Much Slower on my Winter bike ...why ?
Comments
-
A frame really won't make 2mph difference, assuming it's modern and there isn't something seriously wrong with it. Even mudguards won't make more than a fraction of 1mph difference. Weight won't make that much difference to average speeds either, unless perhaps you are riding extremely rolling routes with lots of sharp ups & downs, or very long climbs.
Assuming you've ruled out the conditions you ride the bikes in, clothing, wheels & tyres etc, it really has to be mostly down to setup or psychology.
You need to be pretty obsessive to successfully replicate setup, i.e. the distances between all three contact points. All floors slope to some extent and this will affect plumb lines used to determine saddle setback relative to the BB by as much as 1-2 cm. It's pretty impossible to measure accurately from the wall IME because the distance is considerable relative to the BB/saddle distance and a slightly angled tape measure will throw out the measurement considerably. Reach to the centre of the bars may not be very useful if you always have your hands on the hoods and these are a couple of cm further out or higher up on one bike due to different positioning on the bars or different bar geometry. One bike may have narrower bars, or less distance between the hoods due to lever positioning.
Psychology may be the main issue - if you commute every day on the Defy and you only ever use the Kuota for "proper" rides you probably undergo an unconscious attitude shift when you sit on one as opposed to the other. The Defy is familiar, boring, the bike you are sitting on when you are dragging yourself into work first thing in the morning - you will have a muscle memory associated with the feeling of riding it (especially if the frame feels different under power) that is mainly conditioned by the circumstances of your daily commute.
Borrow a Powertap wheel from someone and try it out on both bikes over the same route. You may find that you are putting out less power on the Defy, or alternatively that when you can see what power you are generating you end up putting out the same effort on both, causing the average speeds to be much closer. If you are really 2mph slower for the same power, there has to be something weirdly different with the setup.0 -
neeb wrote:A frame really won't make 2mph difference, assuming it's modern and there isn't something seriously wrong with it. Even mudguards won't make more than a fraction of 1mph difference. Weight won't make that much difference to average speeds either, unless perhaps you are riding extremely rolling routes with lots of sharp ups & downs, or very long climbs.
Assuming you've ruled out the conditions you ride the bikes in, clothing, wheels & tyres etc, it really has to be mostly down to setup or psychology.
You need to be pretty obsessive to successfully replicate setup, i.e. the distances between all three contact points. All floors slope to some extent and this will affect plumb lines used to determine saddle setback relative to the BB by as much as 1-2 cm. It's pretty impossible to measure accurately from the wall IME because the distance is considerable relative to the BB/saddle distance and a slightly angled tape measure will throw out the measurement considerably. Reach to the centre of the bars may not be very useful if you always have your hands on the hoods and these are a couple of cm further out or higher up on one bike due to different positioning on the bars or different bar geometry. One bike may have narrower bars, or less distance between the hoods due to lever positioning.
Psychology may be the main issue - if you commute every day on the Defy and you only ever use the Kuota for "proper" rides you probably undergo an unconscious attitude shift when you sit on one as opposed to the other. The Defy is familiar, boring, the bike you are sitting on when you are dragging yourself into work first thing in the morning - you will have a muscle memory associated with the feeling of riding it (especially if the frame feels different under power) that is mainly conditioned by the circumstances of your daily commute.
Borrow a Powertap wheel from someone and try it out on both bikes over the same route. You may find that you are putting out less power on the Defy, or alternatively that when you can see what power you are generating you end up putting out the same effort on both, causing the average speeds to be much closer. If you are really 2mph slower for the same power, there has to be something weirdly different with the setup.
I agree it may be psychology however the rest of your points don't really stack up in my case.
For me it is really simple to get the set up absolutely identical, they are both the same frame just made out of different materials, the geometry, contact points, means of setting up are all the same. There are only four differences to the bike itself: frame material, mudguards 23mm tyres v 25mm tyres and 10sp v 11sp.0 -
Frank Wilson wrote:Could you furnish the readership with the respective colours of the two bikes, I think this may be where the answer lies.
I think you've nailed it
0 -
kingrollo wrote:I seem to loose around 2 mph when using my winter bike - and to be honest I feel so much slower on - there just doesn't as much power transfer.
