You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So my ageing Cube Litening Super HPC road frame is really showing the worse for wear - least of all some noticable wheel rub in the rear end that's been worrying me for a while.
I've been trying to replace it with a modern aero road frame, and replicate the fit but improve the performance.
Every frameset i've come across in the same size has an enormous endurance bike headtube.
My 56cm Cube has a 13cm headtube. I run it slammed with a zero stack upper headset, and a -9deg 120mm stem.
56 Scott Foil? M/L Giant Propel? All 17-18cm headtubes that require proprietary upper caps that mean my bars are, at very minimum, 5cm higher than on the Cube.
What's the point of an aero frameset saving 10W (most of the gains are in cables and handlebars) when I'm going to ADD 30W because I'm in a shitty, non-aero position.
FWIW have probably answered my own question. Bikes are made for the kind of people that would ride them...
My Canyon Aeroad has a 130mm headtube. But I don’t think it can be slammed due to the propriety bars, it has “aero” spacers and integrates aero bar/stem.
I don’t recall seeing any of the newer breed of aero bars that are slammed, integrated bars and stems seem to stop this.
Im still in a relatively aero position (I think). I feel that my back is flatter and the narrower bars have me more tucked in. Could all be placebo though.
It does feel significantly faster than my “winter bike” which is a Trek Domane, the ultimate endurance bike.
Should have added, my canyon is a size small, effectively a 54 in normal sizes.
They finally realised it's not the 80s anymore.
Looked at Treks H1 geo? Failing that, look at the less mainstream brands, who aren't necessarily targeting the mass market.
Failing THAT, go custom
Sounds like you’re looking at endurance/sportive style bikes. Have a look at the race geometry frames. Lots of old blokes like me can’t manage a slammed stem and if the market says tall head tubes sell that’s what the manufacturers will produce.
Sounds like you’re looking at endurance/sportive style bikes.
In what way is a scott foil and giant propel advanced sl developed as an endurance bike?
They finally realised it’s not the 80s anymore.
Did the physics of air resistance change in the last 40 years or something to mean that having my body 5cm higher up will now not produce more drag?
If tops vs drops is 10cm and saves like 30-40W at 45kph, how can 6cm higher bars not fail to cause at least 10W of drag?
Looked at Treks H1 geo? Failing that, look at the less mainstream brands, who aren’t necessarily targeting the mass market.
14cm in a 56. Excellent. Now if only a H1 madone came up secondhand for less than £3k for the frame!
😀
No they went and researched that folding your self in half caused more of a drop in power than the drag caused by the position .
No they went and researched that folding your self in half caused more of a drop in power than the drag caused by the position .
An interestingly weird statement given the appearance of the pro peloton in the last few years. However, I think the answer is I need to start looking at 54 frames with 130 stems, rather than 56 frames with 110 sems,
Interestingly the pro peloton have been using some of the bikes you mention, e.g. foil
Interestingly the pro peloton have been using some of the bikes you mention, e.g. foil
With frames 2 sizes smaller than they should be on, and 150mm stems...
Ebike. Bosh!
Trail rats point was proven by the testing done on Obree recently on his aero bikes. He was actually producing less power in some of the more extreme positions
proven? er... no
The results of one test with one older rider. no matter who they are is not proof of very much.
Especially using the only rider in the world to beat drug cheats fueled by marmalade sandwiches for your test
Put your seat up
X
To actually properly prove the point you will need two tests - one with bars at height continuity prefers and one being 5cm higher but all other factors being equal. Where are those test results or are we going to have to clue together and book a wind tunnel session....
If you have the geo charts, then I'd consider looking at stack height rather than just head tube length. Discs mean that forks have changed a bit - thinner crowns that don't have to be drilled for callipers. Head tubes can be longer as a result.
I think Stack height would give you a better comparison against your current bike.
Interesting point about calipers - but i'm cheap and am sticking to rim brakes, despite nearly dying coming off lofthouses in a rainstorm on a fast club ride a few weeks ago.
Put your seat up
I mean I guess I could go for leg extension surgery, but I'd still have my head the same height above the bars.
I'm a flexible bloke and was happy pushing similar wattages during FTP tests both on the drops and tops of the old bike. But the new drops are the same height as the old drops!
Also I think you might have missed the point of that humorous obree test. His available power output was lower in absurd tuck positions or lower positions - but he still went faster because aerodynamics trump everything. Ever looked at a pro TT bike?
The new Cervelo geo makes the 5 series more like you describe with short head tubes, so the r5 or the brand new s5 would possibly suit. The latter has a stupid stem though...
If you have the geo charts, then I’d consider looking at stack height rather than just head tube length. Discs mean that forks have changed a bit – thinner crowns that don’t have to be drilled for callipers. Head tubes can be longer as a result.
The old scott foil (rim brakes only) had a long head tube but a relatively short fork. No idea how it all balanced out
MAMILs like me taking up recreational/fitness cycling in their 40s, trying to regain their youth in the fitness stakes, rather than good looks. 😉
My 58cm Cube Attain GTC Pro Disc has a monstrous 202mm headtube with 610mm stack and 388mm reach, which now just has ~10mm of spacers above the conical headset spacer and below the -6 degree stem, rather than 30mm (steerer not cut).
I could have bought the 56cm to reduce the stack to 591mm and the reach by a massive 3mm, but I was nervous about relying on my weakened lower back to stay as good as it has been in the last ~18 months. When my back went in 2008, it made my 2006 54cm Felt F5C as good as unrideable, the low front end never took long to really upset it, but I stupidly kept hold of it until last summer in the hope of being able to ride it again until as good as giving it away to a mate for drivetrain parts.
MAMILs like me taking up recreational/fitness cycling in their 40s, trying to regain their youth in the fitness stakes, rather than good looks.
The people you describe are not generally best served by aero bikes , more like regular race bikes or sportive bikes .
Given the amount of wind tunnel testing and claims of " fastest bike ever from manufacturers I would suggest buying a modern aero bike and riding it , i'm sure it will be as good or better than your existing bike regardless of what the geometry charts say .
I’m short in the leg for my height, so sized down on my current road bike (Orbea orca) to a 53. It’s got a 148mm headtube, so not super low, and I run it slammed with a 130mm stem. This gives me a better position than the 55 which is 2cm higher on the stack and only 6mm shorter (so likely a 120mm stem needed anyway).
Aside from personal anecdotes about what we all ride (or think we should ride), why not search out a bike fitter with an adjustable jig and try out a few setups on different theoretical frame sizes, then find a few demos of different bikes to get an idea of ride characteristics.
if you are anywhere near Swindon/Cirencester then I offer such services for £15, as do many others I know across the country. Hopefully money well spent before dropping big cash on a new frame/ bike.
I had the same issue shopping for a new commuter, I ended up going for a size smaller than recommended and buying a 400mm seat post and a 110mm stem. That way I got a 545 ETT and a 145HT But it fits nicely now.
It seems to me that if you're not spending over £2000 you're looking at endurance geometry. I didn't want to spend more than £800.
I'm spending £500-£1000 on a secondhand frame.
Foil, Aeroad, Propel, Venge, Reacto (too heavy really) et al.
I'd probably say yes to an ultimate slx though.
Did the physics of air resistance change in the last 40 years or something to mean that having my body 5cm higher up will now not produce more drag?
No, but they now have a lot more wind tunnels and CFD.
Wasn't it proven that higher bars are more aero as they result in one tall/narrow head tube exposed to the wind and flat forearms on the hoods or in the drops, rather than riders holding onto the horizontal bit of the drops with almost straight/vertical arms. Your back/head are in the same position on either setup.
Pretty much as TINAS writes, just look at the fastest guys on TT bikes out there, flat forearms and backs.
Tom Dumoulin for example
your forgetting about the advantages of being able to lick your front wheel - dont need to carry a bottle in a 50TT, just stick the tongue out and lick the moisture off your front wheel.
On my canyon aeroad which doesn't have the integrated stem, you can remove the funky aero shaped spacer above the headtube and run the stem straight on to the bearings if you want, it's what some of the pros do and I do it too when I'm using it for TT's, the only issue is that the rain can get into the bearings I was thinking about making a big flat spacer to keep it out, but I've not bothered yet.
No they went and researched that folding your self in half caused more of a drop in power than the drag caused by the position
My guess is that's not the reason behind the preponderance of tall head tubes. I think it's just about providing a more relaxed riding position for the typical leisure rider that makes up most of the sales market.
Trail rats point was proven by the testing done on Obree recently on his aero bikes. He was actually producing less power in some of the more extreme positions
They measured the different drag coefficients for various bikes and positions, but I don't think they made any measurement of how much power Obree produced in each position?
Pretty much as TINAS writes, just look at the fastest guys on TT bikes out there, flat forearms and backs.
If only such a position was sustainable on a road bike.
If you want a smaller head tube then why not just size down with a longer stem as has been said already?
As the OP said already:...
I think the answer is I need to start looking at 54 frames with 130 stems, rather than 56 frames with 110 sems