Which components actually make a difference?

Feel

Okay, in that case as well as tyres, carbon forks/seatposts, and clip less I'm going to say all expensive parts that you've paid for.

My Phil BB + x2 cups + installation felt smoother than any of the cheap shimano ones I've installed myself.

So, in summary. Although it's possible that the design and quality of many bike parts will make a measurable difference to the efficiency of the cycle when ridden, most cyclists do not possess effective enough senses or athletic ability to notice.

Given the farrago of circus like activity that constitutes the majority of London's bicycle commute, this is an unsurprising conclusion.

You're just upset because there's lumps in your custard again.

It's not custard…

This is what I want to find out. How to do a blind test though - turbo?

Blind drunk?

Begging the question really... Potentially all components can make an actual difference, marginal as it may be.

Blind drunk?

In

Begging the question really... Potentially all components can make an actual difference, marginal as it may be.

Where's the question?

There's one ^

Bang! And the dirt is gone.

So, in summary. Although it's possible that the design and quality of many bike parts will make a measurable difference to the efficiency of the cycle when ridden, most cyclists do not possess effective enough senses or athletic ability to notice.

Given the farrago of circus like activity that constitutes the majority of London's bicycle commute, this is an unsurprising conclusion.

The depressing fact is that half decent budget parts will perform better, when installed with care, than even the most expensive top end stuff, if put together by a clumbsy mechanic.

Like Claris.

"Begging the question really... Potentially all components can make an actual difference, marginal as it may be."

"Where's the question?"

The clue is in the thread title, let alone the premisses stated in the first post...

Ah, well addressing the first post on page 3 wasn't making that clear.

"Ah, questioning the premisses for the whole discussion, didn't quite get that."

Ftfy.

Given the farrago of circus like activity that constitutes the majority of London's bicycle commute

And the crappy quality of London's road surfaces.

I buy my own roads now. Better value for improving rolling resistance values.

Yup, frame play a huge roles, BQ did a blind test by asking a builder to build 3 identical looking frame in three different tubing to see if it's possible to notice the difference.

alias I forget what was the conclusion is, will look through my back issues to find it.

Here's an old one from 1996. Guy rides 7 bikes all the same apart from the grade of tubing; can't tell much difference between them; concludes that fit and geometry are far more important than tube material.

http://www.habcycles.com/M7-8.jpg

Sorry for big image scans of magazine article.

Sorry for wrong link too.

http://www.habcycles.com/m7.html

I commuted on my cx commuter bike this morning, I definitely felt the difference of the bigger tyres.... and gears.

I'm not sold on cranks/BBs being all the same. Had a harder time sorting front mech rub issues on my FSA SLK cranks than my Red ones, though the FSA hardly feel flexy

Hubs on the other hand. My fixed's rear axle barely turns when out of the bike, the bearings are so shagged. But put it all together and the wheels still go round when I make with the pedalling, doesn't feel like a dragging brake would. I'm sure I'd notice the smoothness of a hub that isn't completely fucked, but I doubt I could tell blind between a novatech and a royce on the road.

Sure, but very few of us can afford to have a bike that is high quality throughout (or can't ride it daily for fear of it being nicked). Also lots of people have said that, purely in tems of fun, their preferred ride is actually their rat-bike/beater, so there are also more mysterious factors that give a bike its character. My purpose in starting this thread was basically to find out where people think you should spend your money to maximise immediate riding pleasure (other than beer). FWIW, my fixie goes roughly as follows:

High-end: brake blocks
Mid-range: chain, inner tubes?
Low-end: wheels, brakes, saddle, bar tape, sprocket, tyres, finishing kit
Beater: frame, forks, cranks, chainring

...and I enjoy it a lot.

Immediate riding pleasure around london?

Beater: Everything

Or else you'll worry about it getting nicked, scratches, or otherwise indra'd all the time.

On my SS the parts break down roughly:
Inexplicably good: Fork
Reasonable: Headset
Beater: All the rest
Why is it an oval shape?: Chainring

people's desire to build entirely NJS bikes

No one builds an NJS bike because they're the fastest, they build them because they look sweet.

I think as you're talking about your beater and fixed that its just going to be a question of well maintained components.

I've ridden loads of the Herne Hill fujis and they're all basically the same but bodged together with miss matched cranks, wheels and a range of saddles ect.

You do notice when the BB feels sticky and you notice when the saddle is worn out but in terms of cranks, bars, cogs, chains, wheels even bar tape help together with gaffer I've never had a problem keeping up using any of it.

Everything is relative and depends on what you are trying to achieve but if its just a beater I'd say a carbon fork so it's lighter to carry up the stairs.

Went from Miche to DA track cranks - the only difference I could feel was my enlarged ego.

That's worth at least 0.01 km/h