[Closed] Road bike that climbs

In theory, light ones. In practice, those with a light rider who generates reasonable power.

I can assure you a fat bloke on a light bike doesn't climb well 🙄

Being 85kg/ 5'6" and riding a 2008 Boardman comp I believe both could be improved upon.

My usual routes are Holmfirth/ Holme Moss/ Snakes Pass/ Strines.

The other Holmfirth/ Greenfield/ Standege/ Huddersfield.

I'm only really interested in climbing- the flat runs bore me.

The boardman is awful, anything over 30mph downhill and I get a wobble of doom on.

The boardman is awful, anything over 30mph downhill and I get a wobble of doom on.

So you want a bike that climbs well or descends well? They're often mutually exclusive.

You're going to have to spend crazy money to notice a significant difference from you Boardman going uphill, and if you're spending that money there isn't much between the top frames anyway.

Can I give you the standard STW response of "Try upgrading the wheels first?"

Oh oh oh I know this one.....

"What tyres for........"

New kenesis race light is designed for powerful climbing, looks awesome too.

[url= http://road.cc/content/news/87063-kinesis-launch-aithein-limited-edition-finish ]Kenesis racelight[/url]

I have a couple of mates with this very bike and they don't have a wobble problem whatsoever whether they're sprinting on the flat or coasting on the way down. obviously you'll have consulted the googlemachine but if not this is as good a starter as any

http://www.roadbikerider.com/advanced-skills/speed-wobble

This one?
http://road.cc/content/review/85070-canyon-ultimate-cf-slx-90-sl

Get one with an engine. Or upgrade the current "engine". Otherwise, it's pretty much just weight, but unless you've forgotten to take a pair of panniers off, the differences are going to be marginal.

Something cheap, stiff and aluminium or expensive and plastic. Either one powered by strong legs, heart and a good set of lungs.

But.....but...what size wheels?

Yeah, the Canyon is maybe 2kg lighter than your current one, saving you about 2% in overall bike+bottles+rider+clothing weight.

Some mountain bikes are better climbers due to geometry, suspension tech etc. With road bikes it doesn't really come into it, unless the geometry is really odd.

The road bike industry is to busy gearing it's self up for disk brakes to worry about wheel sizes. The re-inventing of the wheel will come when electrics and hydraulics are the standard.

Dont you know..Its not about the bike! 😉

Thanks for the good advice. I'm just wanting something fresh, not looking at spending heaps of money, the boardman didn't cope very weel with the snow and is going to get restridted to winter/ commute useage. I was just wondering what too look out for in a climber, I guess as I won't be shedding out loads of money its irrevelant.

Would have thought longer chain stays would be top of the list, longer wheelbase so the front wheel stays on the ground. Most climbers tend to have longer stems. Not sure about seat tube, would imagine further forward would be better, head tubes tend to be slacker on MTBs.

So logically >42cm chainstays, 74deg seat tube, 72deg head tube, shortish top tube?

Sounds a bit like a cyclocross frame only they have higher bottom brackets that muck things up. Perhaps an audax frame or Genesis Eq?

Now I've always thought bikes with short chainstays climb better. Something you can get over the front of.

I like the idea of a cyclocross frame to give me the option of off road however they seem to have shorter top tubes, not ideal for climbing.

a stretched, tall cockpit (relatively)? one of my bikes has higher bars than the other (both set to 'comfort' rather than 'speed') and I find standing up climbing easier on the taller one. I soon adjust when riding the other but I do notice the difference.

As noted above, there are no 'climbing' bikes other than the stripped down things that get used for hillclimb events.

The only thing that might make a difference is having low handlebars, so when you stand up and climb you can straighten your arms to reduce the strain on your triceps.

Being 85kg/ 5'6" and riding a 2008 Boardman comp I believe both could be improved upon.

I'm 5'6" and 55kg and have ridden a boardman, I think you'll find "it's not about the bike". 🙂

[i]I've always thought bikes with short chainstays climb better.[/i]

I agree. My old Coppi road bike was a faster climber than the lighter ones which followed it. Down to those short, straight stays I reckon.

Which road bikes/ frames climb well?

Which ever bike has a rider who can climb well! 🙄

Wobble over 30mph?

Have you had the wheels balanced?

Which road bikes/ frames climb well?

Which ever bike has a rider who can climb well

I guess he means: which road bike would the SAME RIDER find is the best climber. Or is that too logical? 🙄

so you want a cheap road frame that climbs well but doubles up as a 'cross bike?

Holmfirth? Orange Five! Or is this place going downhill....

