Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - The Century bike optimized for speed

I have a very comfortable steel framed bike that I use for everything from century rides to group rides to commuting. As a solo rider, I can maintain a 20 mph average for about 20 miles. However, the larger 28 size tires in non-aero wheels, combined with this bike, make any pace faster than this very challenging.

I'm considering a second bike that would be used for faster group rides and to help me optimize my century rides.

From all my research here, I find that very few reviews concerning century bikes optimized for speed.

These bikes have potential;

Specialized Roubaix
Fuji Roubaix
Giant OCR Composite
Jamis Eclipse
Felt Z15, Z25
Cervelo R3

Like most riders, I want a more comfortable position and better ride quality than any all-out race bike offers.

Are there faster bikes that make a good tool for century rides?

Michael

I often do Centuries on my Spec. Roubaix Expert with compact double. Changed out the saddle for a Brooks Professional and generally use DT Swiss R1.1 wheels although the originals are okay too. Have found that 25mm tires are more comfortable and also help protect the rims more. It's not as comfortable as my serious LD bike but a century is just no problem.

You should add the Cannondale carbon Synapse to your list. Take one for a test ride.

There are really only a couple of factors in the geometry of a bike that determine comfort. Most important are fore-aft saddle position and handle bar height.

On longer rides, your aren't applying as much torque to the pedals, so there is more weigh on your hands and butt. Moving the saddle backwards gets weight and pressure off your hands which helps alleviate numbness (you need a comfortable saddle of course). So a long distance bike should have the saddle further back, but for some reason very few manufacturers alter the seatpost angle from one model to the next -- even on touring specific frames. This makes no sense to me, but I suspect it streamlines manufacturing and most people don't really consider seatpost angle when buying a bike. For instance the Specialized Roubaix, Sequioa, and Tarmac all have the same 73.25 angle in the 56cm size. Each bike is made for a very different purpose ranging from racing to commuting/fitness. So with any bike, you should find a seatpost with as much offset as possible and slide the seat back as far as possible (you may eventually decide that's too far back and want to fine tune the position).

Handle bar height does vary widely from model to model, but you can change the height on any bike dramatically with your choice of stem and the number of headset spacers.

So my point is that regarding the two most critical factors, you can essentially make any racing bike as comfortable as any touring or "endurance" bike.

Front end geometry is another factor. Racing bikes have a steeper head tube angle, so they feel a little twitchier and ride a little harsher. This has an effect on perceived comfort, but I don't think it's all that significant.

The frame material and tire size noticeably effect road vibration and comfort on a long ride. My opinion is that you can't beat steel for a smooth ride, and there are some fairly lightweight steel frames out there from manufacturers like Waterford, Gunnar, Soma, Salsa, etc. 25c tires are a good compromise between comfort and speed.

I don't think I'd worry too much about aerodynamics. Whatever marginal benefit you get from something like aero wheels will probably be offset by their harsh ride and added weight depending on what alternative you choose. If you build up a bike from scratch, consider handbuilt 32 spoke wheels with Ultegra/Dura-Ace level hubs, some simple rims in the 400g range, and butted spokes. With D-A level hubs, you can build a nice pair of wheels that will compare favorably weight-wise with some of the higher end wheel sets. Plus they'll provide a smooth ride and be much easier to maintenance.

Lastly, you can't ignore fitness. It's certainly more important than anything bike related. If you are on a trajectory where you'll be improving your form significantly in the future, then centuries may eventually feel relatively easy and you'll have no comfort issues whatsoever even on a bike intended and set up for all out racing.

Most important are fore-aft saddle position and handle bar height.

... Moving the saddle backwards gets weight and pressure off your hands which helps alleviate numbness (you need a comfortable saddle of course). So a long distance bike should have the saddle further back, ... So with any bike, you should find a seatpost with as much offset as possible and slide the seat back as far as possible (you may eventually decide that's too far back and want to fine tune the position).

Handle bar height ... you can change ... dramatically with your choice of stem and the number of headset spacers.

Front end geometry is another factor. Racing bikes have a steeper head tube angle, so they feel a little twitchier and ride a little harsher. This has an effect on perceived comfort, but I don't think it's all that significant.

The frame material and tire size noticeably effect road vibration and comfort on a long ride. My opinion is that you can't beat steel for a smooth ride, and there are some fairly lightweight steel frames out there from manufacturers like Waterford, Gunnar, Soma, Salsa, etc. 25c tires are a good compromise between comfort and speed.

....

Lastly, you can't ignore fitness. It's certainly more important than anything bike related. If you are on a trajectory where you'll be improving your form significantly in the future, then centuries may eventually feel relatively easy and you'll have no comfort issues whatsoever even on a bike intended and set up for all out racing.

