I think it is just really seductive to think you can get magically faster by a significant amount just by buying a new frame with that new bottom bracket that's claimed to be 30% stiffer.
> Before getting the bike: Intrigued by the novelty factor and an excuse to make gratuitous wood puns
> Shortly after receiving the bike: Impressed by the exquisite craftsmanship but also kind of embarrassed by it at the same time
> Shortly after riding the bike for the first time: Wow, it feels great, but what's that creaking? I bet it's broken
> Once I'd solved the creaking by tightening the bottom bracket: I really like riding this bike
> Today: All bikes should be made of wood, metal and crabon is for vulgarians
His whole shtick is being a bit jokey, but anyway he's been writing about this thing for a year now and basically loves it.
I'd also like to point out that people buy bicycles for factors other than speed. Most people, I would wager.
https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/bsnyc-field-trip-20...
https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/would-that-i-could....
https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2017/11/this-title-is-100-f...
https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/06/wood-bike-status-up...
https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2018/01/sawdust-in-wind.htm...
read for yourself
However I must say, the Renovo Aerowood is a good looking piece of wood.
Man, I have a hard time believing that. Now, I've not done a blind taste test, but I truly believe I'll tell the difference between a good carbon frame and an aluminum frame of equal quality. All of the frames in my garage have noticeably different characteristics, and it can't all be placebo. But, I'm an ex-racer, blah, blah, so maybe most people can't tell the difference.
new bottom bracket that's claimed to be 30% stiffer.
OTOH, if a Cat 3 thinks he's putting out enough power to torque a modern bottom bracket, yeah, he's deluding himself.
I don't think I'm alone in that.
Both of my favorite bikes are cyclocross bikes. The first one I got used and upgraded the componyts to ultegra and bb7 discs. Was around 900 all in.
I may be a bit hypocrite with my second bike which was a factory replace of the first with a top of the line racing cyclo cf frame (weld failed). But the cost and some velocity touring wheels (which caused the frame failure in the first frame by moving stress off the wheels). So to me that bike cost $1200... But is likely a $4k bike. I don't know if that makes me a hypocrite or just savvy. But a lot of the bikes I test ride in the 1-2k range we're super nice. And there were plenty in the 700-1000 range as well (trick in Seattle is to buy bikes in August when the Google kids and M$ kids are going back to school)
I have several hours of work invested into my bike too, having installed proper fenders, a rear rack, and some safety equipment like lights and bells. That plus the ~$700 I have in it all told would not be enjoyable to replace.
I probably wouldn't notice the difference between some quality swimming gear vs elite (gold medal quality?) swimming gear either. Running shoes, etc.
Since when does a humans ability to determine minute differences in materials actually matter? Why would we care would opinion the biker has of the material? If it's objectively better, and better is defined by measurable, quantifiable metrics - then what do we care? We're not talking about a wine-snob scenario. Where it's purely subjective opinion based. We're talking about performance characteristics that, when used in competitive scenarios, actually matter.
Now does it objectively matter to some "bike snob" just riding to work? Eh, maybe not. Sure he may make it to work 1m faster due to an objectively better frame, but who cares. Yet, the fact that the bikers use case is subjective does not invalidate more objective use cases for better frames/etc.
when the difference we are talking about is "ride quality" then humans noticing is the only thing that matters. If we were talking about speed, then it wouldn't.
Ex-racer here, and I'll back that statement up. Trick is, which expensive doohickey actually saves a second or an ounce? Or more realistically, since seconds and ounces can actually be measured by a layman, is the bottom bracket actually stiffer? Are you two seconds faster today because of the bottom bracket, or because you're just faster? Was it the smoother shifting of the new chain rings that saved those seconds? Maybe you need a $1000 power meter so you can get the telemetry needed to make sure.
IOW, many thousands have been spent by myself and others to gain only perceived, but not measurable, differences. And, oh how the component marketers know that.
Races sometimes are very close, but they are that close only because the pack or a breakaway finish together. When the sprint happens, there are only a few seconds for riders to pull away from each other. In these cases, minor differences in efficiency still don't matter because it is over such a short time frame.
I have a Scandium bike too with an oversized bottom bracket. Being 200lbs, on a climb, I can definitely feel the difference the bottom bracket makes. All the other bikes flex a little when I stand up and crank. Not the Scandium bike. Maybe that's unimportant to you, but I really enjoy the feeling of stomping on the pedals and having the bike immediately respond to the power.
I had the same tyres, pedals, and shoes on my new bike (switched them over). I had a 3-4 km/h improvement on average on the flats instantly. So my new carbon bike was objectively better than my old aluminium bike.
I'm not sure if the improvement was because the bike was brand new, or because it was carbon and had higher end components, but it was definitely there.
EDIT: oh, you already said it: Merida Scultura
It's a very well built frame, it doesn't look the prettiest, but it gets the job done.
If I had to guess, more gear ratios, newer bearings, and rim profile probably all contributed to that. And maybe just a little bit of placebo...
The difference in weight is not capable of causing much difference on flats, since it would just slightly increase rolling resistance. The differences in mechanical efficiency of well-tuned road bikes is also pretty negligible.
There have been some major innovations, but most of what has come out in the last 10 years in road bikes hasn't been great. Lots of new BB standards that all creak, thinner chains, too few spokes, etc.
One such example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNedIJBZpgM