I recently sold my ENVE road wheels to a friend as I’d ridden them for 2 years. Whilst deliberating my next purchase, I put the stock Look branded Corima carbon wheels back on. Riding with my friend, he would start to pull away on downhills coasting when that was me on our previous ride. My point is…there are gains out there (speed, comfort, etc.). When people have hobbies and tinkerers, nothing will stop those people from trying new things if they have the money. It’s in the business’s best interest to give people options because people like choice. If “the best” at X price point isn’t subjective, then there is no competition. When there is no competition, there no profit to be had, with no profit, smart business people will put their time and effort into other industries.
That an entry level carbon frame is better than a modern aluminium one that costs even less (at the same brand). Sounds harsh but the build quality on mass produced carbon frames is abysmal (see channels like Hambini - especially over BB alignment). This is the other factor in the testing. They are not testing the 'typical' wonky frames, they will be cherry picking the 0.1% that came out perfect. Aluminium is much easier to machine accurately so results will be more consistent. So I would put out the hypothesis that a decent alu frame is actually better than a bottom of the range carbon one. Like Josh said, if you are buying that entry carbon frame it is the one that came out in the worst shape at the end of the production line. It is probably so far out geometrically that it is going to grind all your moving parts into paste. The alu one just below that is probably straight as a die. Buy cheap carbon and you are effectively just paying to contribute towards someone's top of the range one. They get the perfect example, you get the cast off but not at 'we would have normally thrown it away' prices.
@@apexdental9649 Yes for those cherry picked ones where the resin comes out as expected. It is a lottery of inconsistency though. I suspect an extra 200g of resin changes the ride characteristics dramatically. At least with Alu you are likely to get a consistent experience. You can guarantee all the marketing, test bikes, media samples are 100% quality. The one you actually buy might be 70%. I don't think people really expect to get that level of discrepancy? Buying a carbon bike is a bit of a gamble. You probably need to buy the $12K one just to ensure you are getting what is advertised. Otherwise you might end up with a wonky uncompliant production reject with a nice paint job. This is the real reason they don't want testing standards. You should look at automotive which has COP requirements (Conformity of product). It basically means they have to put into place quality checking to ensure that the standard is met by every car made, not just the prototype. I get the feeling if they did that with bike frames then 90% of them would end up in the trash. That is some expensive junk we are buying.
Josh is an absolutely fantastic guest. Whenever he is on, you guys achieve just the right balance between pure tech nerd talk and down-to-earth, how the bike industry actually works discussions. A+
I agree totally, love hearing his tech expertise on anything he's been in. I do have to give a little ribbing though, did you see how quiet he got when they brought up pointless lightweight bottle holders, as Josh's Silca company makes a titanium bottle cage...
@@adamolig3865on many videos and on the marginal gains podcast, he’s often quick to point out that there is other good options for products besides Silca are available.
The guy who sold me my bike said the carbon was woven with mithril , "light as a feather and as stiff as dragon scales." He even said the frame glows blue when Mark Cavendish is around.
When Josh is on I click. By the way, the ceramic bearings in one of my wheel sets lasted about three months before they needed replacing. And they were never ridden in the rain. I didn't replace them with ceramic.
I also got caught up in the ceramic hype, and jumped right back off after I bought grade 3 balls for a loose ball bottom bracket. I rode for just a day, disassembled and inspected it, and found nicely polished races. A month of that and I would be buying a new BB. So now I just use the balls as a tool to re-surface, and then go back to grade 10 steel balls. I spend the ceramic $ on better tires.
I ride a lot in the rain in poor Philippine roads and the carbon wheels I used have maybe 30k kms (yes i know the breakline may be wearing thin) but I've replaced the bearings like twice. Ceramic bearings are pretty good.
I always enjoy the GCN Tech shows, but when you see Josh as a guest, you know you're in for a treat. I love how he shares his industry insider knowledge in a straight forward, no hype manner.
The process of measuring the items as they come of the line and sorting them to different "products" based on the measurement is called "binning" (because the better ones go into bin A, the middle ones go to bin B etc.) This is how lots of computer parts get their product number.
@@Emcai01 nobody but this guy keeps asking for a sticker. I told him to go have his own printed up. Quite asking. Whats that got to do with shiting in my cereal.
@@Mavrik-60 1. I am a woman. 2. This is the first time I have ever commented, so I do now know where you got 'keeps asking' from 'that is a cool sticker. I wish I could have one' 3. I work with vinyl. If I really wanted, I could make the sticker. But, if the design is legally owned by GCN, I would rather buy one.
Josh admitted that he missed the boat with ceramic bearings, and, in an ironic twist, he ended up sinking a boat named "Ceramic Speed." It's fair play and a display of honesty, qualities that are unfortunately too rare in this industry. While the auto industry has its independent and verifiable benchmarks like MPG, 0-60, top speed, lap times, and power/weight ratios, the bike industry relies on marketing! It's puzzling why there isn't standardized testing to verify a bike's performance. Indoor testing eliminates the weather factor. Now, the question arises: What is the average power required to ride at constant 15mph, 20mph, 25mph, 30mph, and so on, for 1 hour? You can also calculate the weight of the rider into or out of the results. Maybe the bike industry already does this?
> What is the average power required to ride at constant 15mph, 20mph, 25mph, 30mph. That is totally up to aerodynamics really more than weight, at least on flat ground. What is the actual CF of an average rider? That totally changes how the frame actually performs in real life vs. a frame in a wind tunnel with someone wearing aero kit (or nobody on it at all). How do we define an average rider? I someone from the Netherlands sitting on a city bike an average rider since there are more of them then pretty much everywhere else? Or is someone decked out in Lycra an average rider? My constant 15/20/25/30 speeds on Zwift for anything more than a short timeframe require far less watts then in real life, because in real life I'm not as aero as on Zwift, nor could I be because it would make me sad and cranky to hold that kind of position for as long or doing a short little test in a wind tunnel all kitted out in fancy gear.
What is true for wide low pressure tubeless bicycle tyres is also true for frames, wheels, helmets bars & stems etc etc etc, manufacturers devise tests to support the marketing performance claims they make. The bike industry has descended into farce, it's ridiculous. Any "advancements" made since the end of the 10/11 speed, cable actuated gears/rim brake era are not justified by the increased cost to consumers. The performance difference between a 2009 and a 2024 top spec bike is marginal at best, and yet the cost (adjusted for inflation) is massive. To be completely honest, the price of a top spec bike in 2009 was already overinflated, but compared to today's prices, it's made to appear completely reasonable. I understand why a bike company makes hyperbolic performance claims about their product, but I don't understand why there are so many consumers who uncritically fall for it hook line and sinker. I honestly thought the cycling community, being so science driven, would be a lot more naturally skeptical of marketing claims. Alas I was wrong. Read any GCN comment section and you'll find it's replete with people regurgitating rote learned ad copy talking points to justify their purchase of the latest over priced, over hyped, unnecessary product that for all intents and purposes does nothing more than provide a temporary novelty sugar hit of enthusiasm that'll wear off as soon as the next "latest and greatest" product is released. I keep referencing Si's comparison of Dan's Cervelo S3 and his Canyon Aeroad because it's informative. For all the advancements and standard changes that promised "better performance" the modern bike was only a hand full of seconds faster, and only on the flat segments of the test route, with the S3 taking back time on the climb. And even then the performance difference could have been reduced (or even inverted) if the old bike had been fitted to Si's bike fit preferences. There's nothing wrong with old bikes, in fact they have something modern cookie cutter bikes don't, they have character. I'd urge anyone who's reluctant to get into cycling because of the price "barrier to entry" to look at the used bike classifieds. There are some truly great bikes available for very little money, and they're so easy to service and maintain. In short, you don't need electronic gears, disk brakes, through axles, conical steerer tubes, oversize BB shells, wide low pressure tubeless tyres, hookless rims, internal cable/hydraulic line routing to enjoy cycling.
