Why are today's bikes faster

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderators: robbosmans, Moderator Team

Post Reply
fromtrektocolnago
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

by fromtrektocolnago

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.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



apb27
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:58 am
Location: Ireland

by apb27

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.

thisisatest
Shop Owner
Posts: 1980
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 4:02 am
Location: NoVA/DC

by thisisatest

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.

User avatar
stella-azzurra
Posts: 5066
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Location: New York

by stella-azzurra

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

wojchiech
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 6:33 pm
Location: bay area, california

by wojchiech

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:

fromtrektocolnago
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

by fromtrektocolnago

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)
Colnago C-64 disc(ultegra) with Bora 35 wheels

User avatar
DMF
Posts: 1062
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:14 am
Location: Sweden

by DMF

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

User avatar
btompkins0112
Posts: 2635
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Location: Mississippi

by btompkins0112

Mavic wheels are SLLLOOOOWWW


:popcorn:

User avatar
stella-azzurra
Posts: 5066
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Location: New York

by stella-azzurra

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

User avatar
DMF
Posts: 1062
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:14 am
Location: Sweden

by DMF

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.

User avatar
GonaSovereign
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 2:34 pm
Location: New Zero Kanada 43° 40' 0" N, 79° 25' 0" W

by GonaSovereign

Send the c59 to me and I'll conduct a full analysis. It might take a couple years, but I do quality work.

User avatar
HammerTime2
Posts: 5813
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed

by HammerTime2

Today's high end bikes are faster at draining your bank account.

Rush
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:10 am

by Rush

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.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



fromtrektocolnago
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

by fromtrektocolnago

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)
Colnago C-64 disc(ultegra) with Bora 35 wheels

Post Reply