Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About
It is currently Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:08 am
Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed ✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken ✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded ✔ FIXED

Please note that we will soon do some changes in WW board template design in case to get a fully mobile/desktop responsiveness board!
If you find more errors please post it here: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=139062


All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm
Posts: 548
Went riding today in my old (2001)Trek 5200. I normally ride a C-59. The difference in weight is between 2.5-3 pounds(apx). I find climbing a a lot easier in the c-59. It can't be weight, I think, two pound is just a little more than a bottle of water. Any ideas? I don't think it's psychological. If it helps the c-59 has dura ace wheels, the Trek has Mavic. The ride was 50 miles with 4000 feet of climbing. Are the new bikes that much more efficient? I can do the same climbs but i have to work harder on the Trek.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:58 am
Posts: 36
Location: Ireland
If there is any difference it is almost certainly not in the frame. A bike frame is a fairly simple concept and as long as its stiff enough it comes down to power to weight, especially uphill.
One thing that greatly effects perceived speed is ride feel. The only Trek 5000 i rode was a fairly early one and it was very dead and lifeless, It went along fine, just didn't give any great sensation to the rider.
Notice in all the marketing spiel that no one tends to say their bike is faster. Bikes can be made progressively stiffer, lighter, more aero, but at the end of the day speed is almost entirely down to power/weight. Fit the same components on the Trek as on the Colnago and i reckon you'd go just as fast, just not in the same style.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 4:30 am 
Offline
Shop Owner

Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:02 am
Posts: 1980
Location: NoVA/DC
It could also be something not necessarily inherent in the bike's age that is making it slower than the newer bike. Cup and cone bearing hubs that have too much preload, tires, tubes, riding position, placebo. Each of those could have a minor or major effect.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 5:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 5072
Location: New York
There have been many threads about this and it always comes down to fit and fitness.

Ride the trek for the next couple of months exclusively then publish your findings.

_________________
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 5:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 6:33 pm
Posts: 416
Location: bay area, california
thisisatest wrote:
Cup and cone bearing hubs that have too much preload.


funny thing is, when set-up correctly, cup-cone bearings feel much smoother than cartridge bearings, last longer, and are easier to service. When they are spun up they even feel faster (to me at least) and spin longer. The only downside is the weight. Makes me wonder why modern hubs are almost all cartridge type. If somebody developed a lightweight cup-cone hub design I would buy some as soon as they were available. In the meantime, I could always lace some Shimano 6800 hubs to lightweight carbon rims for a roll-forever-aero wheel. :lol: :thumbup:

_________________
bike / strava / instagram


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm
Posts: 548
Perhaps i should not have said faster, as i don't notice anything significant on the flats, but on the climbs there is no comparison. On repeated outings the c-59 just feels like it requires less effort. i'll agree that the frame probably does not matter, so that leaves wheel and bottom bracket since shifting doesn't contribute to climbing, especially when the gear has already been selected.

_________________
Colnago C-59 (Dura Ace)
Firefly(Ultegra)
Trek 5200(ultegra)


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:14 am
Posts: 1039
Location: Sweden
Well for one thing the DA wheels are cup n cone, the Mavics are probably not. You can really feel a drop in weight on wheels(rims) on a climb, so that probably explains a lot as even if the DA wheels aren't superlight, their rims are. And depending on the speeds and % of incline, tire choice and bearing drag of wheels, pedals, pulleys, BB all add up. An old bike (not because it's old, because it's used, may lack in this department vs a top end fairly new bike...

There is really too little equipment information here to make an informed response, but generally speaking, I think you get it...

By the way, I can turn my wheels by just blowing on the rims with my breath. Sealed OEM cartridge bearings, non-ceramic, year old Sram wheels with some 5.000 km on them, been thru some rain too... So cup n cone aren't automatically better. The good ones are really, really good. But it's still a matter of tolerances, materials and so forth...

_________________

The Shivenge


Last edited by DMF on Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Posts: 2690
Location: Mississippi
Mavic wheels are SLLLOOOOWWW


:popcorn:

_________________
Mosaic RS-1
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=138478

Cielo by Chris King Cross Racer
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=134376


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 4:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 5072
Location: New York
fromtrektocolnago wrote:
Perhaps i should not have said faster, as i don't notice anything significant on the flats, but on the climbs there is no comparison. On repeated outings the c-59 just feels like it requires less effort. i'll agree that the frame probably does not matter, so that leaves wheel and bottom bracket since shifting doesn't contribute to climbing, especially when the gear has already been selected.


Since you are a new guy on this site I'll cut you a break :D

Using words such as:

fells like
seems to be

is not good enough!

There are thousands of variables at stake.

The only way to determine if your C59 is easier to climb with is to take repeated times up the same hill with both bikes on several runs. Lets say more then 10 on each and then average them out.
Try to take the runs on similar weather type days.

Record them, average them out and see what you come up with.

The reason your C59 "feels" like it climbs a bit easier will most likely be because of its lower weight assuming your fit for the trek and colnago are the same. Other than that the actual performance on both bikes is determined by your fitness only.

I'll be waiting for those results.

_________________
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:14 am
Posts: 1039
Location: Sweden
Stella, there could be a 20w difference only in tire Crr and mechanical resistance within the bike itself if one is top specced and in perfect condition while the other is mediocre, really old, ill-adjusted and generally run down. Do not dismiss the drag from worn out bearings, a less than perfectly maintained chain, and so on.

There are atleast 13 bearings in rolling motion on a bicycle (I count 15 on mine) while pedalling. All ceramic or all run down? Hell of a difference... Not unlike adding resistance on your trainer.

And as for hard data, I'm sure you are aware of all the reports from the likes of FrictionFacts, various Crr-tests and so on. On steady 5% gradients I wouldn't even dismiss the aerodynamics. Conti Attack on wide rim vs Vittoria Evo Corsa on narrow rim even at 25km/h, measurable aero difference with full figure watts.

It definitely adds up. It's just simple science.

_________________

The Shivenge


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 12:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 2:34 pm
Posts: 480
Location: New Zero Kanada 43° 40' 0" N, 79° 25' 0" W
Send the c59 to me and I'll conduct a full analysis. It might take a couple years, but I do quality work.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 12:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Posts: 5351
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed
Today's high end bikes are faster at draining your bank account.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 6:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:10 am
Posts: 312
I bought my first new bike in 18 years this year. A custom Titanium frame with Enve Fork/seatpost, 3T stem/handlebar, SRAM Force groupset with Alchemy/Hed wheels. Previous to that I was riding a custom steel frame with Shimano 6400 groupset with Shimano/Campagnolo wheels.

The new bike isn't that much faster for the sorts of riding I do. If you really put the hammer down then you notice a huge improvement in instantaneous acceleration when putting out lots of power, and its easier to to maintain higher average speeds on the flats. That's where the extra stiffness and lower weight is noticeable. But on long climbs, the difference in speed isn't that great.

Two big differences between the two bikes I've noticed are
a) Fit - the riding position on the new bike is much better (as are modern handlebar/shifter ergonomics)
b) Front end stiffness. The new bike feels much more stable on fast corners and bumpy descents.


Last edited by Rush on Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm
Posts: 548
Rush wrote:
I bought my first new bike in 18 years this year. A custom Titanium frame with Enve Fork/seatpost, 3T stem/handlebar, SRAM Force groupset with Alchemy/Hed wheels. Previous to that I was riding a custom steel frame with Shimano 6400 groupset with Shimano/Camapgnolo wheels.

The new bike isn't that much faster for the sorts of riding I do. If you really put the hammer down then you notice a huge improvement in instantaneous acceleration when putting our lots of power, and its easier to to maintain higher average speeds on the flats. That's where the extra stiffness and lower weight is noticeable. But on long climbs, the difference in speed isn't that great.

Two big differences between the two bikes I've noticed are
a) Fit - the riding position on the new bike is much better (as are modern handlebar/shifter ergonomics)
b) Front end stiffness. The new bike feels much more stable on fast corners and bumpy descents.



It could be fit related. on the older bike i feel my quads more engaged and subsequently more tired as the hills continue to get attacked. On the c-59 I don't feel my quads engaged as much. Ironically it makes me want to ride harder on the Trek.

_________________
Colnago C-59 (Dura Ace)
Firefly(Ultegra)
Trek 5200(ultegra)


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. What is brighter than the sun and faster than the light?

[ Go to page: 16 7 8 9 10 ]

in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.

jdc5r

137

14925

Mon May 02, 2016 4:59 pm

lrdunc View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Nike Wing Sunglasses....$1200 to be more aero and look even faster!!!

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

mile2424

15

1442

Sat Aug 20, 2016 2:08 am

mimason View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Do you feel faster on a lighter bike (compared to a heavier one)?

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

Nimit

25

2766

Thu Jun 16, 2016 3:14 pm

Shmitt View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. If Venge Vias is claimed faster than Shiv TT, then why don't we see Vias in TT's...

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

mile2424

22

3120

Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:53 pm

ProfessorChaos View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. New member/my bikes

in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.

Canofale

11

1324

Sun May 22, 2016 9:41 am

Canofale View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], defride, Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited