Aero vs Standard Road

Mr Dog

In the market to change my TCR.. she's getting long in the tooth and has seen out another winter. It's been a fantastic bike. I'm looking at the Propel Pro but have noticed not many 'pro' teams use their aero bikes on a regular basis. Seems the riders opt for standard road frames over the aero counterpart. Is this because of comfort, handling, rolling terrain or is the benefit negated due to riding in a large group?
Already have R3 which is 'comfortable' if a little lacklustre, but have got the weight down to 7kg with everything hanging on the frame, so I am tempted to try an aero frame. However I really like my TCR and enjoy climbing, so do I stick with what I like? Have considered an S3 but it' s out of my range. Any advice from Propel owners would be greatly appreciated as I don't want to drop all my savings on a bike that I don't get on with.

Grill

Buy whichever you think is prettiest. In the grand scheme of things the aeroness won't make a lick of difference to you.

Mr Dog

Cheers bud....those estimated few seconds gain probably won't materialise. As Tesco say though "every little helps" :-)

bernithebiker

If you look at the pro Specialized teams, they are almost all on Tarmacs, Venges are very rare.

Which is kind of odd given the much higher speeds of the pros (and therefore more potential aero benefit). OK, they are protected somewhat by the peloton itself, but everyone likes a breakaway, and things do tend to string out on the climbs.....

cookeeemonster

As far as I'm aware unless you're time trialling, doing a solo breakaway or sprinting then aero bikes are not gonna give you much benefit when surrounded by other riders in a typical road race

Mr Dog

Exactly Berni... the teams just don't seem keen. Which makes me wonder if the aero frames are uncomfortable twitchy and heavy for very little gain. I spend most of my training time riding solo so am tempted by even a 1kph gain. I fully appreciate the position on the bike is paramount but if there's any gain to be had I'm game.

fenix

If you've been in a wind tunnel and perfected your position then go aero. If you haven't then go with the prettiest. Don't copy what pro teams use. They do what they're told by sponsors.

Mr Dog

You're spot on Cookie Monster. The difference between the two bikes is nearly 700g. But like a lot of people I'm a sucker for marketing. I blame Cervelo for getting me hooked ;-)

Mr Dog

Cheers Fenix...the problem is I fancy the aero more than her sister!

The secret rider

I'd buy the Propel Advance Pro 1 in Orange and black . . . . it looks the fastest thing i've ever seen.

Unless your short and have weak legs . . . Oh

Mr Dog

I'd post pictures to canvas opinion but I'm an old duffer with no understanding of how to do it :-)

Mr Dog

Damn ....rumbled. .cover blown...the short weak legs are outed :-)

bristolpete

From my personal experience, aero road bikes do have their place and having owned Cervelos in the past, and last year, a Giant Propel advanced, I have come to the conclusion that they gain dividends in certain areas. The Propel is without doubt the fastest free speed bike I have ridden. Fast roads make the bike fast, as per all bikes, but this thing rode at tempo like nothing else I have ridden. It climbs really well too as the BB is stiff as a gnats chuff, but a slow climber will always climb slowly irrespective of the bike.

But, here a caveat, the propel is a strange bike to fit as long and low and a medium is near on par a 56cm a.n.other. they are quite slack for a full gas bike, but then Giant bikes seat tube angles are.

Also, to me, it had the stiffest frame around the head tube I have ever ridden and its the first bike which encouraged me to dismount after 50 miles.

Another often over looked benefit of aero road is if you ride within a group or have a fast tuesday ride type thing, the bike will acquiesce the rider and help you sit on without working overly hard on the front or sat on a wheel. If I still lived in Bristol, I would buy another propel for fast Tuesday for sure. I do think bikes like the TCR, Evo and Tarmac are still the best multi faceted bikes out there though - fast as ****.

Don't overlook the alleged benefit of an aero lid such as evade, Ballista and so on as these things yield free speed evidently.

Hope that helps.

noodleman

Grill wrote:

Buy whichever you think is prettiest. In the grand scheme of things the aeroness won't make a lick of difference to you.

Spot on! My TT bike is obviously aero but the gains achieved in speed are much more to do with my position on the bike which comes mainly from the TT specific bars and the 80mm deep wheels. You'd notice naff all difference in speed from an aero frame alone.

