How much faster?
Martin bikeradar
Posts: 28
Go on then. If I go from a sportive angled geometry titanium frame with £200 factory wheels of nonsuch performance, to a racey shaped carbon frame with deep section wheels: how much faster will I go? Stick a percentage on it.
Make me spend, or save cash...
Make me spend, or save cash...
0
Comments
-
Approximately 0% faster, is my guess. For a better return, go on a training camp, or invest in a coaching plan.0
-
Save your money!
Too many variables to offer an accurate figure but it would undoubtedly be a disappointment following a significant financial investment.0 -
When I did something similar from previous good bike to v nice new bike, I was slower, till I got used to the new shape and different geometry etc. Don't expect to suddenly gain 8%. If you want a figure though, expect around 8%, along with a bunch of disappointment thrown in.0
-
Couple of years ago I did the same loop 2 days running, once on my alu winter bike with guards, once on the carbon summer bike. Weather etc was pretty much identical, and according to my Garmin, so was my time. To the second!
So 0% in my experience. The carbon bike's a slightly nicer ride, but if I was forced to have just one bike again I'd have to choose the winter workhorse for it's versatility / full guards for wet riding.0 -
1.6180339887498948482% give or take a smidge
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
What you could do is fit massively heavy tyres on the sportive bike - slow that down and THEN you might notice something on the summer bike.... :-)0
-
If it's blustery, you could actually be slower. Deep rims and a light bike do not hold a line well with a Force 4+ crosswind. This is very tiring and costs energy.
But on a good day, up a good climb, the 1kg+ or so that you will have saved will make the ride feel 'nicer'.0 -
Troll post of the week.
And it's only Tuesday...0 -
I've recently gone from a fairly lardy entry-level aluminium-framed bike to a much lighter, well-specced, slightly racier carbon thing, and so far (not that the weather's let me out on it too much) I'm not looking a whole lot quicker overall on any of my routes.
However, there have been some significant improvements on several individual segments, and it does feel nicer/quicker.
Can't get past the nagging concern that my old bike was innately faster because it was red, though...0 -
Train, eat well and sleep well. Also maintain bike well.0
-
Martin bikeradar wrote:Go on then. If I go from a sportive angled geometry titanium frame with £200 factory wheels of nonsuch performance, to a racey shaped carbon frame with deep section wheels: how much faster will I go? Stick a percentage on it.
Make me spend, or save cash...
Bike is unlikely to be faster, though a more racy bike might encourage you to push a bit more!
To be honest my cheap and heavy CX shod with admittedly light and fast knobblies is no slower than the much lighter road bikes I used to have, or the carbon bikes I occasionally hire on holiday.
But nice bikes are well nice, so what did you have in mind?0 -
The OP should gain a bit from the deep sections, a bit from the weight reduction and potentially a bit from a more aggressive position. Yes it wont be night and day but most people who do hard training rides in a group find it easier on their race bike than their winter bike. Road tyres should always be faster than nobblies or there's something wrong with the road tyres.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0
-
Get the fancy road bike, run it with front and rear discs, and wear the pointiest aero helmet you can find. I assure you that you will go much faster, and you definitely will not receive any abuse whatsoever.0
-
NuclearRed955 wrote:Can't get past the nagging concern that my old bike was innately faster because it was red, though...
Did it have 'go faster' stripes on it too?0 -
SME wrote:NuclearRed955 wrote:Can't get past the nagging concern that my old bike was innately faster because it was red, though...
Did it have 'go faster' stripes on it too?
Yes. Yes it did.0 -
The reduced aero drag and lighter weight from your thinner wallet will certainly help you gain some speed. You could just send the money to me and skip the time and anxiety of going to buy a new bike.0
-
I will correct all of the above posts - I can categorically state that you will go faster.
The first time out will be good weather (well you wouldn't take your new bike out in bad weather) and you will feel full of life, energy and excitement and you will go faster on your new bike.
But for some strange reason, on the second and subsequent times you will find that you are no quicker than your old bike.0 -
Martin bikeradar wrote:Go on then. If I go from a sportive angled geometry titanium frame with £200 factory wheels of nonsuch performance, to a racey shaped carbon frame with deep section wheels: how much faster will I go? Stick a percentage on it.
Make me spend, or save cash...
You might gain a bit from the wheels, but probably not much else. If your current wheels have lots of spokes you might get a measurable gain. If you're already have 16-20 spokes in the front wheel, then you're probably going to notice less of an improvement. Come spring, I take the mudguards off my (carbon) road bike, and swap the wheels from 32 spoke heavies to low spoke ones. I reckon I gain about 1 MPH. Of course it is warmer too, which helps.
I assume that you're already wearing well fitting clothes?0 -
Singleton wrote:I will correct all of the above posts - I can categorically state that you will go faster.
The first time out will be good weather (well you wouldn't take your new bike out in bad weather) and you will feel full of life, energy and excitement and you will go faster on your new bike.
But for some strange reason, on the second and subsequent times you will find that you are no quicker than your old bike.
I guess that could be a problem of 'upgrading' and then taking that as your standard kit, whilst still doing the same group rides.0 -
Well.
Condor Fratello steel audax style bike about 11,000 miles at 18.4.
CAAD with mid range wheels 7,000 miles at 18.7
Canyon Aeroad with Enve 4.5's not enough proper miles yet. But on a regular 110 mile run in as close a conditions, it's approx 1mph faster.
So at a rough guess I'd say that over approx 5,000 miles I'd expect the canyon with fancy wheels to be .75-1mph faster than the condor.
