My personal take, in terms of improvement magnitude rather than importance:
1. Clipless pedalsThey can improve your speed by at least 50%. Without clipless, maintaining an average speed (AVS) of 25 km/h was tough for me. With them, I can easily sustain around 35 km/h solo for quite a while. So clipless gives the fastest speed boost, and you won’t lose power at high speeds. The only downside is that unclipping takes practice — beginners often fall a lot while learning.
2. FrameThe stiffness of the bottom bracket area is actually very important. I’ve used an aluminum frame with fork and headset for 200 RMB and also a TCR frame over 3000 RMB. The difference in frame stiffness is noticeable, but only when riding at high speed, pedaling hard, or sprinting. At low speeds, it’s less obvious. Under heavy pedaling, the bottom bracket can flex, and if it’s stiff, it transmits more of your power efficiently without energy loss to flex. That’s why a well-made bottom bracket makes the bike feel more responsive — as we say, one pedal stroke and the rear wheel feels powerful. Other factors include frame size and craftsmanship. A frame that’s too small may restrict your power, while one too large can be hard to control or even dangerous. Frame size is crucial. Also, frame design matters — hidden headsets are becoming more common. They’re not necessarily better than traditional ones, but within the same tier, bikes with hidden headsets do feel a bit smoother in rotation and look cleaner. Of course, some top-tier external headsets are irreplaceable by 100 RMB hidden ones (like KING headsets — after our rough use and disassembly, they remained flawless, though heavier — my friend’s weighed over 200 grams but were super solid). Frame angles and design also vary: some favor flat terrain, others climbing, and some balance both. Time trial bikes look even more extreme. In short, a good frame should have a stiff bottom bracket, durable head tube and seat stays, fit your body, and match your riding style. That’s a great frame.
I originally planned to rank the frame third because I thought the wheelset mattered more. But the idea of the frame being the bike’s soul influenced me. Still, compared to clipless pedals, the frame doesn’t boost speed as quickly or cost as little. So: clipless first, frame second.
3. I believe it’s the wheelsetWhether for climbing, flat riding, or all-around use, you want wheels that are light yet strong. Within a reasonable weight, a lighter hub is better, and it’s ideal for the rim’s mass to be concentrated toward the outer edge. This way, at the same speed, the rim has better inertia, resisting deceleration. Some ultra-light wheels feel extremely responsive — power translates to speed instantly — but once you stop pedaling, speed drops just as fast. That’s why lighter wheels aren’t always faster or more stable than slightly heavier ones. A good wheelset, whether custom-built or factory-made, typically combines a very light hub with a properly weighted rim and low air resistance. I’ve used SUN’s massive 5–6 cm thick aluminum training wheels — heavy to pedal but excellent at maintaining speed once rolling. So a good wheelset is vital. For beginners spending over 4000 RMB on a bike, I recommend CB’s R400: nearly matching or surpassing factory wheelsets in weight and performance, yet repairable like a custom build. Great for hills (use slightly heavier tires if needed), and excellent on flats. Ideal as an all-around wheelset. Specialized climbing or flat-optimized wheels tend to be less versatile. In my experience, a quality wheelset can boost your AVS by 2–3 km/h. Switching from a very cheap homemade system to decent wheels can even gain you 5–6 km/h. That’s why I rank wheelsets third.
4. I’d rank tires fourthI’ve used 700C tires from 19C to 45C. The narrower the tire (lower C number), the faster it feels — note, I’m talking about average speed (AVS), not top speed. Strangely, the fastest I’ve gone on any bike is around 60 km/h — yesterday, riding a 760 with a big downhill, I hit 60 km/h too, similar to my road bike’s top speed. Narrower tires do yield higher AVS, thanks partly to reduced rolling resistance. As for width, I now ride 20C tires — 19C are hard to find, and I’ve never seen 18C. My dad’s touring bike, carrying three people totaling 300 kg (including my mom and brother), uses 38–45C tires, though I usually ride it.