Mr Dog

Indeed. .helps immensely. Interesting information about the sizing. I have both a medium and small TCR, the later with a 130 stem. Just wish I could stop faffing and make sure I get the right bike.

bristolpete

Mr Dog wrote:

Indeed. .helps immensely. Interesting information about the sizing. I have both a medium and small TCR, the later with a 130 stem. Just wish I could stop faffing and make sure I get the right bike.

Book a test ride via Giants website....small big, medium bigger.

cycleclinic

All I can give you is my personal experience. I have a variety of road bike mostly older ones from the 90's which are all very well mannered (although the 140mm stem on the sannino has lead to a bit of twitchyness not sure why though) and I now have something properly modern a Look 795. It is perfect. It is not twitchy it goes exactly where I want it to go, it is definatley quicker than all my round tubes bikes. I have to average a higher power output on those older bike to maintain the same pace (not much but it is noticable though). Still after 100 miles i still feel fooked I just went a little quicker. I am strugling to find a down side apart from the cost. Looks are not exactly what you buy for value for money.

I raced it today too and did not find anything I disliked. Take one of your prefered bikes for a test ride. depending what you are coming from will depend on how much of difference you will notice.

pedrojake

Fwiw, I bought my Propel for three reasons;

To TT on with clip ons fitted
To road race
To use on club runs as the 'Sunday best'

At first I loved this bike, as well as the compliments and comments I got. Set PBs on 10 mile TTs, all was good. I used it in 3-4 RR's, and if I'm honest I found the gearing heavy on the hilly circuits. Results went backwards, and I reverted back to the old faithful pinarello.

I took the propel out yesterday for the first time this year- a club reliability trial with the fast guys. On the flat, the thing absolutely flys, especially with the 50's I have fitted. Once I hit the hills on it though, I went out the back, dropped, big style, and wished I was on my winter Ribble, mudguards and all.....

And for me, this is the thing. It's stiff, fast and aggressive. But it's no lightweight. I kind of think of it as a luxury to have in the 'stable', for when I'd want to go out for fast flat runs -but if buying again would I purchase one as my all round bike? The answer is no.

I've since bought a dedicated TT bike, as this is what I want to focus on this year. As such, I'm now thinking the Propel as being surplus to requirements. In short, I don't think it's ideal for TT RR or Sunday hilly runs. That's just my experience however, and it might be that a stronger rider than me might say different. Having hastily sold my pinarello, I'm investing in a better 'standard bike'

pedrojake

Also, to me, it had the stiffest frame around the head tube I have ever ridden and its the first bike which encouraged me to dismount after 50 miles

This......

Grill

noodleman wrote:

Grill wrote:

Buy whichever you think is prettiest. In the grand scheme of things the aeroness won't make a lick of difference to you.

Spot on! My TT bike is obviously aero but the gains achieved in speed are much more to do with my position on the bike which comes mainly from the TT specific bars and the 80mm deep wheels. You'd notice naff all difference in speed from an aero frame alone.

You're preaching to the choir when it comes to actually getting aero.

bristolpete

PedroJake wrote:

Also, to me, it had the stiffest frame around the head tube I have ever ridden and its the first bike which encouraged me to dismount after 50 miles

This......

Yep. There is a reason why the propel and before this, the Venge, which rides like a bag of spanners compared to a Propel are the most common bought and sold bikes of the recent generation. For me, had it not ripped my shoulders and neck apart I would have kept it as fast, and I cannot climb for s**t anyway

For the record, I am no slouch on a bike on the right terrain and can easily muster sub 5 hr to 5.30 hrs 100 miles ride when the legs feel like it though harder here in Devon of course, which is like Belgium on acid.

noodleman

Let's be honest. The only reason most people buy an aero bike is because of looks. If you believe the hype then any tiny advantage you gain on the flat (and it will be tiny) you will lose again on hills. Aero has its place but that place is on a TT bike or on a roadbike that you do TT''s on. Put any sort of undulating terrain or ride in a bunch and the benefit is zero.

sloppyschleckonds

My Canyon Aeroad climbs as well as my Cannonade Hi-Mod.
Something like a Scott Foil is probably the same.

noodleman

SloppySchleckonds wrote:

My Canyon Aeroad climbs as well as my Cannonade Hi-Mod.
Something like a Scott Foil is probably the same.

But your Cannondale Hi-Mod probably goes as fast on the flat as your Aeroad. None of my bikes other than the TT bike are appreciably quicker than the rest on a flat road. The quickest uphills is the oltre as it weighs under 6kg compared to at least 7.2kg of the rest. I believe lack of weight is a far bigger benefit on hills than an aero tubed frame is on the flat.

