Aero or non aero?

Borgie
Borgie Posts: 15
edited March 2015 in Road buying advice
I'm looking to buy a new roadbike in the next few weeks. Can't decide if I'm gonna go with an aero bike or a "normal" roadbike. It's typically quite flat were I live, and no hills are steeper than 5-6%. Also, I'm doing a couple of triathlons every year, hence my interest in an aero bike. I'm worried about the lack of comfort though.

Ideally I would like a Canyon Aeroad SLX but it's too expensive. Instead I've been looking at the Canyon Ultimate CF and Giant Propel Advanced. They are about the same prize but unfortunately I haven't tried any of them irl. Both seem to be good bikes (although different) but I'm curious about a few things:

1. Will the Propels aero advantage make me faster?
2. Will the Canyons more relaxed geometry and alleged more comfortable seatpost suit me better (I don't race, just club rides and sportives)?


Any thoughts? Other suggestions on bikes I should look at?

Comments

  • bernithebiker
    bernithebiker Posts: 4,148
    A good position on a 'normal' bike will be faster than a poor position on an 'aero' bike.

    Personally I think the difference is akin to whether or not you happen to be carrying a water bottle.

    Count the Tarmacs in the pro peloton - it'll take you a while.

    Now count the Venges, hmmmmmm.
  • Grill
    Grill Posts: 5,610
    1. Maybe during a TT, but not for normal riding.
    2. Maybe, depends if the geo is suitable.
    English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg
  • diy
    diy Posts: 6,473
    There are more options with a non-aero and they seem a bit cheaper. But aero's look cooler and yep form over function can be a factor as long as you don't kid yourself.

    If you're riding is a mix of off stuff and you want a do all bike, the aeros make sense.
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Get the prettier one.
  • ai_1
    ai_1 Posts: 3,060
    I had exactly this decision to make last year. Like you, I don't do road races, I do sportives and also adventure races, duathlons and will be doing several triathlons including a half ironman this year. I was seriously contemplating an aero road bike in order to cover all the bases as it were but the aero bike selection was a little more limited last year and I really had it down to the 2014 Felt AR4 which was going to cost €3300 or thereabouts and that was with relatively mediocre wheels. The other bike I'd been considering was the Ultimate CF SLX 7.0 which was only a fraction cheaper but a better spec.
    In the end I decided neither the Felt nor the SLX was worth the extra money over the Canyon Ultimate CF SL 9.0 so that's what I got. I've converted my old road bike for TT use with a forward seatpost and extensions. Putting extensions onto an aero bike and re-configuring the setup for TTs and multisport races would have been a pain in the neck and even more so for training. As it is I don't have the minor benefit of an aero frame but I do have a very light and well spec'd bike for a lot less money and that spare change can be spent on an aero helmet, wheels or a other kit that has a bigger impact than the frame. More likely I'll add a bit to it and get a mid range dedicated tri-bike next year if I'm enjoying it enough to warrant it.
  • izza
    izza Posts: 1,561
    In terms of the Propel, I've had mine for 18 months to two years now.

    Not only aero but stiff in the BB area for out of saddle climbing and sprinting efforts increases the fun element.

    Furthermore, it is very comfortable. I use it for all weekend riding 12 months a year. However, check out Kurt 'Tarzan' Searvogel. He is trying to break Tommy Godwin's record riding on one!
    Kurt_zpsyk9vkwyo.jpg
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Well that and his recumbent ?
  • Borgie
    Borgie Posts: 15
    izza wrote:
    In terms of the Propel, I've had mine for 18 months to two years now.

    Not only aero but stiff in the BB area for out of saddle climbing and sprinting efforts increases the fun element.

    You seem to like it. How does it compare to a Supersix, Tarmac or other non aero bikes?

    Btw is your bike the more expensive SL version with built in seatpost or one of th other versions?
  • izza
    izza Posts: 1,561
    Yes I have the SL version.

    I went from a Tarmac to a Venge to a Propel.

    The Propel and Venge, in terms of handling are very similar. The Venge had slightly less damping which meant it felt more tiring over 80 mile rides. The Tarmac is much sharper - that does not make it better. I use to find it too quick into corners that saw me correct mid turn. It is a personal preference but I much prefer the aero bikes' handling.