Bike suggestions

[Nancy Hummel]

This will be fun! Looking for a new road bike.

Me: 5’8 148 -long legs, shorter torso.age: 56

History: Started riding in my early 20’s. Had a crappy Univega. Next bike was a Pinarello. Loved it but it was too large. Went to an aluminum Lemond, 54 cm. Fits great. I still have it and ride it occasionally. Current bike-Sampson Exalt, 54 cm. Like it but do not love it.

Did many triathlons in my 30’s but I no longer run due to knee issues. Now do rides from 20-100 miles regularly at 14-18 mph.

I would consider myself a fairly strong rider. Do not like to push big gears but like to settle into a comfortable groove and ride at a consistent speed.

I keep my bikes for a long time so spending a bit more for the right bike is ok with me.

What do you think?

 

[Philpug]

What do you think?

Whatever you can find in stock? Availability is still really tough right now. Unless you need a bike now, maybe just gather some info and wait till next year and hope that there are some viable choices on the ground?

 

[tch]

I'm not sure you can really go wrong today if you buy a pretty decent bike. Biggest decision is "race" vs "endurance". I'd vote endurance for the more relaxed and slightly upright geometry which will help with shorter-torso folks.
Personally, I bought a Specialized Roubaix Expert this year and really like it. It's got a small-travel shock in the headset which takes the sting out of bad roads and 28c tires which also help. One note: I've become addicted to electronic shifting; Di2 Ultegra in my case. Easy, perfect shifts with the touch of a finger. I won't go back to mechanical shifting willingly.
Giant Defy also comes to mind in the same category if you don't like the idea of a shock.

Phil is generally right about availability, although I've noticed my local bike stores are slowly getting in inventory.
Edit after Scott's post: yes, you should think about material. I rode high-end ti for 20 years; the Roubaix is my first carbon. Personally, I find it much smoother than my ti or steel bikes, although personal preference may vary.

 

[scott43]

That's a big mozza ball. Budget? Frame material preference? Compact or big gears? Road or road/gravel? I kinda like the Moots bikes. They have a good selection of practical road bikes. I'm shopping steel frames at the moment and wishing for a little more tire clearance but with double rings so not a gravel bike entirely. Moots has a bunch of road/gravel mix bikes and you'd be able to find something you like in there I'm sure. Price is up there though so be warned... Ask @Ron about his Moots...

 

[Nancy Hummel]

I am not in a hurry. My Sampson is fine. I would prefer to look and buy the right one.

preference is for road, not gravel.

 

[scott43]

Whatever you can find in stock? Availability is still really tough right now. Unless you need a bike now, maybe just gather some info and wait till next year and hope that there are some viable choices on the ground?

Yeah and some of the custom/smaller makers are in the build-mode now and wait times seem to be around 3-6 months. So maybe shop/order now and have something for spring. That's my approach at the moment.

 

[Nancy Hummel]

I am riding much more than I was in the past couple of years and intend to cut back at work significantly in the next few years.

 

[scott43]

I am riding much more than I was in the past couple of years and intend to cut back at work significantly in the next few years.

That's my plan too!

 

[Nancy Hummel]

I love the geometry of the Lemond Chambery. It seems to fit great and I can go fast.

I am not into the tech details -with skis I like to find a couple of pair that I like and stick with them.

 

[scott43]

Well you've ridden a bunch of bikes and know what you like so go with that as a start. I dug up this chart from the way back machine..it's for a Zurich but Lemonds were all similar in geo.

 

[scott43]

Here's a PDF with a Chambery frame:

https://www.vintage-trek.com/Trek-Fisher-Klein-Lemond/2006lemond.pdf

At first glance, short wheelbase, short chainstay, steep head angle frame. A race frame.

 

[Nancy Hummel]

Here's a PDF with a Chambery frame:

https://www.vintage-trek.com/Trek-Fisher-Klein-Lemond/2006lemond.pdf

At first glance, short wheelbase, short chainstay, steep head angle frame. A race frame.

Thanks! Love the people here with the details!