My bikes
Best Bike - Kuota Kharma 2009 - Mid range CF bike
Winter Bike Giant Defy 2
The appeal of the defy is the permanent mudguards - I find these much better than the clip on jobs. I just wonder why I am so much slower on the giant ? - I have mulled over the possible reasons
1.I have had a full pro fit by adrian timmis including footbeds on the kuota - and have tried to replicate that position myself on the giant.
2.I did think wheels - but even when putting the kuota wheels on the giant - no real difference
3.As I used the giant for commuting I use SPD pedals - on the kuota its SPD-SL
4.Although I have the same rear cassette on both 11-28 - the giant has compact chainset where as the kuota doesn't
5.The Kuota is carbon , and there lighter and maybe just a better bike ?
6.I ride the kuota much more - so i am more used to the position
Any thoughts...
Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?0 -
Well yes, obviously if the frame geometries are absolutely identical and you are using the same components on each it will be much simpler - but usually people are using frames with different head tube and seat tube angles, different ht lengths etc.Gimpl wrote:
I agree it may be psychology however the rest of your points don't really stack up in my case.
For me it is really simple to get the set up absolutely identical, they are both the same frame just made out of different materials, the geometry, contact points, means of setting up are all the same. There are only four differences to the bike itself: frame material, mudguards 23mm tyres v 25mm tyres and 10sp v 11sp.0 -
Why another bike fit could you not just use ones of theese?0
-
Fenix wrote:How do you know you're putting the same effort in ? There's no way that the bike alone is stealing 2mph off you. Even if the brake was rubbing...
Agreed, buy a power meter to swap between the two, then you will know for sure Felt F70 05 (Turbo)
Marin Palisades Trail 91 and 06
Scott CR1 SL 12
Cannondale Synapse Adventure 15 & 16 Di2
Scott Foil 180 -
Imposter wrote:kingrollo wrote:I seem to loose around 2 mph when using my winter bike - and to be honest I feel so much slower on - there just doesn't as much power transfer.
My bikes
Best Bike - Kuota Kharma 2009 - Mid range CF bike
Winter Bike Giant Defy 2
The appeal of the defy is the permanent mudguards - I find these much better than the clip on jobs. I just wonder why I am so much slower on the giant ? - I have mulled over the possible reasons
1.I have had a full pro fit by adrian timmis including footbeds on the kuota - and have tried to replicate that position myself on the giant.
2.I did think wheels - but even when putting the kuota wheels on the giant - no real difference
3.As I used the giant for commuting I use SPD pedals - on the kuota its SPD-SL
4.Although I have the same rear cassette on both 11-28 - the giant has compact chainset where as the kuota doesn't
5.The Kuota is carbon , and there lighter and maybe just a better bike ?
6.I ride the kuota much more - so i am more used to the position
Any thoughts...
Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?
Garmin Edge Touring.0 -
kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?
Garmin Edge Touring.
So you're using the same Garmin on both bikes. Over how many rides between the two bikes have you noticed this difference - and have the routes and weather conditions been same/similar in all cases? Is the variation the same as that which you might see between two different rides on the same bike over different days?0 -
It's the chainset that's making the differance0
-
neeb wrote:
Well yes, obviously if the frame geometries are absolutely identical and you are using the same components on each it will be much simpler - but usually people are using frames with different head tube and seat tube angles, different ht lengths etc.Gimpl wrote:
I agree it may be psychology however the rest of your points don't really stack up in my case.
For me it is really simple to get the set up absolutely identical, they are both the same frame just made out of different materials, the geometry, contact points, means of setting up are all the same. There are only four differences to the bike itself: frame material, mudguards 23mm tyres v 25mm tyres and 10sp v 11sp.
No it is simple to get the setup as close to identical as is physically possible, regardless of geometry if you have the same handlebar and saddle. All you need is a brain. HT lengths and HT and ST angles don't matter UNLESS they contribute to an identical or near identical fit being impossible. Angles effectively hardly do at all unless it affects a choice of inline/setback seatpost.
I really think some people get confused with bike fit. Think of a photo of a bike side on that fits you. Now rub out everything on that photo just leaving 3 things, the Saddle, the Handlebar and the BB. Now you can't move the BB on any bike so if you overlay these strictly fixed points onto a new bike where the BB is lined up, you will fit the same if you can get these 3 points to be the same.
