[Closed] Why arent all road pros on aeto bikes?

Probably more to do with comfort

Are the savings as significant in a bunch?

And control down hill, plus do they even have a double up front?

Aeto bikes? Prevail hrlmeyts?

"As bovre" (sic). What are these things of which you speak?

They ride what they get paid to ride.

The people who pay them to ride tell them to ride what they want to sell.

They may ride what they get paid to ride, but most manufacturers will have an aero and a "climbing" bike (for want of a better description) to offer their riders. So it is more a preference thing. Some like to stick to the one bike, others will chop and change depending on the stage, some even change bikes during a stage. Low weight and a bit more comfort may be more preferable than better aero on a long stage in the bunch or in the mountains.

Also you'd be surprised at how some sponsors components are nowhere to be seen on the bikes of riders who are paid to ride their kit. Cav's tour bike being a good case in point, the only thing FSA on there is the sticker on the bar tape.

I think aero bikes can be heavier than normal road bikes so perhaps not so good for a mountain stage.They can be stiffer and a bit more uncomfortable than a normal road bike so perhaps not so good for the mad distances in typical stage races.
I'm sure marketing will have some bearing on what a pro rides although I would have thought they would have chosen anything that makes the job easier/faster/more competitive from a manufacturers range.
Maybe that's naive?

bensales - Member
They ride what they get paid to ride.

The people who pay them to ride tell them to ride what they want to sell

Not quite. The big riders will ride whatever they want, to the point that occasionally they'll be on a completely different manufacturer's frame rebadged as their sponsor. Admittedly I haven't seen anyone doing that for quite a while but there are still plenty of recent examples of riders preferring and riding one frame rather than their sponsor wants to promote. Cav, as an example.

I think I read a Cyclist mag review recently where they said they hadn't yet ridden a really good aero bike. (I'm sure I didn't make that up? 🙂 )

Oh... and what mrblobby just said!

Giant Alpecin riders can choose Propel/TCR/Defy. Aero bikes may be stiffer and will be heavier. So you won't see thm on a climbing stage. You will have seen the more relaxed bikes on the cobbles. Contadour was thought to be swapping bikes before the last climb if the opportunity arose. See last year's hilly time trial for the most extreme examble of horses for courses.

I thought Tarmacs were aero bikes?

Purito (Joaquim Rodriguez...tiny climber)rides the Canyon Aeroroad everywhere (going to the shops etc) instead of the ultimate.
Adam Hansen (not tiny climber) rides the Ridley Helium despite being part of Andre Gripels lead out train instead of the Noah.

Tarmac is the all rounder. Venge is the aero one. Roubaix is the Sportif bike for those that like to pay to ride on public roads

Roubaix is the classics bike with clearance for bigger tyres and bits of rubber stuck to it to 'damp vibrations' (Treks version, the domane actually works).

You can get a Domane in an aggressive racey geometry too, the Roubaix has a head tube longer than the seat tube.

Not seen many of the new Trek Madones, want to try one of those, I'm very tempted.

Purito uses an aero bike as he rides a XS frame and can therefore get to or below 6.8kg even with the heavier aero frame.

What you really should be asking is why Cav and Sagan seem to be preferring to ride the old Venge, a spectacularly bad aero bike compared to the new one if you believe the hype... Hardly a glowing endorsement.

Alot of them don't have the core strength to ride an aero frame.

Alot of them don't have the core strength to ride an aero frame.

Oh, ok... 🙄

What you really should be asking is why Cav and Sagan seem to be preferring to ride the old Venge

This was largely brakes and not being comfortable on pre-release components built on to these frames (which also came in at the last minute) for the wetter Stages according to Chris Yu. Also, riding what you know and having 100% faith in the bike counts for more than an extra W or two at that level

I still don't get it.

Weight? IIRC even a Venge (the shit old one) will be at UCI weight?

Comfort...today's roads were silky smooth, but a rider on a solo effort was on a Tarmac. If the Venge really has the benefits it has then why wouldn't he want it?

Sagan changed bikes before the last bit today, so at least some of them think theres something in it...not that roadies, even or especially pros, are a good guage!

Anyway had a nice spin on my 8kg Six today.

And they may be riding "Roubaix" frames for the cobbles, which won't have standard sales geometry. Head tubes will be sporty not sportive length, for example.

I thought that all UCI approved and therefore legal frames and components had to be made available to the general buying public, so in theory at least all bikes being ridden in the tour must be standard for sale to the public times, no?

Probably applies to a frame's basic characteristics leaving the geometry open to tweaking. Pretty sure Cancellara's Dommane for example is nothing like any you can buy in the shops.

Cancellara's Dommane for example is nothing like any you can buy in the shops

😳 Maybe not the best example to use! Though I'd still not put any money on any of those "replicas" having the same geo as Cancellara's bike.

When you see the number of 130mm+ -17degree stems knocking around the peleton then it points to the vast majority being on stock bikes.Only the team leaders and superstars can get the custom treatment these days.
Lots of the pro's run pretty normal (not middle aged bloke doing a 50k to the cafe) set ups and not everyone is slamming that stem 🙂

Fair point. I remember reading Sep's defy SL (2nd in paris-roubaix) had the front end of a TCR and rear of a Defy. I think the model has to be available, but custom geometry does not. Spirit not Letter. I can't believe there are many pro bikes with 18 cm head tubes.

I don't get the "aero bikes are heavier" bit as with the UCI weight regs they would be the same anyway; an aero frame is maybe only 150-250g weight penalty after all. I suspect it has something to do with handling and compliance.

Sure, if you're gunning for a stange win in a sprint or breakaway take the few extra watts of the aero bike, but if you're going to attack on the mountains or in the TTs I'm sure a lot of pros would prefer to be sat on a comfier climber's bike for the rest of their 3 weeks in the peloton.

Could be wrong though.

IF you train 99% of the time on your tarmac or whatever you probably get more out of sticking with than rather than using a slightly more aero harsher bike in a peloton.

They just size down a frame size to get a low stack (Hesjedal at 6'4" rides a 56!!) and stick a mahoosive stem on it to get the reach.

I suspect they believe the aero frames have a harsher ride in the same way lots of you do.

A local shop to me has one of these in, the 9. They've put some sexy Bonty aero wheels on too and my, it looks lovely..

I
Am
Tempted
😕

[img] [/img]

I suspect they believe the aero frames have a harsher ride in the same way lots of you do.

Well Sagan swapped from his Tarmac to his Venge towards the end of the stage yesterday for a better bike for the sprint. He referred to the Tarmac as his "climbing bike" so I guess it's a combo of componentry, geo and comfort in his eyes.

Aero bikes aren't really that big a part of the aero package and looking at the pics over the last few days most riders aren't even running deep section wheels, so weight and comfort must be the priority.

Also with the heat over the last week or so has meant in that for helmets cooling is the most important factor.

bikebouy, I rather like that Trek. I think I quite like the look of the new Foil too...

[img] [/img]

If I were buying now I'd almost certainly go aero for what I'd use it for.

Aero bikes aren't really that big a part of the aero package and looking at the pics over the last few days most riders aren't even running deep section wheels, so weight and comfort must be the priority.

Does seem to depend a lot on conditions and terrain. Saw a lot more skin suits, aero helmet and deeper section wheels in the first week than in the second.

Curiously, the only team that I've seen running properly deep section wheels on the road stages seem to be MTN-Qhubeka with their Enve wheels.

Cummings only had 2.2 SES's when he won the other day

no aero bike from Cannondale

no aero bike from Cannondale

I quite liked the original Fo1l, struggling to like the newer aero bikes, they're just not aesthetically pleasing!

the Syncros bars on the foil are nice, should have made an effort to hide the junction box like on the Canyon ones though

6 watts saving on the new v old

All of this creates a bike which Scott claims will save you six watts over the old Foil. That might not sound like much, but apparently it adds up to a 27 second saving if you’re the type of rider who can knock out a 40km time trial at 45kph

[img] [/img]

Cummings only had 2.2 SES's when he won the other day

Was quite a lumpy stage. Was he even on the S5? The only stage I didn't get to see!

Difficult to tell how deep the Enve wheels are as I think the stupid logo always makes it look deeper than it is.

GCN actually have a video regarding the rider/team choices at MTN-Qhubeka/ENVE

he Syncros bars on the foil are nice,

Interesting that they have gone for a 1 1/2 to 1 1/4 steerer too.