Mr Dog

Reality is beginning to bite. The Propel 'looks' fast but sadly I don't have to talent to squeeze out any small gains I'd get from the bike . The desire still burns bright. I guess it's the same reason people buy fast cars. Seems like I may return to the bike shop with my eyes closed and get another TCR :-)

bristolpete

Actually, the biggest issue aero bikes face is opinion from people who have never ridden them, let alone owned one. But that is the internet for you I suppose. As before, the Propel is the fastest free speed ride I have ridden, and seasoned cyclist/road riders will understand what that means - your favourite point on a ride, the magic roads, fast for no reason, chaingang, fast tuesday, saturday shop rides. The propel can cane those bits - and yes, so can all other bikes. I call it aggregate riding as like before, a slow climber irrespective of the frame, shape, modulus or parts.

Grill

bristolpete wrote:

Actually, the biggest issue aero bikes face is opinion from people who have never ridden them, let alone owned one. But that is the internet for you I suppose. As before, the Propel is the fastest free speed ride I have ridden, and seasoned cyclist/road riders will understand what that means - your favourite point on a ride, the magic roads, fast for no reason, chaingang, fast tuesday, saturday shop rides. The propel can cane those bits - and yes, so can all other bikes. I call it aggregate riding as like before, a slow climber irrespective of the frame, shape, modulus or parts.

Owned multiple aero bikes (still have one). Makes no real difference to general riding.

noodleman

Grill wrote:

bristolpete wrote:

Actually, the biggest issue aero bikes face is opinion from people who have never ridden them, let alone owned one. But that is the internet for you I suppose. As before, the Propel is the fastest free speed ride I have ridden, and seasoned cyclist/road riders will understand what that means - your favourite point on a ride, the magic roads, fast for no reason, chaingang, fast tuesday, saturday shop rides. The propel can cane those bits - and yes, so can all other bikes. I call it aggregate riding as like before, a slow climber irrespective of the frame, shape, modulus or parts.

Owned multiple aero bikes (still have one). Makes no real difference to general riding.

Same here. Iv'e owned numerous aero bikes and to claim the fastest free speed you can achieve is from an aero frame is pushing it a bit. The biggest difference anyone can make to get some "free speed" is to adjust their body position. And the next step would be to get fitter and then some deep section wheels. Maybe in a wind tunnel under exacting conditions these aero benefits are noticeable but even if you saved a few watts compared to a standard road bike you'd never notice it.
I'll happily admit to being a sucker for the looks of aero bikes but on a fast club ride or even tri's iv'e never once felt any slower or in fact been any slower on a standard road bike.

bernithebiker

+1 to the above.

If you want to get aero, sort your position. Getting a good drop position with a low head, and narrower bars helped me enormously, far more than any aero frame would have.

Then aero lid, then aero clothing and aero wheels, the frame really is very last on the list.

In any case, people seem to love bolting pumps, saddlebags, Garmin 1000's and things to their aero bikes, which kind of defeats the object, IMO.

cycleclinic

i think grill it depends what you are comparing it too. for me the difference between 90's bikes and my Look is quite noticeable but I would agree noticing the difference between something modern and new aero bike will be much smaller.

But yes you buy it because you like how it looks. Dont we buy anything because on some level it looks right.

The secret rider

I think naturally location and intended use is a factor to consider also, I live in east anglia, the flat'est part of the UK the majority of my riding is done here and as such when it comes to buying a new bike it feels right to look at aero bikes which are going to make even the smallest difference to those rides i predominantly do.

I recently looking to retire my first road bike my Felt F75 and purchase a 2016 propel advanced pro. Will I notice a difference yes, will it be due to aero gains or the fact its lighter or the fact it fits better, who knows ! But it will be faster for sure.

I only ever looked at Aero bikes living where i live, it just seems that if there is a small gain to be had great, if its all a placebo whats the worst case scenario, Ive got a bike perhaps 1kg heavier than it could be for an out and out climbing machine living and riding in a place where there are next to no inclines, regardless of effect it looks bad ass .

For what its worth i believe that the giant figures on this years propel at least are real, real gains during their test, will these translate to your average rider and thus me who is heavier than i should be, perhaps not as powerful as i should be ?> who knows, and honestly looking at it sitting in the showroom all shiny and black with its angled tubes carbon wheels and aero looks. Who really cares

PS to add this year propel in M/L (advanced pro) weighs in at 7.96kg as tested by me and a friend the other day.