On my current two bikes which have the same handlebar and saddle, the only compromise is that the bars are 3mm further forward on the best bike. If I could buy a 3mm longer stem on the other bike then they would be absolutely identical.
As for this guy being this much slower on his winter bike. It will be somewhere in a mix of what people are saying, chainset and approach to using the compact, psychology, fit, power transfer. I bet he goes for a fit (if that's what he's decided rather than transferring the fit) and finds himself way quicker and that will be down to him now thinking everything is better and trying harder because of it.0 -
Also - and this could be critical - do you have speed sensors fitted on one or both bikes, and are you getting the average speeds from the Garmin or from Strava? A properly calibrated sensor will make speed estimation in real time more accurate, but if you have this on one bike but not the other, or on both but calibrated differently, you will get different averages from the Garmin. On Strava (I’ve always assumed at least) such differences are ironed out because it uses total time and distance (map corrected) to work out average speed.0
-
reacher wrote:It's the chainset that's making the differance
You're going to have to explain that one...0 -
You’re either completely missing my point or not understanding how angles interact with saddle and bar positioning. Obviously if the geometries allow you can set up two bikes identically with respect to the relationship of the three contact points. That’s a given. What isn’t always as easy is getting those contact points in exactly the same places on two bikes with different frame geometries.mfin wrote:neeb wrote:
Well yes, obviously if the frame geometries are absolutely identical and you are using the same components on each it will be much simpler - but usually people are using frames with different head tube and seat tube angles, different ht lengths etc.Gimpl wrote:
I agree it may be psychology however the rest of your points don't really stack up in my case.
For me it is really simple to get the set up absolutely identical, they are both the same frame just made out of different materials, the geometry, contact points, means of setting up are all the same. There are only four differences to the bike itself: frame material, mudguards 23mm tyres v 25mm tyres and 10sp v 11sp.
No it is simple to get the setup as close to identical as is physically possible, regardless of geometry if you have the same handlebar and saddle. All you need is a brain. HT lengths and HT and ST angles don't matter UNLESS they contribute to an identical or near identical fit being impossible. Angles effectively hardly do at all unless it affects a choice of inline/setback seatpost.
I really think some people get confused with bike fit. Think of a photo of a bike side on that fits you. Now rub out everything on that photo just leaving 3 things, the Saddle, the Handlebar and the BB. Now you can't move the BB on any bike so if you overlay these strictly fixed points onto a new bike where the BB is lined up, you will fit the same if you can get these 3 points to be the same.
On my current two bikes which have the same handlebar and saddle, the only compromise is that the bars are 3mm further forward on the best bike. If I could buy a 3mm longer stem on the other bike then they would be absolutely identical.
As for this guy being this much slower on his winter bike. It will be somewhere in a mix of what people are saying, chainset and approach to using the compact, psychology, fit, power transfer. I bet he goes for a fit (if that's what he's decided rather than transferring the fit) and finds himself way quicker and that will be down to him now thinking everything is better and trying harder because of it.
If your frame has a steeper st angle you need to put the saddle further back to have it in the same place relative to the B.B. Usually you will have a different seatpost with a different design of clamp and different setback. On modern carbon frames with non-round tubes the actual angle of the seattube may not be the same as the effectively “virtual” angle quoted in the geometry charts. It’s not obvious where the centre line is on a square or ovalised seat tube or seat post, etc.. Believe me I have thought a lot about these issues and completely understand frame geometry. At the end of the day the best way to get the three contact points in the same relationship to each other is to measure them, and that’s surprisingly difficult to do to a high level of accuracy (although can be done if you are suitably careful and obsessive)0 -
Imposter wrote:reacher wrote:It's the chainset that's making the differance
You're going to have to explain that one...
One is standard and teh other compact - but I can't see it making 2mph difference myself.
Without the powermeter test though - we are whistling in the wind. Personally I'd have done that before paying for a bikefit.0 -
Fenix wrote:
Unless he only rides in 50/11 on one bike and only rides in 53/11 on the other (assuming the same cadence in both instances), it's not going to have any impact.0 -
Imposter wrote:kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?
