Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Let's say you had a project along with your, "ready to ride bike".
What carbon frame-set would you go for, Aero or Race. Prio could be told as speed, light weight and comfort. I have looked for fun, at Venge, BMC TMR01 and S5VMD and even Look 695 as a frame-set. Where i bought my bike, the dudes went for Foil instead of Venge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,360 Posts
Scott Foil and Trek Madone seem like the best aero race bikes going right now. They are light, ride very well and offer measurable aero benefit. The others compromise heavily in ride quality, weight, stiffness or all 3. These two would be great race bikes even if aero weren't a consideration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,923 Posts
I'm just not interested in those aero shapes. I find the aesthetics to be horrible.

But considering the price range of the bikes you mentioned, I would be looking at something custom, fit and tuned for exactly the type and style of riding I like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,246 Posts
Yes, it was a stupid phrasing, clumsy. I ment aero frame or more ordinary road bike frame not considered aero.
Given the choice ... assuming the fit was good (which it rarely is), I'd go aero every time. I just love the look of the frames over conventional tubing.

With that said ... why are the manufacturers setting the aero frames up with such tall head tubes and more relaxed STA's? They are meant to be ridden fast and thus should be set up aggressively ... It just doesn't make much sense if you ask me.

I guess, you modify them for the Pro's and market to the slow age groupers who have the money to buy them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,613 Posts
Given the choice ... assuming the fit was good (which it rarely is), I'd go aero every time. I just love the look of the frames over conventional tubing.

With that said ... why are the manufacturers setting the aero frames up with such tall head tubes and more relaxed STA's? They are meant to be ridden fast and thus should be set up aggressively ... It just doesn't make much sense if you ask me.

I guess, you modify them for the Pro's and market to the slow age groupers who have the money to buy them.
The foil and venge don't have long head tubes or relaxed STA's. The S5 has a long head tube, but Cervelo is doing that to their other models as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,666 Posts
Yes, it was a stupid phrasing, clumsy. I ment aero frame or more ordinary road bike frame not considered aero.
Okay. I'd just to with the best frame for me (fit, comfort, handling ect) regarless of if it's Aero or not. I think the numbers being publised for the benefits are total BS* (the ones I've seen) so I would view an Aero frame just like any other frame. If the one that fit and felt best to me happened to be marketed as Aero then fine, I'd get it.

I mean really....given the size of a riders body how significant can tube shape be to the total package that's fighting the wind? Certainly not as significant as the outragous claims would lead us to believe.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,103 Posts
Given the choice ... assuming the fit was good (which it rarely is), I'd go aero every time. I just love the look of the frames over conventional tubing.

With that said ... why are the manufacturers setting the aero frames up with such tall head tubes and more relaxed STA's? They are meant to be ridden fast and thus should be set up aggressively ... It just doesn't make much sense if you ask me.

I guess, you modify them for the Pro's and market to the slow age groupers who have the money to buy them.
My buddy's Madone has the H2 setup, the taller headtube. We know you slammed the stem :) but some guys, like my 40+ teammate, need a frame that is a little more relaxed, even though he rides in a relatively aero position.

I'll get a picture and blur out his face.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,494 Posts
Okay. I'd just to with the best frame for me (fit, comfort, handling ect) regarless of if it's Aero or not. I think the numbers being publised for the benefits are total BS* (the ones I've seen) so I would view an Aero frame just like any other frame. If the one that fit and felt best to me happened to be marketed as Aero then fine, I'd get it.

I mean really....given the size of a riders body how significant can tube shape be to the total package that's fighting the wind? Certainly not as significant as the outragous claims would lead us to believe.
I tend to agree. The S5 comes to mind. Fugly but the wattage saved they advertise is hard to believe. Matter of fact, an old team mate owns Faster (slow speed wind tunnel in Scottsdale) and I've not seen any numbers from him. I've actually asked...oh well.

As to the op I just went through this an opted for a more traditional frame. Both the aero version and traditional fit fine and the weight difference wasn't worth worrying about so I was left with looks. That said, if a the right foil frame/fork was available at the time I was in the market I would have jumped on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,246 Posts
The foil and venge don't have long head tubes or relaxed STA's. The S5 has a long head tube, but Cervelo is doing that to their other models as well.
It's all a matter of perspective ... To me an aggressive bike would be something like the Felt F series. Their 56 cm frame has a 14 cm head tube and 73.5 degree STA. Both the Venge and Foil have a head tube 2.5 cm taller and more relaxed STA by just a small amount.

For me a short head tube length would be something around 15 cm for a 56 (or shorter) ... Look at what Felt did with their AR series compared to their F series ... the head tube is 2 cm taller on their aero frame than on their non aero frame. What's the point of that?

With specialized they used the same geometry as on their Tarmac bikes ... I'm guessing to keep the same geometry, but give riders a choice. However, those wanting an aero frame, I would expect would want to be a bit more aggressive with their position since they are looking for an aero advantage ... hence my desire to see a more aggressive geometry from the aero road bikes than they are giving currently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,246 Posts
We know you slammed the stem :) but some guys, like my 40+ teammate, need a frame that is a little more relaxed, even though he rides in a relatively aero position.
Given the fact I'm 42 years old ... age shouldn't be an issue. I'm every bit as flexible now as I was when I was in my 20's ... my recovery time isn't what it used to be, but flexibility isn't an issue.

I just feel that if you are making road bikes to gain an aero advantage, you should give them the geometry to do so as well ... not set them up for people that just want the latest/greatest. Give people an actual advantage ... and if it doesn't fit them, they should go to the non aero version of the bike ... or give different geometries like Trek does (but give seat post options instead of creating another limiting factor to the design).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,103 Posts
To be fair, your flexibility may not be the norm. From what I understand many guys prefer a slightly more upright setup as they get older. I'll let you know in 10 years!

Anyway, here it my buddy's set-up:


and even with the H2 geo he's rather low:


(2nd in line, on the tops)

Can you imagine the drop if he had a slammed stem on top of a shorter head tube?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,294 Posts
Aero for me. I can coast faster going downhill. :cornut:

I like the taller heat tubes. Who wants a short head tube with a bunch of spacers under the stem? The tall HT gives you more options.

My 54 S2 has a 140mm HT...I just run a -17.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top