tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861673.post8518726668451488963..comments2023-07-11T05:42:02.417-04:00Comments on The ID10T Files: Substandard PartsDer Geishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10615005013929233901noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861673.post-88023147091428991742007-01-26T19:32:00.000-05:002007-01-26T19:32:00.000-05:00No offense taken. It is a valid hypothesis but I d...No offense taken. It is a valid hypothesis but I don't believe it is true for several reasons.<br /><br />When I started college, I was about 180 or 185. Now I've stabilized between about 215 and 220. I can imagine greater weight leading to greater wear but I can't see a 22% increase in weight causing a 100% increase in chain wear and a 250% increase in freewheel wear. That goes against the laws of physics. Wheeled machines should show better efficiency.<br /><br />Secondly, while my weight slowly grew over those years, I did not see a similar change in parts wear. The change was dramatic when I got the new bicycle, indicating that the change was with the bike and not with myself.<br /><br />The evidence points to the new bike parts being made of softer metal than on the old bike. I suspect a broadening of the middle in that cheap bikes use cheap parts and that's not a big deal because people who buy cheap bikes don't ride much so wear isn't an issue. People who ride bikes more are treated as enthusiasts willing to pay more for a bike, in part to get a better machine but also for the prestige of the name. Since they dropped $6,000 for a bike, spending a few hundred a year on maintenance isn't going to phase them. Here I am in the middle, riding my bike a lot because I commute but not wanting to spend a lot of money on a bike as I am trying to save money BY commuting.<br /><br />In addition, the spectrum of cost to wearability probably doesn't work out in my favor. If I pay twice as much for a part, I doubt that I'm going to get a part that lasts twice as long. Now, if I paid twice as much and got something that lasted three times as long then I could see upgrading to a more expensive bike and parts. But if I have to spend three times as much to get a part that only lasts twice as long then the decision must be to either buy the cheaper parts or treat the entire bicycle as non-durable goods and replace it more frequently. Simple economics.<br /><br />I've made a posting on a bike message board to try to get some numbers so I can have the mathematical answer rather than just supposition.Der Geishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10615005013929233901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7861673.post-71286207307876119412007-01-26T01:52:00.000-05:002007-01-26T01:52:00.000-05:00not to sound rude Geis, because this isn't intende...not to sound rude Geis, because this isn't intended to be a rude question. but how much do you weigh now compared to twenty years ago? <br /><br />for someone riding as long as you, i bet you've gained quite a bit in muscle mass and physical strength, maybe the added weight and power in your pedaling is contributing to the faster wear and tear compared to twenty years ago?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com