Garmin Edge Touring.
So you're using the same Garmin on both bikes. Over how many rides between the two bikes have you noticed this difference - and have the routes and weather conditions been same/similar in all cases? Is the variation the same as that which you might see between two different rides on the same bike over different days?
.....and he takes a clear lead in the most unhelpful poster of 2017 competition.
Its the same Garmin ......I think you know the answers to the other questions. But lets face it you're here to ridicule posters rather than provide anything constructive.0 -
Just for the record guys - Im a pretty crap cyclist in terms of speed - were talking 15 mph to 13 mph here ! - I don't know anyone with a power meter or else that would be a good option.
Ive had a few hip problems in recent years - and find that if my backside gets wet my hips stay cold for a good few days afterwards - hopefully I will be able to ride through this winter for the first time in around 3 years - but that going to mean a lot of time on the defy - hence I want to make it as much fun (and fast ) as possible. Its not only the ave speed that bothers me I just feel inefficient on the bike. I have a poor record with injuries so even if it doesn't make me me faster the £110 or so on the bike fit will give some benefit.0 -
kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?
Garmin Edge Touring.
So you're using the same Garmin on both bikes. Over how many rides between the two bikes have you noticed this difference - and have the routes and weather conditions been same/similar in all cases? Is the variation the same as that which you might see between two different rides on the same bike over different days?
.....and he takes a clear lead in the most unhelpful poster of 2017 competition.
Its the same Garmin ......I think you know the answers to the other questions. But lets face it you're here to ridicule posters rather than provide anything constructive.
What a strange thing to say. Those are serious questions. And no, I don't know the answers to them (nor does anyone else, I suspect) which is why I was asking. Not sure why you think I am 'ridiculing' you by simply asking you for the information which might help answer your question, although you're doing a pretty good job of ridiculing yourself with responses like that.0 -
neeb wrote:You’re either completely missing my point or not understanding how angles interact with saddle and bar positioning. Obviously if the geometries allow you can set up two bikes identically with respect to the relationship of the three contact points. That’s a given. What isn’t always as easy is getting those contact points in exactly the same places on two bikes with different frame geometries.
You're either unable to read what I wrote or think whilst reading. All the points you mention there I addressed in saying "HT lengths and HT and ST angles don't matter UNLESS they contribute to an identical or near identical fit being impossible. Angles effectively hardly do at all unless it affects a choice of inline/setback seatpost".neeb wrote:If your frame has a steeper st angle you need to put the saddle further back to have it in the same place relative to the B.B. Usually you will have a different seatpost with a different design of clamp and different setback. On modern carbon frames with non-round tubes the actual angle of the seattube may not be the same as the effectively “virtual” angle quoted in the geometry charts. It’s not obvious where the centre line is on a square or ovalised seat tube or seat post, etc.. Believe me I have thought a lot about these issues and completely understand frame geometry. At the end of the day the best way to get the three contact points in the same relationship to each other is to measure them, and that’s surprisingly difficult to do to a high level of accuracy (although can be done if you are suitably careful and obsessive)
You've started right with your 1st sentence (no sh1t sherlock, it's not hard to have a grasp of that). Past that I think you are confusing yourself over what I was saying as you are looking for relative changes based on geometry as a method for working out a fit setup, that is a method needed to pick a bike for purchase when it isn't in your hands. But, for setup purposes it's all to do with rulers and a plumb line. You've finished by saying it is best to measure which backs up what I said, although I disagree on it being a difficult thing to do accurately.0 -
kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?
Garmin Edge Touring.
So you're using the same Garmin on both bikes. Over how many rides between the two bikes have you noticed this difference - and have the routes and weather conditions been same/similar in all cases? Is the variation the same as that which you might see between two different rides on the same bike over different days?
.....and he takes a clear lead in the most unhelpful poster of 2017 competition.
Its the same Garmin ......I think you know the answers to the other questions. But lets face it you're here to ridicule posters rather than provide anything constructive.
This forum could really do with a filter on who can't answer questions, I hardly come on this forum anymore because of people like this spoiling every thread.0 -
Imposter wrote:kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:kingrollo wrote:Imposter wrote:Can't believe nobody has asked this yet - precisely how are you measuring the apparent difference in speed?