Northbound, thanks for sharing your experience and insights! I personally need a lot of work in the fitness area, but I'm working on it. I'm trying to plan out a comfy bike, too. I like long rides and want to go longer, maybe under the brevet structure, or maybe not. But the ridership comes first.

It sounds like a Rivendell road bike such as a Rambouillet would have all the characteristics you deem important. Because the designs are very similar, a Heron (the one for long distance riding) should fall into the same ballpark.

But, what about fore/aft weight distribution? Many articles on frame design and building say 45% of the bike weight should be on the front wheel. What do you think about that? I think that goal (if it is really a goal) would be helped by long chainstays.

Road Fan

Specialized Roubaix comp (all CF)
Specialized alias saddle
changed bars to FSA wingpro (flat top bars)
DT Swiss RR 1.1 wheels
700 x 25 Conti GP 4000 tires

It's been very comfortable on my century rides (finished Flying Wheels in about 5 hours with it.) Have ridden a few double centuries on it as well.

Lately I've been eyeing the Cervelo RS (vs. the R3).

I think it will be a good thing for you to have a second bike. However, I don't think changing the bike will significantly improve your performance.

In the context of a group ride, you're already drafting so the aero advantages of something like an R3 won't make much of a difference. Unless your rides are really fast or seriously hilly, it's also unlikely that the 1-2 pound frame weight difference of the newer bikes will make a difference.

If you're doing solo centuries, you might want to try aero bars; that's just about the only mechanical change you can make to improve your performance. Otherwise, things like an aero frame or aero wheels or a minor weight change are likely to reduce your century time only by a few minutes.

Another thing to consider is that any improvements due to a mechanical change to the bike is essentially a "one-shot." I.e. if somehow you manage to get a 5% improvement from switching bikes, then you've just gotten to a slightly higher plateau and you're done. In comparison, by training properly you will hopefully gain continual improvements....

But, what about fore/aft weight distribution? Many articles on frame design and building say 45% of the bike weight should be on the front wheel. What do you think about that? I think that goal (if it is really a goal) would be helped by long chainstays.


I think that's right. If you look at some of the "sport touring" models like the Gunnar Sport, Soma Smoothie ES, or Salsa Casseroll, the CS length is 425-430mm. The intent of slightly longer chainstays on these frames might also be for heal clearance if a rack and panniers is being used, but it does improve comfort/stability.

Are faster bikes a good tool for century rides?There are hundreds of bicycle models using dozens of combinations of materials. Using your current bike as a starting point, simply getting an identical bike with 700c wheels and outfitting it with high-performance tires and tubes is the logical choice.

Keep that in mind while amusing yourself about how some new bike frame is going to feel on some unknown century on some unknown roads with some unknown hills - well you get it......

The R3 has a shorter head tube than say a Specialized Roubaix. If you want to have your bars relatively high compared to your saddle, it may not be the right choice for you. OTOH, having your bars high puts you into the wind and requires more power to maintain a given speed. The lower you can get your bars, the faster you'll go for the same power output. Obviously you don't want them lower than is comfortable.

The Cervelo RS is an R3 with a taller head tube, slightly longer chainstays, curved seat stays, and slightly cheaper and thus heavier carbon. The longer chainstays are not a bad thing, I wouldn't mind them on my R3.

A good road racing bike is a good century bike... lots of road races are roughly century distance. I have done plenty of long races and centuries or longer on my R3 and it's been fine for me.

Pretty much any road bike with relaxed (non-race) geometry.
My ride..
http://www.gunnarbikes.com/images/Sport118web.jpg
Gunnar Sport

There is a tradeoff between performance and comfort, and every company has a slightly different recipe.

Btw, randonneur bikes are made to go long and fast, and might be something to look into. Bike Quarterly recently gave a very positive review for the Boulder Bicyles Rando..
http://www.renehersebicycles.com/Randonneur%20bikes.htm

This is what I have been using for commuting, solo rides and the occasional century. It's been a great all around bike. It can be fast; today I rode 61 miles in 3 hours 21 minutes of riding time. I only had to get off the bike twice to refill my bottle and get a little food.

I worked with a professional fitter while selecting the frame. The Soma Double Cross in either a 58 or 60 frames size could be made to fit, but the 60 was closer to ideal. The fitting revealed that the 58 size would have required a well extended seatpost with rearward offset, this would have put my hips rearward of the ideal position to drive the crank. The solution was the 60cm frame size. The seatpost selected would have a zero offset to put the hips in the right place over the BB. The handlebars would be positioned by a 110mm stem positioned at a normal height above the tall Soma headtube.

