Hal Ruzal, the recently-retired mechanic and partner of Bicycle Habitat, and I were talking one day about rides, bikes, music and work. I've always admired Mercians, but I finally ordered my first after taking a spin on one of his. His other bikes, with one exception (an early Cannondale mountain bike) were also built around steel frames, with various combinations of modern and old-school components. So it won't surprise you that we have similar attitudes about bikes and equipment: While most of our preferences run to old-school bikes and parts, or stuff inspired by them, we don't fetishize "vintage" items. At the same time, we don't prize technology for the sake of technology.
He sighed about "the Wall Street guys" who came into the shop and wanted the most expensive bike. "They thought that's what they needed to get up the next hill," he mused. What they really needed, he said, was to spend more time riding.
As often as not, they insisted on buying bikes that were not only "more bike than they needed" but that didn't--or, in some case, couldn't be made to--fit them well.
I thought about that conversation a few months ago, after encountering a guy who wiped out on an L-shaped turn with a sandtrap. Bleeding from his arms and legs, his first concerns were his $12,000 bike and $200 saddle--and the $300 helmet he wasn't even wearing.
I couldn't help but to think that guy probably hadn't ridden long or far. He may not have been, in fact, one of the "Wall Street guys" Hal was talking about, but he shared at least part of their mentality: He seemed to think that buying the "best" (read: most expensive) stuff would make him a better cyclist.
It occurs to me now that the bike may not even have fit him well. That is a common occurence--by whatever ideas about bike fit you subscribe to--more often than one might expect among customers of ultra-high-end bikes. Dave Farmer, owner of Surrey Cycle Works (in Leatherhead, England) says as much. "People can now buy 6000, 7000 or 8000 pound bikes online." As a result, he says, many people are "riding around on very high-end bikes that don't fit them."
One problem is that many of those "very high-end" bikes have "integrated" cockpits. They're great if speed is your primary goal--and if they fit you.
Most people buy bikes--in whatever price range--buy complete bikes. Folks like me who buy frames and build them are actually a tiny fragment of the market, even at the highest price ranges. The problem with complete bikes, at any price, is that they are designed for an "average" person--usually male--of a given height.
Anyone who's ever measured me for a bike, or helped me to make an adjustment has commented on my legs: They are long for a person of my height. So the "square"geometry of many stock frames--on which the seat and top tube are the same length--doesn't work well for me, unless I use a stem with a very short horizontal extension. Likewise, the "sloping" geometry of many modern frames is less than ideal for me.
Other people, of course, differ from norms in other ways: short people with wide shoulders, for example. Then there is the matter of preferences: You might prefer a different saddle position from someone else, depending on your riding style.
Integration of cockpits means that, on some bikes, handlebars, stems and seatpost can't be swapped out--or making such changes is very expensive. If the bike has a standard-diameter steer tube, changing the stem isn't a problem--unless, of course, it's of one piece with the handlebars. So, if you like the width or shape or your bars, you have to find another set that fits your bike. And on some bikes, once your seat height is set, it can't be changed.
Oh, and don't get me started on internal cable routing: I still have nightmares about my bikes that had this feature. I'm glad that I've never had to change a cable that's routed through the headset--or, worse, had to clean or replace such a headset.
Don't get me wrong: I see the benefits of integration, at least for some riders. Turning two pieces into one--like the bars and stem--makes them more aerodynamic, stiffer and stronger. (Remember the "bull moose" bars on early mountain bikes?) That strength makes it possible to use lighter materials which, of course, helps to lighten the bike.
The thing is, most of the benefits of integrated cockpits (and aerodynamic parts) accrue only if you're riding at the speeds, and for the amount of time, pro riders spend on their saddles. Otherwise, you have to choose between compromising comfort and convenience, or spending large sums of money for replacement parts--and bike shop labor, if you don't do the work yourself.
So, before spending $12,000 on a bike and, potentially, another $2000 to make it fit, ask yourself how much, or whether, you'll benefit--or whether you're trying to impress somebody.
