Bikes are getting uglier

[BroDeal]

Looks like it should be ridden by a certain bellringer from Notre Dame.

I think it looks like homemade decals on a no-name carbon frame that can be bought off eBay for $400. The "all black" bikes that people put together from no-name carbon look just like this.

 

[BroDeal]

It's not just the frames. Everything about the average cyclists' position on a bike of out of wack.

Stems that are too short or too long, frames that are too small, handlebars tilted up to the sky, saddles pushed all the way back on the rails-it's an aesthetic monstrosity.

The worst has to be the sloping top tubes on bikes. The bigger the frame, the longer the head tube, the longer the seatpost.

Nothing graceful about it.

We have entered a whole new phase. Instead of convincing people to buy bikes that actually fit, the industry has decided to modify the standard geometry so that frames that are too small have giant head tubes that decrease the saddle to bar drop. People can continue to buy frames that are too small and not have an unsightly number of understem spacers.

I got a laugh from a recent RBR thread that showed Basso's Cervelo from a few years back. People could not get over the fact that the stem was horizontal to the ground. People are so used to looking at clown bikes that they do not even know what a properly fit bike is supposed to look like.

 

[L'arriviste]

Looks like it should be ridden by a certain bellringer from Notre Dame.

Perhaps it's because the discipline of bike design has long since achieved refined perfection, but for me sticking it in front of a flash car does not make it look any less yeahwhatever than it does.

I can only hope that it does indeed ride as fast as they say because it will make Cavendish look like he's always going uphill.

 

[BroDeal]

This bike may have the worst saddle ever.

 

[TheDude]

This bike may have the worst saddle ever.

Yes, but replace the saddle with a Brooks sprung model and that bike is kind of cool - not that I would want to ride it daily, but it gets the neat hobby factor over the ugly factor for me.

 

[pedaling squares]

Granted, it's a TT bike and the manufacturers long ago tried (and failed) to make ugly the new sexy for time trials. But still.....

Looks like they drew their inspiration from an old hand plane.

Oh, already under discussion in the Cersello thread. People, don't forget to dust off these great old threads!

 

[mewmewmew13]

This looks like something that Dr. Suess would ride.

Atrocious!

I would be embarrassed to be seen on that thing....

LOL it does look 'Suessian"

 

[Llewellyn]

Even worse than silly tube profiles and frames that look like they've melted in an oven are the garish, way over the top paint jobs with the manufacturer's name plastered on every available bit of surface area. And then they feel the need to stick a label on there telling you it's got "injection moulded carbon" or whatever their latest marketing bs scam might be. A friend of mine has a Rabobank Giant and it looks like a Year 1 spelling lesson.

Those things alone are enough to make me not even consider an off the peg bike if I was in the market. Give me a single colour paint job with some discreet names/logo's and that'll do me nicely

 

[42x16ss]

We have entered a whole new phase. Instead of convincing people to buy bikes that actually fit, the industry has decided to modify the standard geometry so that frames that are too small have giant head tubes that decrease the saddle to bar drop. People can continue to buy frames that are too small and not have an unsightly number of understem spacers.

I got a laugh from a recent RBR thread that showed Basso's Cervelo from a few years back. People could not get over the fact that the stem was horizontal to the ground. People are so used to looking at clown bikes that they do not even know what a properly fit bike is supposed to look like.

This is something that continually grinds my gears

With more and more people coming to the sport the amount of riders with poorly fitting bikes amazes me. Sometimes it's like shop owners won't even take 5 minutes to check that they are selling the right size bike! Surely they can at least fit the correct stem for the rider.

Stems that are too short, saddles too far forward, bars too far from the rider/up too high and seats that are waaaaaay too low (so low the rider looks like a chicken trying to take off) are some of my pet hates, yet I seem to be seeing them more and more every day

 

[ustabe]

This is something that continually grinds my gears

With more and more people coming to the sport the amount of riders with poorly fitting bikes amazes me. Sometimes it's like shop owners won't even take 5 minutes to check that they are selling the right size bike! Surely they can at least fit the correct stem for the rider.

Stems that are too short, saddles too far forward, bars too far from the rider/up too high and seats that are waaaaaay too low (so low the rider looks like a chicken trying to take off) are some of my pet hates, yet I seem to be seeing them more and more every day

I agree, even here in Boulder where' we're supposed to be smarter than everyone else.

Of course, the manufacturers seem to know where their bread and butter is, spec'ing bikes with shorter stems, longer steerer tubes, and taller spacer towers.

 

[richwagmn]

This is something that continually grinds my gears

With more and more people coming to the sport the amount of riders with poorly fitting bikes amazes me. Sometimes it's like shop owners won't even take 5 minutes to check that they are selling the right size bike! Surely they can at least fit the correct stem for the rider.

Stems that are too short, saddles too far forward, bars too far from the rider/up too high and seats that are waaaaaay too low (so low the rider looks like a chicken trying to take off) are some of my pet hates, yet I seem to be seeing them more and more every day

It's honestly painful to see sometimes. Some of the positions I see people in are not just bad but could even cause pain/injury.

There are days when I'd like to pull up to these people and suggest some improvements that could make their riding a lot more pleasant.

 

[Boeing]

We have entered a whole new phase. Instead of convincing people to buy bikes that actually fit, the industry has decided to modify the standard geometry so that frames that are too small have giant head tubes that decrease the saddle to bar drop. People can continue to buy frames that are too small and not have an unsightly number of understem spacers.

I got a laugh from a recent RBR thread that showed Basso's Cervelo from a few years back. People could not get over the fact that the stem was horizontal to the ground. People are so used to looking at clown bikes that they do not even know what a properly fit bike is supposed to look like.

not the modification and industry conspiracy theory again.

in simpler terms on modern road bikes what they have done is offer race fit with shorter headtubes and roadies with taller HT's to offer a littler more relaxed fit

unless you are talking about the horrid hybrids

 

[Boeing]

Looks like it should be ridden by a certain bellringer from Notre Dame.

it looks a dog humping a leg

 

[42x16ss]

it looks a dog humping a leg

It looks like a beach cruiser with aero tubes, drop bars and an undersized stem.

What's the point of an aero bike if the headtube is SO F&*KING HIGH????

 

[PCutter]

My too biggest peeves at the moment are Pinarello's with their wavey fork/seat stays. If they were made by an Asian brand they'd be the **** of jokes, but because its Pinarello, their ugliness is some how excused as 'stylish'. And there's far too many of them around here.

My other pet peeve is the trend for all black. Black frames with black decals. (usually black bar tape as well) and then to have them described as 'stealth'. A number of brands are now doing this, and they all look sh#t

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

The Venge has set a new benchmark in the ugly bike department.

 

[DirtyWorks]

This is something that continually grinds my gears

With more and more people coming to the sport the amount of riders with poorly fitting bikes amazes me. Sometimes it's like shop owners won't even take 5 minutes to check that they are selling the right size bike!

Easy on the blame game. If the customer says, "But I don't like your way, I like my way to ride a bike." The only answer a shop can give is, "Have it your way then." in order to keep the customer happy. Many customers don't see things your way until much later if they've stayed involved in cycling.

Surely they can at least fit the correct stem for the rider.

Stems that are too short, saddles too far forward, bars too far from the rider/up too high and seats that are waaaaaay too low (so low the rider looks like a chicken trying to take off) are some of my pet hates, yet I seem to be seeing them more and more every day

Part of this is the customer preference, the other part is there's no profit margin for the shop to be trading stems on boxed bikes.

The bike business is hard enough as it is and now many of you want to make it harder still? If more people are riding then where's the problem? The whole point behind the tall head tubes is it sells more high-priced bikes.

I have MANY pet peeves about the bike business. Making/selling bikes *actually* designed for racing is not a good business. There is no end of examples of how bad the race business is in this subforum. Simulating a race bike with a tall head tube is much better business. Bikes that are easier to ride in general is a much better business.

As an example of easy bikes to ride, As much as I love to hate the Budnitz bike marketing, I'm interested to see if the product lasts more than 2 years. I don't think it will, but I'm very interested to see what happens. If there's other models release, you know the product has sales to the effect it got them going on another model despite the unoriginal design and very high price.

 

[42x16ss]

Easy on the blame game. If the customer says, "But I don't like your way, I like my way to ride a bike." The only answer a shop can give is, "Have it your way then." in order to keep the customer happy. Many customers don't see things your way until much later if they've stayed involved in cycling.



Part of this is the customer preference, the other part is there's no profit margin for the shop to be trading stems on boxed bikes.

The bike business is hard enough as it is and now many of you want to make it harder still? If more people are riding then where's the problem? The whole point behind the tall head tubes is it sells more high-priced bikes.

I have MANY pet peeves about the bike business. Making/selling bikes *actually* designed for racing is not a good business. There is no end of examples of how bad the race business is in this subforum. Simulating a race bike with a tall head tube is much better business. Bikes that are easier to ride in general is a much better business.

As an example of easy bikes to ride, As much as I love to hate the Budnitz bike marketing, I'm interested to see if the product lasts more than 2 years. I don't think it will, but I'm very interested to see what happens. If there's other models release, you know the product has sales to the effect it got them going on another model despite the unoriginal design and very high price.

You make some great points there and I did run in a lttle harshly

As ugly as the Roubaix, Cervelo RS, Giant OCR, Performance Fit Madones etc are they DO serve a purpose - as you said they get more people on nice bikes. As ugly as some are they can be great to ride and very capable too. Many of the people who buy these just want a fast capable bike and good on them.

OTOH, you can also see people getting full race geometry bikes, then stacking the headset with spacers and getting huge riser stems I actually had a discussion with someone (mid 50's, newish to cycling) the other week who broke the bank on a brand new Felt F1 and did exactly that. When I asked him if he tried something with a taller head tube designed for someone less flexible he looked at me blankly and said he didn't realise it was option and the shop never mentioned it....

 

[Parera]

You know, am I the only one who thinks that a bike fit shouldn't be about immediate comfort but rather getting you into a position that will become comfortable after about a month of riding or so?

I used to play a lot of golf. One of the founding principles of golf is a proper grip; in fact, it's your only real connection to your club. If you take proper lessons, the instructor probably spends a few weeks getting your grip right. You know why? A properly gripped club is done in the fingers, not the palms. Beginners tend to palm clubs, but this is kills any chance of striking with power. Beginners prefer this because it's comfortable; gripping with your fingers is painful at first. However, after a few weeks of adjustment (hands getting stronger and more limber) the position is natural, and the ball is struck cleanly.

Why isn't that the goal in cycling? A good riding position is one where the saddle is some distance above the bars. There's some leeway for a person's particular physique (knuckle dragger vs stumpy arms) but we're at the point where we know what a solid position is. I'm not advocating everyone suddenly set their bike up like Spartacus does, but there is a ballpark and bars level with the saddle ain't it.

edit: I will qualify that I'm talking about the average person here. Obviously people with bad backs, fused vertebrae, etc are exceptions and have special needs.

 

[Hmmmmm]

Looks like it should be ridden by a certain bellringer from Notre Dame.

It looks stupid.

And the marketing behind these bikes is ridiculous. Last year's model was the "stiffest" bike around (that's what they always say) and now, somehow, miraculously, we are to believe that the new model is way way better. I guess last year's model was not that great after all and this year's is not that great either because it will be surpassed by next year's model. Give me a break!!!!

 

[Hmmmmm]

While I am venting, a lot of time trial bikes look really stupid. I go out on my run of the mill 2004 diamond frame racing bike and see all these people on these time trial bikes and have to wonder why? Do they actually race? They certainly don't go very fast on their bikes and I am not just talking about a one time meeting here, I am talking on weekly group rides, weekend rides, evening short rides. I will admit a stiff bike is more efficient, but if you don't have the muscle and fitness to push it, then it don't matter how stiff your bike is. What do I know though, it's a free world and you can ride what you want

 

[Hmmmmm]

You know, am I the only one who thinks that a bike fit shouldn't be about immediate comfort but rather getting you into a position that will become comfortable after about a month of riding or so?

I used to play a lot of golf. One of the founding principles of golf is a proper grip; in fact, it's your only real connection to your club. If you take proper lessons, the instructor probably spends a few weeks getting your grip right. You know why? A properly gripped club is done in the fingers, not the palms. Beginners tend to palm clubs, but this is kills any chance of striking with power. Beginners prefer this because it's comfortable; gripping with your fingers is painful at first. However, after a few weeks of adjustment (hands getting stronger and more limber) the position is natural, and the ball is struck cleanly.

Why isn't that the goal in cycling? A good riding position is one where the saddle is some distance above the bars. There's some leeway for a person's particular physique (knuckle dragger vs stumpy arms) but we're at the point where we know what a solid position is. I'm not advocating everyone suddenly set their bike up like Spartacus does, but there is a ballpark and bars level with the saddle ain't it.

edit: I will qualify that I'm talking about the average person here. Obviously people with bad backs, fused vertebrae, etc are exceptions and have special needs.

I think bike fit is about getting the right sized frame and stem and then a starting point in terms of saddle height, seat position, cleat position, etc. As you ride you should become of aware of what works and what does not work and adjust accordingly. After all, sitting in the shop and getting "fitted" is not the real world. If you raced and your friends laughed at your position but you cleaned up at every race is your position wrong?

 

[BroDeal]

While I am venting, a lot of time trial bikes look really stupid. I go out on my run of the mill 2004 diamond frame racing bike and see all these people on these time trial bikes and have to wonder why? Do they actually race? They certainly don't go very fast on their bikes and I am not just talking about a one time meeting here, I am talking on weekly group rides, weekend rides, evening short rides. I will admit a stiff bike is more efficient, but if you don't have the muscle and fitness to push it, then it don't matter how stiff your bike is. What do I know though, it's a free world and you can ride what you want

I figure that if I can climb out of the saddle and any flex is imperceptible then any gains to be had from a stiffer frame are very small indeed, probably non-existent.

I read somewhere that the amount of energy lost in frame flex is pretty much nil, and a little flex helps smooth the peddle stroke and improves handling over rough stuff, much like lower pressure tires have less rolling resistance than super high pressure tires. Sounds truthy to me.

 

[marathon marke]

+1

I agree on all points! And add the recent popularity of flat/satin finishes. Harder to clean, and look like the painter stopped at the primer step.

My too biggest peeves at the moment are Pinarello's with their wavey fork/seat stays. If they were made by an Asian brand they'd be the **** of jokes, but because its Pinarello, their ugliness is some how excused as 'stylish'. And there's far too many of them around here.

My other pet peeve is the trend for all black. Black frames with black decals. (usually black bar tape as well) and then to have them described as 'stealth'. A number of brands are now doing this, and they all look sh#t

 

[Boeing]

My too biggest peeves at the moment are Pinarello's with their wavey fork/seat stays. If they were made by an Asian brand they'd be the **** of jokes, but because its Pinarello, their ugliness is some how excused as 'stylish'. And there's far too many of them around here.

My other pet peeve is the trend for all black. Black frames with black decals. (usually black bar tape as well) and then to have them described as 'stealth'. A number of brands are now doing this, and they all look sh#t

I noticed Felt and Colnago and Zipp with the stealthy look. not long ago all bikes were red and black