Buying a frame to suit ones style/preference of ride...?

bristolpete

Looking at a new for frame for 2013. Back story is not a climber. Weigh in at 90kg at best though typically I can get up hills I am not the quickest. So, as such, been thinking about a frame to suit my shape such as a Venge which is described as a 'roulers' bike rather than the Tarmac, a climbers bike. I do like riding solo, hard and fast and can find decent less hilly loops. I can complete 100 miles in sub 6 hours solo no problem.

The question I ask myself is should I buy a frame to compensate for my weakness' in the guise of a Tarmac of play to my strengths with a Venge ? I dont search out hills, but usually enter a couple of events with hills in.

For those who can recall, I had a Venge sized 56 which was too big as the standover is tall and I have a shorter inseam. So, it would be scratching that itch again but downsizing to a 54cm with a nice 120mm stem and a couple of spacers. Tarmac is a great fit on a 56cm. Both great bikes. Horses for courses etc etc. I know a bloke who bought a Venge as he is a climber but wanted to extra oommpphhh on the flat in the bunch on a weekend, hence thinking about a frame to offset weak point on a bike.

After a tricky 2012 with money worries, ill health etc 2013 is looking better so will build a functional yet unremarkable bike over the coming weeks.

Does any of this make any sense ?

styxd

Just buy whichever bike you like the look of, trying to pretend you're a "rouler" (whatever tha is) is daft. Surely you're just a heavy cyclist? Plenty of lighter folk can do 100 miles in 5 hours on a supposed "climbers bike" - because they're fitter than you.

Perhaps spend less on the bike and invest in a coach?

imposter2.0

bristolpete wrote:

Does any of this make any sense ?

Not really, no. Anyone who really thinks that a Venge frame will give you extra 'oomph' on the flat - or that a Tarmac will give you extra 'oomph' up hills needs to stop reading brochures and have a quiet word with themselves..

bristolpete

OK.

Realised my typo. Meant 5 hours not 6. I am fit. No drama there muckers.

LegendLust

If you live in Bristol, take a visit to Bike Science and have a look at the Legend's. Depending on your budget, Marco Bertoletti can build you a carbon bike, and tune the make up of the carbon tubes, and the construction, to make the frame ride how you want. He can build it lighter, stiffer if you want etc

bristolpete

Imposter wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

Does any of this make any sense ?

Not really, no. Anyone who really thinks that a Venge frame will give you extra 'oomph' on the flat - or that a Tarmac will give you extra 'oomph' up hills needs to stop reading brochures and have a quiet word with themselves..

Really? The bikes are chalk and cheese. They ride and respond very differently.

snakedoc

If it was me, I would play to my strengths as I think that this only adds to my enjoyment of riding the bike.
I am 65kg and went through a similar dilemma - I do not think that I put out enough power to take advantage of the aero venge whereas I am much better suited to climbing, hence I played to my strengths and got a tarmac (I did think about yours when you were selling it, but I am a 54, not a 56). I believe that I enjoy the bike more as I get quicker up hills.

IMHO if you like riding hard and fast the venge sounds like a better bet, whereas the Tarmac would be better for hillier rides. Saying that, I do not think that the venge is particularly bad on hills, it's just a little heavier than the tarmac so it's a marginal loss for what I perceive would be a bigger gain on the flats (for you that is, not me).

Let us know which way you go (I always like seeing the pics of your bikes!)

imposter2.0

bristolpete wrote:

Imposter wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

Does any of this make any sense ?

Not really, no. Anyone who really thinks that a Venge frame will give you extra 'oomph' on the flat - or that a Tarmac will give you extra 'oomph' up hills needs to stop reading brochures and have a quiet word with themselves..

Really? The bikes are chalk and cheese. They ride and respond very differently.

You still have to pedal them though. The 'oomph' usually comes from the legs, not the frame. If I genuinely thought a Venge would make me faster, I would trade in my SL3 tomorrow.

styxd

bristolpete wrote:

Imposter wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

Does any of this make any sense ?

Not really, no. Anyone who really thinks that a Venge frame will give you extra 'oomph' on the flat - or that a Tarmac will give you extra 'oomph' up hills needs to stop reading brochures and have a quiet word with themselves..

Really? The bikes are chalk and cheese. They ride and respond very differently.

Yeh, but none of it makes any difference to your speed.

passout

You can choose between comfort and speed to some extent to be fair.

imposter2.0

passout wrote:

You can choose between comfort and speed to some extent to be fair.