The darkest secret of carbon cycling frames is that the finished quality of the important parts is almost universally appalling when it comes to carbon. Bottom brackets, head tubes and the dropouts are critical for performance, safety and bearing life and realistically the quality of these in a $50 kids steel bike will often be better. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the frames look gorgeous but the actual working parts of them are generally out of spec of even the manufacturers that create the specs. The bike selling industry should QC and document how bad the bikes are and something may change.
The motorcycle industry also has 'A-kit' parts... they are jus the parts which are the best tolerances ... they are kept for sale at higher prices, and/or built into racing sets.
Chris Boardman aero tested in the Motor Industry Research Association Climatic Wind Tunnel in Leicestershire, England. "I know, because I was there." So was Mike Burrows. :-)
My SILCA titanium water bottle cage broke after 6years and the factory replaced it to me through local bike shop NO CHARGE ;) so awesome thank you SILCA . I’m from Victoria BC CAN and BROAD CITY CYCLES helped me out .
it's more the user than the bike that matters (contrary to F1 as Ollie said). Also, we as cyclists are guilty of the too hardcore hype. I got a MTB, a road bike and an all-terrain bike -Pathlite 6 2021 with 40mm tyres- and the all-terrain bike is my favourite by FAR! It's not the most aero, but it's durable, it's fast, it has a great drivetrain and the wheel clearance (which accetps even mtb tyres) is ideal, 'cos imho 35mm to 42mm is like the sweet spot for road cycling imho, and a bit of mixed terrain. It's the best bike I've ever had and I wouldn't change it for a 15000€ bike
When high power LEDs are made at the end they get tested for how much light they emit at given power input. Best ones easily bive 20% more than worst ones. They get sorted into "bins" based on this and sold at different prices. If you want the higher efficiency you pay the extra price even though the emitter was made on the same production line as the cheaper option. I am not surprised if bike frame manufacturers do the same. If in some frames the vacuum bags sit a little better and more excess resin got out then sell them for extra money to those who will pay 1000 bucks extra to get it 100g lighter.
I get that and agree to a point, but that extra resin isn't just weight. It changes the stiffness, flex, compliance, brittleness and balance of the frame. It also may create failure points if it is massed in a particular spot leading to a tube having a large differential in stiffness over a short span of material. It also throws off the alignment of the seating for mechanical parts leading to wonky internals for BBs and head tubes. In essence it is substandard. The LEDs functional capabilities are tested and sold as such and so still perform as spec'd for that binned part. What testing and conformity process are the bike manufacturers using? I suspect none. No COP on bikes and therefore the marketing is likely BS for most of the products coming off the production line.
@@codemonkeyalpha9057 you have a point. The cheaper version really may have resin excess where it does more damage than just add weight if it creates a stress concentration point. And testing for actual mechanical properties would be difficult to design even if they wanted to do it. So the pricing vs real value is not as good as with the LEDs and similar products. But I still think it is not a complete BS if they put the same fiber layout in the mold and the sell the lightest at high price as "best we can make it" and the rest at lower price as "good enough for normal people". Nobody will ever pay for aircraft level quality control in bicycle composites so this inconsistency will remain in the production. As long as nothing they sell is dangerously low quality I have no problem with them selling the best ones for more. Assuming there really is a difference and it is not like 2% different only...
@@hebijirik I guess that depends on how variable the output actually is. Have you seen Hambini's channel and seen what sort of state some carbon frames (from major brands) get shipped in? How many people actually have their bikes checked? Or do they just assume they are buying something safe and mechanically sound? Should they have to assume otherwise? Still it is the lack of transparency that I think is underhanded. People don't think they are getting production cast offs, I wonder if the willingness to spend such massive sums would still be there if they did? I'd like at least to see the testing done on the worst 'approved' part. What they advertise should be the guaranteed minimum spec, not the best possible outcome if you win the manufacturing lottery. Otherwise there is no impetus to put any effort into QA at all.
@@hebijirik On another point we are all aware that a lot of what you are paying for is R&D, marketing and for sponsoring teams. Given that the downgraded frames probably don't represent the capabilities of that R&D and are not representative of what teams are riding, or what is marketed, then should they be heaping those costs on those frames. I'd actually support a greater price discrepancy. Triple the frame price of those that match the R&D characteristics, and sell the bulk misfires at material + labour cost plus a modest profit. It would help keep riding affordable, and I suspect those buying 'halo' products would still buy them regardless.
@@codemonkeyalpha9057 I know Hambini's channel and I know what you mean. Some of the things he had there shouldn't have left that factory. But with the carbon fetish cyclists seem to have I guess there is a lot of incentive to sell everything they make as long as they think the consequences of someone crashing will not reach them. And that's very bad. I think you have a good idea: sell the just safe enough frames for "not a loss" price and the ones that came out really good at a price that covers the R&D etc. I think you are right and people would still buy that.
The practice of sorting stuff off of the same manufacturing line to good, better, best and selling them as different products is called "binning" and is done everywhere; particularly in CPUs and Graphics cards
I've been going down the chain waxing rabbit hole lately watching all of Josh's videos and now you post an interview with him. Can't seem to get away from the guy lately 🤣
Great video. Love the chats with Josh. But can you please fix the focus in the future? It’s quite odd to see the bike frame and tools on the rear wall in perfect focus while Alex, Olly, and the guest are blurred.
It would be fun to see the Tour de France for example enforce all Aluminium bikes, or Steel, or something other than Carbon and see how the results would compare to other years.
Races like the tour mostly get decided at a few (relatively) short sections. 99% of the race the riders are just trying to get each other a little more tired before the important bit. So, most of the time, they aren't really putting that much pressure on the frame, it is only at the few important sections when they go all out that there would be a difference. (and it wouldn't be a massive one even then) So I don't think there would be a significant difference for the total race time. You probably wouldn't be able to really make that comparison in any case, since the race is different each year, they change the route and things like the weather can make a difference too.
Others have commented their appreciation and enjoyment of this piece, which is great. Imho, just for me, inexplicably [as on paper he should be riveting]...he bores me to tears, like, he could've bored the channel tunnel from one side to the other in the course of one sunday afternoon...like, just sucks the entire oxygen content out of the room and no, I can't watch to the end. Agghhhhh.
