Why in the world should I buy a new bike?

[philmarion]

Just wondering.....because I have a 1992 Miyata Triplecross. I ride it to work every day and on weekends. I wonder if I need a new bike. I certainly could afford a $1000 new hybrid bike but seriously, why should I bother buying a new bike? Every time I get serious about buying a new bike I guess I start feeling guilty about trading my trusty ol' Miyata in for something younger and newer. Is this misspent loyalty? Is there really any reason why a new bike would be better? Doesn't it just make sense to keep buying new components as they get old and need replacing? I think this year the only expenditure was new brake pads and right gear shifter. Next year I might need new rims. Last year it was new crank shaft. Is it more cost efficient to replace components or buy a complete new bike every 10 years?
This is a serious and sincere post. I really wonder if buying a new bike is a waste of money if all I need is a few new components every year. Has bike technology changed to the point that I should retire the 1993 Miyata? As far as I know a bike is just a frame and components. Why would I want a new bike? Is chtrmoly outdated now? If bikes are better nowadays and I do buy a new bike won't that mean that I'll now have to cycle farther to get the same workout as I did on my current bike?
One important aspect has been that my back and right ankle are starting to hurt more and more. This is what is making me wonder if I need a new bike since it might mean less wear and tear on my body. I am 45 years old now so I am not the spring chicken I once was. I do have 1 killer hill on my daily ride (both ways as it is a steep ravine). Do I really need a new bike or does this sound like I need to pay someone $50 to make sure the bike is ergonomically suited for my body?
The Miyata frame is old and scratched, I doubt any of the other original parts remain other than the handle bar and front forks, but what advantage would a new bike bring? Is it silly consumerism to want a new bike when buying new components is just as good of an option - or is it?
I sincerely thank all replies in advance.

 

[Markz]

It sounds like you really do not need a new bike outside of curiosity of the newer technology. I would get a fit and rule out that as the cause of the aches and pains. Your Psyche will thank you. You could always hit up a demo day that company's hold and see where you stand at that point.

 

[mongooseboy]

sounds like you should keep old faithful for a town bike/beater bike and maybe look into something newar that is fit TO YOU. You probably wont want to ride your new $1000 bike and leave it chained up if your town is anything like mine...i get stares just because im riding a $700 road bike through town, lots of poverty/welfare cases Not that i hear of much trouble, but they look like the type to do anything for a dollar... I dont ride any of my bikes uptown, come to think of it...

the new technology might be better, but Cro-Mo is NOT outdated one bit. custom cro-mo frames are not cheap at all. and many people still love the ride steel gives you.

I like new bikes every so often. Especially if you can afford one, its something you enjoy, and consider it an investment to your health if nothing else!

 

[KellyT]

Is it silly consumerism to want a new bike when buying new components is just as good of an option - or is it?
I sincerely thank all replies in advance.

It certainly isn't silly consumerism, since a good value well respected bigger make, will typically give you a seriously good deal. I fancied building a bike myself, to try and get practice at setting the components etc, etc. I priced each of the parts I wanted and added it all up and found that a Canyon with all of that would be much cheaper and a Bianchi or Cinelli, significantly cheaper as well. The manufacturer's bulk discounts generally are passed on to you and I and their bikes are typically just good value.

I ordered up a Canyon when I realised just how good value it was. But to be fair, lots of manufacturers are similarly good value, it makes upgrading and tinkering something to do for interest, but economically, it's a bad idea.

 

[philmarion]

It certainly isn't silly consumerism, since a good value well respected bigger make, will typically give you a seriously good deal.

I ordered up a Canyon when I realised just how good value it was. But to be fair, lots of manufacturers are similarly good value, it makes upgrading and tinkering something to do for interest, but economically, it's a bad idea.

Thanks for your replies thus far...
I know with cars and computers that technology changes. I don't know if that is the case with bikes.
My current frame from 1993 is fine. I am just wondering if there is any advantage to getting a new bike or whether continuing to buy new components as needed is the way to go.

 

[ABG]

Thanks for your replies thus far...
I know with cars and computers that technology changes. I don't know if that is the case with bikes.
My current frame from 1993 is fine. I am just wondering if there is any advantage to getting a new bike or whether continuing to buy new components as needed is the way to go.

