> My bike has *never* hung out at a coffee shop. It spends it's life on the
> road, or at home in the hallway. But that's beside the point. People spend a
> lot of money (and see value) on things that have nothing whatsoever to do
> with performance. Heck, the silly paint job on my bike added about $700 to
> the cost. How do you rationalize something like that? In my case, because I
> fell in love with what it looked like. Yep, I'll admit that. I love the way
> it looks. It's fun. I paid a bunch of extra money that doesn't make it any
> faster up a hill, just because it's fun. Guilty as charge of whatever crime
> fits.
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
IMO, there are a lot of guys thinking the same as the OP and they
consider these OP wheels thinking they are going to get a significant
performance benefit (which some will at competition speeds but not for
training rides no matter how fast you are) and they are led to believe
this is rational because so many people before him have the same desire
to invest as you have except they lie to themselves and others about
the real reason for the purchase. Photos from cycling mags like
Procycling and Cyclesport sell more gear than anything else because so
many people want to look the part. How many cyclists can tell you why
they shave their legs? Equipment choice very often is decided upon for
emotional reasons and then justifications are attempted. All of these
self-proclaimed experts that think they can tell you the ideal doodad
for you only serve to create this involuntary conspiracy of equipment
threads and the justifications. Some people actually buy in to the
statements and eventually it becomes part of what is most accurately
called legends of equipment benefits. This is not to say that there are
no benefits. I am just saying that the honestly that Mike has offered
here is a refreshing change. I admit I have spreadsheets for just about
every component and wheel pair produced or offered for sale in the US
or Europe with pertinent performance and price info. Partly I do that
because it is interesting to me and additionally I use this when I
choose my investments. Having admitted that, I also realize that like
Mike the primary reason for the majority of purchases is that I like
the look and or feel. I love ultra-light wheels because I love the way
they FEEL when I accelerate, especially out of the saddle. It feels
great while climbing long ascents and noticing the the gyroscopic
stabilizing effect is dramatically reduced compared to a heavier set of
wheels. There are also choices I have made just on appearance (though I
am a "form follows function" guy) and simply the idea that the wheels
or whatever have potential to save X amount of time over a 30 mile ITT.
I am most happy that Mike shared the cost of his paint. It is true that
I have never heard anyone criticize the choice of another to invest in
big bucks paint. Which would you rather have? I really fancy $1000
paint job or a $1000 upgrade to those wheels you last bought? Guess
which one will cause disparaging whispers at the back of the group?
This tells me on some level that what annoys the so-called Luddites the
most (maybe even sub-consciously) is the idea that someone bought
something for performance reasons that may be (Gasp!) greatly
exaggerated!
The funniest thing I ever saw that I will never forget is about 15
years ago while refilling my water bottles at "Robert's of Woodside" (a
really popular spot to meet with or take a rest stop for group rides in
Woodside California less than 10 miles from Mike's shop) I saw a guy
riding with a pseudo-disc wheel (some kind of skin over conventional
spoke wheel) pedaling slowly up to the grocery store with no shoes on.
If he can use a disc wheel for a grocery run I don't feel too silly
using GT winning bikes for my training rides.