lol – If having a harsh bike stopped him training I’d suggest that he was never very motivated…

Still, not many frames can claim to be able to stop people enjoying riding. UKIP will probably shortly mandate the only frames to be sold in the UK are Scott Foils.

Which ever one you’ll choose you’ll be committed to seeing it all the way through.

I’d choose weightweenism over skinsuits and taped helmet vents.

If having a harsh bike stopped him training I’d suggest that he was never very motivated…

What a strange thing to say! He found the bike uncomfortable giving him chronic back pain, sore wrists and saddle sores to the point that he started to avoid club rides. And because he wasn’t made of money, he couldn’t afford to take a hit on the frame he’d bought.

He loved racing it, but anything over 40 miles on typical roads was torture. So unless you’re buying a bike specifically to race, I’d be inclined to opt for a more comfortable all-rounder.

G

Foil harsh? Rode one on Zipp 404 for the weekend last year around the not too smooth roads of north Devon. Wouldn’t say it was perticularly harsh, just felt nice and fast.

Foils ARE harsh. I was an Addict owner as was lent a foil for. Fortnight to test ride to see if I wanted to ‘upgrade’ after 3 rides I’d taken in back, and stuck with the addict, I hated it, might have felt quick but in reality I think my comfortable bike was faster on most roads.

Difference over 6 minutes was 6 seconds in favour of the carbon bike. Not really statistically significant.

I thought it would be a bit more, but this calculator backs up your findings.
http://bikecalculator.com/

Seconds do add up over a longer ride though, especially if your trying to keep up with a group or just a mate on a mission. Not to mention a light bike will feel different and might be a more enjoyable ride for some.

I’d like to think I’m not doing this as the Sensa frames seem to get very good reviews both in the Uk and in Holland

Googleing does agree with you, 7-8/10 on Road.cc and bike radar, but they both say it’s stiff, and bear in mind they never criticise anything unless it’s terible, that means it’s STIFF!

Great for a race bike, rubbish for a first road bike.

And potentialy less VFM, if that is a factor, than a more mainstream brand when it comes to sell it. My (bought 2nd hand barely used at 1year old in 2005) Cannondale R500 has actualy apreciated since I bought it if ebay prices are anything to go by! Not that I’m planning on selling it, the Tiagra groupsets gone and replaced with Dura Ace, (I think) buying the right (middle of the road/range) bike’s worked out cheaper in the long run as I’ve never really felt too much need to change it, just renewed the bits hung off it as and when they needed it or I felt like it.

On the other hand they might be great and you might still be riding it in 10 years time, but then it will no longer be the lightest or the most aero, so the problem with chasing numbers rather than buying a bike you like the look/ride of is you can never win!

Don’t tar all aero bikes with the same overly-stiff brush. My Propel is plenty comfortable for long rides. I won’t be taking it to the Ronde as I have another more suitable bike, but I have ridden a fast century on it in comfort. If I didn’t have another bike, then yes, I’d take it over the cobbles too. I’m sure the Cervelos are the same. The Scott does have history, however. Which is one reason why you can find them heavily discounted.

For a one bike for everything, I think I’d now pick aero. Quite a few non-racers in out club now have Propels, all out on the club run on the harsh lanes of Surrey, not to mention the three of us racing them week in, week out.

There is more to a carbon bike than tube profiles.

Nothing much to add other than as stated comfy can help speed and useability, never been bothered for road bikes other than a way to get fit for xc racing and to get to work.
Had a Planet X sl with durace, fast and light but no feel and hard to get power down. Convinced by my brother to try a trek madonne, the aero model year, bit heavier than my Planet X but far far faster and comfier. Now even just go for a road ride just because, carbon is not just carbon layup geo etc makes a huge differance. No idea if the aero is helping but ave speeds are higher in general.
That bike calculater is an interesting thing to play with, cheers.

It’s pretty funny that in that Cervelo link, they claim the aero bike is faster than a light bike over the Etape course, by a MASSIVE 35 seconds, So in 8 hours of riding you gain 35 seconds. Ie a 0.12% difference! 😆

Thanks again for everyone’s thoughts. One of the reasons I’m buying online is that I know the geometry and size I need from previous road bikes, I’m pretty happy with a stiff frame as well, current bike is a very stiff alu framed job. Anyway, plenty of advice to muse over here.

Do frame manufacturers quote chainstay travel so I know how to choose a “comfy” bike?

Difference over 6 minutes was 6 seconds in favour of the carbon bike. Not really statistically significant.

Having ridden a hired road bike some 5-6lbs heavier than my own, I didn’t really notice the weight when climbing or riding along, but I really noticed it when accelerating. It took a few extra pedal revs to get it shifting, and I had to pedal noticeably harder which did add to the overall fatigue slightly.

Get the lighter one, especially if you’re running shallow rimmed wheels. Aero bikes look awful with shallow rimmed wheels. Also, it takes a standard seatpost, so swap it for a lightweight model and save yourself more grammmz