Comfort vs Speed: Finding the magic bike

Equipment
24

As others have mentioned comfort will come from tires, contact points/fit and your fitness. Personally I find that no matter how perfect my fit is on the road I’m always uncomfortable on the trainer so I never use that as a basis.

  1. Get the biggest nicest tires your frame/fork will fit and run them at a comfortable pressure.
  2. Get a fitting by a respected fitter. For comfort you need: the right saddle height, angle and setback. The correct length stem. The correct bar width. The best cleat placement. The list goes on.
  3. Your fitness. If you can’t hold a plank with your head up you probably aren’t going to be comfortable no matter what.

Those things will get you more comfort than a new bike that still doesn’t fit right or has crappy tires. The question is do you want more comfort or a new bike? If you just want a new bike that’s totally cool. I would never talk anyone out of a new bike and usually push my friends to get new ones. Bikes are awesome. But don’t be surprised if the new bike is more comfortable when its new (just because its the new bike) but gradually you start to notice all the old discomforts. I know this first hand.

1 Like
25

SL6 might be cheaper now :sweat_smile:

26

I can be very wrong but in my opinion any bike you are doing long rides in regularly eventually becomes comfortable at least for me.

I am not particularly flexible but when I slammed my stem for instance it just took a few long rides and my muscles got used to it. Its also true I ride like 16 hrs/week which maybe induce fast postural adaptations for me.

I think road bikes in general have reached all very high level of quality and they are an industrially mature product. Any improvement/claim at this stage is really splitting hairs.

Take for instance the new Tarmac. Half of the aero improvements people claim comes from wheels and integrated handlebars. But then you check the Deceunik QS world tour team version and due to sponsorship they do not use the Spesh handlebar. I think improvements in bikes are now marginal and blown out of proportion by marketing.

The bottomline, we are bike nerds and like discussing about them but in my opinion bike fit, climber vs. aero bike dichotomy, etc. its all a marketing strategy lie so that they get the money out of our pockets. Maybe I am very wrong and I would accept any backslash for this comment :sweat_smile:

2 Likes
27

I am in a very similar boat… I am looking to get a new bike this winter and the comfort is primordial for me. And please don´t get me wrong, I ride for many years and play a lot with all the contact points and factors of comfort in play - tubeless tires with right pressure, the best sadlle I could find (Bontrager Aeolus), carbon handlebars from 3T, Speedplay pedals…got it all, except carbon cranks (those makes a difference when you are standing while riding on a rough surface, I got Campy Chorus carbon, but actualy I am on alu + powermeter from Zwatt - so FSA alu body)
And boy there is a huge difference in different frames and mainly forks! I rode on a hars alu frame and gave it back after 30 miles - never more, than classic steel, different carbons and now I am on a titanium frame and I had to replace (technical reasons) fork from full carbon to carb+alu steerer - what a difference! Suddenly the front end is much harsher ride :frowning:
So just like you, I really don´t want to hear advises to get an endurance bike, hack no, I want a racy position, this is not my problem. But I know very well how the frame + fork can play in your performance when you ride for more than 2 hours. And I am quite bitterly surprised by the actual switch in the latest generation road bikes direction. I was happy big players understood the importance of a smooth ride on the race bike - really not important for a crit racer, but when your focus is big and hard hilly rides on a mix of terrain (we don´t live in a perfect world), a firm frame just batters your body and you loose precious energy. A smooth bike preserves it, delivers you more fresh on the last parts and boy that plays a huge role after 5 or 7 hours!

SL7? No thanks, I am disappointed here, I was expecting the same smooth ride as SL6 with an aero touch, but their focus was stiffness - for me I don´t get it. No more super stiff Venge, so to justify it´s annihilation, we are going to give to our sponsored racers a stiffer Tarmac :unamused: And we can´t provide our marketing department with big savings aero numbers, so we prefer to make new wheels tubeless incompatible :man_facepalming:

Sooooo… as TCR looks really nice, but not fully hidden cables (I admit I just love the looks) and seems quite stiff, what else?
There is still Canyon Ultimate - not fully hidden cables, but super aero and really comfortable. But nothing on stock, speculations about a new generation in sight just after the new Ultimate, but who knows? :thinking:
Bianchi Oltre - apparently a very nice bike, some smoothness thanks to Countrevail, but less comfy than Ultimate…
Orbea Orca OMX looks really nice, not so comfy as a Ultimate neither it appears…
Cannondale SuperSix EVO - honestly starts to look realy interesting in my eyes… when you get the integrated cockpit it looks super slick, handling is on par with Tarmac, the question mark remains for me the comfort - reviews are a bit contradictory here… but seems as a very good allrounder… I would definitely like to test ride it…

Not easy to make a right choice, right? :smiley:

28

I have a similar shortlist as above, although the BMC SLR is in there too. My requirements:

  • under £4k, towards top end of that I’d want ok wheels, at bottom end I can upgrade
  • second tier frame is fine, not expecting top tier for my budget
  • Ultegra, if only so I don’t have metal levers
  • comfort (fit and vibration, current CAAD8 leaves me buzzing even on biggest tyres)
  • reliable, this is a really tough one as it seems pot luck, with opinions on some brands being more risky than others. I expect a frame to be well aligned and built to the spec the manufacturer says though
  • performance comes from my legs, I am not going to pretend 5w of drag at 40km/h means much to me
  • good looks, even if I don’t look good the bike should

The way I am approaching it is to wait until I can get a new bike fit. My CAAD8 is comfortable in terms off fit on a good day, but I’m seeking that bad day comfort too.

Trouble is fit on a chart doesn’t always mention mandatory spacers. Stem lengths are complementary to trail/offset, headtube angle and bar width - as I run a ‘narrow’ bar for my height I have to swap bars, then it’s working out what stem length is needed to retain the handling feel I like, and then if that is compatible with the frame and forks (often overlooked, or maybe doesn’t matter to some?).

My other issue is with the BS marketing from manufacturers and the press. I see contradictory reviews about comfort when although it’s not absolute it should be viewed consistently.

I can tell you my CAAD12 was comfortable but firm, you could feel the type of tarmac you were riding on yet it rarely got tiring. I can even tell you my weight and the tyre pressures. I can tell you my CAAD8 with a similar fit is also comfortable but buzzes like hell and quickly fatigues me. A couple of hours on it and I feel beaten up regardless of running a 28mm on the front and 25mm on rear (biggest I can fit and both at lowest pressures I can ride with).

Why can’t someone who rides 100 bikes a year as a journalist give me a similar opinion to another? Sure there will be preference and different reference points but one saying a bike is smooth and another a bit harsh is pure BS unless they have radically different tyres, tyre pressures or one writer has gel filled bones… I suspect it is all dodgy as anything with zero impartiality. Either way new bikes in teh area I am looking at generally are said to be less comfortable than the preceding model.

1 Like
29

Does anybody has any experience with Argon18? Their Krypton GF seems to tick all the boxes for me and the geo of the front is similar to my current Emonda with H2 geometry.

30

The 2021 Orbea OMR and OMX frames can take 35mm tires. You can practically bounce down the road on 35mm tubless. It’s just a matter of getting your stack and reach comfortable after that.

31

Maybe on a related note, do folks here think/find carbon wheels make any difference? Right now I ride a BMC Teammachine SLR02 and overall I like the bike for the most part. I do wish it could take > 28mm though. I have the stock DT Swiss wheels on it and wondering if a carbon upgrade would make a more pleasant ride experience, rather than looking at a new bike.

32

Something like the new SL7 or even an SL6 is what I think I want next. I’d like to run a wide aero clincher with 28mm GP5000s around 60-70psi. It should be plenty comfortable for a race bike.

33

I absolutely adore the Tarmac and am totally with you here. Just trying to convince myself to drop the $…

34

I’d be very surprised if Canyon don’t bring out some models with completely hidden cables in the next few months. It’s the way the market is going, nearly all the competition have done this, and we’ve already seen pictures of a hidden cable Aeroad as far back as January.

I have an Aeroad and it’s already quite compliant for a full aero bike, I’ve done multiple >200km rides on it with no issue. Or if they go in the same direction as Specialized then an Ultimate with hidden cables and a few other aero tweaks would be very tempting.

2 Likes
35

Same here. Love my 18 month old Endurace. Aero bars (but not hidden cables) and maybe some aero wheels could be in my future, but, honestly, it is just a great bike as-is for me.

Plus when I can feel comfortable drafting again in a paceline post-covid, it will like I am going so much faster!

1 Like
36

I don’t know about your specific issue, but if you want to try not flexing your hips as much then you could try shorter cranks and scooting your saddle forward a bit which will help open up the angle.

1 Like
37

Tires (width, pressure, suppleness) are still underrated for their impact to improve both speed and comfort in my opinion. People have come around to the fact that they should be on at least 25 or 28 mm tires and less than 100 psi, but they aren’t going far enough.

I bought a Cervélo Aspero. I was feeling a bit disappointed in how harsh it felt on gravel. Then I swapped from the stock tires to supple tires and latex tubes. It now rides so much better. I could feel the difference in the first half mile.

And the effects of wider tires is highly underestimated to comfort. I think it’s obvious that comfort is proportional to tire volume, but it’s not obvious how much a small change in width has to volume. A 700x30 Tire has 1.5 L off air volume while a 700x25 has only 1 L. It will be much more comfortable when run at the correct pressure.

And it’s faster too for almost all real world surfaces. Roller drum testing is not real world, both because of the surface used and the way the round drum reflects the tire different than the flat ground.

See this link for details [https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.silca.cc/part-4b-rolling-resistance-and-impedance%3Fhs_amp=true](http://Silca Blog)

39

I’m not sure if rider suspension losses can even be well measured. I lived in NM for the last two years and we had a lot of rough farm roads. I moved there with my 23/25mm tires running at 100psi. It was horrible and I was ready for a new bike. I backed it down to 85psi and things because tolerable but that was the lowest I could go. I got a new wheelset and was able to run 75/80psi tubeless (25mm GP5000TL) and that was a little bit better. I couldn’t go wider because of my frame clearance.

I still suspect that for those rough county roads in NM, an actual 30-32 mm tire at a lower psi would have been even faster.

41

Yeah, I think I will just be patient and hope that Canyon will solve their probable technical problem… a real shame, I suppose they wanted to have a new gen Aeroad for this summer and - as I hope - new Ultimate just after. But now…who knows? :face_with_monocle:
New Aeroad under MVP looks like a serious aero gun, I am affraid it will loose some of it´s compliance in the chase of lowest drag possible…so not a bike for me in this case…but after all, I was expecting something else from SL7, so it´s like guessing from a crystal ball :smiley:

But if Canyon would make just a few aero tweeks on the Ultimate to get similar aero drag numbers like the new SL7 whilst maintaining it´s compliance and liveliness, I´d get a clear winner there… :heart_eyes:

42

Yeah… + I just don´t get the media narrative - “okey this frame is super harsh to ride, because it´s really aero optimised, but this is not important, as you can put 32mm tires on those super wide rims!”
Eeeeeeugh…only, boys, getting an aero frame and than ruin the aero benefits by not only making your frontal area much more important, but because of the fact you just created this nice bulb form of rim+tire, you just create turbulences and hence annihilate all the positive effect of super expensive wheels that are optimised for 23, 25mm at the best… :man_facepalming:

I am sorry, but if a frame is too firm and uncomfy when ridden on 25mm tubeless tires, than it´s simply a harsh frame. And if it is meant to be raced, you are simply not going to put chunky tires on it to make the comfort “ucceptable”. No matter what the marketing bullshit sells…

1 Like
43

I can tell you from my experience - reasonably deep carbon wheels (around 45mm) are definitely going to make your ride more comfy. It´s really not like switching your alu bar for the carbon bar - with carbon you get a much smoother ride. With wheels, it´s the exact opposite - you will loose some vibration damping of longer spokes and softer alu rim. Good carbon is waaaaaaaaay more stiff - and that is the point! So in the end, with the right choise, you are going to have a wheelset in the same weight range like your alu wheels, but more aero and most importantly, so much stiffer - and you will love it I think, as I do. This makes your bike so much more responsive and light-footed under acceleration and it keeps the momentum much better than a box shaped rim…
Just be prepared, performance is WAY better, but the comfort is not going to be enhanced…in fact, it will be a slightly more firm ride - but for me, the performance/momentum gains clearly overweights the comfort aspect!

44

You just run 2 wheelsets. An expensive aero set that is optimised for speed on the days when every watt counts and you don’t mind sacrificing a bit of comfort. And a second set with wider tires (and maybe more spokes, shallower rims) for the days when you don’t mind sacrificing a little speed for more comfort.

Also, you may be a little out of date, nobody is optimising for 23mm any more, expensive rims are mostly optimised for 25mm. And some of the Rovals have external rim width of 29.4mm meaning they’re really optimised for a tire that measures 28mm wide. Though confusingly that probably means fitting something like a 26mm tire, since on rims that wide a 28mm tire is likely to balloon out to 30mm or more.

1 Like
45

Actualy I don´t think to be that much outdated… exactly as you mention, if Rovals are 29,4mm outside, they should be optimal for GP5000 25mm as they run rather large… but 29,4 of the rim is still much more than the current norm, I don´t speak about Enve and such, but look at the majority of stock rims, majority is still far less wide than the new Rovals…

In my point view, I think I should not be forced to choose between aero and comfy set - common, we are in the 2020, for many years there are comfortable and decently aero bikes, why should I get battered and fatigued by a harsh frame during a demanding marathon race on less than perfect tarmac?