It doesn't seem that technology is changing as quickly since about 1993 as it did before then. The mountain bike revolution was before 1993, and components have not been changing much since then. Frame materials and building methods (like oversize butted aluminum tubes and carbon frames) are the main things that have changed since then, so if you are happy with your current frame, then keep it. Current drop-bar road bikes have fancy shifters integrated into the brake levers, which might not have been available in 1993 either, but that's minor.

I don't think a good bike needs entire replacing. However you have said you replaced the rim at some point - did you replace only the rim or the entire wheels? My bike needs both of its entire wheels replaced since the rims are dented inward from a particular pothole and spokes are popping every month now, even though my wheels have been trued and spokes replaced. A pair of quality double-walled rims costs $150 or more, and my bike was originally $260 and is a heavy steel hybrid. Plus my frame really is too small for me.

I suppose it depends on how satisfied you are with your your bike and, especially, its frame. If my bike were more suited to my needs, I would have no problem replacing components when the time comes. Components like shifters, brakes, and derailleurs that are several years old usually are quite cheap to replace, even with new parts of the same model. Some things, like wheels and bottom brackets, tend to be the same price to replace whether you have a new or used bike. So be happy with what you got.

It sounds like your bike might just need a re-fitting, as long as you discover the frame is sized correctly.

 

[FreeHueco]

Technology has changed a lot since 1993, but that doesn't mean that you need a new bike. Shifting has gotten smoother, ergonomics have gotten better; but the frame itself has changed very little (unless you look at those newfangled carbon fiber bikes).

If you're happy with your frame, and it doesn't have any defects; stick with it. But upgrade the components as you can.

I commute (and do long weekend rides) on a steel bike and can happily say that steel is by no means outdated. It works as good today as it has since the 1880s...

 

[ABG]

Has component technology really changed all that much since 1993? Bikes in 1993 used trigger index shifting, smoother shifting gears (due to "ramps" on the cogs), and narrow, bushingless chains. Those things are still around today and, as far as I can tell, haven't changed much. I don't know much about bottom brackets and hubs, but I do know that sealed bottom brackets were also common at that time. Shock absorbers weren't around much at the time except on high-end mountain bikes, or suspension seatposts though. And if you are not a mountain biker, you don't need disc brakes.

Some of these things may not have made their migration from mountain bikes to road bikes yet in 1993, but if they have and are present on his bike, then it's not outdated.

I'm not in the loop as many bike enthusiasts who have spent some time shopping for high-end new bikes have lately, so let me know what in components have changed much since then. I know they often use lightweight metals like titanium in high-end components now, but other than the trigger-shifters that are integrated into brake handles, I don't think they have been greatly mechanically advanced lately.

 

[philmarion]

Well I've talked myself out of ditching the old bike in favor of a new bike. I think instead I'll keep the old one AND get a new one. I once believed you only needed one watch and one computer and one camera. Now I own several of each. I guess having only one bike is an idea I have let go of. So I'm gonna get a new bike and use the beater when I park in 'bad' areas.

Quick questions to all you big brained people...

...what are the advantages/disadvantages of disk brakes? Do they break better? only in wet weather? Are they more likely to break and require expensive maintenance?

...Are there any websites that have done bike product reviews where I could read (hopefully impartial) evaluations of hybrid bikes? These sites exist for cameras and computers - do they exist for bikes?

I really need help with brand recommendations. All the hybrids I have looked at all appear to be considerably different in design. When I last bought a bike in 1993 ALL the frames essentially looked identical - the Miyata was diferent. I think it had revolutionary triple butted welds that made it better than most.
Now I notice there is huge variation in bike frame shapes - some have larger tubing, some have different shapes (not round but flattenned) so it makes me wonder if there is huge difference in the ride between them. I wonder if some companies sacrifice smooth ride or power transfer for a certain 'look' that they believe would sell better. I'd prefer a bike that rides better over a bike that is designed to sell rather than to perform. That's the kind of info, opinion that I am interested in - thanks again to all those who take the time to help me out. MUCH appreciated!
What I want in a bike is a bike that gives me a more upright riding position, plenty fast and pretty light weight. I cycle on busy urban streets some that are of poor quality near the curb. So the 'flat bar' refers to the straight flat handle bar? I prefer that to the curled racing bike handle bars.

 

[philmarion]

I don't think a good bike needs entire replacing. However you have said you replaced the rim at some point - did you replace only the rim or the entire wheels? .

I guess it was the whole wheel the inside part, the rim and the spokes. I think I have replaced everything on my bike except the original frame, fork, seat and seat post and handle bar. I am getting new handle bars as we speak. I'd get a new seat but it's advanced state of decay detracts from the bike's desirability. I live in a high bike theft city. Ugly = safer from theft. NOBODY in their right mind would want to sit on my bike seat - he he.
But I am prettty certain I am getting ANOTHER bike, not to replace my current one but rather to ADD to it. I'll drive the beater to places where parking the nice one might be a bad idea...i.e. areas of little desirability.

 

[philmarion]

It's been 15 years since I bought a bike. I see Miyata's are no longer sold in North America.

What are the better hybrid brands?
Is Trek highly regarded?

 

[eugkimj]

I'm actually in the same boat. I have a Miyata 912, probably 1986 which I just started using again. No complaints at all. I'd be content to continue to use it, but will probably end up buying something new.

I, too, will keep my Miyata, although it probably won't see the light of day.

 

[philmarion]

It's been 15 years since I bought a bike. I see Miyata's are no longer sold in North America.

What are the better hybrid brands?
Is Trek highly regarded?

Anyone?

 

[ABG]

I have a Specialized Sirrus, a hybrid bike, which I bought used just a few weeks ago. It's from 2006, so it's fairly new, since the last person hardly used it The 2007 Sirrus has an MSRP of $550, but I bought mine for $375. This was definitely a good deal. I noticed that these bikes are lighter than comparably-priced hybrids that I've fiddled with at bike shops like REI, and have the same features. I'm pretty happy with it so far, though the aluminum frame with large-diameter tubes makes for a pretty rigid frame. It has good road handling but very jittery dirt road and off-road handling. Basically, it's a flat-bar road bike with a suspension seat post, and rims capable of taking tires as big as 38 mm and as small as 23 mm.

I looked only on the used market myself, and it's often hard to find a bike that suits all my picky needs, so I took the best I could. If I were you, I woud just look for a hybrid bike that has all the features you want, some of which are:

• Light weight.
• Steel frames can have small tubes and still be durable, while I wouldn't trust skinny tubes in an all-aluminum frame. For aluminum, the more butting, the better, but these frames are also rigid and transfer a lot of vibration and bumps.
• Wheels capable of taking skinny road tires (if you are more of a road cyclist like myself), or capable of taking big, knobby tires (if you do more off-road). No matter what size rims the bike has, make sure they are NOT single-walled, which you may find in the cheaper hybrids. And if you do ANY off-road at all, the spoke count in each wheel needs to be at least 32. Anything less is only suitable for the road and is vulnerable to broken spokes.
• 2 pairs of eyelets in both dropouts if you want a touring/commuter bike capable of taking both fenders and racks. For touring, some bikes also have a pair of braze-ons halfway up the fork to attach a front rack, if touring is important to you.
• Some saddle or seatpost suspension is always good for upright-style riding in a hybrid. If you do more off-road than road, then some suspension in the fork might be good too, but suspension requires maintenance and is another thing that can go wrong.
• An adjustable stem is nice, otherwise you may have to spend about $20 to extend the steerer.
• Triple chainring. Why people choose to buy a new bike with a double chainring is beyond me. I've seen to many cyclists dressed in expensive gear struggling up hills under 60 RPM and sometimes even swaying their bike. Don't be like them. Do yourself a favor and make sure it has a triple chainring (which most hybrids have anyway) if you plan on either off-road, rides of more than 10 miles, or rides in areas that are not flat or nearly flat.
• Gear combinations that are both low enough for off-road and high enough to still pedal down hills is a plus.
• I wouldn't care about disk brakes unless you do a lot of off-road. The new linear-pull brakes (like the Shimano V-brakes) are very powerful, but of course still prone to collecting mud. So your decision should really depend on how much off-road riding you do. Linear pull brakes are still powerful when wet, so it's really just the mud factor. I don't know much about the maintenance of disk brakes except you need a special Torx 25 bit to work on the rotors, but I do know that V-brakes and cantilever brakes are easy to work on yourself with standard tools.
• I don't think the brand level of components matters as much as the build of the frame, its weight, and the quality of the wheels. Things like brakes, shifters, gear clusters, saddles, and derailleurs are cheap to replace if something goes wrong. But wheels are expensive, and the frame stays with the bike of course.

I hope this info helps.

 

[philmarion]

I hope this info helps.

WOW!! Does it ever! Sincere thanks for the long comprehensive and considered reply.
Anyone have any other musings?