To me, this is a bit of an old man fallacy. To stick with skiing, I'm confident that Shiffrin would ski the absolute doors off almost any mid-90's World Cup Racer. The equipment allows for better things, sure, but so does increased fitness, better training, more analytics, etc. etc. etc. It's delusional to think that this is just down to the technology of the equipment. Plake was a groundbreaker, sure, but I think it's delusional to suggest that people were better skiers back then.
Same with bikes. I used to think that learning on a hardtail was better. Much of this was gear driven, though. 10-15 years ago, what full suspension bike were you sending a beginner to that was both affordable and not going to be a bucket of rattly bolts within a year? But also, sure, you learn skills riding a hardtail that you might not get on a full suspension. You learn skills riding a horse that you don't learn driving a car, as well.
I agree though with the sentiment that we're chasing something. New technology definitely allows us to experience riding in a new way, and harkens back to that original feeling we got just riding our bike down a trail. That feels like a pretty noble reason for an upgrade though, to me. If a particular part helps you to ride "better" that feels reasonable. It's just how much "better" justifies the price, is the thing. Using my own examples, I enjoyed the 2016 Spartan. The Yeti was a bit of a recalibration as to how I rode bikes though. At first, I couldn't make that thing turn, but I also felt like I was hauling a noticeable amount of ass. But I'm pretty confident that 8 years newer geometry is just going to be easier to ride. So the 2024 vs 2016 upgrade is easily justifiable. The 2022 vs 2024 is likely more of an argument.
June 3, 2024, 12:11 p.m. - Dave Tolnai
To me, this is a bit of an old man fallacy. To stick with skiing, I'm confident that Shiffrin would ski the absolute doors off almost any mid-90's World Cup Racer. The equipment allows for better things, sure, but so does increased fitness, better training, more analytics, etc. etc. etc. It's delusional to think that this is just down to the technology of the equipment. Plake was a groundbreaker, sure, but I think it's delusional to suggest that people were better skiers back then. Same with bikes. I used to think that learning on a hardtail was better. Much of this was gear driven, though. 10-15 years ago, what full suspension bike were you sending a beginner to that was both affordable and not going to be a bucket of rattly bolts within a year? But also, sure, you learn skills riding a hardtail that you might not get on a full suspension. You learn skills riding a horse that you don't learn driving a car, as well. I agree though with the sentiment that we're chasing something. New technology definitely allows us to experience riding in a new way, and harkens back to that original feeling we got just riding our bike down a trail. That feels like a pretty noble reason for an upgrade though, to me. If a particular part helps you to ride "better" that feels reasonable. It's just how much "better" justifies the price, is the thing. Using my own examples, I enjoyed the 2016 Spartan. The Yeti was a bit of a recalibration as to how I rode bikes though. At first, I couldn't make that thing turn, but I also felt like I was hauling a noticeable amount of ass. But I'm pretty confident that 8 years newer geometry is just going to be easier to ride. So the 2024 vs 2016 upgrade is easily justifiable. The 2022 vs 2024 is likely more of an argument.