£2,500 but do I go endurance or racy?
Discussion
First, some basics. I'm 35, 80kg, which is 'racing snake' for my height of 6'4". I only started riding in May but have fallen for cycling and am generally very fit, so I'm already reasonably quick. I do about 250km a week. I don't think I'm interested in racing but I do like the idea of endurance and audax events. I've done centuries and a 200km already. That said, I will be doing some challenging sportives and looking to set good times. I will, from time to time, get to ride in the alps and I also plan to ride London-Monaco next year. I have had a lot of knee surgery and haven't been troubling the rankings on hills, but that's just turning a corner and I'm slowly creeping into top 5-10% positions on Strava, so that may or may not be an issue any more.
I thought I'd settled on the 2015 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Ultegra, thinking that I could use this for audaxes and it wouldn't give up too much performance compared to, say, a SuperSix EVO when I wanted to put the hammer down, but an experienced riding buddy has just cast doubt on the wisdom of that. His advice was that the time saved over a long ride by having more comfort would be lost in pace and he'd go for the most focused bike possible.
All for n+1 and having a dedicated audax bike and a quick bike, but with regards s-1, s is probably a small number.
I'm aware that the best advice will be to try and test ride both styles, which I'm going to try and do, but I'm not sure how easy it will be to persuade Evans etc to let me take bikes out for 100 mile rides. After all, it really comes down to "is the racier bike still comfortable enough at the end of a massive ride". Ideally I'd do even bigger distances.
I've done enough research to have settled on 11-speed and disc brakes too. The extra gears are a plus for my knackered knees and the Alpine rides and I'm very keen on disc brakes. I'd rather keep discussion away from the pros and cons of these and focused on the bike.
So, with that out of the way, I invite opinion and advice from the sages of Pedal Powered. Where should my money go?
I thought I'd settled on the 2015 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Ultegra, thinking that I could use this for audaxes and it wouldn't give up too much performance compared to, say, a SuperSix EVO when I wanted to put the hammer down, but an experienced riding buddy has just cast doubt on the wisdom of that. His advice was that the time saved over a long ride by having more comfort would be lost in pace and he'd go for the most focused bike possible.
All for n+1 and having a dedicated audax bike and a quick bike, but with regards s-1, s is probably a small number.
I'm aware that the best advice will be to try and test ride both styles, which I'm going to try and do, but I'm not sure how easy it will be to persuade Evans etc to let me take bikes out for 100 mile rides. After all, it really comes down to "is the racier bike still comfortable enough at the end of a massive ride". Ideally I'd do even bigger distances.
I've done enough research to have settled on 11-speed and disc brakes too. The extra gears are a plus for my knackered knees and the Alpine rides and I'm very keen on disc brakes. I'd rather keep discussion away from the pros and cons of these and focused on the bike.
So, with that out of the way, I invite opinion and advice from the sages of Pedal Powered. Where should my money go?
If you don't want to race, it's hard to understand why the last bit of pace would matter. Whether you can achieve enough comfort on a more extreme geo bike is impossible for us to say.
You could test one, but a bike fit might shed more light. I just adjusted a Wattbike to see what kind of drop I felt I could cope with.
Once you have an idea of the stack height then you can gauge whether you could get a comfort model and slam it a bit later. You can probably drop the bars about 50mm by slamming the front and changing the stem, maybe more.
You could test one, but a bike fit might shed more light. I just adjusted a Wattbike to see what kind of drop I felt I could cope with.
Once you have an idea of the stack height then you can gauge whether you could get a comfort model and slam it a bit later. You can probably drop the bars about 50mm by slamming the front and changing the stem, maybe more.
A big question is how flexible you are, and therefore where you want the bars to be. You'll be able to get a drop on the Evo that you can't on the Synapse.
However- you're a tall lad so you may want more headtube than someone smaller. I am assuming you are looking at 60cm frames? Or a 58 with a bit more post?
The Evo is meant to be very comfortable- Pro level bikes have been moving away from "stiff at all costs" (my SystemSix) to "lets not beat the rider up", however if it is too long and low for you then it's a pointless bike to own.
In your situation I'd buy a CAAD10 disc and play around with stem height, reach, bar-shape etc and make my mind up with a 6,000 mile test ride- then buy the frame/bike that suits you most.
However- you're a tall lad so you may want more headtube than someone smaller. I am assuming you are looking at 60cm frames? Or a 58 with a bit more post?
The Evo is meant to be very comfortable- Pro level bikes have been moving away from "stiff at all costs" (my SystemSix) to "lets not beat the rider up", however if it is too long and low for you then it's a pointless bike to own.