But switching from 25C to 20C doesn’t automatically mean faster. Tire type matters. I’ve only tried tubulars once and didn’t get a deep feel, plus the glue job wasn’t great. But for clinchers, the difference is clear. Good tires offer strong grip, good shock absorption, and puncture resistance. Great tires stick to the road even on wet surfaces (though slicks are unbeatable on dry days — I bought 26x1.20 mountain slicks and “embarrassed” some road bikes on a recent ride). The sensation? The bike glides, wind rushes by, and all you hear is the smooth, subtle friction between tire and road. When I used MICHELIN PRO RACE tires, I constantly worried about their fast wear and durability compared to others. After a year, they were still great, so I kept them as a souvenir after selling the road bike. A good tire must grip well — the right tires can make up for the difference between 25C and 20C. I once tried a pair of 20C MAXXIS tires (50 RMB each), same width as PRO RACE, but the ride felt completely different: my hands vibrated painfully, and the wheels felt sluggish (no surprise — PRO RACE tires were 209 g each, those MAXXIS weighed ~350 g). For daily riding, I prefer Vittoria’s Roma series (23C), which feel and perform better than 20C MAXXIS or KENDA tires under the same conditions, even matching or exceeding their speed.
So, tire width matters, but when widths are similar, grip is more critical. Shock absorption also counts — quality rubber absorbs vibrations. On cheap tires, I felt every bump. Switching to PRO RACE made a noticeable difference (not that only PRO RACE is good, but it’s the highest-end tire I’ve used for a year; others were either borrowed or less memorable). Less vibration means more comfort and the ability to ride faster without discomfort.
Finally, puncture resistance. Everyone praises Vittoria, and my experience with Michelin was good too — just two flats in a year. Kevlar tires are increasingly common, with some high-end models using five layers. But flats happen to all tires. Generally, premium tires handle this aspect decently.
As for weight, lighter tires may be thinner and less durable but more responsive and energy-efficient. Heavier tires have thicker casings for durability but feel slower and sap more energy. Folding tires save weight by skipping steel beads but can be prone to sidewall damage depending on the model. The best tire I’ve used is PRO RACE: MAXXIS tires I tried weren’t durable, pricey, and underperformed. KENDA has good folding options but are rare here. Vittoria tires are excellent — durable, puncture-resistant, and grippy. I rode their Roma series (100 RMB each, ~200 g) for ages: affordable, light, grippy, and resistant to flats. Hutchinson disappointed me — expensive (up to 600 RMB per tire!), light but wore out quickly, likely race-only tires. Too rich for my blood.
So, a great tire balances grip, shock absorption, puncture resistance, and weight. Manufacturers try to optimize all four.
And riders want them cheap, ultra-durable, and easy to mount. Sadly, you can’t have all seven traits at once. I once got lucky with PRO RACE: two tires for 350 RMB (unusually cheap, normally 240–300 RMB each) plus free M tires pads. They grip like champions, absorb shocks well (though other high-end tires may too — PRO RACE was just the best I’ve used), flat twice in a year (decent), weigh 209 g (very light), and were affordable. After a year and 10,000 km, they should last another 5,000 km. Mounting? A breeze with Mavic rims — when I flatted mid-ride, I just pulled the tire off by hand, then popped it back on with minimal effort.
So, personally, I rank tires fourth.
5. Drivetrain and other speed boostersThere are many miscellaneous ways to gain speed, with no clear priority, so I’ll group them: drivetrain. Some say ISIS bottom brackets are stiffer than square taper — true. Think of the spindle as a lever: thicker = stronger. Others claim ISIS is lighter — also true, as larger diameters allow more hollowing. Integrated spindles are now common and more affordable, further improving stiffness. But here’s the bummer: unless you’re highly skilled or chasing marginal gains, the differences are minor. CP doesn’t offer ISIS, yet their square taper systems are plenty stiff (possibly due to thicker Italian-thread spindles vs. Japanese ones, plus CP’s narrower axles, like 103 mm vs. SHIMANO’s common 109.5 mm). Imagine a thick, short lever — it’s hard to break, hence very strong.
Cranksets matter too. Some say cranks shouldn’t flex, others say chainrings shouldn’t. Same principle as bottom brackets: less flex under heavy pedaling means less power loss. You’ll only notice flex at high AVS (around 40 km/h). Most bikes don’t flex enough to affect speed significantly, though it does impact performance — just not as much as the top four factors. For racers, every second counts, but domestic competitions rarely hinge on split-second wins. So, spend wisely.
Generally, CNC-machined chainrings are stiffer than stamped ones. Think of slicing a potato: a thick slice from a big spud is stronger than a thin one smashed from a small chunk. Better materials mean stiffer chainrings — 7075 CNC beats ordinary steel stamping easily. Crank material and stiffness also matter. Carbon cranks are light, stiff, and dampen vibrations but cost a fortune. Choose based on budget. I’ve tried both: my first fake Lightning crank (100 RMB) vs. a SORA crank (people claimed it was way better). Turns out, they weighed the same (aluminum crank arms, steel chainring), and I never noticed a difference during rides. So for beginners: SORA or 105? I tell them SHIMANO’s entry-level cranksets are weak (except UT/Dura-Ace). Spend 100 RMB on a fake Lightning, or upgrade to Tiagra/Sora for lighter, stiffer options. Most switch their minds quickly.
As for derailleurs, shifters, brakes — they don’t affect speed much. Weight varies: 7700 (425 g), SORA (450 g), UT (485 g but more durable). But these tiny weight differences are negligible compared to upgrading tires. Mud splatters? A better tire can compensate. The cost difference? Huge. SORA’s rear derailleur supports 7–10 speeds — I tested it. For 100 RMB and 265 g, it’s solid. 4400’s rear derailleur (180 RMB, 265 g) uses slightly better materials. UT and 105 (around 228 g) cost over 300 RMB. Dura-Ace (195 g) is 600 RMB. Choose based on your wallet.
Chains? Dura-Ace is decent (160 RMB each) if you want the prestige. SRAM’s is great too, with a magic quick link for under 300 RMB — very convenient.
It’s slightly lighter than Dura-Ace, while HG/IG/KMC series chains have negligible weight or strength differences. Riders who claim they snap chains often either pedal too aggressively or install them incorrectly.
In my upgrades, I never noticed huge differences between high-end and entry-level parts — certainly not proportional to the price gap. Twenty-dollar JAGWIRE cables from Taiwan didn’t feel slower than SHIMANO’s ~50 RMB sets. Premium cables and housings are noticeably better, but races aren’t won by shifting speed. The rider’s power is the key. Otherwise, even if you’re given Armstrong’s bike, you’d still lose.
So, the drivetrain has a minor impact on speed. Other speed boosters are even more minor.
A. For example, when all bike dimensions fit your body comfortably, you ride more efficiently, saving time you’d otherwise waste adjusting.
B. The bike must be extremely comfortable—for example, with sweat-absorbing and shock-dampening handlebar tape, a carbon fork, a stiff yet non-jarring frame, carbon handlebars, and a comfortable saddle (Italy offers too many great choices). In short, you need to understand one thing: comfort and proper fit are what ensure your speed. Even if high speed isn’t your goal, the right size and comfort are the most important factors. That’s why I recommend even entry-level bikes around ¥2000 to use carbon forks and saddles made in Italy, along with higher-quality handlebar tape—these upgrades will make you as comfortable as possible. Comfort is key to riding well. Here’s some experience on upgrading for comfort: start with the handlebar tape—for instance, GINELLI’s recent work-style tape for about 40 yuan. Getting a top-brand tape for 40 yuan is like finding a bargain. Plus, handlebar tape requires the least investment but delivers noticeable results—your hands will be the first to feel the improvement!