@@andrewmcalister3462 not sure if you noticed the price increase of all major brands. Labour and material prices didnt increase that much... Its clearly not money they are looking after...
@GCN, placing the guest on one end and the hosts on the other would work a lot better. Sticking the guest in the middle looks like they have whiplash, swiveling their head 180° to answer all the hosts' questions/comments.
It‘s typical „sold to end user“ stuff. In industrial stuff, the datasheet means „does 100% guaranteed match this value, even under worst case conditions“. Imagine a „frame weight max. xyz gramms for 60 cm model with the wildes paint job“ in the bike industry.
Josh is one of my favorite guests. Next time will you please focus the camera on his (and your) face(s) instead of the tool pegboard in the background?
The frameset weight choosing of which model it will be is very analagous to the microchip world. They make a number of chips and the ones that work perfectly are the premium chips, but the ones that dont work properly (but enough) get chosen as the cheaper less functional model. End of the day its the same chip.
One myth they mentioned but didn’t discuss was Josh saying “cheaper labor cost makes products cheaper.” My only question then is, “where are motorbike parts made?”
Cheaper labor costs makes more profit for shareholders and investors. There’s no trickle down effect for the buyer. People don’t understand capitalism and how it only works for a few wealthy elite.
I think it’s a given in any product category marketing is doing its seductive best. For me, skip the stiffer, lighter, more aero and buy the best bike you can afford and then enjoy it. So, I bought a Vitus Vitesse with SRAM etap. More expensive than some very good bikes a lot cheaper than a *lot* of others and I smile every time because I know the bike is better than me and I love riding it. And then just sit back and enjoy the pro models - they’re a different league
Well, I don’t know what to believe anymore but - in 2013 I bought some Zipp Firecrests (303). Absolutely the worst wheel I’ve owned. So flexible that I was 2 cogs up the block - on the same hill - compared to when I was running Fulcrum Racing 1s. Switched to Campagnolo Boras and they were unbelievable good in comparison.
Not surprised about the frame weight selection at the end of production. And semiconductor manufacturing It's called binning. The same chip off the same wafer tested faster or lower power or whatever the criteria is gets put into a different bin than the one next to it that measures with a different value.
The marketing is the con that is why cycling is expensive the lube company's claims are wild aero light weight the difference is arguably enjoy what you ride
Something you dont need that doesnt affect how your bike rides is the super duper high end pedals. Usually the second or third tiers down are very marginally changed, have almost all the same features, and you wont feel a difference. Some brands even have 6 or 7 tiers, like in the case of the Look road pedal line or the Time pedal lines, road or off road. That top tier $300 pedal? You dont need that. Back off a bit. As a cross guy, ive been racing on the Look X Track carbon Race pedals- one step down from the top notch pedal. Marginally lighter than the regular carbon pedal but it was only $5 more and both were on sale so i did it for $5 bucks. Top end only difference was a Titanium spindle, and while that is nice, it makes no real difference for me on the cross course. Im a lightweight rider, about 160 pounds, and the chances of the stock axle failing is slim, even if i put that on a MTB drop of 8 feet. Just saying.
Question for Josh, is Silca working on a special tubeless sealant for road tubeless? It seems we have good tubeless wheels and tires for road, but not the right sealant.
RE Aero Testing: You standardise a test format, yaw angles that must be tested, etc. etc. If every bike/wheel has to do the same test, then you end up with a fair benchmark, irrelevant if that testing is flawed or new research suggested it's not the best method of testing. Then ZIPP can say on the standard test we are A- but in our extra testing we are better in this test A B and C which is important because X Y Z
What a top bloke Josh is! Really enjoy the videos he appears in, articulate, knowledgeable, humorous and hugely entertaining for what could be quite a dry subject. More of this please.
Re: rider choices and tech…I recently saw someone asking Lance Armstrong what tire setup he thought he’d be riding today, his answer was “what ever the propeller heads said was best”.
Thank you! Great segment. I like the shop but Alex looks like his neck is getting uncomfortable starting around 2:15 forward. Have ya'll considered more traditional cinematic interview setup? or latenite talkshow "newsdesk" host format for the longer interviews? A GCN Tie and red sportcoat?
Thank you sooo much about mentioning the 6 ceramic bearing inside the wheel hub. I almost pay $900 for those little marginal gain I thought it will actually make me go fast when it's not because I'm not a pro lol
@@chrisridesbicycles What are you on about? The varying labour cost is to do with cost of living for a particular country, not lower safety standards. China has so much manufacturing expertise and high safety standards these days because western companies have essentially given away their manufacturing techniques and trade secrets. A good example are electronics - the USA are falling behind in chip research and development compared to China (this is something that the USA have identified as a serious threat). It's incredible that westerners still have this superiority complex towards 'made in China' when China literally have all the expertise. A good example are Tesla vehicles: the ones made in China are better than the ones made in the USA.
About lighter tyres and tubes: are we really talking spending millions in developement vs hundred quid component on one bike or is it rather about a mil in development vs tens of mil in production for the whole lineup?😑
I really don’t know why you found what Josh so surprising about frames, this happens industry wide. Painted speaker v natural wood finishes. The ones with not so perfect wood grains get painted. Computer and binned processors apple do this for example with there Apple silicon. It stops waste within the industry. And they just market it as something else or brand it a different model within the range.
From my point of view, bike brands are cheating us with that Marketing data. I would require them to measure stiffness and aerodynamics as per a normalised and certified test carried about by an official external certifications company. All measured with same parameters would bring us the real data and comparison. In addition to that, it would be great to know at which ranges of power generated that increased stiffness will be appreciated by the rider. I assume the effect is not starting from 0 W. Same as they do for Watts saving at X kmh when improving aerodynamics. What do you think?
Impossibly expensive and no one would agree to do it. That doesn’t work in any other industry why would it work here? Marketing as a profession would disappear
@Millicente well, I disagree. I work in the Security Industry and all companies manufacturing Safes need to do standardise and normalised test vy an external company to get the certification about time before being able to open the safe or time resistance against fire. If other companies must do that, why not the bike Industry? You must proof what you are saying or selling to your customers.
@@fabianbv82 That sounds incredibly basic though. It sounds similar to bike companies needing to make sure their bikes don't break the moment a human being sits on it, or falls apart when going above 5mph. We're talking about certification on the feature level. That would be like creating certification requirements for how well a gaming pc plays video games, or how long a frisbee actually flies in the air, or perhaps how good the buttons, or whatever interface options there are, feel on a safe. Past the "this is the minimum requirement for it to do what it's intended," or "this is the minimum of what anyone buying x product expects," making companies agree to testing standards for aspects that separate them from competitors is impossible.
@Millicente well, I think we will never find a common point of view. But, always nice to share different thoughts. I still think that of they say that are faster or stiffer than X, they should provide same evidences of the results against the other brands, specially, if that is the reason for selling more. You cannot "sell" something without real demonstrable data. Anyway, thanks for your comments.