I decided that Get a grip (my LBS) should build the bike. They disassembled the Felt doner bike, applied Framesaver the Soma, installed the BB & headset, finished the assembly and installed a computer for $150.

The result;

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll210/wildcat-bucket/Somasilver019.jpg


Below: Ridley 4ZA Zornyc carbon CX fork, Cane Creek headset, Felt 1.3 6061 Butted Alloy Bar, Felt 1.2cm 3D-Forged Stem, Shimano 105 brifters, Tektro Oryx brakes with Tektro RX bar-top levers, Mavic CXP-22 Double-Wall Rims and DT Doubled Butted Champion Spokes, Felt Precision Sealed-Bearing Hubs & 700x28 Continental Gatorback tires

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll210/wildcat-bucket/Somasilver021.jpg

Below: 175mm Sram S300 GXP CX compact double crank with a 46 X 38t ring pair, Shimano CX SPD pedals, Ultegra derailleur

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll210/wildcat-bucket/Somasilver022.jpg

Below: Ultegra derailleur, 105 12-25 cassette

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll210/wildcat-bucket/Somasilver023.jpg

I am still thinking of a second bike that will be faster.

Daveyboy's bike sound nearly perfect;

Specialized Roubaix comp (all CF)
Specialized alias saddle
changed bars to FSA wingpro (flat top bars)
DT Swiss RR 1.1 wheels
700 x 25 Conti GP 4000 tires

The Felt Z35 looks very good, but I would need to upgrade the wheels.

A Soma Smoothie ES with Campy 11 speed group would be an improvement also.

The Salsa Pistola looks good and is a good value.

For now, I can use the Double Cross to improve my fitness, but I dream of faster days.

Michael

I have a very comfortable steel framed bike that I use for everything from century rides to group rides to commuting. As a solo rider, I can maintain a 20 mph average for about 20 miles. However, the larger 28 size tires in non-aero wheels combined with bike make any pace faster than this very challenging.

I'm considering a second bike that would be used for faster group rides and to help me optimize my century rides.

From all my research here, I find that very few reviews concerning century bikes optimized for speed.

These bikes have potential;

Specialized Roubaix
Fuji Roubaix
Giant OCR Composite
Jamis Eclipse
Felt Z15, Z25
Cervelo R3

Like most riders, I want a more comfortable position and ride quality than an all-out race bike offers.

Are faster bikes a good tool for century rides?

Michael


Sounds like you're doing great with the bike you have. You could buy another one EXACTLY the same.

For now, I can use the Double Cross to improve my fitness, but I dream of faster days.
Again, I gotta say.... Unless you put some really heavy and/or slow wheels on your cross bike, I can't think of a mechanical reason why any of the bikes on your list will be noticeably faster.

You'd have to step up to a fairly aggressive racing bike, like a Specialized Tarmac, Giant TCR or a Cervelo S1/S2 to get any sort of improvement. That could backfire for longer rides, if the ride position and/or shock absorption is less comfortable. And again, any sort of improvement will be a tiny boost and you'll plateau right away.

You could even do a test: put the narrowest tires on the cross bike. If 28's are the narrowest possible, then get the slickest and highest-PSI tires you can find on the bike. I doubt you will be able to reliably quantify any performance change over numerous 50-mile rides.

These are bicycles, not motorcycles. Changing parts will not make the engine work any harder or more efficiently.

If you want to ride faster, then do the work and start training.

Again, I gotta say.... Unless you put some really heavy and/or slow wheels on your cross bike, I can't think of a mechanical reason why any of the bikes on your list will be noticeably faster.

You'd have to step up to a fairly aggressive racing bike, like a Specialized Tarmac, Giant TCR or a Cervelo S1/S2 to get any sort of improvement. That could backfire for longer rides, if the ride position and/or shock absorption is less comfortable. And again, any sort of improvement will be a tiny boost and you'll plateau right away.

You could even do a test: put the narrowest tires on the cross bike. If 28's are the narrowest possible, then get the slickest and highest-PSI tires you can find on the bike. I doubt you will be able to reliably quantify any performance change over numerous 50-mile rides.

These are bicycles, not motorcycles. Changing parts will not make the engine work any harder or more efficiently.

If you want to ride faster, then do the work and start training.

I'll consider your test. I'm changing wheels to Open Pro's and I'll put 700 x 25 Conti Grand Prix 4000 tires and give it a try. I'll also test ride some of the bikes listed and will record ride time over 60 miles.

You may be right.. I should try to find out for myself.

I will, without a doubt, accelerate more quickly on group rides. Longer rides might not see much benefit.

Michael

Not sure a second bike would help all that much. I just rode my longest ride in about 20 years (116 miles) on my Cannondale Six. It has "race" oriented geometry, with 23 mm tires and an Arione "racing" seat. The setup also has the bars about 10 cm lower than the seat. I felt surprisingly good at the end of it. Not because the bike is the best long distance specialist out there, but because I'm used to it, and it fits me perfectly. The only change I made was to run 100 psi in the tires (about 15 lower than normal) to accommodate the rough chip-seal road surface on this route.

Cheers,
kaNUK

PS - On the other hand: Maybe I was able to maintain the 20 mph average because it's a fast bike?:thumb: Also you can never have enough bikes, so don't let me stop you!

A point to be made is that a lighter, racier bike is easier to keep in a pace line than a heavier bike. This can get one through a Century faster. So I think for this reason the OP is asking about bikes that are light and racy but also comfortable.

most bikes aren't fast without the rider.

at the dull end of the sport, its the rider that can offer the most potential for increase in performance (assuming reasonable comfort, good fit, etc.). at the sharp end i could see how the smallest changes could affect tiny % of performance increases... but at the upper end, where you are trying to squeeze out every tiny bit of speed and give up comfort, luggage, durability, etc. etc.


and when looking at long distance bikes... you might also consider what you plan to carry and how comfortable do you want to be in inclement weather. and consider the option to go to wider tires - wider than what most 'race' bikes will allow due to frame clearances.

I'll consider your test. I'm changing wheels to Open Pro's and I'll put 700 x 25 Conti Grand Prix 4000 tires and give it a try. I'll also test ride some of the bikes listed and will record ride time over 60 miles.

You may be right.. I should try to find out for myself.

I will, without a doubt, accelerate more quickly on group rides. Longer rides might not see much benefit.

Michael

narrow, high pressure tires aren't always the fastest... dig around for some back issues of bicycle quarterly and check out some of the randon. lists...

A point to be made is that a lighter, racier bike is easier to keep in a pace line than a heavier bike. This can get one through a Century faster. So I think for this reason the OP is asking about bikes that are light and racy but also comfortable.

But how much heavier?

I think if anything the cross geometry of the OP's bike might be holding him back on the road, and just getting a road bike will speed up overall riding. Gunnar is a good start, along with the other choices listed by the OP.

But I don't think it's all about the weight. I don't really do "fast centuries" but Jan Heine does fast 1200k's (fastest North American PBP finisher '07) on a 22 lb bike from the 70's.

If you're doing solo centuries aero wheels may help you speed up over long distance. Something like Williams (http://www.williamscycling.com/sys30x/sys30x.html) which aren't carbon so perhaps more durable for longer rides.

But how much heavier?...

If you're doing solo centuries aero wheels may help you speed up over long distance. Something like Williams (http://www.williamscycling.com/sys30x/sys30x.html) which aren't carbon so perhaps more durable for longer rides.

I agree with what you are saying here. I am just keeping in mind that the OP is asking about Centuries as distinguished from much longer rides. In my mind this makes a difference. I have a Gunnar Sport with 36-spoke Ultegra wheels (about 22 lb + bags+stuff) and it is very comfortable riding solo and for mileage beyond 100 miles. But, if I wanted to just do 100 miles drafting others at the fastest possible pace it would be on the lighter plastic Roubaix with the lighter (and stiffer) DT Swiss R1.1 wheels (about 18.5 lb and no bags and little stuff).

I agree with what you are saying here. I am just keeping in mind that the OP is asking about Centuries as distinguished from much longer rides. In my mind this makes a difference. I have a Gunnar Sport with 36-spoke Ultegra wheels (about 22 lb + bags+stuff) and it is very comfortable riding solo and for mileage beyond 100 miles. But, if I wanted to just do 100 miles drafting others at the fastest possible pace it would be on the lighter plastic Roubaix with the lighter (and stiffer) DT Swiss R1.1 wheels (about 18.5 lb and no bags and little stuff).

Yes, this is the usage I have in mind.

The existing Soma Double Cross would be set up for credit card touring, commuting or any event where some load capacity is needed. Most of these would be multi-day events. The Soma is comfortable, tough, can be re-geared at a modest cost and it can carry 20 lbs on racks, if needed.

The new bike would be oriented towards comfort over a 6 hour period, and would be used without panniers except maybe a seat bag for a few basic items. It would also be my weekday night group-ride-bike for 20-30 mph travel over 30 miles.

I'll try to test ride some bikes over this summer.

Michael

...but Jan Heine does fast 1200k's (fastest North American PBP finisher '07) on a 22 lb bike from the 70's...

Can you tell us more? What kind of bike; pics; links? I'm not disputing, just curious.

I have a Cervelo RS and I am very happy with it. I think the Cervelo R3 and Cannondale Super Six would also be good choices.

Can you tell us more? What kind of bike; pics; links? I'm not disputing, just curious.

he had the fastest mixed tandem in the 2003 PBP on a restored 1946 Rene Herse tandem.

Can you tell us more? What kind of bike; pics; links? I'm not disputing, just curious.

I think he rode an Alex Singer, but here's the pic from the last PBP:
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/PBP07Heinekm240.jpg (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/PBP2007.html)

(source (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/PBP2007.html) - good article by him about riding at the front of PBP 07)

I think he rode an Alex Singer, but here's the pic from the last PBP:
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/PBP07Heinekm240.jpg (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/PBP2007.html)

(source (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/PBP2007.html) - good article by him about riding at the front of PBP 07)

the engine... is far more important than the bike.

As a solo rider, I can maintain a 20 mph average for about 20 miles. However, the larger 28 size tires in non-aero wheels, combined with this bike, make any pace faster than this very challenging.

I'm considering a second bike that would be used for faster group rides and to help me optimize my century rides.

Like most riders, I want a more comfortable position and better ride quality than any all-out race bike offers.

Are there faster bikes that make a good tool for century rides?

Michael

There are three ways to improve your speed. Going from a 28 tire to a 23/25 is one. There is a slight improvement from the more narrow aero width and probably less rolling resistence but the larger thing is its hard to find performance tires that wide.

The second and more benefical improvement is aero wheels. But you need really deep wheels to make much of a difference. For example many of the 23.5 popular rims aren't much better than standard box ones. If you go with 40mm to 60mm depth, you will get improvements. But they are costly.

The biggest speed gain is from improving your position. At 20mph, most of your power effort goes towards overcoming wind resistence. To the extent you get a bike that allows your back to become flatter and your profile less, you will gain speed. Of course, this comes with a compromise. You may not be comfortable with lower bar and higher seat positions.

You listed several possible condidate bikes. My suggestion is test ride a few and see how you like them.

the engine... is far more important than the bike.

I think it's the beer in that front bottle

My fast bike is a Lynskey Ti frame, Easton EC90 fork, seatpost and bars, Ritchie stem, Dura-ace group. What makes it fast, for me, is the wheels -- Rolf Prima Elan Aero. The Rolf's weigh in around 1250 grams for the set. Lower rotating weight really makes a difference. I run 23's on this bike and it weighs in at 18.10 pounds -- including seat wedge full of tools and spare tubes and frame pump (everything but water needed to ride); Speedplay X1 pedals. It would be even faster with fast tires -- I'm riding on Specialized Armadillo Elite's -- I found that fast riding gets very slow with flats and I basically stopped having flats with these tires.

There's a noticeable difference in speed when I switch to my "hummer" that I use for longer rides -- longer than 200k that is -- it's a litespeed Classic Ti frame, Ouzo Pro fork, Easton EC90 seatpost and bars, rear frame rack, Dura-ace group, but much heavier wheels. I use the same tires for rando rides, but 25's. I'm considering switching to 28's, but it becomes a pain getting the tires past the brake calipers. I have clearance for even wider than 28 but I'd have to use an allen wrench on the brake cables to get the wheels on and off :). The rando bike -- my hummer -- weighs in at 26 pounds or 35 pounds fully laden with Perpetuem, spares and water, ready to ride.

If I switched to the lightweight bike and simply stayed there, as others have noted, I would simply move to a new plateau. However, I ride both bikes and enjoy switching "down" in weight for "shorter" rides. I put that in quotations because many would not think of a 200k Permanent as a short ride. The lightweight bike is faster climbing and on the flat -- due to the overall weight and the rotating weight of the wheels. It's noticeable.

My '99 Trek 5200 works well for me. Carbon soaks up the small stuff and some of the large hits. It's not a crit bike, so isn't twitchy. Who wants a twitchy bike on a Grand Tour?

I've always run Rolfs on it and think they make quite a difference. Extremely reliable wheels, low spoke count and low spoke tension, with strong, bladed spokes. Remember, the top spoke is moving at twice the speed of the bike and slows you even in a paceline. Aero is more important than wheel weight for LD. You try really hard not to accelerate the bike. A torsionally stiff frame helps with efficiency as do short chain stays.

23c high pressure tires are faster, no question. Tricomps are great, Corsa Evo CX are even faster. Bars 2"-4" below saddle, body well stretched out. Agree with aft saddle position comment.

I explain why narrow HP tires are faster in this thread: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=537756

23c high pressure tires are faster, no question. [/URL]

i think there are a number of folks here, and out in the rando community that would beg to differ.

I have a 23 on the front and a 25 on the back. I out-coast almost everyone I ride with, most of whom are running 23. Obviously there are other factors involved, but I don't think the 25mm tires are hurting me much.

I have a 23 on the front and a 25 on the back. I out-coast almost everyone I ride with, most of whom are running 23. Obviously there are other factors involved, but I don't think the 25mm tires are hurting me much.

i ride 28s and sometimes 32s.
i can out coast everyone i ride with as well...
its just that getting to the top with the group is always a challenge. ;)

i think there are a number of folks here, and out in the rando community that would beg to differ.No kidding! ;) Hope some of them took the trouble to read that tandem thread, though.

Also: http://yarchive.net/bike/tire_pressure.html

Also: http://www.biketechreview.com/tires/images/AFM_tire_testing_rev8.pdf
noting that all tires were inflated to 120 psi, which means that only test results for tires of identical widths should be considered valid for comparison purposes. Or that narrow tires should be upgraded and wider tires downgraded, since they will not be inflated to identical pressures in use, but rather will be inflated to produce similar deflections. Still, very interesting to see 13 watts/wheel difference between best and worst tires. 26 watts is a major difference!

Zipp has an interesting article posted about wind tunnel testing: http://www.zipp.com/_media/pdfs/technology/revolutionary_speed.pdf
They show a difference of about 100 gram-force between a 28 spoke box section rim and a Zipp in the 20-30 mph range. That works out to about 9 watts at 20 mph and 13 watts at 30 mph. I assume they're showing the total for 2 wheels.

Coasting races are 95% body aerodynamics. I've only ridden with two people who could coast wheel-to-wheel with me, and they used the bar-top hand position, which I regard as overly dangerous. Not that that means a single thing about tires, aero wheels, aero frames, etc. It just means that my legs are short for my weight. :rolleyes:

I think he rode an Alex Singer, but here's the pic from the last PBP:
http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/images/PBP07Heinekm240.jpg (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/PBP2007.html)

(source (http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com/PBP2007.html) - good article by him about riding at the front of PBP 07)

Thanks for the info, Matt. It certainly looks like a very ordinary rando rig. Nothing would jump out at you from that pic to say this guy is fast, except maybe the look of determination on his face.

Other than using a "normal" saddle, and of course a higher quality wheel set with good tires - there is no such thing as a "century bike."

Listen to yourselves, dudes are riding 200k stages at the "tour" on "tour bikes" for God's sakes. Aw shucks - should they all be using "century race" bikes?

Either you ride a comfortable bike or you don't. Whether its the "tour" - a century - or PBP makes no difference.

Other than using a "normal" saddle, and of course a higher quality wheel set with good tires - there is no such thing as a "century bike."

Listen to yourselves, dudes are riding 200k stages at the "tour" on "tour bikes" for God's sakes. Aw shucks - should they all be using "century race" bikes?

Either you ride a comfortable bike or you don't. Whether its the "tour" - a century - or PBP makes no difference.I don't think that's quite the discussion here. More like, "but is it fast?" and "Why?" I have a rain bike that I'd ride a century on any time, but I'd never take it on a 300k. Nor is it particularly fast.

But thinking some more on this subject, we can see that tires can save us say 20w, and wheels maybe 5w, and moving one extra pound up a 6% grade only costs 1w. But much more important is - does the package deliver our power to the road? An anecdote:

A buddy and I were out on a long group ride. He was a stronger rider than I, but I was staying with him and even pulling occasionally. I was on my carbon Trek, he on his steel Bianchi. We are the same size, even shoe size, so up at Snoqualmie Falls we traded bikes and rode the Tokul loop together. It's about a 5 mile loop with some nice rollers, little climbs, fast descents. No way could I keep up with him. I felt like I simply was not delivering the power to the asphalt. I worked like crazy, but the bike would not go. I could not hold his wheel. This was back when I was still using Conti 3000, the very worst tires on the list. So it wasn't that. Just wheels and frame. All the difference in the world.

I hate admitting that RC is right, but...

Most people ride race bikes for centuries. And obviously, pro racers ride race bikes for "centuries" as well. So there really is no reason not to ride a race bike if you are trying to go fast.

For that matter, if going as fast as possible in your century is the goal, then the time trial bike is the answer. Bearing in mind that aero bars were "invented" by Pete Penseyres for use in the RAAM (he was looking for more comfort) there really is no reason not to ride the TT bike when going fast is the goal and the rules do not disallow it.

Personally, when I want to race I enter races. Everything else is strictly for fun, and in those circumstances I ride whatever fancies my tickle. So let us know what you use to win your century ride. I hear the prize list is great. :p

I hear what SJ and RC are saying, but . . . There's a little century my group does once every year. Right in the middle, it has about 40 miles of steep chipseal rollers through just lovely backwoods country. Besides having fun on the couple of steep climbs in there, it makes all the difference if your bike accelerates quickly on the descents and you can rock it up the other side and over the top. It's the difference between a joy ride and a job of work. The rest of the ride is no big deal, just ordinary roads that any ordinary bike is fine on. But we ride this route for that bit in the middle. I never notice the chipseal. I do notice the joy of riding with the group as well as the joy of riding a bike that makes it fun. Those are the prizes and they are great. Do we have a tendency to lose track of the joy of kinetics? It's not just about the plodding, be it fast or slow.

It's not just about the plodding, be it fast or slow.


i don't think anyone who doesn't ride the latest and greatest and lightest and slickest and with the lowest aerodynamic profile and Crr and dimples and and blah blah blah just 'plods' along. if there isn't much climbing folks should really consider a bent, nay, a fully faired one at that.... ;)

the point is there is a continuum from cargo bike>utility bike>cruiser>commuter bike>touring>recreational>sport>club>racing>pro racing>tri>time trial>human powered world record attempt.

most folks will find a blur in there based on what roads they ride, what terrain, their fitness, luggage, length of event, etc. etc. etc.

for you, your low Crr tires and go fast wheels and super accelerating bike are the ticket. but i wouldn't much want to ride 23's - they really look silly with my fenders and perform poorly on the mixed terrain metrics, centuries, and 200ks that are a favorite riding type of mine...

on the other end is this:

http://www.picpile.net/ims/pic_264UD99M/23418.jpg


it belongs to a pbp, bmb 78 hours, shenandoah 1200k (in brutal weather) (and numerous other events) finisher.... not a 'fast century bike' like being described here, but apparently set up for the task at hand, per the riders needs.

the point is there is a continuum from cargo bike>utility bike>cruiser>commuter bike>touring>recreational>sport>club>racing>pro racing>tri>time trial>human powered world record attempts.

That's why I started this thread. I was interested to know where on this continuum does the century rider select a bike?

I could see how a time trial bike would be provide added speed. However like most century riders, I would not want to use a single purpose bike. Under less than ideal conditions, the TT bike would be very problematic to use.

My opinion at this point is that a steel or titanium sports road bike that takes tires larger than 700 x 24 and will accept fenders is close to the ideal century bike. The bike could be moderately light at about 20 lbs and feature strong high performance wheels would comfortable without any unneeded aerodynamic penalty. The Salsa Pistola looks good and many of the bikes from Gunnar, Soma, or any of the Titanium frame builders would be very acceptable.

Cheers,

Michael

My opinion at this point is that a steel or titanium sports road bike that takes tires larger than 700 x 24 and will accept fenders is close to the ideal century bike. The bike could be moderately light at about 20 lbs and feature strong high performance wheels would comfortable without any unneeded aerodynamic penalty.

you'll need to look at long reach brakes for 25s or 28s and full fenders. you can go wider if you pull the fenders.

I was interested to know where on this continuum does the century rider select a bike?

It's an unanswerable question. For the folks who are solely interested in finishing time, the TT bike makes sense. I've seen them used. And for the folks who couldn't care less, there are the bikes like the one Bmike posted.

If forced at gunpoint to answer the question, I would say "whichever one makes the rider happy".

I ride 5-10 centuries/year on a 1970 Lygie, 1980 Raleigh Pro and a 2006 Serrota Fierte. Lygie is slowest but old, long wheel base steel and 28 Panaracer tires makes it most comfy diamond frame. Easyracer Goldrush is LB catagory (lazy boy). Raleigh with 23c tires beats me up most and Fierte w 23c tires middle. Riding 100+ miles on sequencial days, my preference'd be my LWB recumbent, Lygie then Fierte.

Barrett, I noticed in your OP you considered looking at the Jamis Eclipse. I love mine and have ridden it in 600 km brevets. This year I am doing a century a month. I have a 2005 model. I think the 2009 is quite different. The Salsa is intriuging, but if I were you I would consider a Waterford too. All these brands can be found at a bike shop in Carpentersville on Main Street. Great proprietor. Enjoy the hunt!

BlueJay66

My fast bike is a Lynskey Ti frame, Easton EC90 fork, seatpost and bars, Ritchie stem, Dura-ace group. What makes it fast, for me, is the wheels -- Rolf Prima Elan Aero. The Rolf's weigh in around 1250 grams for the set. Lower rotating weight really makes a difference. I run 23's on this bike and it weighs in at 18.10 pounds -- including seat wedge full of tools and spare tubes and frame pump (everything but water needed to ride); Speedplay X1 pedals. It would be even faster with fast tires -- I'm riding on Specialized Armadillo Elite's -- I found that fast riding gets very slow with flats and I basically stopped having flats with these tires.

There's a noticeable difference in speed when I switch to my "hummer" that I use for longer rides -- longer than 200k that is -- it's a litespeed Classic Ti frame, Ouzo Pro fork, Easton EC90 seatpost and bars, rear frame rack, Dura-ace group, but much heavier wheels. I use the same tires for rando rides, but 25's. I'm considering switching to 28's, but it becomes a pain getting the tires past the brake calipers. I have clearance for even wider than 28 but I'd have to use an allen wrench on the brake cables to get the wheels on and off :). The rando bike -- my hummer -- weighs in at 26 pounds or 35 pounds fully laden with Perpetuem, spares and water, ready to ride.


If I switched to the lightweight bike and simply stayed there, as others have noted, I would simply move to a new plateau. However, I ride both bikes and enjoy switching "down" in weight for "shorter" rides. I put that in quotations because many would not think of a 200k Permanent as a short ride. The lightweight bike is faster climbing and on the flat -- due to the overall weight and the rotating weight of the wheels. It's noticeable.

Do you have a picture of your Classic? I'm trying to set up a Litespeed Catalyst in the same way.

Regards,

RFC

But how much heavier?

I think if anything the cross geometry of the OP's bike might be holding him back on the road, and just getting a road bike will speed up overall riding. Gunnar is a good start, along with the other choices listed by the OP.

But I don't think it's all about the weight. I don't really do "fast centuries" but Jan Heine does fast 1200k's (fastest North American PBP finisher '07) on a 22 lb bike from the 70's.

If you're doing solo centuries aero wheels may help you speed up over long distance. Something like Williams (http://www.williamscycling.com/sys30x/sys30x.html) which aren't carbon so perhaps more durable for longer rides.

Jan devoted a substantial chunk of one of his issues of Bicycle Quarterly to discussing what makes for a faster long distance ride. I highly recommend finding and reading the Autumn 2006 edition (Volume 5, Number 1). All his findings are carefully researched and backed up. Tires have the greatest potential difference by a wide amount, and better tire choices aren't what a lot of people think. Narrow tires run at high pressure is not the formula for making an intelligent choice. Several articles in the issue explain it quite clearly and thoroughly. Aero position and aero rims are very close in being the #2 and #3 factors.

Anecdote time. Since building my Fuji up with Sun Cr-18's on old Sunshine Pro Am hubs and Grand Bois 26mm tires about 3 weeks ago, I am finding I out-coast everyone on club rides (and no, I am not the heaviest in the group). I am having to hit the brakes repeatedly on even very gradual downhills to avoid running into the ride leader - regardless of the wind direction. I have been keeping pace even after we reach the flats and my ride companions have been pedaling for 50 meters. Some of it is the hubs, but I believe the greater part by far is the tires.

If you have rims/geometry that will accommodate a true 26 or 28mm tire, you really should consider giving these things a try. At the very least, lay hands on that issue and give it a read.

Your post is as silly as the rest - carry on.... and inaccurate to boot.

Your post is as silly as the rest - carry on.... and inaccurate to boot.

How so?

Perhaps when I wrote: Narrow tires run at high pressure is not the formula for making an intelligent choice. I did not state what was found as clearly as I could have. Let me elaborate.

There are fast tires that are narrow, and which run best at high pressure. There are tires of the same width which run like "dogs", regardless of what pressure they are run at. There are wider tires which run as fast as the fastest narrow tires, and at lower pressure - which tends to make them more comfortable. There are also wider tires that are every bit as much "dogs" as the slow skinny tires. The factors which make tires fast (in real world tests I might add), clearly are things other than width and tire pressure. The old adage that narrow tires have less rolling resistance is simply not true. The adage that higher pressure tires have lower rolling resistance is not true either. However, when all is said and done, the best tire for you might be one that is narrow, and which runs at high pressure. They just aren't the best tires for you because they are skinny and high pressure. They are the best tires for you because they are well designed and made tires that have low rolling resistance.