Modern bikes are they lardy?!

[mattpayne]

Its been a long time since Ive had any interest in modern bikes, but I have a friend that would like to upgrade her old town bike to something a little more trail friendly - has to be new to fit the bike to work scheme...

so about a grand is the budget - easy! aluminium hard tail with front suspension, some newfangled 1x10 drivetrain 28-29" wheels and an overal weight in the low 20lb region

all the bikes seem to fit the bill - sort of - tyres are all 2.8"wide or thereabouts!! thats nuts! and the weights are crazy! for example, a Cannondale Cujo tips the scales at 14.5kg - ~30lbs?! back in the day a CAAD3 with headshok era bike would have been low 20's!!!

whats happening with the world!!??

 

[clubby]

Its been a long time since Ive had any interest in modern bikes,...........

whats happening with the world!!??

Progress.

 

[legrandefromage]

Its been a long time since Ive had any interest in modern bikes,...........

whats happening with the world!!??

.ssergorP

 

[widowmaker]

Re:

I have a Modern Giant along those lines.

Its competent, but leaves me cold when riding it :shock:

 

[d8mok]

Re:

So what we are saying is that bigger wheels , bigger tyres , bigger forks , bigger cassettes , bigger frames , wider bars are heavier ? Well I never what next ....

 

[clubby]

.ssergorP

Nah, it’s just everyone outside this forum has realised that weight is pretty shitty measure of how good a bike is.

Going back to 1990. My top of the line Dyna Tech. Was £800. For that I got a full rigid steel frame, steel bars & stem and a full XT group set. Gears were great but no better than a low end modern group. Canti’s were great for the time but no match in power or consistency for even cheap disks. Bike also weighed 30lbs.
Inflation adjusted price would be £1250, which today gets you a hell of a lot more rideable bike.

 

[greencat]

I think OP's problem is that they are evaluating trail bikes using the standards of cross country ones.

 

[CassidyAce]

Re:

Or perhaps the problem is looking for a hardtail. If it only has to be 'a little more trail friendly' perhaps something like this would fit the bill: Boardman women's adventure bike (£750, 10.5 kg). https://www.boardmanbikes.com/gb_en/pro ... omens.html

 

[simdagger]

So my main XC Race bike is a Niner RDO which comes in at around under 20lbs a whopping 5lbs under the 1993 Kona Explosif.

My training Niners are about 23lbs which depends on running Laufs or Rock Shox... so most of my 29ers weigh less than high end 1990's 26ers with wider bars, disks, better tires etc etc.

All that said I believe the most talented and most winningest cyclist in history once said "it's not about the bike"






ED just noticed the inflation equation...

Your budget today would be about £400 in 1990

Have fun riding that 40lb Raleigh ATB Mustang

 

[legrandefromage]

.ssergorP

Nah, it’s just everyone outside this forum has realised that weight is pretty shitty measure of how good a bike is.

Going back to 1990. My top of the line Dyna Tech. Was £800. For that I got a full rigid steel frame, steel bars & stem and a full XT group set. Gears were great but no better than a low end modern group. Canti’s were great for the time but no match in power or consistency for even cheap disks. Bike also weighed 30lbs.
Inflation adjusted price would be £1250, which today gets you a hell of a lot more rideable bike.

I think you will find that the site is about cycling as a whole these days. Hindsight allows us to see the mistakes made previously and the mistakes made today and tomorrow. And when it comes to servicing the modern stuff, there is just as much cheap bendy materials used to make cost savings as there was high end bendy expensive stuff 25 years ago. All bikes are 'rideable' regardless of weight but basic physics says a lighter bike is easier to ride. There is no 'progress' in having to have two people lift a lardy new bike onto a highly placed bike rack because it is too heavy for the owner.

The Dynatech would have been a bit cheap in 1990

30 years on from your Raleigh (sniggers; Raleigh... shoulda bought a Kona mate!), bikes should have been light and super futuristic in materials and designs - but none of that makes for good returns for shareholders.

Internet generated insecurity has even the casual rider decked out in body armour, full face helmet and 8 inches of travel to 'ride' the most benign trails that your Dynatech was always intended for, it just doesnt make for as good a Youtube video.

As for what to buy, a £600 Specialized Sirrus reads like a cheap catalogue bike from 20 years ago complete with a hi-ten fork

Have a look at the Boardman range in Halfords, an underpaid spanner monkey may have assembled it but at at least the spec is reasonable with the weight in the right place for what you are looking for.

https://www.halfords.com/bikes/hybrid-b ... 28064.html

The average person just want a form of transport that gives them the least amount of problems, to many cycling is still seen as what you did as a child and if you do it as an adult, you are some sort of sporting fanatic or too poor to won a car.