So, I see thus far we've had recommendations for:

- long chainstays
- short chainstays
- high front end
- low front end
- long reach
- short reach

It's [i]almost[/i] as if (a) the bike's not really all that important, and/or (b) STW advice is on a par with flipping a coin 🙂

Also, gearing. 52/36 and a race block might sound great when you're trying to impress people on internet forums but point the bike up the hardknott and it's a different story no matter how powerful you are.

the boardman didn't cope very weel with the snow and is going to get restridted to winter/ commute useage

I'd say the STW advise so far makes total sense Bez... 😕 8)

Personally I'd say that stiffness, particularly around the BB and chainstays, is the key to a good climbing road bike. Weight obviously matters as you are fighting gravity, but it's overall weight that matters (including you, kit etc) and I wouldn't sacrifice stiffness just to save a pound or two.

Something cheap, stiff and aluminium or expensive and plastic

Or cheap and plastic. Which (relatively speaking) is what my road bike frame is, on a bike which is probably lighter than most of yours. Though it's really all just about power to weight, provided you've got your position on the bike sorted to enable you to put maximum power down. How would any other factor come into it?

Would have thought longer chain stays would be top of the list, longer wheelbase so the front wheel stays on the ground.

Do you often have problems with keeping the front wheel on the ground on road climbs?

Gearing? Alternatively try riding a cross bike up the same climbs on knobbly tyres then go back to your road bike. It'll suddenly seem to be climbing a lot better... works for me.

[b]My bike climbs well, heres part of the reveiw:-[/b]

"This all adds up to a remarkably light package; at 7.17kg for the complete bike it’s within a couple of hundred grams of the UCI limit. That’s impressive for a bike with this level of kit, but not unexpected when paired to the *** frame, which shaves plenty of weight through some clever touches like the use of carbon dropouts and even a carbon fibre front mech mount.

The wears its racing heart on its sleeve, with a shallow head-tube and long top-tube combined with a slacker than standard seat-tube leading to a shorter wheelbase. Out on the road the ’s racing prowess is very evident. That long top-tube and the layback seatpost put you over the rear and in the prime position to really get on top of the standard 53/39 gearing. The low overall weight makes climbing almost fun and despite the standard double we never felt the need for lower gearing, even on the hills on our test route where we’re normally reaching for them.

You’d expect a frame with such little weight to be found wanting when it comes to sprints, but it’s worth remembering that a certain * ****** made his name winning aboard an ***. The Manx Missile didn’t have any issues with it on his way to his multiple stage wins, and neither do we, especially with the way it responds under power. In fact we absolutely love the way it reacts. The shorter wheelbase and sharp steering makes it easy to throw around, yet the long reach and over-the-rear weight make descending a joy too.

So there you see what makes a climbing bike, trouble is it doesnt appear to work for me when climbing 🙁
However the descents thats a different story 🙂

Getting the seat height right makes a huge difference to seated climbing - an inch too low can rob you of 20% forward motion for the same effort in my own unscientific experience. Less so if you generally climb out of the saddle of course.

Obvious perhaps but try edging the saddle up and down to maximise the transfer of your effort to the road (it's free).

"[i]52/36 and a race block might sound great when you're trying to impress people on internet forums[/i]"

A 36 is going to impress no-one, fella 😉

85kg/ 5'6......loose 10kg you bloater and you'll be much faster up the hills.

also try shifting the saddle forward a little (just 10mm or so at a time) to put your weight back over the crank when climbing seated. may have adverse effect when not climbing.

I don't get how low handlebars could possibly help when climbing on the road, seated or standing. and I like to be able to breathe freely when standing on the pedals.

Because on a steep climb high bars will be up by your chest so your upper body will be forced back. Low bars mean you can get over the front when standing.
When seated (the way I was dragged up) is bum on the back of the saddle and push the bars from the centre.

Mine was literally built for them
[IMG] [/IMG]

Loose 10kg, you'll climb better

At 5' 6" and 85 kg you should be able to loose a lot more than 10 kg. more like 20.
if you are fat then frame type is going to be pretty irrelevant for climbing.

"[i]Because on a steep climb high bars will be up by your chest so your upper body will be forced back. Low bars mean you can get over the front when standing.[/i]"

But on the other hand, highish bars may mean a more comfortable reach, a less stressed lower back, and less rocking when standing. Different things may work for different people. I'm 11" taller than the OP (though only a couple of kilos heavier 😉 ) so what applies to one may not apply to the other.

so low bars are useful in as much as they allow one to get over the front when climbing? so would it be fair to say that this is only an issue if you have problems with the front end popping up on steep climbs? (not a prob I have but the roads on my commute only go up to 1:8.) perhaps longer chainstays would allow a taller front end then?

Bez - Member

"52/36 and a race block might sound great when you're trying to impress people on internet forums"

A 36 is going to impress no-one, fella

I dont have a 52/36 its a 52/39 with a race block 😛

Being 85kg/ 5'6" and riding a 2008 Boardman comp I believe both could be improved upon.

Very much the former. You could easily lose 10kg, your bike will be 2kg at most. You'll also find it easier to hold a more aerodynamic position on the bike.

I've significantly improved my climbing ability this year (over 10% faster up my local hill climb), and I lost just 3kg since Christmas. I haven't changed my bike.

CX then you can ride Ramsden rd, Trans Pennine Bridleway, TPT and other nice non road bits on those loops

[i]A 36 is going to impress no-one, fella[/i]

too late to fix the typo now. 😉

did I also mention that hiding behind the 39 is a 30 😀

Just for perspective, I'm 6ft, 67kg and ride a 2010 Boardman Pro Carbon.

I like riding up hills (I go to the Algarve once a year and take in the climb to Foia, my PB of which is a few seconds over an hour) , and have never had any speed wobble when coming down the other side. Cheddar Gorge, Burrington Combe, Brockley Combe, Shipham Hill, and others leading up onto the Mendips are all hills that I've tackled on my bike without any issue (other than my legs not being powerful enough).

Drop 15+ kg and you'll be flying. Also sack off all the advice from the STW internet bike fitters and go and get yourself a real bike fit, mine did my riding wonders.

+1 for losing weight, the frame is not the issue here!

spend the money on a cx bike for your winter training and commuting. Shed a few pounds, train all winter on aheavyier bike and you'll eb flying next summer on the current road bike

Ahh - the good old 'get a bike fit' - make sure you don't get a cheap one...! I had a bike fit done and ended up with my saddle waaay too low, so swings and roundabouts.

I'm assuming that you're factoring in losing weight so regarding a bike, do you really one something that's just good for climbing? In that case, have a look at what they use for hill climbs - fixed gear, tt bars, light wheels....

Road bikes are much of a muchness now, for me personally I'd focus on a decent set of wheels, the position being comfortable (ignore all this 'slam that stem' nonsense) and if you plan on doing a lot of climbing, make sure you have the gearing to do so. Ignore the masses - a compact will help, especially if you're not a racing whippet. No point having a 53/11 if you never use it or if it means you're over geared going up hills. Ignore fashion, 'the rule' or whatever. And personally I'd avoid a cross bike as your only road bike but thats just me..

Sadly guys I don't have an ounce of fat on me!!!

I'm not massively intent on spending too much money, I am a mountain biker, the road bike is just a bcak up.

I was wondering if there was a quick fix to the wobble problem, I think I'll try lower my saddle, I was wondering if lowering the bars/ shorter stem might help.

FWIW, I was having lunch at the fleece just out of Holmfirth the other week, saw a chap coming off the moor, having quite obviously just ridden over it, in full club kit and riding

(I kid you not)

A chopper. Yep, a Raleigh Chopper! If anyone knows him, please buy him a drink from me, for both being so ridiculous, and manning the FU!

Goes to show, it's the engine, not the chassis and body that gets you up hills 🙂

Ahh - the good old 'get a bike fit' - make sure you don't get a cheap one...!

😆

Sadly guys I don't have an ounce of fat on me!!!

Well a) you do
b) Who said anything about fat. Losing weight will make you go up hills faster, no point carrying excess muscle bulk

You seem to want to cure speed wobble, which is totally at odds with wanting to go up hills fast!

the wobble problem is very very unlikely to be anything to do with the height of the saddle or the length of the stem, it's more probably a loose headset or wheel bearing, so check those first, unless of course you're merely trying to justify a new bike

or it could just be 'one of those things', i had a bike that speed wobbled at 48 miles an hour, pedal through it at 50 and it was fine, not a speed that was obtained often though so not really a problem, but a speed wobble at 30, hmmm.

how do you know he's carrying excess muscle? maybe op has a hunch.

edit - or a hump even.

edit edit - or is just really well endowed!

It's all irrelevant, gravity doesn't give a shit why he's heavy, he's still heavy!

Sadly guys I don't have an ounce of fat on me!!!

At 5'6" and 85kg, is this you?

[img] [/img]

Lol.

Something with a compact crankset and an ability to spin not honk. Oh the 52/39ers will scoff on the first hill or two, but a hundred miles in 39x25 is not so funny.

I ride 50/36 and a close ratio block. Spin at up to 120rpm without any issues and can drop plenty of my clubmates on the Surrey Hills. It helps that I am 5'11" and 69 kg too, I guess 😉

That's personal though innit. I'm perfectly happy on 53/39 around the Surrey Hills, probably go compact on my next road bike, or the Dura Ace 52/36, as I think that's a nice middle ground.