He did prettymuch answer it. The only significant difference is in aero bikes. Jonas grabs most of his time in mountain climbs, so no earo bike. The rest he sits behind team mates so aero doesn't really matter for him except for maybe flat time trials. So yes, he probably could win with a lower range bike.
I think a big misconception from the manufacturers to the consumers is that they arent always talking to you. When the new Domane came out and was maybe stiffer, a bit lighter and slightly more aero... they weren't talking to the previous gen Domane owners expecting them to dump their bike and replace it with a near identical example. They're focusing on the people that might have a 12 year old bike and are considering a handful of options from a few leading companies. They want to steal Diverge customers and people debating a Canyon or a Giant. Do some upgrade to the newest gen each time? Sure... a small amount. But realistically, the marginal gains are aimed at leaning you towards their brand or model in the first place.
Super interesting. I love it when Josh is on. I'm currently in the market for a new bike for endurance racing and I'm comparing everything from Ribble to cervello to specialized to Bianchi and I find myself saying well bloody he'll, what's the difference? If you could do a nerdy video on here's what to look at in the white papers, here's where to find them, that'd be great. I'm about to say I'm not buying any of them and bust out my helicopter maintenance, flight, and Art degrees ( I have 9 degrees so far) and experiment with building my own and selling models on the market at $29, 000 so it can be said that it's "available to the public on the market" and race that. Oh yes and: -that green shirt on Alex is a great new choice. Great color. -Ollie's hair was on point today-very dapper -it'd be a fun race to have riders both pro and amateur show up and they draw a number and race what they get.
Check out Cruzbike V20. I can stay on my titanium road bike for about 3 hours before things start hurting, but I can sit on my V20 for 8 hours, and not only is it more comfortable, it is significantly faster on less power. Road bike = 310 watts for 40kph. V20 = 210 watts for 40kph. If you really want a road bike I'll sell you my titanium one since all it is doing now is hanging on the wall, cannibalized for parts.
#askgcntech They've put salt on the streets to prevent ice forming where I live. Should I stop riding outdoors until the temperatures rise? How much of an issue is it going to be for my components and bike overall if I keep riding on salted streets? Will it be a problem even if I wash my bike afterwards?
~4:50 To the point of "cherrypicking the best result" -- just post all of the results, good ones and bad. All it requires is for the public to be statistical and aerodynamic experts!
Since there is no regulatory agency to validate company claims, there is a lot of marketing myths employed to sell product. Oh, and what myths were busted?
That the only way to win the TdF on a specific bike is if your rear tire is 28mm, tubeless, inflated to exactly 72.742psi, your 25mm tubed front tires is inflated to 96.427psi, with a Xentis Mark 1 TT rim on front, a 2017 Corima disc wheel in back, waxed chain, seat at a 1.2 percent nose up position, your 2016 Tarmac frame waxed left handed in alternating clockwise and counterclockwise 3cm circles on an odd number Wednesday in a month ending in "ber", only in a leap year, and your bar tape removed by a Leprechaun who enjoys pegging in his free time.
“They are not doing it to be rich, they are doing it to be more competitive in price”. I like you Josh but that is a BS statement! The cost of a Trek Madone 5 years ago 100% USA made was cheaper than today’s China Made! Also they are 100% USA made bikes ( Carbon, Ti and Carbon, Ti, Steel ) that cost the same or less than a big brand made in China.
Did Alex get a really BAD bottle cage one time and lost his water at a crucial moment? 🙂This is not the first video where he has complained about super lightweight and expensive cages that won't hold a bottle. I assume it happened to him. The rest of us buy the ones made by unicorns (nice one Oillie!) that weight next to nothing for $15 for a PAIR that are stiff enough to hold a (big) bottle.... Inquiring minds want to know what scarred Alex so badly.......
Wind tunnel test are crap if they only test it at the front of the bicycle !!!! How about side winds !!!! That could allmost stop a bicycle in windy conditions !!!!
Build location does matter; if you send all the manufacturing jobs to places where they don't care about your pollution and labor laws to save a few bucks your only fooling yourselves and diminishing diversity of jobs where you live and seal your dependence on others, which isn't good for any people in the long run, especially when your near slave labor on the other side of the world gets smart and starts charging prices you can't afford for things you can't make for yourselves because you vote for ridiculous localized virtue legislation, while not wanting to pay prices you would demand yourself if you were the ones doing the work; you people are laughably disconnected from reality.
What cycling myths would you like Josh to unpick ⚙? Let us know 👇
You can feel compliance in an expensive carbon frame vs alloy.
high end steel beats unbranded Carbon/Alloy frame?
I recently sold my ENVE road wheels to a friend as I’d ridden them for 2 years. Whilst deliberating my next purchase, I put the stock Look branded Corima carbon wheels back on. Riding with my friend, he would start to pull away on downhills coasting when that was me on our previous ride.
My point is…there are gains out there (speed, comfort, etc.). When people have hobbies and tinkerers, nothing will stop those people from trying new things if they have the money. It’s in the business’s best interest to give people options because people like choice. If “the best” at X price point isn’t subjective, then there is no competition. When there is no competition, there no profit to be had, with no profit, smart business people will put their time and effort into other industries.
That an entry level carbon frame is better than a modern aluminium one that costs even less (at the same brand). Sounds harsh but the build quality on mass produced carbon frames is abysmal (see channels like Hambini - especially over BB alignment). This is the other factor in the testing. They are not testing the 'typical' wonky frames, they will be cherry picking the 0.1% that came out perfect. Aluminium is much easier to machine accurately so results will be more consistent.
So I would put out the hypothesis that a decent alu frame is actually better than a bottom of the range carbon one. Like Josh said, if you are buying that entry carbon frame it is the one that came out in the worst shape at the end of the production line. It is probably so far out geometrically that it is going to grind all your moving parts into paste. The alu one just below that is probably straight as a die. Buy cheap carbon and you are effectively just paying to contribute towards someone's top of the range one. They get the perfect example, you get the cast off but not at 'we would have normally thrown it away' prices.
@@apexdental9649 Yes for those cherry picked ones where the resin comes out as expected. It is a lottery of inconsistency though. I suspect an extra 200g of resin changes the ride characteristics dramatically. At least with Alu you are likely to get a consistent experience. You can guarantee all the marketing, test bikes, media samples are 100% quality. The one you actually buy might be 70%. I don't think people really expect to get that level of discrepancy? Buying a carbon bike is a bit of a gamble. You probably need to buy the $12K one just to ensure you are getting what is advertised. Otherwise you might end up with a wonky uncompliant production reject with a nice paint job.
This is the real reason they don't want testing standards. You should look at automotive which has COP requirements (Conformity of product). It basically means they have to put into place quality checking to ensure that the standard is met by every car made, not just the prototype. I get the feeling if they did that with bike frames then 90% of them would end up in the trash. That is some expensive junk we are buying.
Josh is an absolutely fantastic guest. Whenever he is on, you guys achieve just the right balance between pure tech nerd talk and down-to-earth, how the bike industry actually works discussions. A+
I agree totally, love hearing his tech expertise on anything he's been in. I do have to give a little ribbing though, did you see how quiet he got when they brought up pointless lightweight bottle holders, as Josh's Silca company makes a titanium bottle cage...