I'd imagine the advantage (if any) would be pretty slight in the middle of the peleton

nickc - Member

I'd imagine the advantage (if any) would be pretty slight in the middle of the peleton

Does every rider spend the whole day sitting in the middle of the peloton? It doesn't take much to work out who would benefit from a decent aero bike.

dirtyrider - Member

the Syncros bars on the foil are nice, should have made an effort to hide the junction box like on the Canyon ones though

dirtyrider - Member
6 watts saving on the new v old

@ 45kph, LOL, every on else using 40kph IIRC, cheats!

Suspect the 40/45 kph comes from aero testing of TT bikes, which is fairly relevant for the average rider. But for road bikes figures it's not that relevant, maybe 30/35 would be better. Or just publish the CdA at specific yaw angles.

All of this creates a bike which Scott claims will save you six watts over the old Foil. That might not sound like much, but apparently it adds up to a 27 second saving if you’re the type of rider who can knock out a 40km time trial at 45kph

If you are then you wouldn't be doing it on a Scott Foil!

The reason for me looking around, and boy I really shouldn't be.. is I borrowed a mates S5 for a few days whlst he borrowed my R5ca (he went to the Alps with it) and I really like the feel of the S5, hate the looks mind.. Thats why I'm interested in both the Trek (gawd help me) and the Scott and the Propel.
I ride the South Downs, it's my playground see, and the S5 was a really nice ride. I didn't think it would be, thought it'd be too harsh but nope and it's climbed the 800-1kmtr climbs I play on really nicely. I didn't stick my Garmin on to check against my times on my bike but on some sections it "felt" quicker.

I'm planning on a test ride on the Trek, hoping in the next month when stock comes in...

I'll let you know.

I'll let you know.

Sounds like it could get expensive!

Hmm.. £5k for the 9 without the spangly wheels 😆 But then I've got the M40C's off my R5 (it's currently got the r-sys's on for climbing)

I'm already being moaned at by my inner chimp 😆

Does every rider spend the whole day sitting in the middle of the peloton?

No but the bulk do and even when not they are sitting in the slipstream of another rider. Look at Stybar yesterday, he did a solo effort at the end and was out front for what ~8km. So if he was on that Scott Foil he'd have been maybe <5 seconds faster over the distance, which is next to nothing.

Factor in a lot of th finishes this tour are uphill where any aero benefits a very small.

It's 'another' bike to sell. Most people,once the get a 'nice' road bike are unlikely to change it for a while.Roadbiking does'nt have the built in obsolescence that mtb'ing enjoys or the constant upgradeitis (bar maybe a set of wheels).
Bikebouy,would you even be considering swapping your R5 for an equivalent bike in the near future? But having an 'aero' bike is a different matter. A few years ago mtb sales were pretty stagnant.Along comes enduro/650b and the merry go round gets a good push and away we go.
At the end of the day professional cycling is there to promote sales (with a large number of title sponsors now being actual bike manufacturers like Trek,BMC,Giant,Argon) they need a direct return.

[quote=dragon ]No but the bulk do and even when not they are sitting in the slipstream of another rider.

So it's only the times when it makes a significant difference how fast they're going that an aero bike makes a difference?

So if he was on that Scott Foil he'd have been maybe <5 seconds faster over the distance, which is next to nothing.

Enough to make a difference between winning and coming [s]second[/s] nowhere on plenty of occasions I can think of.

Factor in a lot of th finishes this tour are uphill where any aero benefits a very small.

On the Mur de Huy maybe, but they were doing about 20mph on at least one of the uphill finishes. Plenty of flattish finishes - I'd include Cummings' win in that category, as he'd have likely gained more from an aero bike on the finish than he might have lost on the climb. Especially given that as already mentioned the aero frames aren't that heavy, and it should still be fairly straightforward to get one down to 6.8kg.

Alot of it just comes down to comfort and fit; hence why Rodriguez uses the Aeroad as he wouldn't be able to get his bars in a low enough position on the standard CF frame.

That's all there is to it I think.

mrblobby - Member

Suspect the 40/45 kph comes from aero testing of TT bikes, which is fairly relevant for the average rider. But for road bikes figures it's not that relevant

For racing I'd say it is, even a 3rd cat race is 25mph IME. Sprint/break faster.

