login
high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike
-
No new posts
| General Discussion | Triathlon Talk » high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike | Rss Feed  |
 2009-11-18 9:00 AM |
Veteran  117 |  Subject: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bikeI have a carbon road bike (Fuji SL-1) with clip ons that I've used for a few triathlons. The bike rides like a dream as any decent carbon bike should. Of course, it had road geometry. I can put together an entry-level aluminum tri bike for a few hundred bucks. I'm seriously considering the Leader 720TT, and I have enough spare components on-hand to be able to build it up for relatively cheap. Please give me your opinions. Do the benefits of a dedicated tri position on an entrly-level aluminum frame outweight the benefits of being on a sexy road bike with road geometry? Thanks. Ray |
| 2009-11-18 9:06 AM in reply to: #2519614 |
Cycling Guru 15134   Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike If you can swing it, yes it is a good idea. Simpy to have separate tools for separate jobs. Being on a sexy road bike doesn't mean sh-t if you get a good solid fit on a bike with more aerodynamics and geometries that allow you to stay in an aero position longer. |
| 2009-11-19 9:46 AM in reply to: #2519614 |
Veteran 117 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike Thanks for the reply. You've restated exactly what I had thought. I'm definitely worried about losing the responsiveness and ride that I have with the road bike. Any other thoughts? Ray |
| 2009-11-19 10:04 AM in reply to: #2519614 |
Extreme Veteran 590 Sioux Falls, SD | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike Not to mention that adding an additional bike to your stable is in line with the fundemental rule of cycling: the correct number of bikes to own is n+1, where n is the number you currently have.  Edited by Tundra_Man 2009-11-19 10:04 AM |
| 2009-11-19 10:18 AM in reply to: #2519614 |
Master 2460 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike Although while the above is correct, since you already have aerobars on your roadie, you will likely gain no more than 60 seconds per hour of racing on the TT bike - and that's if you're going 22+ mph the entire way. |
| 2009-11-19 10:26 AM in reply to: #2521679 |
Pro 3804 Seacoast, NH! | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike agarose2000 - 2009-11-19 11:18 AM Although while the above is correct, since you already have aerobars on your roadie, you will likely gain no more than 60 seconds per hour of racing on the TT bike - and that's if you're going 22+ mph the entire way. Cool factor outweighs this issue any day! |
| 2009-11-19 10:26 AM in reply to: #2521679 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike Unless his fit and position are not very good on the roadie with aero bars. One cannot assume he is perfectly set up currently. |
| 2009-11-19 11:30 AM in reply to: #2519614 |
Extreme Veteran 644 Anaheim | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike I have a Leader Bike. It is stiff and chattery on a bad road (w/ aluminum Easton clinchers at 95 psi). On nice pavement its just fine, but I guess I got lucky because I am very comfortable in my aero position. with the 78 degree SA I my hips are fairly open. I wish the graphics were a little more subtle, but whatever. Note: The Leader has a tall headtube. If you get one, be sure not to cut the steering tube on the fork too short. The seat clamp is unorthodox so if you get a carbon seatpost be sure you have some assembly paste. Edited by Broompatrol 2009-11-19 11:33 AM |
| 2010-04-04 2:10 PM in reply to: #2519614 |
Veteran 117 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike Hi. I figured that I'd resurrect this thread. I found an entry-level tri bike for fairly cheap...real cheap. And it fits. I'm still worried about moving from a high-end carbon road bike to a basic aluminum tri bike. I'm not too worried about the bling factor of carbon since I don't mind aluminum. If I had the money, I'd probably buy the P1 or a Tequilo. I have a good fit on my road bike for road riding. I've used clip-ons but my big frustration is that I shift a lot (probably too much) to maintain that sweet spot. It's fine when riding the hoods, but troublesome when in the aero position. Am I correct in saying that a proper aero position will offset any benefits of a lighter carbon frame? Ray |
| 2010-04-04 2:26 PM in reply to: #2767592 |
Master 2426 Central Indiana | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike rjp7204 - 2010-04-04 3:10 PM Am I correct in saying that a proper aero position will offset any benefits of a lighter carbon frame? Yes |
| 2010-04-04 2:39 PM in reply to: #2767592 |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike rjp7204 - 2010-04-04 4:10 PM Am I correct in saying that a proper aero position will offset any benefits of a lighter carbon frame? The value of carbon in the manufacture of aerodynamic bikes isn't the weight savings but rather the ability to make aerodynamic tube shapes more easily than working with a metal. So, if your tribike has lots of tubes that have an aspect ratio of 3:1, you are likely giving up little in aerodyamics over a carbon frame. As for weight, unless you are doing uphill, point to point courses, weight can be ignored in tri/TT applications so I wouldn't worry if your alu tribike is a little heavier than a similar carbon one would be. As you point out, the key thing is your positioning on the bike as the rider is responsible for the majority of the aerodynamic drag experienced while riding. Shane |
| 2010-04-04 2:41 PM in reply to: #2767592 |
Champion 7233 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike rjp7204 - 2010-04-04 1:10 PM Hi. I figured that I'd resurrect this thread. I found an entry-level tri bike for fairly cheap...real cheap. And it fits. I'm still worried about moving from a high-end carbon road bike to a basic aluminum tri bike. I'm not too worried about the bling factor of carbon since I don't mind aluminum. If I had the money, I'd probably buy the P1 or a Tequilo. I have a good fit on my road bike for road riding. I've used clip-ons but my big frustration is that I shift a lot (probably too much) to maintain that sweet spot. It's fine when riding the hoods, but troublesome when in the aero position. Am I correct in saying that a proper aero position will offset any benefits of a lighter carbon frame? Ray my tri bike set up race ready is roughly 19-20 pounds. the road bike i was on before, with training wheels, was 16. on a 10 mi all out TT on the road bike/training wheels i ave 25.7 mph same course, the same day (about two hours later), same wind, tri bike and race wheels (setup mentioned above), i ave 27.3. I have my fastest two bike splits to date (23.8 and 26.7 in a HIM and sprint respectively) on my heaviest, alum frame. |