Let 10psi out of your tyres - instant comfort improvement. Speed (real-life speed, not imaginary 'magazine bike tester' speed) is a product of fitness - very little else.

styxd

passout wrote:

You can choose between comfort and speed to some extent to be fair.

Of course. But unless you use a heavy, flexy, steel bike, with wide tyres and an upright riding position, the difference in terms of speed is negligble.

When comparing two top of the range carbon race bikes such as a Tarmac and Venge, the difference is non existant.

keef66

bristolpete wrote:

OK.

Realised my typo. Meant 5 hours not 6. I am fit. No drama there muckers.

Well I was impressed by the 6 hours. 20mph for 5 hours solo riding is hard for a mere mortal to comprehend... :shock:

bristolpete

keef66 wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

OK.

Realised my typo. Meant 5 hours not 6. I am fit. No drama there muckers.

Well I was impressed by the 6 hours. 20mph for 5 hours solo riding is hard for a mere mortal to comprehend... :shock:

More than doable. Even with my limited output. Did Bristol - London 117.5 miles in 6 hours 3 mins.

Smoked the first 100 miles sub 5 hours, but lost time heading into London. I think could do 5.30 on a Venge.

bristolpete

Imposter wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

Imposter wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

Does any of this make any sense ?

Not really, no. Anyone who really thinks that a Venge frame will give you extra 'oomph' on the flat - or that a Tarmac will give you extra 'oomph' up hills needs to stop reading brochures and have a quiet word with themselves..

Really? The bikes are chalk and cheese. They ride and respond very differently.

You still have to pedal them though. The 'oomph' usually comes from the legs, not the frame. If I genuinely thought a Venge would make me faster, I would trade in my SL3 tomorrow.

Can I pressume you have or have not ridden a Venge to make such assumptions or remarks. Interesting stuff.

imposter2.0

bristolpete wrote:

Can I pressume you have or have not ridden a Venge to make such assumptions or remarks. Interesting stuff.

Not ridden a Venge, no. But I do know that legs are fast - frames are not. However, I'm happy to be corrected if you can convince me otherwise...

galatzo

LegendLust wrote:

If you live in Bristol, take a visit to Bike Science and have a look at the Legend's. Depending on your budget, Marco Bertoletti can build you a carbon bike, and tune the make up of the carbon tubes, and the construction, to make the frame ride how you want. He can build it lighter, stiffer if you want etc

I've been looking at them Legends too - very nice Ti prince.
Reasonable too as made to measure Italian goes.

Spesh have never inspired me. Sure they make some good bikes and its not all markeing but theres nicer out there for sure.

passout

Imposter wrote:

passout wrote:

You can choose between comfort and speed to some extent to be fair.

Let 10psi out of your tyres - instant comfort improvement. Speed (real-life speed, not imaginary 'magazine bike tester' speed) is a product of fitness - very little else.

Generally I agree but I think your positioning on the bike does make a difference, just as using the drops does. Less so if you are comparing 'proper' road bikes to each other.

imposter2.0

passout wrote:

Generally I agree but I think your positioning on the bike does make a difference, just as using the drops does. Less so if you are comparing 'proper' road bikes to each other.

No argument there - position on the bike (or indeed on any bike) definitely makes a difference. But it is eminently possible to achieve a good position on both the Tarmac and the Venge.

bristolpete

Taking a punt on a 54cm Venge.

Building it up next Tuesday all being well. Pix to follow.

Feel ready for another Venge. Doing 130 miles a week commuting on a single speed 48x16 gearing since Oct so the legs ready for some speed and some edurance miles.

Thanks for all the replies positive or not. Nice to see a healthy debate so long as opinions are respected.

on-yer-bike

bristolpete wrote:

keef66 wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

OK.

Realised my typo. Meant 5 hours not 6. I am fit. No drama there muckers.

Well I was impressed by the 6 hours. 20mph for 5 hours solo riding is hard for a mere mortal to comprehend... :shock:

More than doable. Even with my limited output. Did Bristol - London 117.5 miles in 6 hours 3 mins.

Smoked the first 100 miles sub 5 hours, but lost time heading into London. I think could do 5.30 on a Venge.

Was that on your own? If so, maybe you should become a pro.

bristolpete

Usual retort. Lets not be silly.

85 on my own. Not hard. Aside fro Toghill Bath and the climb out of Marlborough pretty flatish. The bummer is London as you see time slipping away at each red light despite that Garmin on auto stop it is frustrating.