Input On Bike Choice Request

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

Post Reply
Fastfwd
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:20 am

by Fastfwd

My first post here. I've read a few of the threads on here and I think I get the general idea of this forum, but excuse me if asking such a general question is frowned upon here.

I'm in the market for a new new bike. I actually have a 2015 Cannondale Synapse 5 Disc 105 aluminum road bike which was my first road bike. I got it last September after riding my old 35lb Cannondale mountain bike with street tires last year when I started to get more serious about cycling regularly. I'm right at 3k miles for the year so far this year and I think I'm sticking with the cycling thing. I like to ride longer distances - centuries, metrics, etc. I'm never going to race crits, but I have enjoyed the longer distance events that I've participated in. The aluminum Synapse weighs in about 21lbs with pedals and a few lighter aftermarket components. It's around 25lbs riding weight (I do carry my phone, etc. with me that piles on). It's never going to really be lightweight no matter what I spend on wheels so I'm not really interested in trying to trim it down any further.

I'm interested in something lighter possibly - hence my posting here. I've been torn about moving from an endurance geometry to a more race geometry. I get the impression there is a consensus of opinion believing it is a waste to get another endurance geometry bike. I might agree that if my intent is to try to better my times for centuries, etc. that a more aero position will help in that, but I'm still unsure how comfortable it's going to be. I might keep my Synapse for more general purpose training riding.

I suppose that I am looking for something that will be more on the compliant side in terms of soaking up road vibrations - chip seal, etc. but still provide the stiffness that will help in climbing. I've been eying the new 2016 Cannondale Hi-Mod Supersix Evos that were recently introduced. I've also been considering the Cervelo R3. I recently talked to a dealer about a Cervelo and he was highly recommending the new Giant TCR in the Advanced Pro 0 trim. I wouldn't rule out the Giant - I do seem to catch a lot of praise for them being the manufacturers of so many brands of carbon bikes. It might seem like a steep price tag for so many house brand components on them and others. I question the profit margin on the Gaints possibly motivating dealers to push them a little harder? Maybe the new TCR is just that good.

I'm not a huge fan of the 2015 Cervelo R3 color scheme and it looks like maybe they carried over a bunch of 2014 models in the bike shops? Maybe nobody liked the 2015 color scheme IDK. I catch there is some sort of bottom bracket creak issue on these too that might be worth taking into consideration.

My situation is sort of complicated in terms of my local bike shops. I've been really put off by several of them and I'm considering going to Dallas to purchase my bike. I've picked up handling most of the maintenance on my Synapse - drivetrain adjustment, chain replacement, cable replacement, etc. I think I can handle it, but I'm not sure yet about the DI2 systems being user friendly for adjusting if I intend to swap cassettes, etc. I can keep Googling on that, but it seems like they are adjustable where anyone can maintain them?

The budget is around $5K. I'm open to suggestions. If I went with something like the Cervelo R3 DI2 for instance I would be pricing myself out of getting wheels for it. It might be worth it to put wheels off for a while though to get the DI2. The 2015 Supersix Evo looks like I would have to get the mechanical Dura Ace possibly if the pricing was right, but I can maybe do without the trick electronic shifting if it's the right bike for me.

I know a lot of this is subjective and it's hard to go wrong with the crop of bikes out there, but if anyone has suggestions I am open to hear them. I'm about at my saturation point of researching into the options. Thanks!

by Weenie


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

www.starbike.com



cyclenutnz
Posts: 854
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

Rather than worrying about whether a bike is labelled as "race" or "endurance" - focus on whether it fits you well. It's easy to set so called "endurance" bikes up to be twitchier than a same sized race bike.

In the case of Synapse vs R3, you have to weigh the impact of the lower stack height
fastfwd.PNG


I used the 54 as an example, the relationship is similar in other sizes. You can see that you need 24mm more spacers under the stem to get the same bar position. Spacer towers tend to rob a bit of front end stiffness - so you won't be getting the best of your high tech frame. So unless you have a slammed -17 stem on the synapse, or it is particularly long (so you can size up) the R3 may not be the best option.

Of course, this is predicated on you having your position sorted and wanting to maintain it to a new bike.

TCR even lower than R3, so unlikely to suit. Defy might be an option if you like the disc brakes.

I'd suggest that you focus on finding bikes that fit. Then take into consideration the tyre width they can fit - if you can get 25mm tyres (mounted on wide rims) in there it will mean a cushy ride regardless of how anyone else classifies the bike. Personally I'm not that fussed by electronic - it does the same thing as properly set up mechanical. But others feel differently and you need to decide what appeals most to you. Make sure to factor in good wheels. Bad wheels/tyres can kill a good bike.

raisinberry777
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 1:09 am

by raisinberry777

@cyclenutnz what site is that for the geometry comparison?

Fastfwd
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:20 am

by Fastfwd

cyclenutnz wrote:Rather than worrying about whether a bike is labelled as "race" or "endurance" - focus on whether it fits you well. It's easy to set so called "endurance" bikes up to be twitchier than a same sized race bike.

In the case of Synapse vs R3, you have to weigh the impact of the lower stack height
fastfwd.PNG


I used the 54 as an example, the relationship is similar in other sizes. You can see that you need 24mm more spacers under the stem to get the same bar position. Spacer towers tend to rob a bit of front end stiffness - so you won't be getting the best of your high tech frame. So unless you have a slammed -17 stem on the synapse, or it is particularly long (so you can size up) the R3 may not be the best option.

Of course, this is predicated on you having your position sorted and wanting to maintain it to a new bike.

TCR even lower than R3, so unlikely to suit. Defy might be an option if you like the disc brakes.

I'd suggest that you focus on finding bikes that fit. Then take into consideration the tyre width they can fit - if you can get 25mm tyres (mounted on wide rims) in there it will mean a cushy ride regardless of how anyone else classifies the bike. Personally I'm not that fussed by electronic - it does the same thing as properly set up mechanical. But others feel differently and you need to decide what appeals most to you. Make sure to factor in good wheels. Bad wheels/tyres can kill a good bike.


I'm afraid that you're getting into specifics of bike fit that I have not dealt with. For that matter my Synapse is not necessarily the optimal fit in the terms that you've presented. I was simply measured for bike size and took what came with the bike that I said I wanted for the rest. Where I purchased didn't offer a fitting and I've tinkered with it based on what I've read on the internet to get my seat height and position where it seems to feel the best to me. The bars, stem, etc. are generally as they came - I rolled the bars back a bit for better reach to the hoods.

I have only been to one bike shop that took measurements and told me they had a program that they could plug those into and it would tell what bikes were the best fit for me. It wound up the poor guy was getting on the internet and looking at geometries and making a random list. I know they do have that computerized fitment machine that supposedly will give you a list of bikes that fit your measurements but I haven't had a firm answer what all bikes are in the database at the only place I know that has one. I don't want to spend $85 to find out only what a particular dealer sells that fits me.

I think I'm definitely going to have to go carbon to get the vibration absorption and weight characteristics that I'm looking for. I'm open to suggestions beyond that.

MiddMan
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 4:54 pm

by MiddMan

Dear Fastfwd, first off, welcome to Weight Weenies :welcome:

You are wise not to rush into anything nor let yourself be pressured into a purchase. A lot of US bike shops (if not all) are going to want to sell what they have in stock or the brands they carry, and a great majority carry the same brands. Therefore, I would suggest to read a lot about several different bikes first. Take a look at the Bianchi Infinito CV for example. It's in your price range and comes as a complete bike, and something with good reviews, different than the usual brands you see around.

If your heart is set on an American brand like Cervelo or Cannondale, by all means go for it, I'm just suggesting you look beyond your local bike shops. I have to drive two hours to get to a bike shop whose staff are friendly and helpful--and that's perhaps only because I'm quite experienced; if I send my wife who is a complete newbie it's a somewhat different experience. Cycling should be fun. You should enjoy your bike and like the look and feel of it. (All the more so if you're spending your hard earned money on it!)

This is not to detract from your question, merely to give you food for thought. Good luck!

User avatar
WMW
in the industry
Posts: 893
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:59 pm
Location: Ruidoso, NM

by WMW

Fastfwd wrote:I have only been to one bike shop that took measurements and told me they had a program that they could plug those into and it would tell what bikes were the best fit for me. It wound up the poor guy was getting on the internet and looking at geometries and making a random list.


Fitting at a shop is usually a joke IMO. Read through this thread regarding fit: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=133748&hilit=fit

You definitely don't need to worry about getting a specific "bike geometry that fits you" because the differences between one model and the next is tiny compared to the amount of adjustment at your disposal. Buy some cheap stems (or adjustable stems) and experiment. I'd suggest doing the experiments on your Synapse first. If you have a trainer, post videos of you riding for visual feedback.

There are just two contact points to worry about, the saddle and bars relative to the bottom bracket. If you determine where you want those to be, transferring to another bike is just solving some trig.

Unfortunately you can't tell much from test riding bikes. Unless you make the shop spend a lot of time setting each up identically (including tires, tubes, and pressure) it won't be a fair test. The great majority won't even know how or have the equipment to set the bikes up identically. It's best to have a jig to measure vertical and horizontal distances quickly and accurately.

BTW, definitely look at aero road bikes if you want to go fast. They make a difference and they are common now. I wouldn't consider anything else. An S5 would be a top pick. Maybe a new Madone.

So... in summary, I'd recommend experimenting with position on your Synapse, until you have a good idea of the xy location of the saddle and bars relative to the bottom bracket. Then decide on the bike and figure out what size would work best. Then find a shop that has one and set it up with the proper coordinates. Fit it with your preferred tires and tubes, preferred saddle (if you have one), and take it for a ride. Buy it if you like it.
formerly rruff...

nlouthan
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:41 am
Location: SF Bay Area

by nlouthan

All the above are excellent replies and spot on.

You don't mention how many spacers you have under your stem and what length it is. As WMW says, you might be able to test a bunch of different fits on your current bike. Here is a great stack/reach calculator that a fellow Weenie created: http://bb2stem.blogspot.com

I'm currently looking for a new bike right now too. My method has been to first figure out what range of geometries I can use to get the fit I want. Then, I made a list of the features I want for this particular bike. This includes, BB design, rim brake/disc brake, electronic/mechanical, seat post design, etc. Since you currently have discs, perhaps disc brakes would be high on your list of wants? Also, do you want to be able to move wheels between your new bike and your old bike? And lastly, but not in any way less important, do you like the way the bike looks?

If your main priority is getting something lighter and you like the way your Synapse fits and rides, how about another one in carbon? The geometries would be the same or very close and it would make dialing in the position quite easy. Then your aluminum bike is the rain/trainer bike and the carbon is bike #1.

Fastfwd
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:20 am

by Fastfwd

Thanks for the replies and suggestions. I suppose it possibly boils down to asking what of the lighter bikes available seem to have the best consensus of opinion regarding their ability to combine stiffness for climbing and still remain compliant enough to absorb road vibrations. For example I seem to gather a consensus that the Trek Emonda is super light, but transmits quite a bit of road buzz and that's not what I want in a bike I might be riding for six hours on a century ride. I'm willing to give up some of the comfort geometry for a more aero position in pursuit of getting my century times down, etc.

I originally was thinking I wanted something more out of the ordinary in a new bike until the factor of frame warranty and customer support became apparent with some of the more exotic brands. I also was originally looking at endurance geometry bikes that were lighter. I actually like my disc brakes and fluid disc brakes seem even more appealing, but they don't tend to lend to a lightweight bike.

I'll give the Bianchi a second look. I did see one at a local dealer when I first started looking around.

Fastfwd
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:20 am

by Fastfwd

nlouthan wrote:All the above are excellent replies and spot on.

You don't mention how many spacers you have under your stem and what length it is. As WMW says, you might be able to test a bunch of different fits on your current bike. Here is a great stack/reach calculator that a fellow Weenie created: http://bb2stem.blogspot.com

I'm currently looking for a new bike right now too. My method has been to first figure out what range of geometries I can use to get the fit I want. Then, I made a list of the features I want for this particular bike. This includes, BB design, rim brake/disc brake, electronic/mechanical, seat post design, etc. Since you currently have discs, perhaps disc brakes would be high on your list of wants? Also, do you want to be able to move wheels between your new bike and your old bike? And lastly, but not in any way less important, do you like the way the bike looks?

