Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:34 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Modern Vs Retro.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 4:39 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 7:18 pm
Posts: 3798
Location: Staffordshire
Has anyone else got the August 2009 issue of Procycling? There is a rather interesting article on whether or not retro can get anywhere close to a modern carbon machine. The two bikes are:

2009 Lapierre with DA group Vs NOS 1983 Pinarello Super Record.

They uses SRM Power cranks and a group of good consistent riders (sort of like the Stig on pedals) on an up and down course.

Without spoiling (too much) the results we are all mad! A rather good article though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Modern Vs Retro.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 4:50 pm 
The Guv'nor
The Guv'nor
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:19 pm
Posts: 23177
Location: Retrobike HQ
Iwasgoodonce wrote:
Has anyone else got the August 2009 issue of Procycling? There is a rather interesting article on whether or not retro can get anywhere close to a modern carbon machine. The two bikes are:

2009 Lapierre with DA group Vs NOS 1983 Pinarello Super Record.

They uses SRM Power cranks and a group of good consistent riders (sort of like the Stig on pedals) on an up and down course.

Without spoiling (too much) the results we are all mad! A rather good article though.


I won't buy this mag. What were the results? Sounds like an interesting comparison for sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:00 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 7:18 pm
Posts: 3798
Location: Staffordshire
Right. Those who don't want to know the scores, look away......Now.

Timed Run Lapierre: 8-56 Pinarello: 9-15 (mins)

Output Lapierre: 317 Pinarello: 308 (Watts) Difference=Flex

Speed Lapierre: 18.3 Pinarello: 17.7 (KPH)

Cadence Lapierre: 77.7 Pinarello: 77.1 (RPM)

Heart Rate Lapierre: 168 Pinarello: 167 (BPM)

What surprised me a little was that the Pinarello lost out badly on stiffness and comfort.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:04 pm 
King of the Skip Monkeys
King of the Skip Monkeys
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:34 pm
Posts: 26178
Location: Moomin Valley
wonder what the two frames with identical groupset would have been like.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:08 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:56 pm
Posts: 4776
Location: No brakes? Way to commit soldier.
Cycling plus ran a similar article a month or two back and came up with pretty much the same conclusions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:14 pm 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:45 pm
Posts: 10945
Location: kent
Top of the range carbon frames are very good machine and have a price to match .

for middle range bikes , steel will match carbon fiber .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:30 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:49 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: Boiling in a Bivvy Bag
Factoring in the'soul' of the Pinarello doesn't it come out the winner ?
Hang on, let me check the figures again...........Yep outright winner! -It's a clean sweep .. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:47 am 
Retro Guru

Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 2096
Location: Sheffield, top city
its a pity they werent able to test em to destruction and compare things like durability, longevity and point of destruction (sudden crack v gradual fatigue).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:20 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:49 am
Posts: 4061
Location: A veritable floating palace
Very, very few people could get the best performance from either of them, which makes comparisons like this entirely theoretical.
You've also got to factor in how well the bikes will perform when they're mechanically at less than peak performance. People who buy a bike like Lance's forget that when he rides a bike, there's a van following him which contains an identical one and an army of crack cycle mechanics.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:07 pm 
Pumpy's Bear
Pumpy's Bear
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:03 pm
Posts: 8145
Location: Hereford
Nice little experiment but no real surprise at all that a modern top end bike beats a 26 year old top end bike.

Not really comparing like with like though is it - for a start the Lapierre has indexed gears so changes will be sharper and quicker with no need to move out of the aero position. Would have been interesting to compare them both with non indexed downtube shifting although that's just bringing up, yet again, a point I keep laboriously making.

In a related way, Ian Cammish is riding not dissimilar times nowadays to when he was at his peak and he puts it down to modern equipment.

But given the above, why we like older bikes is nothing to do with performance, is it? If I was racing I'd certainly have a modern bike but riding for fitness/enjoyment I'd much prefer an older bike - how much does passion weigh in any case?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: NWGuy99, petermschwarz and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group