| 2010-04-04 2:44 PM in reply to: #2767612 |
Champion 7233 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike also something else worth noting, that "jump" and handling yuo are used to with a raod bike, ignore that, its not what you are looking for in a tri bike. its like buying a semi to haul stuff and then wondering why it wont accelerate like a sports car. |
| 2010-04-04 3:16 PM in reply to: #2519614 |
Expert 774 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike newbz - 2010-04-04 2:44 PM also something else worth noting, that "jump" and handling yuo are used to with a raod bike, ignore that, its not what you are looking for in a tri bike. its like buying a semi to haul stuff and then wondering why it wont accelerate like a sports car. To elaborate on this, you don't want the quick responsiveness on a tri bike that you expect on a roadie. That is why the head tube angle (caster) is much lower on a tri bike than a roadie. I have an aluminum tri bike and a sexy carbon roadie. Even with the heavier tri bike, I ave 1+ mph faster on a tt than I do on a roadie, so that translates to about 3 minutes / hour for me. (I do a 40k tt in about 1:06). Edited by greyg8r 2010-04-04 3:18 PM |
| 2010-04-05 9:28 AM in reply to: #2767592 |
New user 147 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike one important point to bring up beyond the speed, weight and aero is that tri-bike will save you legs for the run. you will get notably more fatigue when riding a road bike then transitioning to the run than on a tri-bike -jersey walt |
| 2010-04-05 10:22 AM in reply to: #2768538 |
Not a Coach 11473 Media, PA | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike qclabrat - 2010-04-05 10:28 AM one important point to bring up beyond the speed, weight and aero is that tri-bike will save you legs for the run. you will get notably more fatigue when riding a road bike then transitioning to the run than on a tri-bike -jersey walt Not true. Some have argued there might be some marginal benefits. But even that seems unlikely, at best. |
| 2010-04-05 10:34 AM in reply to: #2768700 |
Champion 7233 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike JohnnyKay - 2010-04-05 9:22 AM qclabrat - 2010-04-05 10:28 AM one important point to bring up beyond the speed, weight and aero is that tri-bike will save you legs for the run. you will get notably more fatigue when riding a road bike then transitioning to the run than on a tri-bike -jersey walt Not true. Some have argued there might be some marginal benefits. But even that seems unlikely, at best. i was thinking this as well, look at some of the ITU run times..... |
| 2010-04-05 10:39 AM in reply to: #2768538 |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike qclabrat - 2010-04-05 11:28 AM one important point to bring up beyond the speed, weight and aero is that tri-bike will save you legs for the run. you will get notably more fatigue when riding a road bike then transitioning to the run than on a tri-bike This is a myth; there are a few studies that people have attempted to interpret as evidence of saving legs for the run but there was little if anything in the studies that would support this conclusion. The advantage of the tribike on running is that you will be on the bike for less time due to the aerodynamic position. So, an athlete on a road bike who puts out 200W might ride a 40km in 1:15 while the same athlete well positioned on a tribike with the same 200W would might ride 1:05. So, ten less minutes riding at 200W would lead to a better run as the athlete has accumulated less fatigue during the bike leg. Shane |
| 2010-04-05 10:58 AM in reply to: #2768761 |
| Expert 618 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike gsmacleod - 2010-04-05 11:39 AM qclabrat - 2010-04-05 11:28 AM one important point to bring up beyond the speed, weight and aero is that tri-bike will save you legs for the run. you will get notably more fatigue when riding a road bike then transitioning to the run than on a tri-bike This is a myth; there are a few studies that people have attempted to interpret as evidence of saving legs for the run but there was little if anything in the studies that would support this conclusion. The advantage of the tribike on running is that you will be on the bike for less time due to the aerodynamic position. So, an athlete on a road bike who puts out 200W might ride a 40km in 1:15 while the same athlete well positioned on a tribike with the same 200W would might ride 1:05. So, ten less minutes riding at 200W would lead to a better run as the athlete has accumulated less fatigue during the bike leg. Shane What he said ^^^. |
| 2010-04-05 12:20 PM in reply to: #2519614 |
Master 1662 Flagstaff and Phoenix, AZ | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike How about the comfort factor? I thought the longer the race the more fatigued you'll get on a stiffer alu frame, aero or not. I ride on alu only so I can't compare from first hand experience but I've heard people say that carbon is much cushier. |
| 2010-04-05 1:31 PM in reply to: #2519614 |
Veteran 117 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike Thanks for all the great responses. I've found an aluminum tri bike that fits good for $650 (minus wheels). It's not the sexiest bike, but it has newer components. I don't think I can pass on the price. Ray |
| 2010-04-05 1:35 PM in reply to: #2769054 |
| Expert 618 | Subject: RE: high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike SauseEnte - 2010-04-05 1:20 PM How about the comfort factor? I thought the longer the race the more fatigued you'll get on a stiffer alu frame, aero or not. I ride on alu only so I can't compare from first hand experience but I've heard people say that carbon is much cushier. It is not because it all depends on how the frame is designed. The material component facor of that "comfort" part of the equation is dramatically overblown. You can get a really well designed aluminum frame to not be as stiff. I have a carbon road bike and the frame is so stiff it will rattle your teeth out without even blinking. Great for climbing and sprinting but not for demonstrating that carbon is more absorptive!  |
| General Discussion | Triathlon Talk » high-end carbon road bike vs entry-level aluminum tri bike | Rss Feed |
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK