'm competing against are getting the same benefit. 

As far as enjoying passing people with better equipment, why not just find enjoyment in having better fitness than them? 

Agree with everything Andrew just said.

I have worked harder this year on my tri bike than I did the last 2 years on my road bike. Why? Because my tri bike is freaking fun to ride. I can't wait to hit the roads and see what I can do to make that thing go. Yes, I am faster this year. Is it from the bike or is it from hard work? In reality it is probably both. The "worth" for me is not even so much related to racing. I know there will always be someone with a better bike, better wheels, faster times.

It is a feeling, a satisfaction that the bike is no longer holding me back.

Fundamentally that is where the enjoyment is coming from, but if you pass someone on lesser equipment you can't be sure if it's your fitness level or your bike that is permitting you to get by them.  If I pass someone rocking the disc rear wheel, carbon frame, and deep front wheel, then I can be pretty sure that my fitness is better than theirs (or that I'm burning myself out and I'll be seeing them again on the run ).

 

I can understand that - kind of an engineering/optimization challenge.  My personal thought is that it is (or could be, with equipment cost caps) a straight up fitness challenge, but I can respect the puzzling-together-the-best-possible-bike approach.  But as a guy that just wants a race, I wish I didn't have to invest a pile of money to be competitive with the guys at the top.  There are plenty of nice, cheap aluminum and/or steel things that could be tweaked and optimized.  If there was a cost cap of $1000 or so, that'd even be another constraint: "hmmm... I want this item, but it'd put me over budget".

shhh don't give the UCI any fresh ideas.

For those that want the "straight fitness challenge" or "level playing field" setup your own circut and provide the bike.

Get Felt, or Giant, or... to sponsor it, and provide one style of bike in many sizes.

This might even become popular as traveling to a race without having to worry about getting the bike there might reduce some of the stress.

Any other level of $ cap or cheapest wins would only start a different type of arms race.  Who has the most time/skill to put together a bike from a junk pile.

The claiming rule would be a blast too.  After each stage of the TdF they could air the bike auction, with bids starting at some amount.  You'd have teams get completely denuded of bikes each stage.  Dear UCI/ITU/USAT: Think of all the extra TV income you'd get from the post-race auction.  It'd be the Barret-Jackson of sweaty athletic equipment.  Please implement.

Well, triathlons are supposed to be a race.  So if you pass someone who is clearly using better equipment, then it is a clue that you aren't doing too bad in the race.  Example: If I pass a Ferrari on a racetrack while driving a Yugo, then it is a hint that my driving skills are, at least, better than the Ferrari's.  If I'm consistently passing Ferraris in my Yugo, then it means that my overall race result may be quite satisfactory.  

It's not like I'm thinking "haha, I have defeated you, rich guy, take that", it's more "oh good, the fact I'm passing this better equipment means that I'm doing pretty good".  I fully admit that if I could justify it, I'd buy and race a nice bike in a heartbeat.  I'm not ideologically opposed to nice bikes, I just think it'd be good for the sport if the podium wasn't full of people with bikes more expensive than the cars they came there on/in.

As for the "starting a race series" idea, it's really not a bad one.  I wonder if you could piggy-back a "claimer class" onto an existing series to try it out, as Ontario is pretty saturated.  Also, I can think of a few holes: since you can't seriously do a "forced-sale", you'd probably just end up with two classes of racing: though who have spent lots on their bike, and those who haven't.  Since there is a strong correlation between strong athletes and those who have nice bikes, you wouldn't necessarily end up with top-end competition in the "cheap" class.

This argument happens all the time whenever there is equipment involved in a race (the  more complex the equipment, the more arguments).  Happens in motorsports (is it the car or the driver - but the reality is that it is always the combination of both) and it will happen with triathlons/cycling.

Having said that, there are 'spec' classes in motorsports where they TRY to constrain expenses (even happens at the highest levels - Formula 1 went to a single tire supplier as well as MotoGP).  The reality is that people with more $ will try to buy speed.  However, with the right rules - speed gains are so small that it won't make sense to spend on it.  With cycling/triathlons, I personally think that the differences in the equipment are small enough and variability of human performance high enough that it's not as much as most people think.

I thought it was a big deal when I went from a road bike to a TT bike...but didn't gain much (less than 1mph) when I went to a TT bike with aero helmet and more aero wheels (both road and TT bikes were professionally Retul fitted).  Sure the extra 1mph helps, but I got much more improvement by being able to run faster (almost 1min/mile better than last year on 5Ks), and getting a bit faster on my swim (where I had and continue to have a lot more improvement potential). I did change shoes to a lighter pair than last year so that must be the reason for the speed improvement on the run (went from averaging about 7:45/mile to under 7:00/mile on my last couple of sprints).

In fairness I suspect many many of us had/have simmilar thoughts when we first started.  The importance of equipment, the required and potential dollars and the overwhelming amount of bike  knowledge takes a period of adjustment.

I'd think the typical triathlete goes through stages of innocence, shock, grudging acceptance, full acceptance, and finally complete admiration of the system.

Some never make it past the shock stage.

In my case that's more a statement about my car than my bike

On the other hand, I spend far more hours on my bike in a given month than I do in my car...

Sorry folks...when I mentioned the cost/time statement it was sort of tongue in cheek. I'm always trying to see how I can get the most bang for my buck for as little as possible...like I said, it's a bit of a disease. But that's all relative, as someone mentioned, my bang for the buck might not be another person's value.  I don't begrudge anyone spending their hard earned cash on cool, fast, sleek racing machines or whatever enhances their lives,  and I certainly don't feel like it is an uneven playing field that needs handicapping according to equipment. It is what it is and I enter knowingly.  I am somewhat competitive, however, so I do have a little more sense of achievement if I pass someone on a carbon missile. Odds are, they'll blow by me on the run anyway.

I'm kind of in the middle of the road as far as this debate goes.  I was lucky enough that my dad gave me his old road bike from the 80s after fixing it up (though he'd kept it in great condition anyway over the years) once he saw my interest level in tris.  He was an avid cyclist back in his prime but primarily does mountain biking now when he rides so he had no more need for it.  So I've invested very little $$$ so far in my bike.  I still have the toe cages, though I made the move this year to start using some old school biking shoes (also given to me by my dad) that fit better with the cages and are more effective than running shoes.  I'm sure next year I'll probably switch over to clipless pedals and shoes.  I've gotten clip on aerobars this year.  I have racing tires.  So I've done a few things to try and buy some speed on the cheap and do enjoy getting faster whichever way I can.  However, I'm torn on whether (or when) to purchase a tri bike.  Part of me is seriously tempted.  The more prudent part of me figures that money is better spent on a vacation or work that may need to be done on the house.

It gnaws at me a bit that people that I am possibly faster than can beat me on the bike, but then again I probably pass some people on mountain bikes that may be stronger than me.