Lightweight, aero or just better

ChrisB200SX wrote:

A new bike is always nice but you don't need any more than an aero pair of wheels, tyres, maybe an aero handlebar, save a few watts. Although the recommendation of upgrading components isn't a bad idea.

 

Ditto the wheels and components.

For £2k you could get;

• DT Swiss PRC 1400 SPLINE 35 wheelset (1434g),
• 105 R7000 hydro groupset (weight saving there - and better shifting),
• Deda Superzero aero bars and stem.

You'd easily make £200-£300 back by selling the 105 5800 and TRP HYRD brakes (it'd be worth keeping the wheels spare)

Johnnyvee wrote:

Sadly no I have the Renegade Expert 2016 version with some wheels made up on pacenti forza rims and tubeless tyres 32mm. It's around 10kg at the moment and I weight around 96kg at the moment which is a good 8kg than when I started riding it.  It was in the sale and already has shamans hydro disks which were a mid season upgrade...

I am trying to get more aero and reduce the 80% of me but was wondering whether a dedicated Road bike would help or whether my gravel bike is as good as.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.evanscycles.com/jamis-renegade-expert-2016-adventure-road-bike-EV245159&ved=2ahUKEwiMypKSvbraAhVHZlAKHaLOBg0QFjACegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw1CPp_XIXnSO9Jwev_pAQiz

This is what I have - hope I've pasted the link correctly. 

I appreciate it's the engine that matters and a good few people are a fair bit faster - even on Bromptons...

Ah ok, you certainly have a nice bike in that Jamis Renegade Expert anyway.

The difference between a "gravel" bike and an endurance is surprisingly small, largely the differences are in the tyre clearance and gearing. A dedicated road bike will have slightly steeper tube angles and be a little more responsive, but it will lose the ability to take wider (32+) tyres.

I have a Whyte Wessex as my commuter bike, it's got more relaxed geometry compared to my Canyon CF SLX Disc road bike and it weighs about 9.2kg (which is a good 2kg over my Canyon). You'll struggle to find many disc brake bikes less than 9.2kg for less than £2500.

I'd certainly consider upgrading to 105 R7000 or Ultegra R8000 and buying a set of lightweight mid section wheels - like DT Swiss ER 1600 Spline DB (1528g). Only reason I say this is because you might find that if you spend £2k on a new bike, you'll end up with a nice carbon frame with 105 and RS505 disc brakes - the wheels won't be anything fancy and it's unlikely to weigh much/any less than 9.5kg.

Both the Whyte Wessex and the Trek Domane SL5 disc are good, but they are both a bit over £2k.

While a lot of the advice in this week's CW aero edition is good, I'd be careful of big numbers like the 22%, they don't necessarily translate to that in the real world.

madcarew wrote:

And +1 on the Cannondale Super six....

in which case I'd suggest that the CAAD 12 is similar enough to the Super Six to be surely worth a look.

Buyers are spoilt for choice. For some more suggestions look at road.cc's own 2017 buyer's guide for bikes in the £1500-£2000 bracket at road.cc/207770

But in the end it's personal preference and I'd strongly recommend that the OP visits a few shops and tries to narrow it down.

Rich_cb wrote:

I think that most claimed aero benefits for bikes/wheels etc only really kick in above 40kph (25 mph). If you're not likely to be hitting those sort of speeds on the flat then in reality the aero benefits for frames/wheels etc will be much lower. My advice would be to forget aero/weight and go for comfort. Get a good bike fit and then find a bike that matches your suggested geometry as closely as possible. If you're on a well fitted comfortable bike you'll be able to maintain a more aero position for much longer giving you far more of a speed advantage than any aero bike or wheel. As an aside it's also worth looking at your tyres, when I switched from a fairly basic set of panaracers to some schwalbe pro ones I was amazed at the difference in speed.

Chris Boardman says that aero has an impact even at low speeds, even going sloly uphill, he repeated this this morning when commentating on the ladies road race in the commonwealth games.

Aerodynamic benefits of bike and body are by far the biggest factor in terms of effort expended, the body is roughly 80% of all the resistance.

people are very willing to put up with a less than perfect comfortable body position to gain extra speed.

Your advice to forget aero is well off, it should be something first on the list, the bike the OP has is more of an endurance bike so more upright, a subtle change in body position, arms and clothing not to mention a more aero frame and wheels will 'buy' you less effort for same speed all things being equal.

Also going for discs is another 8-10 watts or so 'lost'.

Instead of dropping £2k on a bike maybe look at:

Lowering the stem/changing body position/getting some well fitted clothing, are you in the drops/on the hoods/on the top of the bars.

Think about how and when you raise your head, when you sit up/open your body as this changes your aerodynamic profile.

Think about shoe/pedal interface are your shoes reasonably stiff

Think about tyres and tyre pressures, could your tyres be swapped for a lower rolling type, how often do you clean your drivetrain.

Think about cadence, a faster cadence is more efficient than a slower one for most people.

Also, can you lose some body fat, how is your food before and during the ride, can this be improved so your perform better, even warming up before a ride can have an impact.

Once you've checked things you can do without buying a new bike and checked to see if this has made a difference then go spend your money, even if you don't 'need' a bike, a new bike can often have a placebo effect even if the reality is that the aero and weight difference is negligible.

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Chris Boardman says that aero has an impact even at low speeds, even going sloly uphill, he repeated this this morning when commentating on the ladies road race in the commonwealth games.

Aerodynamic benefits of bike and body are by far the biggest factor in terms of effort expended, the body is roughly 80% of all the resistance.

people are very willing to put up with a less than perfect comfortable body position to gain extra speed.

Your advice to forget aero is well off, it should be something first on the list, the bike the OP has is more of an endurance bike so more upright, a subtle change in body position, arms and clothing not to mention a more aero frame and wheels will 'buy' you less effort for same speed all things being equal.

Also going for discs is another 8-10 watts or so 'lost'.

Instead of dropping £2k on a bike maybe look at:

Lowering the stem/changing body position/getting some well fitted clothing, are you in the drops/on the hoods/on the top of the bars.

Think about how and when you raise your head, when you sit up/open your body as this changes your aerodynamic profile.

Think about shoe/pedal interface are your shoes reasonably stiff

Think about tyres and tyre pressures, could your tyres be swapped for a lower rolling type, how often do you clean your drivetrain.

Think about cadence, a faster cadence is more efficient than a slower one for most people.

Also, can you lose some body fat, how is your food before and during the ride, can this be improved so your perform better, even warming up before a ride can have an impact.

Once you've checked things you can do without buying a new bike and checked to see if this has made a difference then go spend your money, even if you don't 'need' a bike, a new bike can often have a placebo effect even if the reality is that the aero and weight difference is negligible.

You didn't actually read my comment did you?

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Also going for discs is another 8-10 watts or so 'lost'.

He's already got discs on the bike so tricky to avoid. Also for a fixed speed and yaw angle, could be 8-10 watts, could be 10-12, could be 1-2,  could be less, we just don't know on this set-up - there's no general "discs cost X watts" factor to apply.

fukawitribe wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Also going for discs is another 8-10 watts or so 'lost'.

He's already got discs on the bike so tricky to avoid. Also for a fixed speed and yaw angle, could be 8-10 watts, could be 10-12, could be 1-2,  could be less, we just don't know on this set-up - there's no general "discs cost X watts" factor to apply.

^Ditto.

Disc brakes actually lose very little, if anything, when compared with rim brakes.

In fact, disc brakes often outperform rim brakes at positive yaw angles because they are sheltered from the incident airflow. 

ChrisB200SX wrote:

I'd say your not fast enough to be worried about buying a faster bike. 

Disagree, by that logic presumably only pros should ride £2k+ bikes

If 'best' is fastest on the flat then sure, go aero. But you may find light and stiff the best combination for riding enjoyment by which I mean smashing it uphill, stomping on the pedals, dropping your mates and generally riding spiritedly..

Much like the poster above i prefer riding my tcr adv sl with a lighter wheelset, if conditions allow, over my ti bike even with the deep rims. But of course I'm probably not fast enough to warrant owning either bike anyway!

700c wrote:

ChrisB200SX wrote:

I'd say your not fast enough to be worried about buying a faster bike. 

Disagree, by that logic presumably only pros should ride £2k+ bikes

 

If 'best' is fastest on the flat then sure, go aero. But you may find light and stiff the best combination for riding enjoyment by which I mean smashing it uphill, stomping on the pedals, dropping your mates and generally riding spiritedly..

Much like the poster above i prefer riding my tcr adv sl with a lighter wheelset, if conditions allow, over my ti bike even with the deep rims. But of course I'm probably not fast enough to warrant owning either bike anyway!

You're logic, not mine. He's already got a £2k+ bike that is good enough

Buying a new bike is unlikely to make much difference to the OP's speed. At 17mph average, I'm faster on my Brompton.

Another bike is always nice though, and if that allows are far superior aero position, that will make the difference, not the bike itself.

I see no reason why you couldn't go far quicker on that Jamis though.