@@adamolig3865on many videos and on the marginal gains podcast, he’s often quick to point out that there is other good options for products besides Silca are available.
We love having Josh on the channel! He really is a fountain of bike knowledge... maybe the biggest bike nerd out there?
It's worth listening to or watching his marginal gains podcast which is also on TH-cam now.
The guy who sold me my bike said the carbon was woven with mithril , "light as a feather and as stiff as dragon scales."
He even said the frame glows blue when Mark Cavendish is around.
Did you buy this bike from The Lord of the Bikes Store?😂
When Josh is on I click. By the way, the ceramic bearings in one of my wheel sets lasted about three months before they needed replacing. And they were never ridden in the rain. I didn't replace them with ceramic.
I also got caught up in the ceramic hype, and jumped right back off after I bought grade 3 balls for a loose ball bottom bracket. I rode for just a day, disassembled and inspected it, and found nicely polished races. A month of that and I would be buying a new BB. So now I just use the balls as a tool to re-surface, and then go back to grade 10 steel balls. I spend the ceramic $ on better tires.
I ride a lot in the rain in poor Philippine roads and the carbon wheels I used have maybe 30k kms (yes i know the breakline may be wearing thin) but I've replaced the bearings like twice. Ceramic bearings are pretty good.
I always enjoy the GCN Tech shows, but when you see Josh as a guest, you know you're in for a treat. I love how he shares his industry insider knowledge in a straight forward, no hype manner.
Always a wonderful video when Josh gets paired up with GCN's dynamic duo. 👍
Never a dull day if Josh is in the office 🎬
The process of measuring the items as they come of the line and sorting them to different "products" based on the measurement is called "binning" (because the better ones go into bin A, the middle ones go to bin B etc.)
This is how lots of computer parts get their product number.
I just saw your comment after I had already posted. Essentially the same thing....
I really want that "UCI you have no jurisdiction here" sticker 😂
So go to the local vinal shop/decal shop and have them make you one for heaven sake.......
@@Mavrik-60 who shat in your cornflakes?
@@Emcai01 Someone who doesn't ride a UCI legal bike. Like me ;)
@@Emcai01 nobody but this guy keeps asking for a sticker. I told him to go have his own printed up. Quite asking. Whats that got to do with shiting in my cereal.
@@Mavrik-60
1. I am a woman.
2. This is the first time I have ever commented, so I do now know where you got 'keeps asking' from 'that is a cool sticker. I wish I could have one'
3. I work with vinyl. If I really wanted, I could make the sticker. But, if the design is legally owned by GCN, I would rather buy one.
Josh admitted that he missed the boat with ceramic bearings, and, in an ironic twist, he ended up sinking a boat named "Ceramic Speed." It's fair play and a display of honesty, qualities that are unfortunately too rare in this industry. While the auto industry has its independent and verifiable benchmarks like MPG, 0-60, top speed, lap times, and power/weight ratios, the bike industry relies on marketing! It's puzzling why there isn't standardized testing to verify a bike's performance. Indoor testing eliminates the weather factor. Now, the question arises: What is the average power required to ride at constant 15mph, 20mph, 25mph, 30mph, and so on, for 1 hour? You can also calculate the weight of the rider into or out of the results. Maybe the bike industry already does this?
> What is the average power required to ride at constant 15mph, 20mph, 25mph, 30mph.
That is totally up to aerodynamics really more than weight, at least on flat ground. What is the actual CF of an average rider? That totally changes how the frame actually performs in real life vs. a frame in a wind tunnel with someone wearing aero kit (or nobody on it at all). How do we define an average rider? I someone from the Netherlands sitting on a city bike an average rider since there are more of them then pretty much everywhere else? Or is someone decked out in Lycra an average rider?
My constant 15/20/25/30 speeds on Zwift for anything more than a short timeframe require far less watts then in real life, because in real life I'm not as aero as on Zwift, nor could I be because it would make me sad and cranky to hold that kind of position for as long or doing a short little test in a wind tunnel all kitted out in fancy gear.
Ask your GCN Deutsch about a bike mag in Germany that does full bike reviews. They are seen as the closest thing to a consistent Industy standard.
th-cam.com/video/HMKWyNdEfvM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Y95RL5DVZf0BPV9y
Tour Magazine -
Indeed…seems like translation is required. German people seem to follow English content. But never the other way around…
They did mention the Tour Magazine at some point in this video
@@TheSkilllor yes…you are right
“More betterer”! That’s perfect.
The way that Ollie says "Jonas Vingegaard" is transcripted by TH-cam as "yona's finger gun". That's sweet.
Love having Josh on the show, what a New Year's blessing!
What is true for wide low pressure tubeless bicycle tyres is also true for frames, wheels, helmets bars & stems etc etc etc, manufacturers devise tests to support the marketing performance claims they make. The bike industry has descended into farce, it's ridiculous. Any "advancements" made since the end of the 10/11 speed, cable actuated gears/rim brake era are not justified by the increased cost to consumers. The performance difference between a 2009 and a 2024 top spec bike is marginal at best, and yet the cost (adjusted for inflation) is massive. To be completely honest, the price of a top spec bike in 2009 was already overinflated, but compared to today's prices, it's made to appear completely reasonable.
I understand why a bike company makes hyperbolic performance claims about their product, but I don't understand why there are so many consumers who uncritically fall for it hook line and sinker. I honestly thought the cycling community, being so science driven, would be a lot more naturally skeptical of marketing claims. Alas I was wrong. Read any GCN comment section and you'll find it's replete with people regurgitating rote learned ad copy talking points to justify their purchase of the latest over priced, over hyped, unnecessary product that for all intents and purposes does nothing more than provide a temporary novelty sugar hit of enthusiasm that'll wear off as soon as the next "latest and greatest" product is released.
I keep referencing Si's comparison of Dan's Cervelo S3 and his Canyon Aeroad because it's informative. For all the advancements and standard changes that promised "better performance" the modern bike was only a hand full of seconds faster, and only on the flat segments of the test route, with the S3 taking back time on the climb. And even then the performance difference could have been reduced (or even inverted) if the old bike had been fitted to Si's bike fit preferences. There's nothing wrong with old bikes, in fact they have something modern cookie cutter bikes don't, they have character. I'd urge anyone who's reluctant to get into cycling because of the price "barrier to entry" to look at the used bike classifieds. There are some truly great bikes available for very little money, and they're so easy to service and maintain.
In short, you don't need electronic gears, disk brakes, through axles, conical steerer tubes, oversize BB shells, wide low pressure tubeless tyres, hookless rims, internal cable/hydraulic line routing to enjoy cycling.
Finally...someone who speaks without an accent. :)
Best show in a long time! brilliant guest!
The darkest secret of carbon cycling frames is that the finished quality of the important parts is almost universally appalling when it comes to carbon. Bottom brackets, head tubes and the dropouts are critical for performance, safety and bearing life and realistically the quality of these in a $50 kids steel bike will often be better. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the frames look gorgeous but the actual working parts of them are generally out of spec of even the manufacturers that create the specs. The bike selling industry should QC and document how bad the bikes are and something may change.
He's right about ceramic bearings.
The motorcycle industry also has 'A-kit' parts... they are jus the parts which are the best tolerances ... they are kept for sale at higher prices, and/or built into racing sets.
Chris Boardman aero tested in the Motor Industry Research Association Climatic Wind Tunnel in Leicestershire, England.
"I know, because I was there." So was Mike Burrows. :-)
My SILCA titanium water bottle cage broke after 6years and the factory replaced it to me through local bike shop NO CHARGE ;) so awesome thank you SILCA . I’m from Victoria BC CAN and BROAD CITY CYCLES helped me out .
Glad to hear the truth regarding ceramic bearings come out. Nobody rips you off like CeramicSpeed.
it's more the user than the bike that matters (contrary to F1 as Ollie said). Also, we as cyclists are guilty of the too hardcore hype. I got a MTB, a road bike and an all-terrain bike -Pathlite 6 2021 with 40mm tyres- and the all-terrain bike is my favourite by FAR! It's not the most aero, but it's durable, it's fast, it has a great drivetrain and the wheel clearance (which accetps even mtb tyres) is ideal, 'cos imho 35mm to 42mm is like the sweet spot for road cycling imho, and a bit of mixed terrain. It's the best bike I've ever had and I wouldn't change it for a 15000€ bike
When high power LEDs are made at the end they get tested for how much light they emit at given power input. Best ones easily bive 20% more than worst ones. They get sorted into "bins" based on this and sold at different prices. If you want the higher efficiency you pay the extra price even though the emitter was made on the same production line as the cheaper option.
I am not surprised if bike frame manufacturers do the same. If in some frames the vacuum bags sit a little better and more excess resin got out then sell them for extra money to those who will pay 1000 bucks extra to get it 100g lighter.
I get that and agree to a point, but that extra resin isn't just weight. It changes the stiffness, flex, compliance, brittleness and balance of the frame. It also may create failure points if it is massed in a particular spot leading to a tube having a large differential in stiffness over a short span of material. It also throws off the alignment of the seating for mechanical parts leading to wonky internals for BBs and head tubes. In essence it is substandard. The LEDs functional capabilities are tested and sold as such and so still perform as spec'd for that binned part. What testing and conformity process are the bike manufacturers using? I suspect none. No COP on bikes and therefore the marketing is likely BS for most of the products coming off the production line.
@@codemonkeyalpha9057 you have a point. The cheaper version really may have resin excess where it does more damage than just add weight if it creates a stress concentration point. And testing for actual mechanical properties would be difficult to design even if they wanted to do it. So the pricing vs real value is not as good as with the LEDs and similar products. But I still think it is not a complete BS if they put the same fiber layout in the mold and the sell the lightest at high price as "best we can make it" and the rest at lower price as "good enough for normal people". Nobody will ever pay for aircraft level quality control in bicycle composites so this inconsistency will remain in the production. As long as nothing they sell is dangerously low quality I have no problem with them selling the best ones for more. Assuming there really is a difference and it is not like 2% different only...
@@hebijirik I guess that depends on how variable the output actually is. Have you seen Hambini's channel and seen what sort of state some carbon frames (from major brands) get shipped in? How many people actually have their bikes checked? Or do they just assume they are buying something safe and mechanically sound? Should they have to assume otherwise? Still it is the lack of transparency that I think is underhanded. People don't think they are getting production cast offs, I wonder if the willingness to spend such massive sums would still be there if they did? I'd like at least to see the testing done on the worst 'approved' part. What they advertise should be the guaranteed minimum spec, not the best possible outcome if you win the manufacturing lottery. Otherwise there is no impetus to put any effort into QA at all.
@@hebijirik On another point we are all aware that a lot of what you are paying for is R&D, marketing and for sponsoring teams. Given that the downgraded frames probably don't represent the capabilities of that R&D and are not representative of what teams are riding, or what is marketed, then should they be heaping those costs on those frames. I'd actually support a greater price discrepancy. Triple the frame price of those that match the R&D characteristics, and sell the bulk misfires at material + labour cost plus a modest profit. It would help keep riding affordable, and I suspect those buying 'halo' products would still buy them regardless.
@@codemonkeyalpha9057 I know Hambini's channel and I know what you mean. Some of the things he had there shouldn't have left that factory. But with the carbon fetish cyclists seem to have I guess there is a lot of incentive to sell everything they make as long as they think the consequences of someone crashing will not reach them. And that's very bad. I think you have a good idea: sell the just safe enough frames for "not a loss" price and the ones that came out really good at a price that covers the R&D etc. I think you are right and people would still buy that.
The practice of sorting stuff off of the same manufacturing line to good, better, best and selling them as different products is called "binning" and is done everywhere; particularly in CPUs and Graphics cards
I've been going down the chain waxing rabbit hole lately watching all of Josh's videos and now you post an interview with him. Can't seem to get away from the guy lately 🤣
@29:55…that lightweight bottle cage comment looked to hit Josh a little hard!
Brilliant sesh with Josh...more, please.
Great video. Love the chats with Josh. But can you please fix the focus in the future? It’s quite odd to see the bike frame and tools on the rear wall in perfect focus while Alex, Olly, and the guest are blurred.
Those tools pay the bills!
Love Josh's chats, its so revealing and fun.
It would be fun to see the Tour de France for example enforce all Aluminium bikes, or Steel, or something other than Carbon and see how the results would compare to other years.
Races like the tour mostly get decided at a few (relatively) short sections.
99% of the race the riders are just trying to get each other a little more tired before the important bit.
So, most of the time, they aren't really putting that much pressure on the frame, it is only at the few important sections when they go all out that there would be a difference. (and it wouldn't be a massive one even then)
So I don't think there would be a significant difference for the total race time.
You probably wouldn't be able to really make that comparison in any case, since the race is different each year, they change the route and things like the weather can make a difference too.
Didn’t Sagan ride an aluminum frame for a couple TdF stages in the last 5-6 years? He was probably right in there with the bunch.
Happily listen to Josh talk tech’ and Eng’ any day 👍
Others have commented their appreciation and enjoyment of this piece, which is great.
Imho, just for me, inexplicably [as on paper he should be riveting]...he bores me to tears, like, he could've bored the channel tunnel from one side to the other in the course of one sunday afternoon...like, just sucks the entire oxygen content out of the room and no, I can't watch to the end. Agghhhhh.
Josh is such a great addition to this show!
"Noone is doing it for the money" lol
yeah lol it is always such cap when people in the bike industry say that
Not sure if you've noticed how many brands have gone out of business or are in bankruptcy in the past year?
There are literally hundreds of bike brands and the competition is fierce. The overhead and margins are thin compared to other industries.
@@andrewmcalister3462 not sure if you noticed the price increase of all major brands. Labour and material prices didnt increase that much... Its clearly not money they are looking after...
@GCN, placing the guest on one end and the hosts on the other would work a lot better. Sticking the guest in the middle looks like they have whiplash, swiveling their head 180° to answer all the hosts' questions/comments.
Josh at a tennis match.
It‘s typical „sold to end user“ stuff. In industrial stuff, the datasheet means „does 100% guaranteed match this value, even under worst case conditions“. Imagine a „frame weight max. xyz gramms for 60 cm model with the wildes paint job“ in the bike industry.
Including top notch tires and tubes (or lack of tubes) also makes a bike feel fantastic on a test ride. Comfort and speed are much improved.
Josh is one of my favorite guests. Next time will you please focus the camera on his (and your) face(s) instead of the tool pegboard in the background?
The frameset weight choosing of which model it will be is very analagous to the microchip world. They make a number of chips and the ones that work perfectly are the premium chips, but the ones that dont work properly (but enough) get chosen as the cheaper less functional model. End of the day its the same chip.
One myth they mentioned but didn’t discuss was Josh saying “cheaper labor cost makes products cheaper.” My only question then is, “where are motorbike parts made?”
Cheaper labor costs makes more profit for shareholders and investors. There’s no trickle down effect for the buyer. People don’t understand capitalism and how it only works for a few wealthy elite.
Apparently the Bike Manufacturer Marketing worked when the Overweight MAMIL is caught bragging about how fast his new bike is...
I think it’s a given in any product category marketing is doing its seductive best. For me, skip the stiffer, lighter, more aero and buy the best bike you can afford and then enjoy it. So, I bought a Vitus Vitesse with SRAM etap. More expensive than some very good bikes a lot cheaper than a *lot* of others and I smile every time because I know the bike is better than me and I love riding it. And then just sit back and enjoy the pro models - they’re a different league
This was an AMAZING video! Thanks guys!❤❤❤
Well, I don’t know what to believe anymore but - in 2013 I bought some Zipp Firecrests (303). Absolutely the worst wheel I’ve owned. So flexible that I was 2 cogs up the block - on the same hill - compared to when I was running Fulcrum Racing 1s. Switched to Campagnolo Boras and they were unbelievable good in comparison.
It’s not just about labor cost. Taiwan is not a third world country. It’s about work ethics, efficiency and management.
Not surprised about the frame weight selection at the end of production.
And semiconductor manufacturing It's called binning.
The same chip off the same wafer tested faster or lower power or whatever the criteria is gets put into a different bin than the one next to it that measures with a different value.
The marketing is the con that is why cycling is expensive the lube company's claims are wild aero light weight the difference is arguably enjoy what you ride
Something you dont need that doesnt affect how your bike rides is the super duper high end pedals. Usually the second or third tiers down are very marginally changed, have almost all the same features, and you wont feel a difference. Some brands even have 6 or 7 tiers, like in the case of the Look road pedal line or the Time pedal lines, road or off road. That top tier $300 pedal? You dont need that. Back off a bit. As a cross guy, ive been racing on the Look X Track carbon Race pedals- one step down from the top notch pedal. Marginally lighter than the regular carbon pedal but it was only $5 more and both were on sale so i did it for $5 bucks. Top end only difference was a Titanium spindle, and while that is nice, it makes no real difference for me on the cross course. Im a lightweight rider, about 160 pounds, and the chances of the stock axle failing is slim, even if i put that on a MTB drop of 8 feet. Just saying.
Question for Josh, is Silca working on a special tubeless sealant for road tubeless? It seems we have good tubeless wheels and tires for road, but not the right sealant.
RE Aero Testing: You standardise a test format, yaw angles that must be tested, etc. etc. If every bike/wheel has to do the same test, then you end up with a fair benchmark, irrelevant if that testing is flawed or new research suggested it's not the best method of testing. Then ZIPP can say on the standard test we are A- but in our extra testing we are better in this test A B and C which is important because X Y Z
What a top bloke Josh is! Really enjoy the videos he appears in, articulate, knowledgeable, humorous and hugely entertaining for what could be quite a dry subject. More of this please.
Re: rider choices and tech…I recently saw someone asking Lance Armstrong what tire setup he thought he’d be riding today, his answer was “what ever the propeller heads said was best”.
Thank you! Great segment. I like the shop but Alex looks like his neck is getting uncomfortable starting around 2:15 forward. Have ya'll considered more traditional cinematic interview setup? or latenite talkshow "newsdesk" host format for the longer interviews? A GCN Tie and red sportcoat?
imagine Jonas and all of UAE racing on the cheaper cube bikes or the new Decathlon Van Rysel team bikes...
Isn't it GCN that pushes the +$2000 bike thats X% stiffer and Y% more aero, with their youtube vidoes (advertisements)?
Your ideal guest would have been Hambini.
Thank you sooo much about mentioning the 6 ceramic bearing inside the wheel hub. I almost pay $900 for those little marginal gain I thought it will actually make me go fast when it's not because I'm not a pro lol
The German Tour Magazine does standard tests….so there is some testing you can compare.
Josh is the best guest for Tech…period. Though I think GCN has just lost all their partnership deals with bike companies as a result!
I won't be surprised if there's an Italian bike company in Prato manned by chinese laborers for that "Made in Italy" label.
Still better than made in China because (hopefully) the factory is inspected to conform to EU rules and not be a death trap.
@@chrisridesbicycles What are you on about? The varying labour cost is to do with cost of living for a particular country, not lower safety standards.
China has so much manufacturing expertise and high safety standards these days because western companies have essentially given away their manufacturing techniques and trade secrets. A good example are electronics - the USA are falling behind in chip research and development compared to China (this is something that the USA have identified as a serious threat).
It's incredible that westerners still have this superiority complex towards 'made in China' when China literally have all the expertise. A good example are Tesla vehicles: the ones made in China are better than the ones made in the USA.
I think the wall spent more time in focus than the presenters
I see Donut and Gtechniq stickers on that laptop lid. Is Ollie a secret car guy?
Oliver starts off like RPMF1 😅 and he certainly subs!
Nothing looks like a S5
Good & useful video 👍👍
Alex, are you aware that Josh/Silca manufacture expensive water bottle cages? For the record, I'm pro Ti cages...
Marginal gains can also be though of as diminishing returns.
About lighter tyres and tubes:
are we really talking spending millions in developement vs hundred quid component on one bike or is it rather about a mil in development vs tens of mil in production for the whole lineup?😑
in the motorcycle world, you can easily compare each bike
awesome video
Why are there 5 of the same size cone wrench on that display wall?
Hmm, the same guy that is trying to sell a tiny tube of anti-seize for $20?
I really don’t know why you found what Josh so surprising about frames, this happens industry wide. Painted speaker v natural wood finishes. The ones with not so perfect wood grains get painted. Computer and binned processors apple do this for example with there Apple silicon. It stops waste within the industry. And they just market it as something else or brand it a different model within the range.
frontal camera little yellowish red. side camera color is good. 😅
From my point of view, bike brands are cheating us with that Marketing data. I would require them to measure stiffness and aerodynamics as per a normalised and certified test carried about by an official external certifications company. All measured with same parameters would bring us the real data and comparison. In addition to that, it would be great to know at which ranges of power generated that increased stiffness will be appreciated by the rider. I assume the effect is not starting from 0 W. Same as they do for Watts saving at X kmh when improving aerodynamics. What do you think?
Impossibly expensive and no one would agree to do it. That doesn’t work in any other industry why would it work here? Marketing as a profession would disappear
@Millicente well, I disagree. I work in the Security Industry and all companies manufacturing Safes need to do standardise and normalised test vy an external company to get the certification about time before being able to open the safe or time resistance against fire. If other companies must do that, why not the bike Industry? You must proof what you are saying or selling to your customers.
@@fabianbv82 That sounds incredibly basic though. It sounds similar to bike companies needing to make sure their bikes don't break the moment a human being sits on it, or falls apart when going above 5mph. We're talking about certification on the feature level. That would be like creating certification requirements for how well a gaming pc plays video games, or how long a frisbee actually flies in the air, or perhaps how good the buttons, or whatever interface options there are, feel on a safe. Past the "this is the minimum requirement for it to do what it's intended," or "this is the minimum of what anyone buying x product expects," making companies agree to testing standards for aspects that separate them from competitors is impossible.
@Millicente well, I think we will never find a common point of view. But, always nice to share different thoughts. I still think that of they say that are faster or stiffer than X, they should provide same evidences of the results against the other brands, specially, if that is the reason for selling more. You cannot "sell" something without real demonstrable data. Anyway, thanks for your comments.
The question from Ollie was not answered? Jonas could win or not with a lower range bike?
He did prettymuch answer it. The only significant difference is in aero bikes. Jonas grabs most of his time in mountain climbs, so no earo bike. The rest he sits behind team mates so aero doesn't really matter for him except for maybe flat time trials. So yes, he probably could win with a lower range bike.
@@rnedisc I think he's done quite well in the time trials as well, where aero is huge.
I think a big misconception from the manufacturers to the consumers is that they arent always talking to you. When the new Domane came out and was maybe stiffer, a bit lighter and slightly more aero... they weren't talking to the previous gen Domane owners expecting them to dump their bike and replace it with a near identical example. They're focusing on the people that might have a 12 year old bike and are considering a handful of options from a few leading companies. They want to steal Diverge customers and people debating a Canyon or a Giant.
Do some upgrade to the newest gen each time? Sure... a small amount. But realistically, the marginal gains are aimed at leaning you towards their brand or model in the first place.
so carbon frames are binned like microprocessors are binned? Ollie and Alex were right to be shocked!
Josh knows all the tricks on how to dupe the consumers.🤔
Super interesting. I love it when Josh is on. I'm currently in the market for a new bike for endurance racing and I'm comparing everything from Ribble to cervello to specialized to Bianchi and I find myself saying well bloody he'll, what's the difference? If you could do a nerdy video on here's what to look at in the white papers, here's where to find them, that'd be great. I'm about to say I'm not buying any of them and bust out my helicopter maintenance, flight, and Art degrees ( I have 9 degrees so far) and experiment with building my own and selling models on the market at $29, 000 so it can be said that it's "available to the public on the market" and race that.
Oh yes and:
-that green shirt on Alex is a great new choice. Great color.
-Ollie's hair was on point today-very dapper
-it'd be a fun race to have riders both pro and amateur show up and they draw a number and race what they get.
Check out Cruzbike V20. I can stay on my titanium road bike for about 3 hours before things start hurting, but I can sit on my V20 for 8 hours, and not only is it more comfortable, it is significantly faster on less power.
Road bike = 310 watts for 40kph.
V20 = 210 watts for 40kph.
If you really want a road bike I'll sell you my titanium one since all it is doing now is hanging on the wall, cannibalized for parts.
Rose xlite has TT tyres and TPU tubes from the factory.
#askgcntech They've put salt on the streets to prevent ice forming where I live. Should I stop riding outdoors until the temperatures rise? How much of an issue is it going to be for my components and bike overall if I keep riding on salted streets? Will it be a problem even if I wash my bike afterwards?
~4:50 To the point of "cherrypicking the best result" -- just post all of the results, good ones and bad. All it requires is for the public to be statistical and aerodynamic experts!
Who would love to have a few beers with Ollie and Josh (ok, and Alex) and listen to them geek out?? 🖐
Since there is no regulatory agency to validate company claims, there is a lot of marketing myths employed to sell product. Oh, and what myths were busted?
That the only way to win the TdF on a specific bike is if your rear tire is 28mm, tubeless, inflated to exactly 72.742psi, your 25mm tubed front tires is inflated to 96.427psi, with a Xentis Mark 1 TT rim on front, a 2017 Corima disc wheel in back, waxed chain, seat at a 1.2 percent nose up position, your 2016 Tarmac frame waxed left handed in alternating clockwise and counterclockwise 3cm circles on an odd number Wednesday in a month ending in "ber", only in a leap year, and your bar tape removed by a Leprechaun who enjoys pegging in his free time.
Don’t even need to watch, take them with salt. 😂😂
Donny Osmond worked in the bike industry for 20 plus years😳….AND sang with his sister??!?!
“…….24 years and counting.” Are you sure about that? I would think telling the industries darkest secrets would be a real career killing move.
Silca, that well known supplier of "grease" laced with high amounts of carcinogenic nickel.
Tamest comment from Hambini on any YT channel, ever - has your account been hijacked?
“They are not doing it to be rich, they are doing it to be more competitive in price”.
I like you Josh but that is a BS statement! The cost of a Trek Madone 5 years ago 100% USA made was cheaper than today’s China Made! Also they are 100% USA made bikes ( Carbon, Ti and Carbon, Ti, Steel ) that cost the same or less than a big brand made in China.
Did Alex get a really BAD bottle cage one time and lost his water at a crucial moment? 🙂This is not the first video where he has complained about super lightweight and expensive cages that won't hold a bottle. I assume it happened to him. The rest of us buy the ones made by unicorns (nice one Oillie!) that weight next to nothing for $15 for a PAIR that are stiff enough to hold a (big) bottle.... Inquiring minds want to know what scarred Alex so badly.......
LET'S SPEND MORE MONEY ON OUR 105 BIKES TO CLOSE THE GAP AT THE TOP END!!
He looks like Rob Dahm from Wish .
Wind tunnel test are crap if they only test it at the front of the bicycle !!!! How about side winds !!!! That could allmost stop a bicycle in windy conditions !!!!
Boom
😮
More like "4 bicycle RACING industry myths busted"
Build location does matter; if you send all the manufacturing jobs to places where they don't care about your pollution and labor laws to save a few bucks your only fooling yourselves and diminishing diversity of jobs where you live and seal your dependence on others, which isn't good for any people in the long run, especially when your near slave labor on the other side of the world gets smart and starts charging prices you can't afford for things you can't make for yourselves because you vote for ridiculous localized virtue legislation, while not wanting to pay prices you would demand yourself if you were the ones doing the work; you people are laughably disconnected from reality.
Wait, what?! No wonder they ride the same.