Have road bikes changed?

I think the most significant advance has been the realisation that fatbikers were right all along - wider wheels and tyres really are better.

Since I started riding mumble mumble years ago - yes a lot.  Much lower bars, much smaller seat tubes so sloping top tubes  Used to be you had your seat and tops of the drops at the same height.  Much more variety in bar bends as well and much bigger "hoods" to put your hands on

The general ‘position’ is heavily regulated (for UCI sanctioned racing). As well as some of the geometry figures.

It’s the little ‘marginal gains’ that have really improved.

if you can’t zone 3 at 6W/kg or descend alpine roads or ride in a 45mph peloton, and you are doing your own mechanicing they might not truly be defined as improvements.

Endurance bikes are the biggest change. Room for wider tyres, less aggressive geometry, comfortable riding position (less arse down). Discs, electric shifting....so yes. Definitely.

Marginal gains in my time perhaps (14 years perhaps). Can now fit lightweight, supple and grippy 30mm tyres under standard Shimano rim brake callipers which is awesome.

Attitudes might have changed slightly, I certainly feel less peer pressure to slam my stem than I used to haha

Yes, but they call them gravel bikes.

"Are the tyre contact points the same distance apart on modern bikes? Are the forks and seatpost positioned in similar or different angles?"

If you look at some modern geomety like Cervelo's approach of reach and stack focus it is quite different to the Italian approach of the 80-90s.
I'll go out on a limb and say the Italians did what they did for good reasons that still stand - CoM balance over a wheelbase that varied as little as possible because in bunch racing that's important. I also think that's why those bikes go round corneres with such a well balanced feeling, racing or not.

An out and out road bike has not changed in geometry in last 5 years (or much more) for seat post/head tube angle and BB height.  If you ride a bike with the same reach and stack between different brands I can't see them being much different as contact points will be very similar do to very similar seat post/head tube angle and BB height

My assumption is that ‘v’ stems from Cervelo and Bianchi still put the rider in the same approximate position but enable adjustment / weight / aero benefits? They do alter the traditional silhouette of the bike.

Pearson designed their new Forge with geometry based around the ‘normal’ rider, there was quite an interesting section on their website about it but they seem to have removed it.

I don't think it's that they have fundamentally changed so much as the more comfortable variants are more widely available. I could be wrong but things like my bog-standard canyon endurance (which I love for long day rides) were had to find back in the day. Anything could be hand-built for a price of course.

Also larger sizes improved when aluminium came along but that was a while back really. Growing up it was hard to find a steel frame to fit.

Various marginal things with the kit, like disc brakes that can shrug off a bit of grunge on the roads without shredding through your rims or stopping working.

What exactly is it that you think has changed so much on DH bikes in the past 5 years or so?

For Road Bikes, I’d say that little has changed, but much has been refined.  Brakes, wheels, tyres and their interface to the bike are the big areas.  The cockpit is essentially the same, the materials are pretty much the same, shifting is still the same (Di2 especially so), aero design is…somewhat considered, but not much.  Probably the biggest single thing is the flip back to BSA threaded BB.  5 years ago most things were PF.

A bit longer than 5 years and not really a road bike, but TT bike position has changed a lot. It wasn't that long ago that if you didn't have a saddle to arm rest drop of at least 200mm you were basically considered to be riding a hobby horse with the aero of a brick. Front ends have changed a lot there. And only triathletes rode a steeper seat tube angle.

I think it's important to differentiate between the bikes pro's and serious amateurs ride and what the rest of us muggles have

From perusal of geo charts and comparisons with my older rim braked bike the main things I think have perhaps changed in the last few years are pretty simple and not that groundbreaking.

Chainstays seem to have gotten a wee bit longer, maybe 8-10mm, probably to accommodate bigger tyres now everything is disc braked and space for a 30-34mm tyre is a bit of a requirement if you want to sell the thing, the knock on effect is that wheel bases have grown by about the same amount.

Head and seat tube angles, BB drop, reach figures for most bikes are about the same as they were 20 odd years ago (all IME/IMO of course).

I agree the major difference is the endurance bike. Let's be honest, most road riders don't really need aggressive full on race geometry. Gearing is also a huge change since the turn of the century. My 90s Harry Hall has 52/42 and 11-28, 50/4 and 11-34 is much better for "general use". Since it now seems normal for TT bikes to have a higher front end than in the old days (better aero than extreme arse up head down) I wonder if that will migrate to road race bikes (increased stack).

Not really. Geometry is fixed on 73 degrees parallel plus or minus half a degree, a sub one metre wheelbase, and similar saddle to drops distance. Of course there have been changes in materials, head tube and handlebar drop, but location of contact points is little different. I’m less convinced by silly wide tyre on continental roads. Surrey potholes, sure, but the tour is largely raced on resurfaced roads

My 11 year old Defy SL has current geometry, as do my Propels and older steel bikes. Both have decent stack and my stems are slammed. And I’m not overly flexible. The TT positions are achieved by risers, My trike gets the same with a longer headtube instead.

MUCH bigger tyre clearances in general, and wider rims... In 2019 most disc brake bikes had clearance for 28mm tyres, now clearance for 32's is expected and often clearance for 35's is normal.

Rim widths have gone up... In 2019 a 17-19mm internal rim width was the norm... Now it's 21-23mm...

Wheelbases are typically still around 1m give or take a few mm, but even the pro's bikes tend to have a slightly more relaxed "stack to reach" ratio these days.

Integrated bar/stems have really made a BIG comeback on pro level bikes.

And whether we want/like it or not, fully integrated cable routing (usually through the headset!) has now become the norm too...

Internal cables/hoses

Tubes which are a variety of profiles rather than cylindrical

MY road bike is probably 60 years old.  I bought it second hand.  It was clearly never a touring bike as it was set up and sized for tubulars and had campag kit on it and is a 531 frame with a french BB.  My guess either a club enthusiasts good bike or a racers training bike but who knows.  Certainly not a tourer - no braze ons and tubs.

handlebars are several inches higher than a more modern bike as the headtube is much longer.  tops of the bars are around seat height.  Its also got huge toe overlap so a very short wheelbase with short chainstays as well and I think a steep head angle

So in that time road bikes have changed an awful lot in the riding position imo

Tops of the bars are around seat height

the drops will be in the same place as modern bikes. Handlebar drop was 17cm rather than the 10-12 now.

So in that time road bikes have changed an awful lot in the riding position imo

Not really, BITD you'd have spent most of your race in the drops, the deep deep drops. Hoods were rarely used. As they were bloody uncomfortable.

Now they're pretty much the defacto/default position. I've done 100+ miles days in the hoods.

Also, another driver for seat tubes getting shorter is that seatpins have got stronger. So you don't need to have your frame made for you, or made in a dozen sizes, as now, each size will cover 100-120mm of inner leg length. BITD, it might only cover half that.

In summary, no, they haven't actually changed that much, as far as the riding goes, refined a lot though.

Looking at this Gios it appears the same as it would have been in 80's so assuming they have;t amended the geometry.

https://gios.it/products/vintage-blue

For a size 54 it is 73/73 with a 140 head tube so the same as most road bikes you would buy today.

Endurance bikes are the biggest change. Room for wider tyres, less aggressive geometry, comfortable riding position (less arse down).

Not really anything new.

Sportsman and Clubman type bikes where around for the best part of a century. Then bicycling came to mean "racing" and all the sensible bike were dropped.

MUCH bigger tyre clearances in general, and wider rims… In 2019 most disc brake bikes had clearance for 28mm tyres, now clearance for 32’s is expected and often clearance for 35’s is normal.

Rim widths have gone up… In 2019 a 17-19mm internal rim width was the norm… Now it’s 21-23mm…

And I guess this translates to more comfort / less road buzz, which in turn can translate to going faster and less fatigue.

I have a 2018 high-mod carbon road bike with discs and 28mm tyres, and the ride feel is massively different to the 2014 high-mod carbon road bike I had before that (which was not massively different from the 2010 carbon road bike before that).

So in short, the big changes were happening about five years ago. But they weren't necessarily about geometry and contact points. In more recent years, it's been more about iteration and a bit more tyre clearance / moar aero.

When Giant first produced Mike Burrows (RIP) ground breaking TCR compact frame, they only made three sizes. The beauty of the design (for Giant) was that stem and seatpost length could accommodate riders with more nimble inventory. And it worked well. When the pros took to racing the TCR they complained that three sizes weren’t enough and the SML added XS, ML, XL to make six frame sizes which they still make. The geometry of the TCR was really classic road geometry from the 70’s and 80’s, (73 degree parallel and 56cm effective top tube for medium frame), and the only change was the addition of the word “effective” to top tube length. Now almost all frames have some compactness to their design. Cannondale, and more recent aero frames being the exception.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/icons-of-cycling-giant-tcr-206346

Just had a look on the geometry geeks website and compared a Tarmac SL2 from 2008 to an SL8 from 2024. There’s not much difference in the geometry at all. They even have 1990s bikes on there.

The differences really are refinements in gearing, bigger tyre clearance, electronic shifting, internal routing and hydraulic disc brakes. These changes really do make a huge difference. I now run 28mm wide tyres at 60 PSI. I remember TTing 15 years ago pumping up my 23mm tubulars to 150PSI thinking that was quicker. I would now run 32mm wide tyres if I had the clearance. I’d need to buy a new frame for that I have an older giant TCR from 2019. 28mm is tight the new model has clearance for 33mm tyres.

Electronic gear changing is fantastic. Only downside is the expense of replacing a rear mech if you smash it.

Hydraulic disc brakes total game changer. I remember running carbon rims with rim brakes on my old TT bike in the wet and missing the dead turn in a 10 mile TT. Cursing the extra 100 yards and time I wasted. I remember having to brake once to clear the water then a second time to slow down. Nightmare.