 

[tch]

You should find and ride and buy what feels good to you.
But I will offer one thing to keep in mind: your flexibility as you age. I have a good older (63) friend who found a bargain online and insisted that a Specialized Tarmac (race geometry) felt "great". I wondered if he wanted such long and low geometry, but he insisted. After 6 months, he sold it and bought a frame with a slightly shorter top tube and a longer head tube with more options to add stack height.
Just consider all possibilities.

 

[Nancy Hummel]

You should find and ride and buy what feels good to you.
But I will offer one thing to keep in mind: your flexibility as you age. I have a good older (63) friend who found a bargain online and insisted that a Specialized Tarmac (race geometry) felt "great". I wondered if he wanted such long and low geometry, but he insisted. After 6 months, he sold it and bought a frame with a slightly shorter top tube and a longer head tube with more options to add stack height.
Just consider all possibilities.

Thanks! I posted here so I could get help narrowing things down. There are so many bikes. Reading the specs etc. does not help me. There are many knowledgeable people here and I value the input.

 

[Ron]

This will be fun! Looking for a new road bike.

Me: 5’8 148 -long legs, shorter torso.age: 56

History: Started riding in my early 20’s. Had a crappy Univega. Next bike was a Pinarello. Loved it but it was too large. Went to an aluminum Lemond, 54 cm. Fits great. I still have it and ride it occasionally. Current bike-Sampson Exalt, 54 cm. Like it but do not love it.

Did many triathlons in my 30’s but I no longer run due to knee issues. Now do rides from 20-100 miles regularly at 14-18 mph.

I would consider myself a fairly strong rider. Do not like to push big gears but like to settle into a comfortable groove and ride at a consistent speed.

I keep my bikes for a long time so spending a bit more for the right bike is ok with me.

What do you think?

as stated above, inventory is loosening, slowly but kind of summarizing many good posts, you are looking for road specific, there are really 2 classes (excluding TT), race and granfondo. Since you just saw Ray at Alchemy Body. & Bike, you now have a lot of very useful information about your fit. I am happy to help sort through that or even better, I would consult Ray about the type of bike that may best work for you. I would be looking at Reach and your current angle on your torso for a big clue as to how you are best positioned on the bike, 45* or 50* for instance, the amount of stack is also going to be a big determinate in the frame that will accommodate your body geometry. Many of the newer race geo's have a decidedly lower stack since the trend of "slam your stem" handlebars makes you faster thing is in vogue. Hint, watch a TT rider and the height of their bars... Not low. its about getting your body aero, not necessarily your H bars low as possible, especially for a pleasure ride over time. I haven't ridden any new race bikes like the New Emonda or the New Spec' SL7, Cervelo's and Canyons but the Specialized Roubaix is a fantastic bike and if the geo works, the Trek Emonda is excellent ( I own a 2019 Emonda with H2 geo). Also consider where you ride. Do you ride 30 miles on flats? 50 Miles with 3k climbing? I know you ride here in CO but that is also very important. from a efficiency perspective, above ~5% grade, weight beats out aero so consider the time spent on flats, rolling vs long climbs. the good news is that almost all new frames are excellent as far as aero with the vast majority of savings (aero and climbing) achieved through a 16-16.5 pound build, , 40-50mm deep wheels with aero bars and stem. Most new bikes now come with the integrated bar and stem which are great if that fixed position works for you. I run 27c enve tires up front and a 29c in the rear on Enve AR 4.5's but there are a lot of very good wheels and tire combo out there and Spec' Roval or Bontrager wheels are excellent and another reason to look at those two brands. But my point is a proper matching of tire width and rim width is critical. but, for speeds below 18mph, the lower rolling resistance of wider tires is faster.... food for thought. this holds true on climbs.

On a side note, I went to shorter cranks this season (172 down to 167.5) and saw significant gains in efficiency and lessened the stress on back and knees. the difference is most significant on flats and rolling terrain and especially on the 2-5% slogs. There is a slight adjustment on steeper climbs, those longer and >7% will require a difference cadence but once you adjust, I am actually climbing faster now, especially on the 9-10% stuff. I would never go back to longer cranks. if interested please watch this video from one of the top pro fitters in the world. its now been proven many times over that shorter cranks are better for so many riders.

 

[martyg]

Lots of great info here. The money quote, "Whatever you can find in stock? Availability is still really tough right now."

Some general observations from my riding. A lot of parallels to skis, and what kind of feedback you seek.

- Gravel bikes are like appliances. Great, do anything rigs. Totally uninspiring to ride. Kind of like a 20 year old 4Runner. Will go anywhere. But boring.

- Racer verses endurance: I rarely, rarely do a ride of 4 hours or longer. Most of my events are under an hour, so longer training rides net close to zero benefit for me. I tend towards race geometries. Note that an "endurance" geometry will net a bit of the vibe of gravel bikes.

- Race geometry bikes are becoming more compliant. The beauty of composites is that you can tweak lay ups to do infinite variety of things.

- Tires, and wheels, make the bike: My last gen Venge is a bit harsh to ride. It came with a 26mm S-Works tire. I went to a 28mm Cotton Turbo. Huge, huge difference. It rides more like my much more compliant SL7 Tarmac now. If you really want to compare apples to apples, swap the same wheel set between bikes when testing. A different tire, 10PSI difference, etc, will net huge differences in ride quality.

- As said above, really really tough time. If you have a great shop that you vibe with, figure out what you want. Let them know. Buy it if it comes up. There may also be enough dealers of the brand that you are after in the Rockies that a road trip could net something. I'm connected with Mountain Bike Specialists (Specialized) in Durango. I know that we have 30ish assorted mtn and road bikes hitting soon. Mayne ring them. Ask for Mike. Another resource for you may be Specialized's facility in Boulder.

- FYI I have an S-Works Crux ('cross bike) that I'd entertain selling. Maybe $1K? 56cm.

Enjoy!

 

[Ron]

Gravel bikes are like appliances. Great, do anything rigs. Totally uninspiring to ride. Kind of like a 20 year old 4Runner. Will go anywhere. But boring.

LOVE the ride on my Moots. smooth, steady and fun.

 

[martyg]

LOVE the ride on my Moots. smooth, steady and fun.

Like i said... "A lot of parallels to skis, and what kind of feedback you seek." That is one kind of feedback. A pro level road racing bike is another.

 

[wooglin]

Ride everything you can find in your price range. Pick the one that speaks to you.

 

[scott43]

Regarding frame material, carbon is the ultimate material to make a frame from. They're also fairly expensive. But as Marty says, you can tune the build to exactly what you want. If you ride a carbon frame, you think, why would I buy anything else?? However, I like steel for durability and aesthetic reasons. I wouldn't consider aluminum frankly unless you are money-limited. They're good for certain things but carbon is superior in most ways. Ti is kinda the best of both worlds but again, expensive.

Regarding geo and aging, I somewhat agree. Really it's about flexibility. I think everyone is different. If you can manage good flexibility, I don't think you're limited in frames. For instance, one of the questions I usually ask people is, can you touch your toes? If you can still do that, you're fairly good in terms of what you can ride. But..time marches on and affects people differently. You don't HAVE to be low as someone pointed out. Lance had a huge hump-back TT style and that is actually very efficient from an aero point of view. Point being, everyone is different and see a fitter about how much flex you have and are likely to have.

Regarding endurance vs race geo, I like race geo. My rides are hardly ever over 2-2.5 hours. I would like to go 3 or 4 but I don't see short wheelbase limiting me here. Having said that, I'm in the wider tire is better crowd these days and would like to run 28 or 30c tires. So that's a consideration. If you go custom, maybe think about more than 25c (road race) clearance. It will give you flexibility in the future and you really don't lose much now if you plan ahead with the build. Disc brakes relieve you of short/long caliper decisions. Don't go caliper brakes, there's no future there and if you're buying a complete bike, just get hydro discs for sure. I'm dedicated Shimano guy..hate me if you want but they make great stuff.

Regarding wheels, if you're flush, deep vee rims are not limiting. Carbon deep vee rims are very light and the aero benefit from a 40-50mm vee is significant. In terms of climbing, yeah, lighter is better. Most people can't ascend significant grades (over 6%) for extended periods very quickly. And aero really is speed dependent. So yeah, if you're mostly climbing, go light. However, if you care about how fast you can go (if you're doing a workout, who cares really..), carbon deep vee rims will make you faster I believe.

Finally, it's really about feel and sizing at the end of the day. Try to do some test rides and get a good fit. If you like a certain geo and you know that's for you, try to get close to it.