Tech stuff – do people REALLY know…

Home Forum Bike Forum Tech stuff – do people REALLY know…

Viewing 8 posts - 81 through 88 (of 88 total)
  • Tech stuff – do people REALLY know…
  • mikee
    Member

    ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜†

    twohats
    Member

    Well, this thread goes to prove that people really do spout a load of old bollocks… ๐Ÿ˜‰

    MrSalmon
    Member

    Yes they do, although I think that’s just because they like buying new shiny stuff rather than because they think it’ll make them a better rider. Do people buy loads of new clothes because they think they’ll get more sex? Do people buy new cars because they think they’ll get to work faster?

    I already acknowledged the shiny-new-stuff factor, but it looks to me that in bikes/cars/clothes whatever lots of stuff gets bought after advertisers/magazine reviewers have suggested that it’s better than the (often pretty much equivalent) stuff people have already. So it’s not obvious to me that people are immune to being told their current stuff is no longer good enough.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    But it’s still more like a curve than a series of steps, and if you jumped on a bike at any point on that curve you’d likely be hard pushed to tell the difference from one just upstream or downstream.

    I disagree. As molgrips says, it’s the small but discrete innovations which have resulted in the difference rather than a gradual flow, hence it’s a series of small steps, not a continuous curve. If your two bikes were without and with discs, or with a significant advance in suspension between them then you could quite easily tell the difference – otherwise you couldn’t as there isn’t one. The manufacturers meanwhile feel obliged to generate a difference each year even if there isn’t really one, by the use of different tube profiles etc. which don’t actually really make a significant difference.

    Premier Icon molgrips
    Subscriber

    stuff gets bought after advertisers/magazine reviewers have suggested that it’s better

    Hmm, well we’re onto the psychology of advertising, which is somewhat complex I think. For example, why would they make Marmite adverts that tell you it might make you puke in a policeman’s hat? What they do is subliminally plant an association in your brain between their product and something positive. That might be a desirable image of shredding trails, or a sexy woman (it’s always women), or something funny or unusual (hence the Marmite ad).

    So the bike ads aren’t actually telling you the new is better or faster than the old UNLESS it’s an actual technological change like say the Gary Fisher G2 geometry ads; rather, they’re making you want something but you don’t know why. Lots of people on here say stuff like ‘I don’t know why but I really want this’. It’s not necessarily specific advertising, but a culture that’s been fostered.

    I agree advertising works, and we are all manipulated to an extent by it (even the Rivindell bloke) in all walks of life. But I don’t think it’s fair to claim that most people really think that the latest bit of kit will make them faster or a better rider. After all, I’d say most people on here don’t even know their personal best time for their local trail centre ๐Ÿ™‚ So how would you know if you were faster?

    mikee
    Member

    flamejob that looks coolas **** how much to bulid me a frame
    provided it weighs 4lb or less that is

    flamejob
    Member

    ta… I didn’t actually make it, some nice chinaman did from this:

    As I said before; I have a LOT of respect for everyone who makes and sells bike bits, no matter how shonky. It’s really quite hard to get things right. Maybe I’m just a numpty.

    Guess that answers the OP. No I have no idea ๐Ÿ™‚

    mikey74
    Member

    Do people buy new cars because they think they’ll get to work faster?

    Never a truer word said.

    I personally have changed my bike, on average, every two years: Why? Mainly due to changing riding styles. I started off on xc hardtails, went to an xc full-suss, and then on to more “all-mountain” type bikes. The changes have been direct responses to changes in my riding outlook and therefore requirements, NOT due to reviews in magazines. I have also ensured that each bike is markedly different to the previous one: One thing I dont understand is people moving from say, a 5-inch travel Spesh, to a 5-inch travel Commencal. Surely the bikes are too similar to make any marked difference to your riding.

    Out of all the bikes I have owned, the one I could probably had done without was my Titus Motolite. Don’t get me wrong, I loved it, but it wasn’t vastly different to the Spesh Enduro (2004) it replaced. In fact, the bike I have now, Banshee/Mythic Rune, is the bike I wish I had bought instead of the Titus, although it wasn’t out then. I didn’t really realise this until I went to Whistler last year and rode a bike with a slacker head angle: It really woke me up to why I was finding somethings difficult on my Titus (I am happy to confess that this was mainly mental, but it is what I prefer now).

    In the end, it is your experience that should drive what you buy, not what other people tell you. If you follow what you have learned yourself, then you can sift through all the crap to find out what you really helps you.

Viewing 8 posts - 81 through 88 (of 88 total)

The topic ‘Tech stuff – do people REALLY know…’ is closed to new replies.