In your situation I'd buy a CAAD10 disc and play around with stem height, reach, bar-shape etc and make my mind up with a 6,000 mile test ride- then buy the frame/bike that suits you most.
The current bike is a 60 and that feels too small, though it does have a short (110) stem.
I'm very flexible. I used to do kung fu & tai chi to a high level and have held on to most of my flexibility. Should be as able to adopt a racing position as a racer of a similar age.
I'm very flexible. I used to do kung fu & tai chi to a high level and have held on to most of my flexibility. Should be as able to adopt a racing position as a racer of a similar age.
Edited by Gruffy on Monday 18th August 19:18
This is one occasion where the "get a CX bike" line might actually be somewhat appropriate... "Racy" now generally means a shorter head tube (around 150cm) and a headtube angle greater than 73 deg but I think you can be comfortable and still feel sporting on pretty much any bike with some careful spec. Race orientated CX bikes will have the geo you want to be quick, most have a horizontal top tube which if you are flexible wont be an issue and are great when you are on the drops, but as the nice ones are full carbon, they can also be lightweight and most importantly, are designed for discs rather than, as I suspect, some manufacturers are guilty of, just throwing disc mounts onto their current range of bikes to meet the market.
Anyway, what about the Condor Bivio-X which would make a cracking £2k build or the Rose DX cross or if you want to blow the budget, a Ridley X-Fire all of which could post a quick sportive time with a quick tyre change or remain comfy over long distances thanks to carbon forks and a some sensible geo concessions.
Anyway, what about the Condor Bivio-X which would make a cracking £2k build or the Rose DX cross or if you want to blow the budget, a Ridley X-Fire all of which could post a quick sportive time with a quick tyre change or remain comfy over long distances thanks to carbon forks and a some sensible geo concessions.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 18th August 19:41
The more bikes I ride, the more I think the whole thing is largely nonsense for most riders.
Riding position matters, absolutely, but the only aspect of that which is affected by type of frame choice is stack height (for a given frame size); up to a point you can always raise the stack on a "racy" bike by adding spacers, or lower the effective stack on a "relaxed" bike by using a -17 degree stem.
Comfort matters - and racy frames are sometimes less comfortable, in the sense that they have less vertical compliance. But this varies enormously, even within manufacturers. I have a Cervelo S5 (racy frame) which has very little vertical compliance, and an R5 (racy frame) which has loads. In addition, you can adjust this with tyre choice (size, type, pressure), seatpost choice (not in aero frames) and saddle choice.
As for lateral stiffness, power transmission, handling and all that stuff, I think a) it's subjective and b) most of us can't tell the difference. If you can, great, but I suspect unless you really do have a 450w FTP, you won't be troubling the lateral stiffness of any £2500 carbon bike, and you certainly won't go any faster.
Aero does make a difference, but only if it's fairly flat and you get low. I'm faster on my S5 than my R5, but only around Regent's Park.
Weight makes a difference, but it's a law of diminishing returns and increasing money. I'm faster on my 6kg R5 than my 7.5kg Mekk Poggio, but not so's you'd really notice, and only up hills of course. Incidentally, the Mekk and R5 are the same size, but the pin-money "relaxed" Mekk has a "racier" geometry than the daft money actual grand tour Cervelo race machine; trust a tape measure, not marketing...
I commute and do winter group rides on a Felt F3X, which is technically a cross bike, and if I really was allowed to keep only one of my n+1, I'd keep that, for all its manifold compromises. So if you can get a low-ish (say 200mm or less from tyre top to the bottom of the headset cap) disc-braked bike without the BB height issues of a cross bike, I'd get that.
Riding position matters, absolutely, but the only aspect of that which is affected by type of frame choice is stack height (for a given frame size); up to a point you can always raise the stack on a "racy" bike by adding spacers, or lower the effective stack on a "relaxed" bike by using a -17 degree stem.
Comfort matters - and racy frames are sometimes less comfortable, in the sense that they have less vertical compliance. But this varies enormously, even within manufacturers. I have a Cervelo S5 (racy frame) which has very little vertical compliance, and an R5 (racy frame) which has loads. In addition, you can adjust this with tyre choice (size, type, pressure), seatpost choice (not in aero frames) and saddle choice.
As for lateral stiffness, power transmission, handling and all that stuff, I think a) it's subjective and b) most of us can't tell the difference. If you can, great, but I suspect unless you really do have a 450w FTP, you won't be troubling the lateral stiffness of any £2500 carbon bike, and you certainly won't go any faster.
Aero does make a difference, but only if it's fairly flat and you get low. I'm faster on my S5 than my R5, but only around Regent's Park.
Weight makes a difference, but it's a law of diminishing returns and increasing money. I'm faster on my 6kg R5 than my 7.5kg Mekk Poggio, but not so's you'd really notice, and only up hills of course. Incidentally, the Mekk and R5 are the same size, but the pin-money "relaxed" Mekk has a "racier" geometry than the daft money actual grand tour Cervelo race machine; trust a tape measure, not marketing...
I commute and do winter group rides on a Felt F3X, which is technically a cross bike, and if I really was allowed to keep only one of my n+1, I'd keep that, for all its manifold compromises. So if you can get a low-ish (say 200mm or less from tyre top to the bottom of the headset cap) disc-braked bike without the BB height issues of a cross bike, I'd get that.
You mention days in the Alps. My 'quick' bike is a slammed 58cm Supersix (I'm 6 foot 1). It has a pretty steep saddle to bar drop but I find the position great and comfy most of the time. Out in the Alps this year however I found that repeated long steep descents were hurting my neck because I was having to crane my neck up further than usual. It got a bit tiresome after a while, and I'd consider taking my taller training bike next time. Not a problem here in the UK, but worth mentioning.
964Cup said:
The more bikes I ride, the more I think the whole thing is largely nonsense for most riders.
I get this. I'm sure it's mostly n+1 marketing and the real world gains (comfort or performance) are negligible for most of us, but I wonder how significant they are over 300/400/600/1200km. I really need those long-distance test rides. I'll try to get two consecutive weekends where I can get out and test ride centuries with a couple of benchmark Strava segments near the start; one flat sprint, one hill and one fast descent. Maybe a lap of Richmond Park too. It's hard, I know, but if I can keep as many variables constant as possible it'd be interesting to assess the difference between an endurance bike and a racy bike empirically as well as 'feel'.To add a bit more background: my FTP is only around 250 at the moment but I'm still getting newbie gains so hopefully this will go up a bit. On out-of-town solo rides over decent distances I'm currently averaging around 33km/h. I realise it makes me a cock but I do like a bit of Strava trophy hunting and PB attempts. I'm hoping to build the endurance over the next 12 months to tackle London-Monaco, one of the Spring Classics, audax events up to 400km and hopefully some Alpine stuff (Club du Cingles 'appeals'). In the mid-term I really fancy things like London-Edinburgh-London and maybe even the Transcontinental Race. Perhaps I'll succumb to n+1 by then but I'm hoping the bike I buy will get me to this stage without breaking me.
Birdthom said:
You mention days in the Alps. My 'quick' bike is a slammed 58cm Supersix (I'm 6 foot 1). It has a pretty steep saddle to bar drop but I find the position great and comfy most of the time. Out in the Alps this year however I found that repeated long steep descents were hurting my neck because I was having to crane my neck up further than usual. It got a bit tiresome after a while, and I'd consider taking my taller training bike next time. Not a problem here in the UK, but worth mentioning.
I can understand that. Do you reckon it was simply that your neck was unaccustomed to long descending periods or something permanent that you wouldn't adapt to? Would adding more spacers be a quick fix for trips like that, just to take the sting out of it? Gruffy said:
I can understand that. Do you reckon it was simply that your neck was unaccustomed to long descending periods or something permanent that you wouldn't adapt to? Would adding more spacers be a quick fix for trips like that, just to take the sting out of it?
Adding spacers would be a quick fix if I hadn't cut the steerer tube down!I think I probably would adapt to it given more time out there and some specific exercises, but that's not realistic for most people and I don't think it would really be worth the bother for most real-world riders. If you are knocking out 5 or 6 hours then you aren't going to be hammering away at 10 mile TT pace, so probably better (and ultimately faster) to build a bit more comfort into the setup. Either that or just leave your options open by not cutting your steerer tube ;-)
Birdthom said:
You mention days in the Alps. My 'quick' bike is a slammed 58cm Supersix (I'm 6 foot 1). It has a pretty steep saddle to bar drop but I find the position great and comfy most of the time. Out in the Alps this year however I found that repeated long steep descents were hurting my neck because I was having to crane my neck up further than usual. It got a bit tiresome after a while, and I'd consider taking my taller training bike next time. Not a problem here in the UK, but worth mentioning.
I'd agree with this, I ride a borrowed Giant Defy in the Apennines, and long descents get very hard on your neck, and also your wrists. You spend an hour grinding up some long mountain road, thinking all these hairpins are going to be magic coming down, but you're as knackered at the bottom as at the top, just with different parts of your body complaining at you.Try dropping your saddle 5-10mm, if your neck hurts your saddle to bar drop is too great, and at 6'1" on a 58 you are on the larger of the frame sizes you could ride.
As you rotate forward and down when on the drops (as opposed to the hoods) you will generally find you need to drop your saddle to allow for the change in position.
As you rotate forward and down when on the drops (as opposed to the hoods) you will generally find you need to drop your saddle to allow for the change in position.
Gruffy said:
First, some basics. I'm 35, 80kg, which is 'racing snake' for my height of 6'4". I only started riding in May but have fallen for cycling and am generally very fit, so I'm already reasonably quick. I do about 250km a week. I don't think I'm interested in racing but I do like the idea of endurance and audax events. I've done centuries and a 200km already. That said, I will be doing some challenging sportives and looking to set good times. I will, from time to time, get to ride in the alps and I also plan to ride London-Monaco next year. I have had a lot of knee surgery and haven't been troubling the rankings on hills, but that's just turning a corner and I'm slowly creeping into top 5-10% positions on Strava, so that may or may not be an issue any more.
I thought I'd settled on the 2015 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Ultegra, thinking that I could use this for audaxes and it wouldn't give up too much performance compared to, say, a SuperSix EVO when I wanted to put the hammer down, but an experienced riding buddy has just cast doubt on the wisdom of that. His advice was that the time saved over a long ride by having more comfort would be lost in pace and he'd go for the most focused bike possible.
All for n+1 and having a dedicated audax bike and a quick bike, but with regards s-1, s is probably a small number.
I'm aware that the best advice will be to try and test ride both styles, which I'm going to try and do, but I'm not sure how easy it will be to persuade Evans etc to let me take bikes out for 100 mile rides. After all, it really comes down to "is the racier bike still comfortable enough at the end of a massive ride". Ideally I'd do even bigger distances.
I've done enough research to have settled on 11-speed and disc brakes too. The extra gears are a plus for my knackered knees and the Alpine rides and I'm very keen on disc brakes. I'd rather keep discussion away from the pros and cons of these and focused on the bike.
So, with that out of the way, I invite opinion and advice from the sages of Pedal Powered. Where should my money go?
Sounds like you are over thinking it a bit, less thinking more pedalling! I would find a shop that stocks the two you have narrowed it down to and see what they are like, a decent shop will recommend other models based on them as well I thought I'd settled on the 2015 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Ultegra, thinking that I could use this for audaxes and it wouldn't give up too much performance compared to, say, a SuperSix EVO when I wanted to put the hammer down, but an experienced riding buddy has just cast doubt on the wisdom of that. His advice was that the time saved over a long ride by having more comfort would be lost in pace and he'd go for the most focused bike possible.
All for n+1 and having a dedicated audax bike and a quick bike, but with regards s-1, s is probably a small number.
I'm aware that the best advice will be to try and test ride both styles, which I'm going to try and do, but I'm not sure how easy it will be to persuade Evans etc to let me take bikes out for 100 mile rides. After all, it really comes down to "is the racier bike still comfortable enough at the end of a massive ride". Ideally I'd do even bigger distances.
I've done enough research to have settled on 11-speed and disc brakes too. The extra gears are a plus for my knackered knees and the Alpine rides and I'm very keen on disc brakes. I'd rather keep discussion away from the pros and cons of these and focused on the bike.
So, with that out of the way, I invite opinion and advice from the sages of Pedal Powered. Where should my money go?
Its easy to get carried away as there is too much choice now, plus you can narrow it down to what you want, then you just sit on you favourite choice and realise it isnt for you! Or you chose a bike and then realise you cant get one for 5 months due to order issues.
I agree with what 964 cup says and that you can tailor a bike for your fit/choice anyway, things like stem height, tyre choice/ etc will have big implications on how it rides and comfort. I also ride with people who pick "race focused" bikes, they then slam the stem "as per the rules" then then never ride on the drops as its too harsh for them!
For the 150-200 mile rides I have done, I have ended up taking my 23c/harsher reach/39/52 summer bike over my more relaxed 50/34 steel bike I specifically purchased for long rides!
I just find the steel bike a touch too inefficient and whilst the summer bike has a harsh ride and "harder" gears I get the miles in quicker.
Plus if you do want disks that limits your choice down anyway, I also bet there will be delays in getting them as well
I love CXs but if you want to start getting in top 10s on Strava, unless the road is broken/dirt trackish then it will hold you back , if its piss poor roads then they will help.
Dammit said:
Try dropping your saddle 5-10mm, if your neck hurts your saddle to bar drop is too great, and at 6'1" on a 58 you are on the larger of the frame sizes you could ride.
As you rotate forward and down when on the drops (as opposed to the hoods) you will generally find you need to drop your saddle to allow for the change in position.
It's only an issue on long days in the mountains, the rest of the time it's spot on. I might give that a go though. As you rotate forward and down when on the drops (as opposed to the hoods) you will generally find you need to drop your saddle to allow for the change in position.
Gruffy said:
To add a bit more background: my FTP is only around 250 at the moment but I'm still getting newbie gains so hopefully this will go up a bit. On out-of-town solo rides over decent distances I'm currently averaging around 33km/h. I realise it makes me a cock but I do like a bit of Strava trophy hunting and PB attempts. I'm hoping to build the endurance over the next 12 months to tackle London-Monaco, one of the Spring Classics, audax events up to 400km and hopefully some Alpine stuff (Club du Cingles 'appeals'). In the mid-term I really fancy things like London-Edinburgh-London and maybe even the Transcontinental Race. Perhaps I'll succumb to n+1 by then but I'm hoping the bike I buy will get me to this stage without breaking me.
If you're serious about Alpine climbing, then weight is definitely a factor. I can't decide if the weight penalty of discs on the way up would be outweighed by the braking advantage on the way back down. Last time in Oisans it rained the whole time but I had no trouble with rim brakes (Exalith, admittedly). Position-wise, it does help to lower your saddle a little (say 5mm); more to save your knees than your neck. IMO neck trouble (as cited by another poster) indicates that one's back isn't flat enough - in other words one's hunching down to the bars, rather than rotating at the hips. Given that most people climb on the tops, one could always flip the stem if the bike is otherwise too low at the front.I know I'm a bit of a Cervelo fanboy, but if you want a one-bike-for-everything including serious distances and Alpine climbing, then I'd say you could do worse than an R3 for your budget. I suspect you will end up with more than one wheelset eventually, though. I had an R3 before I got the R5, and it's a seriously comfortable bike. Bear in mind also that with 11-speed you can go for a very wide ratio cassette to get the ultra-low climbing gears you'll want for the Alps and for the back end of Audax rides. I ran a GS derailleur and an 11-32 cassette for the Alps and loved it (and so did my knees).
964Cup said:
IMO neck trouble (as cited by another poster) indicates that one's back isn't flat enough - in other words one's hunching down to the bars, rather than rotating at the hips.
I know I'm a bit of a Cervelo fanboy, but if you want a one-bike-for-everything including serious distances and Alpine climbing, then I'd say you could do worse than an R3 for your budget. I suspect you will end up with more than one wheelset eventually, though. I had an R3 before I got the R5, and it's a seriously comfortable bike. Bear in mind also that with 11-speed you can go for a very wide ratio cassette to get the ultra-low climbing gears you'll want for the Alps and for the back end of Audax rides. I ran a GS derailleur and an 11-32 cassette for the Alps and loved it (and so did my knees).
On the neck issue, my back is pretty flat and I am lucky with flexibility - it was more that a position which is 'racy' but fine normally wasn't great when pointing downhill at 10% for prolonged periods, as my head was having to rotate upwards 10% more than normal. Regular descents like Lautaret were no problem, but long really steep descents like Col du Granon showed it up for me. Nudging the saddle down a touch in those particular circumstances is a good suggestion so I'll give it a go next time. I know I'm a bit of a Cervelo fanboy, but if you want a one-bike-for-everything including serious distances and Alpine climbing, then I'd say you could do worse than an R3 for your budget. I suspect you will end up with more than one wheelset eventually, though. I had an R3 before I got the R5, and it's a seriously comfortable bike. Bear in mind also that with 11-speed you can go for a very wide ratio cassette to get the ultra-low climbing gears you'll want for the Alps and for the back end of Audax rides. I ran a GS derailleur and an 11-32 cassette for the Alps and loved it (and so did my knees).
R3 would probably be a great choice.
Dammit said:
Try dropping your saddle 5-10mm, if your neck hurts your saddle to bar drop is too great, and at 6'1" on a 58 you are on the larger of the frame sizes you could ride.
As you rotate forward and down when on the drops (as opposed to the hoods) you will generally find you need to drop your saddle to allow for the change in position.
Not sure how the dropping the saddle will help in this situation - if the saddle is at the correct position, lowering it may cause issues that otherwise aren't there...As you rotate forward and down when on the drops (as opposed to the hoods) you will generally find you need to drop your saddle to allow for the change in position.
As you say though - it is worth trying to lower the seat > bar drop.. I have to run my six with the stem flipped the "wrong way" (for some) so it raises the bars slightly... Doesn't look as good, but i'd rather be comfy!
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff