Aero bike vs climbing bike (same weight)

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
MMW
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 4:23 pm

by MMW

Hello WW.

I've seen a ton of post regarding aero vs light bike, but if your abel to get your aero bike to the same weight as a climbing bike (like the venge sup 7kg) why then go for the climbing bike?

Regard Mathias

by Weenie


User avatar
VTR1000SP2
Posts: 655
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:21 pm

by VTR1000SP2

My aero bike was 6.6kg with mid depth tubulars but my climbing bike is 5.8kg with mid depth tubeless. I can feel the difference in comfort and it’s much easier going up hill plus I prefer tubeless maintenance over tubular.

If I was content at 7kg then I’d go with aero all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
42.

spdntrxi
Posts: 2781
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 6:11 pm

by spdntrxi

since you have seen a ton....then likely you know the answer already. If your climbing bike is 7kg on WW then it's needs to go on a diet.

exFictitiouZ
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:20 pm

by exFictitiouZ

Because for the same budget a light bike will always be lighter. Likewise, to achieve the same weight, you'd have to spend more to shed weight on an aero bike.

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 7647
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

+1
And because the light-frame one might be a better bike overall than the aero-frame one.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8187
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

MMW wrote:Hello WW.

I've seen a ton of post regarding aero vs light bike, but if your abel to get your aero bike to the same weight as a climbing bike (like the venge sup 7kg) why then go for the climbing bike?

Regard Mathias
Two things: Ride Quality and Comfort. By the very nature of aero tube profiles they are less vertically compliant than that same tube shape (for example) turned 90 degrees, which makes it steadier in the lateral plane and more compliant in the vertical. Use a 2x4 as an example. Pretend it’s a downtube. Looking at it from the side, imagine the 2x4 positioned so that it’s 4” deep, ala Trek Madone. Now imagine it rotated 90 degrees so that you see the 2” profile from the side, ala Emonda. Two very different riding characteristics.
Then factor in the use of very thin high modulus carbon, with likely thinner walls on the aero tubes than the non aero tubes (equal weight and all), and that also contributes to a harsher ride. More “brittle” feeling if you will. They’re getting better, but still a long ways to go in comparison. While the aero bike is more aero in a straight line, it is also more susceptible to crosswinds. Not so great when descending down a gusty twisty mountain road. At least in comparison to the alternative.
Last edited by Calnago on Sun Dec 02, 2018 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

izza
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:03 pm

by izza

Trek Madone SLR article in cyclist magazine -

The Madone is the most comfortable road bike I [the journalist] have ever rode. Not just the most comfortable aero bike.

Would put a link up but it’s not on the web yet. Read the article whilst waiting in my local corner shop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8187
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

I’m not at all surprised you are able to find a “journalist” who would write that. I’ve been riding a Madone for the last week (last years model). I can unequivocally state it’s by far not the most comfortable road bike I have ever ridden. But if that’s your thing, then go for it. They are nice bikes. Actually, I think you have one and posted it up here. I think I even commented on it, saying if I were to own an aero bike, this would be it. Or something to that effect.
Last edited by Calnago on Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

RocketRacing
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 2:43 am

by RocketRacing

MMW wrote:
Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:31 pm
Hello WW.

I've seen a ton of post regarding aero vs light bike, but if your abel to get your aero bike to the same weight as a climbing bike (like the venge sup 7kg) why then go for the climbing bike?

Regard Mathias
I guess because that climbing bike will be cheaper.

JeffK
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:13 pm

by JeffK

If they are the same weight, i'd sacrifice a small amount of comfort for aero every time. I will be on a new Venge for this season and can't wait!

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

No comfort issues on my look 795. In fact it's very comfortable.

Aero bikes can climb as well as a non aero bike. How they climb has alot to do with the geometry

User avatar
wheelsONfire
Posts: 2750
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:15 am
Location: NorthEU

by wheelsONfire

I think it's stupid not to counterweight the mental aspect of things.
If you believe the best bike is (ex) Madone, the risk that you feel like that is pretty huge.
The only way to determine which is the best would be to ride many bikes to a point we have passed the "in love" or different makes it better sense.
Most end consumers will have no way of testing several bikes (maybe not even one), to a point you actually know this is the one for you.
I tend to believe i sum up different aspects over years. From those experiences i have to make my move.
Bikes:

Ax Lightness Vial EVO Race (2018.12.21)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156137
Paduano Racing Fidia (kind of shelved)
Open *UP* (2016.04.14)


Ex bike; Vial EVO D

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 725
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

Whilst aero bikes are sexy looking and proven to be faster up until about 6% hill gradients many pros still don't use them.

Aero bikes seem artifically popular because of the UCI weight limit of 6.8kg, and that an aero bike can fairly easily be built up to 7-7.5kg. If there was a 5.5kg UCI weight limit how popular would aero bikes be?

For me, I'm on the fence, one day I'm thinking of buying deeper wheels for my climbing bike, another day I'm thinking about an aero bike's possibilities.

User avatar
Noctiluxx
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:17 pm
Location: Southern California

by Noctiluxx

The answer is to have one of each, a lightweight aero bike and an aero lightweight bike. My Oltre XR4 is 6.7KG with Bora Ultra 50 clinchers, Vision 5D aero cockpit, pedals, cages, dual sided power meter, and Garmin mount while and my TCR is 6.3KG with Mavic 40mm clinchers, Enve/Giant aero cockpit, bottle cages, garmin mount, and pedals. Both are great all around bikes.
2018 Bianchi Oltre XR4, (Celeste Matt)
2018 De Rosa SK Pininfarina (Blu)
2019 Trek Madone SLR (Rage Red)
2019 Giant TCR Advanced SL (Chameleon Blue)
2019 Giant Revolt Advanced 0

Bordcla
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:42 pm

by Bordcla

For what it's worth, I've got (all size 58 or L):

a Specialized Tarmac Expert with Dura-Ace C24s (around 7.5kg);
a Cervelo S3 with Enve 4.5s (around 7.4kg); and
a Canyon Aeroad CF SLX 8.0 disc with Enve 4.5ARs (around 7.6kg)

I'd say the S3 climbs the best of the 3, closely followed by the two others, which climb very very well, despite different geometries between them.

To me, the fact that a disc aero bike and another aero bike match and exceed a superb climber like the Tarmac SL4 tells me that performance when climbing is certainly no reason to prefer an non aero frame. All 3 also descend superbly, with the Cervelo possibly again being my favorite.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post