Now you’ve got me thinking of ways to justify a new bike…
4 Likes
Yes!. Because modern climbing bikes borrow some aero features and that Scott RC has the best set of wheels in the market. It’s a bike that will last forever, with tire clearance to 34mm!!
How did you calculate this? Or is it a feature of intervals.icu/strava/another app?
Good luck with your decision 
Nothing fancy although I have asked Strava to implement it on their data fields, I termed it Elevation Specificity Factor (ESF)
Take your elevation gain (meters m) and divide that over your ride distance (kilometers km) to get a factor of what elevation gain (vm vertical meters) you ride per kilometer.
You have seen some examples above but to clarify,
a recent ride of 2091 vm over 68 km is a factor of 1:30,75 (1:31). For every kilometer ridden, on average I gained 31m in elevation.
This is also ideal to work out climbing segments what the factor is/are for the effort. Also allows one to see what Ana barge for a race will be if you know the two data points and this can assist with one’s training.
Makes sense to train a similar factor than train in the flats and yet race in the hills and wonder why you cramp/don’t so so well.
Manual method made perfect sense, was just wondering if it was automated somewhere! Maybe it’s time for feature requests on intervals.icu!
Many thanks.
1 Like
Ok, so I looked and in this ride that was about 4hours, I spent 55 minutes (~25% of the time) in gradients equal or greater than 6%, of those, 15m in gradients greater than 8%.
Aero bike for climbing? Absolutely. Apart from differences in weight an aero bike performs equally to a non aero light weight one. A lightweight bike could be of the endurance variety and have a slightly different geo but then the apples to oranges comparison begins to be a thing. Geo among race bikes is broadly similar so that they exhibit the characteristics required of the genre. Get away from that the one will be comparing bikes for differing uses.
Shouldn’t we be looking at the total time to go up AND down the hill? Seems like an aero bike would be a significant advantage going downhill.
1 Like
Uphill segments are worth more 
2 Likes
This ^
More time is spent on the uphill than downhill given the distance is the same. Increasing overall speed on the uphill portion should give you a bigger gain.
1 Like
This is the case, and it’s what the pro teams have been realising
LLMs are pretty bad at maths. I would not use one for that!
Well, on a first approximation……seems like the Aerobike is the better choice.
This has me thinking now between:
Tarmac SL8 vs Aeroroad CFR vs Factor Ostro VAM
I’ve tried to build my 2023 Factor Ostro VAM V1 into the ultimate gran fondo/breakaway bike for me. The best aero/weight package I could come up with (for now, within my current budget).
It’s at least as fast as my Systemsix with 58mm Zipp 404 Firecrests was on the flats but much more lively on the climbs. Still like the way the Systemsix felt on the descends more, felt more “on rails”. The Systemsix was 8,3kg with mechanical Ultegra R8000.
I have to weigh it again with the new wheels and so on but it should be right around the 7kg mark incl. bottle cages and Favero Assioma Duo pedals.
Size 52 with Ultegra Di2 12 speed
- Changed to Rotor Aldhu Carbon 170mm crank with DM 52/36 chainrings. Saved ~180g compared to the same size Ultegra R8100 crank
- ZTTO gen 3 11/30 cassette, saved ~120g compared to the 11-30 Ultegra cassette
- EXS Aerover 360x130 cockpit, saved ~110g compared to the Black Inc AB02 cockpit
- Newmen Streem Vonoa Sprint 60/66mm wheelset with Revoloop TPU inner tubes ~130g saved on just the wheels compared to Black Inc 45s
Still on 160mm Ultegra rotors so there’s still room to drop some weight. Could also go for a Hylix seat post and save another 50g.
6 Likes
Very nice setup!….Im surprised that with all the weight savings you implemented it’s not under 7kg. I also wonder how it compares in stiffness with an SL8 Sworks, which climbs very well.
I really want this to work, but I’m also wondering if the perfect bike for me is the SL8….
For what you have described I would look hard at the Tarmac SL8 and the Cannondale Supersix Evo in Hi-Mod or Lab 71. The Tarmac is lighter but a touch less aero. The Cannondale is gonna be a little heavier but tests better aero.
I was surprised at the weight of the Factor when picking up an Ultegra build recently (tbh felt heavy esp considering price) the Canyon packs a great value but there is a lot of proprietary complication going on with the bars and fork.
1 Like
I wish I could test drive these bikes. On paper, the Factor is 5w faster and they are similar weight. The stiffness data I don’t know.
How can I derive climbing performance (aside from weight)?
Assuming same position (so same power) and same tyre choice (so same rolling resistance) I seriously doubt there is any measurable difference in climbing performance between top end frames other than weight. If they’re stiff enough for Worldtour riders to be climbing on them they’re stiff enough for the rest of us.
2 Likes
I’ve ridden both bikes…I like the tarmac out of the saddle climbing (stiffer front end), C-Dale seated. Couldn’t dial my fit on the Tarmac, so Cannondale hi mod built frame out w/ultegra 12, Momo 1 piece bar, and some Ceramic speed upgrades. I use the RSL-50 wheels on flat rolling rides and some Enve 2.3’s for Mtn, finishes or if it’s gonna be super windy. It’s around 15-ish w/Ultegra and the Enve’s with a lot of low hanging fruit for weight left to grab if you wanted to.
Couldn’t go wrong w/either of those bikes. Can’t speak to the Factor. A friend has the Ultegra build in the 58 and it felt a bit portly to me.
1 Like