But frankly it's only really the steepest hills where you're in bottom gear, and that's the only place it becomes relevant.

speed wobble? - a dodgy tyre/tube/rim?

just a guess...

Stiff frame, stiff wheels, long stem, low bars, short chainstays. And the ligher the better.

Stiff frame, stiff wheels, long stem, low bars, short chainstays. And the ligher the better.

There's a fella who knows what's what.

The best climbers in the world are racing in that France at the moment, why not have a look at the bikes they are riding for a few tips?

52/36 is a nice mix. Indeed 52/39 isn't bad with 12/25 on the back for Surrey (Bar Hatch excepted). But dropping to 50/36 allows a closer spaced rear (12/23) for mortals like myself and the 36 is used a bit more. With the stock 12/28, i was not using the 36 at all. Bit like not using the drops 😉 .

I race on the 50 without any issues (or comments), but i am a spinner - average cadence last night was 102 for 58 minutes.

The best climbers in the world are racing in that France at the moment, why not have a look at the bikes they are riding for a few tips?

except for one minor detail i would agree, thing is, is the OP a pro with a decent level of fitness, flexibility, and no beer gut?

Something with a compact crankset and an ability to spin not honk. Oh the 52/39ers will scoff on the first hill or two, but a hundred miles in 39x25 is not so funny.

did 135miles the other week including the Forest of Dean, Malverns and Gospel pass with a 53/39, 13-23. I survived. and i am only average fitness

Gearing isn't that important in the grand scheme of things, the difference between a compact and standard chainset isn't that great. The only place it matters is if your doing steep long climbs or horrifically steep short climbs, the climbs that are few and far between in the UK.

Most climbing is in the riders head, accept it hurts occasionally and you'll ride most things.

Indeed 52/39 isn't bad with 12/25 on the back for Surrey (Bar Hatch excepted)

Meh, even Barhatch is doable, in fact I don't find it any harder on the Madone with a standard double vs the Allez with a compact, I think on climbs like that you just dig a little deeper and MTFU! Bit like 1x10 on the MTB!

I did do a century on a new Madone 6-series demo bike with a compact and 11-28 a couple of months ago, and did the whole thing in the big ring comfortably, which I quite liked, I'm up and down a bit more on the double if it's hilly. Agree 50-11 is plenty tall enough as a top gear.

except for one minor detail i would agree, thing is, is the OP a pro with a decent level of fitness, flexibility, and no beer gut?

The OP was asking about bicycles, I think the bicycles used by those climbing chappies would be a good starting point.

crikey, good starting point agreed, just concerned that trying to emulate a slammed stem and long reach, as per the average pros bike, without the decent flexibility and core strength is not going to be very comfortable. be better kicking it back a little and slowly adapting the bike if you want to get the same position rather than trying to get there in one step.

Climbing works best if you actually put some effort in rather than trying to sit and spin. Winching up there as you might on a MTB, spinning away in the granny ring, just doesn't work as well on road bikes.

The bike itself is less of an issue although light/stiff helps.

Oh yes, I agree that the whole slammed stem and pro style thing isn't something to copy without thought, but in terms of the ...type of bicycle, the setup, the approach, then the type of bike described above by davidtaylforth is as good a recommendation as you can get.

😀

Even with a slammed stem and a long reach to the hoods, you can still sit up and hold onto the top of the bars.

I reckon longer and lower bars are better for out of the saddle climbing though. Also, climbs in england arent that long, and I find it best to mix standing and seated climbing, so even up one of the longer climbs, you're probably only sat down for a few minutes at a time.

Whereas the climbs in the alps tend to take ages, so its important to have a comfortable seated position for those.

Climbing works best if you actually put some effort in rather than trying to sit and spin

you can do both. I spin, but pick a gear that keeps my power at about 300-330W. Mind you, I ride singlespeed on my mountain bike, so I can do the honking stuff as well, it's just not as efficient.

So in answer to the OP. A comfortable one. Climbing is about technique. Know what works for you and adapt the bike to it.

But Contador rides a compact and spins, and he's no bad climber 😈

contador might spin but he does an awful lot of it out the saddle, for what it's worth.

pick a gear that keeps my power at about 300-330W

Surely that depends entirely on the length of the climb? I find doing that is good for endurance, but frankly I go quicker if I just ride hard, not to a number!

Also depends on your FTP. I couldn't stay at 300w for more than about 5 minutes but I can sit at 240 for half an hour without too much difficulty what so ever, my current 20 minute PB for this year is 254w which is 3.8w/kg.

Not really. On a long ride a power meter stops you going too hard - even when you know you can (on the current hill). If you want to finish the ride, climbing the first hill at 900W is not going to be a good strategy, trust me! And keeping to 300W is hard enough. That means no slacking either.