If your main priority is getting something lighter and you like the way your Synapse fits and rides, how about another one in carbon? The geometries would be the same or very close and it would make dialing in the position quite easy. Then your aluminum bike is the rain/trainer bike and the carbon is bike #1.


My current bike has all of the original spacers - there was some debate on if the Cannondale IS allowed for spacers to be placed on top of the end cap or not with a carbon fork and I've not experimented. I think there are five if I'm counting correctly, but there is a large oversized spacer under those even.

I'm going to have to be honest that I haven't encountered there being so much scrutiny over the stack and reach factor. I can say that I have a relatively long torso and short legs. When I went in to the one place that measured me I tried to jot down a few of the measurements.

If it helps those were: 76.8 cm inseam, 36.9 cm reach, 58 cm torso, 56 cm arm, and 46 cm shoulder. It was suggested that around a 50.5 would be the correct size for me. Based on those measurements the guy was steering me toward a few bikes with geometries that he thought were a best fit for me - which happened to be the more aero race geometry bikes if I recall. The Trek Emonda was one of those that I specifically recall.

I'm letting myself be open to variations from what I have now. Yes, I like my disc brakes and originally I couldn't imagine doing without discs. I wish there were more options for road discs in lightweight carbon road bikes, but maybe not this year yet. I don't have expensive disc brake wheels for my current bike and they are very expensive is another consideration I found. At this point I'm open to the main features as far as mechanical vs. electric shifting too.

nlouthan
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:41 am
Location: SF Bay Area

by nlouthan

How about some pictures of your bike? And measure the height of the top cap and the spacers under the stem (separately). Measure the length of the stem also.

The new range of disc brake bikes are pretty light and racy.

Here's some:

http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/cate ... isc-49544/
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/ ... armac-disc
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=131107

I know some of those are beyond your budget, but you can get some idea of what is possible.

cyclenutnz
Posts: 854
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

I have 140 brands in my database, so it's no problem to match to anything common (and a lot of uncommon)

Making sure that this new bike feels awesome will be best achieved by aiming to improve everything. A flash bike with a poor fit is still rubbish, just as a great fit with spongy wheels and garden hose tyres will still be hard work.

So I'd echo the suggestion above that you work on making sure you have your position sorted. Either by self educating (maybe using IOS bikefastfit app or Kinovea), finding a well regarded fitter locally, or finding someone to work with online. If it turns out that you can comfortably run your bars lower, or further away - that will open up your fit options.

Then you look for a new bike with confidence that you know what you need fit wise. Finishing kit is the easy bit.

The measurements you gave aren't exactly what I use, but running the numbers I get plenty of nice bikes that will fit you well in a moderate position (not a racer, but not a fitness rider), with discs and without.

by Weenie


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

www.starbike.com



Fastfwd
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:20 am

by Fastfwd

cyclenutnz wrote:Of course, this is predicated on you having your position sorted and wanting to maintain it to a new bike.


About to have to run to work, but maybe this answers a lot of questions about my current bike - no, it hasn't been 'fitted' for me to have any certain position. I have adjusted it myself to what feels the best to me. I've tinkered with the seat height/position, rolled the bars back a tad so I can reach the hoods comfortably, made adjustments to my cleats, etc. It seems to feel pretty good. Is it setup in the most optimally efficient riding position? IDK.

I would fully expect that a more race geometry bike is going to mean that I am forced into a lower (and less comfortable) position = more aero. I certainly don't want to be forced into a position that is unbearably uncomfortable, but I would anticipate factors like my head being lower and more strain on my neck to have to look up, etc. are to be expected from a bike with a more aero position. I believe I am fairly flexible according to the tests that I've taken or seen so that shouldn't be a problem for me.

I do appreciate the tips on stack and reach - it's the first that I'm hearing this much about the importance of it. I've been reading the Bike Forums website for over a year and I haven't picked up on much about it at all over there.

Post Reply