Alot of it just comes down to comfort and fit;

For the top riders that's true, but I suspect for the rest another factor is that the mechanics will want bikes that are to work on.

Does every rider spend the whole day sitting in the middle of the peloton? It doesn't take much to work out who would benefit from a decent aero bike.

Yes, bu if you're the domestique at the front of the train on your aero bike then you're not moving enough of the air out of the way for your leader thus making them use more energy than required. You want your leadout man to be cycling the equivalent of a bus surely 😛

Does every rider spend the whole day sitting in the middle of the peloton?
No but the bulk do and even when not they are sitting in the slipstream of another rider. Look at Stybar yesterday, he did a solo effort at the end and was out front for what ~8km. So if he was on that Scott Foil he'd have been maybe <5 seconds faster over the distance, which is next to nothing.

Aracer already made some points but how about the breakaway riders? They'd give anything to get some 'free' power surely? (There are teams and riders whose only raison d'etre is to be in breakaways.) How about Sky's domestiques, sitting on front of the bunch all day? I expect they'd feel the same. Yes, the majority of the field are just coasting along in the bunch all day but there are a significant amount of riders who should expect to benefit from aero bikes.

breatheeasy - Member
Does every rider spend the whole day sitting in the middle of the peloton? It doesn't take much to work out who would benefit from a decent aero bike.
Yes, bu if you're the domestique at the front of the train on your aero bike then you're not moving enough of the air out of the way for your leader thus making them use more energy than required. You want your leadout man to be cycling the equivalent of a bus surely

I like that! 😆

[quote=breatheeasy ]Yes, bu if you're the domestique at the front of the train on your aero bike then you're not moving enough of the air out of the way for your leader thus making them use more energy than required. You want your leadout man to be cycling the equivalent of a bus surely

Only an issue if the leader is second in line. I'd suspect the optimum would be for the front guy to be as aero as possible, then have the guy behind as draggy as possible!

Would be interesting to try in a wind tunnel and see what difference it really makes whether the front guy is on an aero bike (etc.) or not. I suspect the difference would actually be lost in the noise.

I saw an article that I think had Cav's bike on (may have been somoene else's), everything was aero and I was quite surprised to see it was 7.4kg or so - I'd assumed they all ran 6.8kg bikes regardless of the aero.

And although cav is a sprinter, he's not the biggest and other sprinters probably need to carry around slightly heavier components to take the beating they give it.

So I reckon non-aero is probably more due to weight than you might think. Also, as others have said, the frame and wheels make pretty small aero differences, if you're wearing an aero helmet, overshoes and a skinsuit, that's massively more beneficial.

Also, as others have said, the frame and wheels make pretty small aero differences

Spec say their new frameset/wheels/bars are 50% of the aero gain but yes, you could wear the shoes, helmet, skinsuit and keep the climbing bike

other sprinters probably need to carry around slightly heavier components to take the beating they give it.

http://www.specialized.com/us/en/5minutes/

all that time and effort and they sony even fit the Garmin on straight 😆

edit - the image rotates round, in one shot it looks like its of centre, its not

Those Madones are coming to 15lbs ex pedals even with the lighter OCLV 700 frame, tubs, etc, definitely conceding a reasonable amount versus a similarly specced Emonda (for example). The bars look awesome though - no cables, wires, junction box, battery etc, super clean.

Virtually sold on one, just need to try the 54cm as I've always ridden a 56 - downsizing to avoid their stupid mile long head tubes, I feel decidedly pro! Sod paying £1000 extra for the H1 frame.

For racing I'd say it is, even a 3rd cat race is 25mph IME. Sprint/break faster.

If even 1% of the aero bikes sold are used for that purpose I'd be surprised. They'd be better off marketing them based on what they can do for your strava segment times 😉

Spec say their new frameset/wheels/bars are 50% of the aero gain but yes, you could wear the shoes, helmet, skinsuit and keep the climbing bike

The interesting thing is that if you look at Specs own data, you will go quicker swapping your BOA shoes for lace ups than you would swapping a Tarmac for the new Venge. Funny how the buying public look to the big bucks purchases for an advantage but probably overlook the smaller details.... it is almost as though most of this aero stuff is an exercise in marketing 😀

It is also funny to time saved at 40km/hr or 45km/hr over and hour quoted as it makes the savings often sound huge. If you say the Foil is 1.5-1.7% fewer W's compared to the old it sounds much less impressive (6/350 or 6/400). As others have said, the reality is that the actual gain in a real scenario is pretty negligible.

The Felt AR is supposed to be the most aero frame at yaw angles greater than 0 (S5 is still most aero head on)... yet how many people are thinking of buying a Felt? They may be making good stuff but they are losing the marketing battle with Spec/ Trek/ Scott/ etc.

If you already have a ridiculous position, BioRacer skinsuit, aero helmet, laces, shaved legs.... then I guess you it makes sense to eek out the last few seconds dropping a ton of money on the bike. Some of the aero bikes do look rather nice tough which is the main thing!

The interesting thing is that if you look at Specs own data, you will go quicker swapping your BOA shoes for lace ups than you would swapping a Tarmac for the new Venge. Funny how the buying public look to the big bucks purchases for an advantage but probably overlook the smaller details.... it is almost as though most of this aero stuff is an exercise in marketing

To that end then... All this stuff about "aero trumps weight" on bikes is surely bollocks? You'd be better on a less fatiguing bike (that's not marketing, Foils, Venges etc are harsher than Addicts, Tarmacs etc) that also weighs a bit less...?

If the UCI dropped the weight limit then overnight aero frames,deep section whhels and power meters (possibly not stages!) would disappear.

Some will come down to the way the carbon is engineered, not so much the weight or the aero side of things.
Bikes like the Aero Propel are heavier than their TCR stable mate, but are more efficient when wound up or in the test tunnels.
And lightness doesn't always equal the best. Again looking at Giant. Their Defy frame is lighter than the top end race TCR frame, but that's because the TCR has a beefed up BB and front end for the rigors of racing.
I think you just have to look a bike nowadays to see what it's purpose in life is.

To that end then... All this stuff about "aero trumps weight" on bikes is surely bollocks? You'd be better on a less fatiguing bike (that's not marketing, Foils, Venges etc are harsher than Addicts, Tarmacs etc) that also weighs a bit less...?

I don't think aero as a whole is bollocks, but that is more about your position than your bike. So in that respect I'd agree that the reason you don't see Nibali on a Venge or even Cancellara on the new Madone is because they have gone with what is most comfortable and practical for the ridiculous distance of a GT.

If the UCI dropped the weight limit then overnight aero frames,deep section whhels and power meters (possibly not stages!) would disappear.

Power meters aren't going anywhere and the aero equipment will always be another thing to sell beside the weightweenie stuff

If the UCI dropped the weight limit then overnight aero frames,deep section whhels and power meters (possibly not stages!) would disappear.

Now if they dropped the weight limit and the need for bikes to resemble a bike from the 1920's... now that would be interesting 🙂

im not sure the world needs more bikes that look like the Falco Tri Bike

Haha funnily enough I did think about posting a photo of that! Though something like the Lotus bike Boardman used would be a bit easier on the eye.

Someone mentioned Cav and his choice of the old not the new Venge, well according to GCN the brakes on the new one are crap and so anything involving hills or the rain he prefers the old bike.

Some of the current 1920's "aero" bikes look ok to me.... that's the main reason to buy one and I'm sold on the idea 😀

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

I'll have an S5 by the end of the week*. So excited, can't wait!!

*I'm winning that British Cycling competition...

I went for an s3 over an s5 back in March. It's a really nice frame but make sure you use the insert into the stearer as it makes the front end sooooo much stiffer than a regular plug.

Contrary to what people say and believe, it super comfy even compared to the litespeed Siena I had previously.

[quote=njee20 ](that's not marketing, Foils, Venges etc are harsher than Addicts, Tarmacs etc)

No, that's not marketing, that's just old wives tales

god knows why felt use that hideous 12k carbon look

No, that's not marketing, that's just old wives tales

How so? I'm confused how you can refute that. 😕

Are you suggesting a Venge is as comfy as a Tarmac? More so? No different? Roubaix the same? Epic?