Seems to me there are two parts to this equation. The rider and the equipment.
The equipment needs to fit the rider correctly for ultimate proformance. {Marginal gains on short rides...possible significant gains on long rides}
The rider must be fit enough to gain ultimate results from the equipment. {Huge variable based on rider condition and bicycle riding skills}
The miracle cure is a better conditioned rider with good bicycle riding skills NOT a better bicycle[whatever that IS}.
Nick Zatezalo Atlanta,Ga
>If I am going to ride more than 10 miles, I am
>probably going to take a modern bicycle (i.e. off
>topic post 1983.) It's just physically easier, really,
>I think most of us who have both (pre and post '83)
>would agree on that.
Do you have an explanation why that might be the case? I can see a speed difference if your old bike does not fit you, if the bearings are totally worn out, if there is no air in the tires... but otherwise, the speed difference for a commute is negligible, if there is any.
Faster shifting? Better brakes, allowing you to brake deeper into turns? Stiffer (or less stiff) frame? Clipless pedals? Bolder graphics? What causes the extra performance? Even if we accept that some of the above improve the power transfer or speed in some way, the effect will not be noticeable on a normal ride.