Internal routing looks good but is a pain for maintenance especially when you have to change the headset bearings. I have to shorten my rear hose each time cutting of the olive to get it through the frame. I suppose by the time I need a new hose the bike will be old.

Would be great to ride back to back a 1980s pro bike with a modern pro bike. Probably no difference in weight or position just a huge difference in comfort, shifting and braking.

Would be great to ride back to back a 1980s pro bike with a modern pro bike. Probably no difference in weight or position just a huge difference in comfort, shifting and braking.

Yes position would be same as still a 73/73 frame, 10ish cm stem etc,.

There could be a noticeable weight difference though, shifting would be downtube shifters and tyres could be 21mm so to most people a much worse bike to ride.

Would be great to ride back to back a 1980s pro bike with a modern pro bike. Probably no difference in weight or position just a huge difference in comfort, shifting and braking.

GCN have several videos on their YouTube channel of this sort of thing. Retro bike in modern circuit race, bike from 80's/90's against same brand from now etc.

I have to shorten my rear hose each time cutting of the olive to get it through the frame

You can pry the olive open.

Would be great to ride back to back a 1980s pro bike with a modern pro bike. Probably no difference in weight or position just a huge difference in comfort, shifting and braking.

I'd say the difference in aerodynamics would be the key one.

I've done two crits and two road races this year on a bike from 2008, with exposed cables and shallow wheels (because that's all I have).

I feel like I'm genuinely at a disadvantage in sprints - but that might just be because my sprint is rubbish 😀 .

Would be great to ride back to back a 1980s pro bike with a modern pro bike. Probably no difference in weight or position just a huge difference in comfort, shifting and braking.

I have a steel colnago from the late eighties / early nineties which is probably a little below a pro class frame but not by much.

The frame is lovely, handles well and comfortable but it is a different shape to modern bikes; longer top tube and much less seat pin showing. It can only take 25c tyres on my 32h colnago rims.

Brakes are ultegra and so pretty much the same  compared to modern rim brakes. Gearing is much too high 52/42- 13-25 and nine speed.

It has sti shifters so that is a big improvement on the simplex downtube shifters of the early eighties and clip in pedals only came in in the mid-eighties, another big change.

With a bit of fettling it would not be far off a decent road bike today (mainly change the gearing and modern wheels)

Don’t get excited by exposed cables. The CdA from a straw (diameter of a cable) travelling at 25 mph equates to about 1-2W per metre of exposed cable. My original propel with some exposed cables is costing me about 0.5W max. It’s a fashion thing. Pure and simple. Deep wheels will provide perhaps 10-15W, the frame tube profiles might buy another 20W over a steel skinny tubes frame. If that. But cables are not where the gains lie.

The most significant improvement is in the race skinsuit that everyone now rides, not the bike.

So in short, the big changes were happening about five years ago. But they weren’t necessarily about geometry and contact points. In more recent years, it’s been more about iteration and a bit more tyre clearance / moar aero.

Funnily enough the UCI rules for Discs on Road bikes were updated in in 2018 weren't they? The significant change was Disc brakes in Grand tours.

Yes Disc braked road bikes existed prior to 2018, but their acceptance for competitive use was certainly a catalyst. all of a sudden the rim doesn't have to do braking anymore so it can more easily be made of Carbon, made in more Aerodynamic shapes, made wider to accommodate larger tyres which give give more compliance and volume, and by extension these changes required changes to frames to accommodate, and hence we are where we are today.

The long and the short of it is that an update to the racing regs has yielded changes to the design of all road bikes, whether intended/bought for competitive use or not. There are obvious benefits and some minor drawbacks to this.

But the thing that changed the Endurance road bikes us tubby muggles trundle about lanes on and enter the odd sportive with was a UCI ruling prompted by cycle industry pressure. The rate and extent of the changes has been interesting to note; 5 years and you'd be forgiven for thinking rim brakes and Skinny tyres were a distant memory from over a decade ago.

Would be great to ride back to back a 1980s pro bike with a modern pro bike.

Biggest difference is probably the stiffness plus, as TiRed says, the aero gains of the frame and wheels.

Agree although aero stuff doesn't make it that different to ride.  The geometry hasn't changed because it doesn't need to change.  Roads are roads and 73/73 works.  No need/benefit for slacker head tubes, changes to BB height and so on.

The changes in MTB geometry are because people are doing different things and have different requirements and riding styles.  If you ride the sort of XC that people rode in 1990 then a 1990 bikes geometry is still fine.  My only bike is a 1996 MTB and it is great and I prefer it to a slacker modern bike I have owned previously for riding single track and gravel.  If I was riding trail centres then my 1996 bike would be worse than a modern geometry bike.

The changes in MTB geometry are because people are doing different things and have different requirements and riding styles.

I think these things have reinforced each other - change in bikes have changed trails, which then encourage more changes in bikes and so on.