Garmin Edge Touring.
So you're using the same Garmin on both bikes. Over how many rides between the two bikes have you noticed this difference - and have the routes and weather conditions been same/similar in all cases? Is the variation the same as that which you might see between two different rides on the same bike over different days?
.....and he takes a clear lead in the most unhelpful poster of 2017 competition.
Its the same Garmin ......I think you know the answers to the other questions. But lets face it you're here to ridicule posters rather than provide anything constructive.
What a strange thing to say. Those are serious questions. And no, I don't know the answers to them (nor does anyone else, I suspect) which is why I was asking. Not sure why you think I am 'ridiculing' you by simply asking you for the information which might help answer your question, although you're doing a pretty good job of ridiculing yourself with responses like that.
you've got previous0 -
kingrollo wrote:
you've got previous
So have you, to be fair - albeit for different reasons. Are you serious about getting answers, or not?0 -
If you bunged a pair of spinacis on the winter bike you'd bring up your average speed a bit just from less aero drag.0
-
Let’s just put it down to talking at cross purposes.. ;-)mfin wrote:neeb wrote:You’re either completely missing my point or not understanding how angles interact with saddle and bar positioning. Obviously if the geometries allow you can set up two bikes identically with respect to the relationship of the three contact points. That’s a given. What isn’t always as easy is getting those contact points in exactly the same places on two bikes with different frame geometries.
You're either unable to read what I wrote or think whilst reading. All the points you mention there I addressed in saying "HT lengths and HT and ST angles don't matter UNLESS they contribute to an identical or near identical fit being impossible. Angles effectively hardly do at all unless it affects a choice of inline/setback seatpost".neeb wrote:If your frame has a steeper st angle you need to put the saddle further back to have it in the same place relative to the B.B. Usually you will have a different seatpost with a different design of clamp and different setback. On modern carbon frames with non-round tubes the actual angle of the seattube may not be the same as the effectively “virtual” angle quoted in the geometry charts. It’s not obvious where the centre line is on a square or ovalised seat tube or seat post, etc.. Believe me I have thought a lot about these issues and completely understand frame geometry. At the end of the day the best way to get the three contact points in the same relationship to each other is to measure them, and that’s surprisingly difficult to do to a high level of accuracy (although can be done if you are suitably careful and obsessive)
You've started right with your 1st sentence (no sh1t sherlock, it's not hard to have a grasp of that). Past that I think you are confusing yourself over what I was saying as you are looking for relative changes based on geometry as a method for working out a fit setup, that is a method needed to pick a bike for purchase when it isn't in your hands. But, for setup purposes it's all to do with rulers and a plumb line. You've finished by saying it is best to measure which backs up what I said, although I disagree on it being a difficult thing to do accurately.
Difficult is subjective obviously but as an example, I find that if I put a bike on an apparently flat floor, measure saddle setback from the BB using a plumb line (tilting the bike slightly to avoid the line touching the crank arm or frame which will throw it out), turn the bike around and take the same measurement from the other side, it can often be out by the best part of a centimetre. So usually what I do is take an average of these two measurements to cancel out the effect of the floor slope and then do the same with the other bike, making sure that the wheels are always positioned on the same spots on the floor.0 -
I blame wiggle.0
-
Friction in the welds.0
-
simple tyre rolling resistance is normally higher on winter bikes and you have mudguards which are not aero and your position is less aero. add to that the extra clothing which often is not as aero as summer kit and you have your difference.
Also colder air makes a big differencehttp://www.thecycleclinic.co.uk -wheel building and other stuff.0 -
Yes but OP has swapped his wheels round so its not that. Also he's swapped bikes in the same week so it's not the clothing.
He must have very flared mudguards to lose 2mph.
It's not the normal summer v winter thing.0 -
Fenix wrote:Yes but OP has swapped his wheels round so its not that. Also he's swapped bikes in the same week so it's not the clothing.
He must have very flared mudguards to lose 2mph.
It's not the normal summer v winter thing.
Looking at all the replies sensibly it is probably a little bit of all sorts. I have the bike fit a week tomorrow hopefully that will at least make feel a bit better on the bike and I will take it from there.
Thanks for all the replies though folks.0