Obvs that's not scientific, there could be otgerfactors involved but that's just the findings of 1 bloke and 3 different bikes ridden very similarly in the same sort of places..0 -
Optimistic. Of course if you only take it out on sunny days for serious rides, you’ll easily meet your expectations.DanTe1977 wrote:So at a rough guess I'd say that over approx 5,000 miles I'd expect the canyon with fancy wheels to be .75-1mph faster than the condor.
In practice, there are many things that affect the speed of a bicycle. Chief among them are the tyres, tubes, and pressures, which together dictate rolling resistance.
Thereafter the aerodynamics. Much more of your energy is spent on air resistance than rolling resistance, but there is much less you can do about air resistance, assuming you already have a road bike and a good position on it.
Weight is irrelevant on the flat but when climbing it begins to matter a little. However, except on the steepest hills, it still matters less than most cyclists imagine.
Mechanical efficiency matters a bit. For example, the type of lube you use on your chain, the cleanliness of the chain, and whether the pulleys in the rear derailleur have ball bearings (for Shimano, only Dura-Ace has ball bearings in both pulleys; Ultegra has ball bearings in one pulley; the others only have sleeve bushings that may consume upwards of 1 watt).
It is completely misleading to compare an aerodynamic bicycle to a non-aero one if you additionally run Continental’s finest on the aero one, with latex tubes for good measure, and only take it out in the summer, with a perfectly lubed chain, when dressed in your tightest-fitting lycra. And yet that is the sort of comparison you hear about all the time.0 -
I've got a different view. I've got two bikes: a Giant Defy for commuting that has a pannier rack and mudguards but upgraded wheels and a full-on Argon 18 flyer for racing. Sometimes I commute on the Argon and it is usually at least 5% faster, sometimes 10%. Of course, there are variables, in terms of the amount of weight carried in the panniers, or on my back, and the feel of the flyer may be making me work harder. But this is a robust effect, happening almost invariably. And at this time of year, when the weather is beginning to turn slightly better, sometimes my training rides are on the Defy, and sometimes on the Argon. The summer bike is at least 1 to 2 mph quicker. Again, wind effects, temperature and motivation will all affect performance, but I reckon a better specced and more lightweight bike is good for at least 5% or more.0
-
OnYourRight wrote:In practice, there are many things that affect the speed of a bicycle. Chief among them are the tyres, tubes, and pressures, which together dictate rolling resistance.
Thereafter the aerodynamics. Much more of your energy is spent on air resistance than rolling resistance
Contradictory statements surely?0 -
Topcattim: putting draggy things like mudguards and a rack on a bicycle are obviously going to affect its speed.
Your example is the sort of example I’m complaining about. You’re not comparing two frames there; you’re comparing a bunch of other things. You didn’t even mention the tyres, tubes, and pressures of your two bicycles!
No. As I said, you can only fiddle with marginal gains when it comes to the aerodynamics of bicycles (in part because the rider makes up the vast bulk of it). But you can halve your rolling resistance with carefully chosen tyres and tubes (not without other costs, but that’s a separate issue).bernithebiker wrote:Contradictory statements surely?0 -
At speed the biggest factor is air resistance. What you wear and riding position have the largest impact assuming your bike is correctly setup for you and of reasonable quality. As an experiment try riding on the hoods wearing fairly baggy clothing and then try again riding in the drops with fitted cycle clothing. The speed difference at a similar effort is very noticeable.
Another is weight but only really on longer hilly rides. I weight 16 stone and a twelve stone rider of similar fitness will ride and climb faster than i do over longer hilly rides.0 -
42.0
-
I reckon you could expect to average up to 1mph faster on a good day. More if you're running very deep wheels and it's not too hilly.0
-
You do not mention colour. Red is good for about a 1.5% increase in speed.
That aside, the variables for amateur riders involve so many aspects of the ride that a straight comparison is fantasy.
Fitness, flexibility and strength of rider.
Ability of rider to produce power while folded onto a funky frame - this catches out many who seek speed through wallet.
Condition of mechanical parts - bearings, oily bits, brakes, tyres and so on.
Pressure in tyres.
Weather on the day - wind, temperature, rain and all that gubbins.
But key is colour. Red tends to be quite quick. Lilac (from memory) offers poor speed and tends to weigh more. Black is OK, but it is tricky to achieve good times unless componentry is well coordinated with an overall 'look'.0 -
topcattim wrote:I've got a different view. I've got two bikes: a Giant Defy for commuting that has a pannier rack and mudguards but upgraded wheels and a full-on Argon 18 flyer for racing. Sometimes I commute on the Argon and it is usually at least 5% faster, sometimes 10%. Of course, there are variables, in terms of the amount of weight carried in the panniers, or on my back, and the feel of the flyer may be making me work harder. But this is a robust effect, happening almost invariably. And at this time of year, when the weather is beginning to turn slightly better, sometimes my training rides are on the Defy, and sometimes on the Argon. The summer bike is at least 1 to 2 mph quicker. Again, wind effects, temperature and motivation will all affect performance, but I reckon a better specced and more lightweight bike is good for at least 5% or more.
5% = about 1 mph. Seems realistic.
I really don't get how people are going at the same speed on their fancy bikes vs heavy mudguarded hack. Some possibilities:
-The hack bike isn't so bad after all
-There is a fit difference on the fancy bike which hampers performance
-The fancy bike isn't all it's cracked up to be (possibly very non-aero?)
-The fancy bike handles differently (going slower on descents?)
-Not enough data to make a reasonable judgement
-The rider spends more time admiring the fancy bike than pedalling0