Next is the saddle—the butt is important, the prostate is important, and if you want kids, the “family jewels” are important. This is an area where you should invest a bit more, slightly more than the handlebar tape, but it’s worth it. A VIPER saddle at 140 yuan is a good choice. Without cycling shorts, you can usually ride around 100 kilometers without your rear end staging a rebellion. Then there’s the carbon fork—whether semi-carbon or full-carbon, the shock absorption effect is similar, with only minor differences in weight. If you’re on a budget, even a CB carbon fork for 280 yuan (I might sound like a CB shill here, but that fork costs about the same as an aluminum one—the top tube is steel but sturdy) will significantly reduce hand vibrations. Your hands will feel comfortable, your butt won’t hurt, and your arms won’t go numb. How can you not ride faster?
Finally, there’s the carbon seatpost. Why is this last? Because the handlebar tape costs little and delivers quick results, and changing the saddle improves comfort faster than switching to a carbon seatpost. I recommend the carbon fork first because its benefits also outweigh those of the carbon seatpost—at least I can responsibly tell you that after upgrading the first three items, switching to a carbon seatpost doesn’t make a huge difference in saddle comfort, but it still has some effect. So if you can afford it, it’s worth upgrading!
So, to upgrade your bike for comfort, the order is: handlebar tape → saddle → carbon fork → carbon seatpost.
C. Now, about cycling clothing—my experience is that cycling-specific shorts and jerseys are very useful, especially those bib-style shorts. Once you have these, your butt will be much more comfortable, and because of the shape of the pad, your butt will stay firmly planted on the saddle without shifting back and forth. This also helps maintain a consistent pedaling position. Bib shorts, as opposed to those waist-banded half-pants, have the added benefit of keeping your waist comfortable and unrestricted, allowing for smoother breathing. Jerseys made from technical fabrics wick sweat away quickly, keeping you dry. And the snug fit reduces wind resistance—have you seen people riding in oversized sports clothes, with their backs flapping like balloons? How fast can they go?
D. Learn to shift gears appropriately to maintain a high speed—it actually relies on a consistent pedaling cadence. For example, if you’re using a 53×17 gear combo and the road conditions are good, your cadence may naturally increase beyond your ideal range. Switch to a 53×16, and you’ll return to your target cadence. When climbing, if your cadence drops too much using a 39×15, try shifting to 39×16, or even 39×17 if needed. The key is to settle into a familiar “anchor” cadence, which will let you ride fast without excessive fatigue. That’s why professional riders aim for 10 or even 11-21 speed setups—with fine gradations to keep their cadence steady!
If you see someone rushing downhill in a 53×12 and then frantically switching to a 39×23 when they hit a climb, you can relax—they don’t know how to shift gears. Just wait for their energy to run out, and you’ll pass them easily. My bike has a SORA 8-speed system: a 52-39 front chainring and an 8-speed 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21 cassette in the back. Some mock me for not using a 9-speed or triple chainrings. But I’m in the northeast, where it’s mostly flat—I’ve never encountered a hill I couldn’t climb in a 39×16. There’s no need for a triple. As for 9-speed? A 9-speed gives you 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23. Sure, it adds a 23-tooth cog compared to my setup, but I’ve never even used the 21-tooth cog. With a single 39-tooth small chainring, I only use the 12-16 range and removed the last three cogs. You say 9-speed offers smoother shifting? I don’t need that, so 9-speed is just extra. But does my bike shift poorly? I can guarantee it shifts just as smoothly—even compared to the latest DA7800 10-speed (11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23), if you remove the 11 and 23, it’s the same range. Besides, I can barely pedal a 52×11, and I’ve never used anything above a 19-tooth cog. So my gearing system is just as refined. But why do some setups offer finer gradations? That’s understandable—for example, an 8-speed with a 12-30 range might use 12-14-16-19-21-25-28-30, which has slightly larger gaps. My 12-21 range has 8 cogs, offering much smoother transitions, and within the commonly used 12-17 range, I have six cogs, each increasing by just one tooth. So yes, my 8-speed is different. My 12-21 8-speed setup is just as smooth as a 9-speed—and not much worse than a 10-speed!
Alright, that’s enough about shifting. I still believe an 8-speed is sufficient—mine works just like a 10-speed would. Of course, smooth shifting is key. An 8-speed with a 12-30 range is definitely not refined enough for road cycling, but for us in the northeast, a 12-21 8-speed is perfect.