Aero frame pros and cons (Rose CRS vs CW)
bad_ash
Posts: 47
I'm looking for some advice with regards to my next purchase, which is to replace my trusty Triban 3. The intended use for the bike is a combination of group rides, sportives and triathlons (sprint distance to 70.3 IM this year).
Budget is around £2k, so with that in mind I think I'm probably best off getting one new bike rather than two (a standard road bike and a dedicated TT bike).
Therefore I am kind of being drawn towards a road bike with an aero frame, like the Rose CW, which I could add clip on aero bars to for the triathlons. What are the pros and cons for a bike like this? I'd expect that the frame would be a little heavier (therefore less ideal on climbs) and possibly a harsher ride on bad road compared to a more standard road bike (like the Rose CRS). Is this assumption right? Is there anything else to consider?
Does anyone have any comments or suggestions? Thanks.
Budget is around £2k, so with that in mind I think I'm probably best off getting one new bike rather than two (a standard road bike and a dedicated TT bike).
Therefore I am kind of being drawn towards a road bike with an aero frame, like the Rose CW, which I could add clip on aero bars to for the triathlons. What are the pros and cons for a bike like this? I'd expect that the frame would be a little heavier (therefore less ideal on climbs) and possibly a harsher ride on bad road compared to a more standard road bike (like the Rose CRS). Is this assumption right? Is there anything else to consider?
Does anyone have any comments or suggestions? Thanks.
0
Comments
-
I'm in the same position. Updating my bike and I do a mixture of sportives, duathlons, adventure races (essentially duathlons with cross country running) and I'll be starting into some triathlons this year. All going well with my swimming I might do a half ironman later this year and an ironman next year.
My budget was €2000-€3000ish. I considered the Canyon Aeroad, the Rose CW and the Felt AR bikes but in the end I decided against an aero bike and ordered a Canyon Ultimate CF SL. I won't lie, I've had second thoughts a few times and if there are any delays with delivery of the Canyon I might cave and switch to the Felt AR4! However, on balance I think it's the right choice for me.
Aero bikes really give relatively little benefit unless you're really moving and already have a very good aero position on the bike. They're typically more expensive than an equivalent quality non-aero bike of similar spec. Since the shape is optimised for aerodynamics not structural properties, there will likely always be a bit of a compromise on comfort, weight, stiffness or any combination of the three.
Initially I decided it was down to the Canyon Ultimate CF SLX 7.0 for a non-aero or the Felt AR4 for aero. Both are similarly priced around the €3000 range. The Felt can be got a couple of hundred cheaper but based on claimed weights, it's 1.3kg heavier and the wheels are very basic compared to the Canyon. On the other hand, the Felt AR frames have got great reviews so far. The Canyon is uber-light, wheels are top-notch but not aero and the frame has routinely gotten superb reviews over the past year.
I was finding it difficult to decide but swaying towards the Canyon. Then I realised I could downgrade to the Canyon Ultimate CF SL 9.0 which is almost the same bike but with a cheaper and slightly heavier carbon lay-up and cheaper but still excellent wheels. the groupset etc is all the same. It comes in €1000 cheaper, is only about 250g heavier and should still be a great ride - I doubt I'll be able to tell the difference.
I'm considering that €1000 towards either proper aero wheels or a Tri bike if I decide to stick with the triathlons and take it seriously. In the mean time I'll still have a great bike for general riding and sportives and i can take part in events without worrying that I'm not fast enough to justify the aero bike!0 -
The new Felt AR's and Giant Propels have been receiving steelar reviews, have a look at them
0
