Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - "Distance" or "Comfortable" geometry from Race Bike: or Dedicated LD bike?

I ride a lot of centuries and occasional doubles with some pretty fast riders (cruising speeds on flats are usually well above 20 mph and are often around 25 at times). My long rides are often still hammer fests, so I still have to have a fast bike even if it also has to be comfortable.

I don't have a dedicated distance bike so I usually just use my aluminum TCR0 (full on race bike) with a few extra headset spacers, double wrapped bars, 25c tires and a Selle Italia Pro-link Gel Flow saddle. This set up seems to serve me very well giving me comfort and speed at the same time and the TCR frame has been a hard one to give up for me. . I actually have a great chance to buy a Specialized Tarmac SL frame for little $ but am thinking that might be a little too fragile for a good double-century-in-the-middle-of-nowhere bike.

I dream of dedicated "comfort" or "distance" bikes like the Independent Fab. Club Racer, Gunnar Sport, or Salsa Pistola. But I am not really sure I will see any difference in comfort and am afraid that I might actually see a decrease in stiffness, speed, reaction time, etc.

When I look at "comfort" bikes, the biggest differences seem to usually be a shorter top tube and taller head tube. I can get the same result of both of those from a stem swap out.

So what am I missing? What are the guys who ride fast LD rides buying? I am more than receptive to an excuse to buy a new fast LD bike but I am just not sure that I can get anything with a more optimal mix than what I already have.

Who has fast LD bikes and what do you love about them relative to the option of "comfortizing" a racer.

From a post further down: This looks really sweet:
http://www.pearsoncycles.co.uk/product/3936/PEARSON_CARBON_AUDAX_PRO_2009

Well, my fast LD bike is a Softride :). But I have it set up for tri/TT so i don't use it for group rides or brevets. For those I use my old Vitus 979 aluminum - a racer that I've done nothing special to "comfortize".

I've never looked into the "distance" bike market although I do see quite a few from local builders (Dave Anderson, Chris Kvale, and I thought I saw a Bob Brown once) at the brevets.

I use my SL2 Tarmac as a long distance bike, my bike is comfortable to me, I never have any pain or issues from riding a racing bike. They're certainly tough bikes, not fragile. Stepping up to a carbon frame would probably be more comfortable than your current aluminum frame.

...When I look at "comfort" bikes, the biggest differences seem to usually be a shorter top tube and taller head tube. I can get the same result of both of those from a stem swap out.

So what am I missing?...

I use a Gunnar Sport which comes in at about 21.5 lb with fenders and Selle An-Atomica saddle. I think the main differences from bikes like the Tarmac and the Roubaix are in the chain stays which are 430mm versus say 415mm for the Roubaix or 405mm for the Tarmac and also in the seat and head tube angles which are more relaxed for the Sport. (You can also use wider tires and fenders.) This gives the Sport a smoother ride with more stable--some would say less responive (but nevertheless precise)--steering.

However, in my club, many of the fastest long distance riders are using something like the Spec. Tarmak or Orbea Orca.

What is a fast century?

From a post further down: This looks really sweet:
http://www.pearsoncycles.co.uk/product/3936/PEARSON_CARBON_AUDAX_PRO_2009
Agreed, what a great bike...wonder if I can get it in a frame/only option.


I use my SL2 Tarmac as a long distance bike, my bike is comfortable to me, I never have any pain or issues from riding a racing bike. They're certainly tough bikes, not fragile. Stepping up to a carbon frame would probably be more comfortable than your current aluminum frame.
Good to know...my main fear here is that I have seen two of my buddie's carbon bikes destroyed in wrecks that left other bikes just fine. I sure love the tarmac; just don't know if I want to be bumping into another bike 100 miles out on it.


I use a Gunnar Sport which comes in at about 21.5 lb with fenders and Selle An-Atomica saddle. I think the main differences from bikes like the Tarmac and the Roubaix are in the chain stays which are 430mm versus say 415mm for the Roubaix or 405mm for the Tarmac and also in the seat and head tube angles which are more relaxed for the Sport. (You can also use wider tires and fenders.) This gives the Sport a smoother ride with more stable--some would say less responive (but nevertheless precise)--steering.

However, in my club, many of the fastest long distance riders are using something like the Spec. Tarmak or Orbea Orca.
Dang, those are full on race bikes, for sure. Does the more relaxed geometry translate to slower speeds at all, or is it more precision handling? Would you consider your sport to be a "fast" bike? Do you love it? What fork do you have on it? I love the light weight of all carbon forks, but that straight legged gunnar fork looks so sweet!


What is a fast century?
Everyone has their own goals, but I am GOING to break 5 hours or die trying :). My fastest is 5:14. (I Count break time: imo, the breaks are part of the sport; if I can't manage them, I suck at part of the sport :) ) I always end up dancing at the rest stops trying to get everyone back on the road. I could manage breaks much better alone but I would also ride much slower....a difficult trade-off.

From a post further down: This looks really sweet:
http://www.pearsoncycles.co.uk/product/3936/PEARSON_CARBON_AUDAX_PRO_2009

Dunno 'bout the smaller sizes, but the geometry on the 60cm looks anything but sweet: the top tube is about 5cm (yes, CENTImeters) too short, and the seat angle about 2 deg too steep for me, and I'm a pretty average-proportioned tall guy.

SP
Bend, OR

I'm wrestling with this issue for my next bike. I want to be able to use a handlebar bag and fenders. I don't think I'll worry too much about raising the head tube or shortening the top tube. You can always do that with a stem.

...Does the more relaxed geometry translate to slower speeds at all, or is it more precision handling? Would you consider your sport to be a "fast" bike? Do you love it? What fork do you have on it? I love the light weight of all carbon forks, but that straight legged gunnar fork looks so sweet!...

I don't know if relaxed geometry is inherently slower or not. The Gunnar Sport is pretty fast...It largely depends on the engine and I confess I am not a fast rider. I have the Steel Gunnar fork but I think you save a pound and a few dollars if you get the carbon fork.

My first impression of the bike was that it steered with precision and complete control like no other bike I had ever been on. I don't know if this is unique to the steel fork or is a larger property of the frame.

I love the bike. It comes as a (customized) frame so you set up the paint and decals, attachment points, fit and componentry just the way you want it. Mine also has the S&S couplers so it can be disassembled, put in a suitcase and checked on an airline.

It never beats me up. After 150 miles I may be tired but never sore. I originally had DT Swiss R1.1 32-spoke wheels on it but decided to get 36-spoke Velocity Aeroheat rims with Ultegra hubs for training. Surprisingly, these are softer riding and mostly what I use. The DT Swiss are now on the Roubaix.

I got a steel bike for the same reasons you stated in your original post: I was paranoid about damaging my CF Roubaix out in the middle of nowhere. I already had a US$500 repair job done by Calfee on the top when it was pushed a little too hard against a post...The Gunnar wouldn't have been damaged. The Roubaix also had less possibilities for attachments. Still, most (really almost all) of the fastest LD riders I know ride fast CF road bikes with some Ti riders.

I think you are looking at this wrong. You can be comfortable for long distances on any bike that fits you. Look at what you want to do on the bike and choose the bike that fit's that mold. If you are going to be carrying a lot of stuff then relaxed geometry is for you. If you want fenders make sure there is room for them. If you want light, fast with crisper handling then a bike with racier geometry is what you want. It's as simple and difficult as that.

The bike can assist you in being fast but ultimately it's the engine that makes the difference.

If you want light with crisper handling then a bike with racier geometry is what you want.
I would think that "crisper" handling, in itself, provides no advantage for long distance riding. It might be that a bike that tracks a bit straighter might make things a bit easier if one is tired.

Race bikes already have stable handling. Stage racers don't want something that tires them out. You want something that you can drop into a turn when tired, and it will neither understeer nor oversteer. I see Cervelos under the fast crowd around here. I think the RS model by the look of the tubes. Want!

Dunno 'bout the smaller sizes, but the geometry on the 60cm looks anything but sweet: the top tube is about 5cm (yes, CENTImeters) too short, and the seat angle about 2 deg too steep for me, and I'm a pretty average-proportioned tall guy.

SP
Bend, OR

The 58 has a virtual toptube of 575 which should be quite OK for most people around 6 feet. Angles are parallell 73 which also should be fine.

I would think that "crisper" handling, in itself, provides no advantage for long distance riding. It might be that a bike that tracks a bit straighter might make things a bit easier if one is tired.

If you are so tired that you can't handle your bike it's time to get off and get some rest...since when did race geometry bikes stop tracking straight? Mines not that old and I can ride it with no hands. Even at the end of a 1200k!

My thought is that if you are doing 5:15 centuries in a group, then why change the bike? Find a faster group, a 5:00 century group.:p

I myself don't draft on centuries and have done several at 5:45 solo. If I wanted a 5:00 century, I'd suck wheel like crazy but it's not my style. I like my claims to be my own efforts!:D

I use descent stuff, nothing highend with Heavy Deep V rims. I'm pretty sure that if I used a $10,000 bike, my centuries wouldn't automatically become 5 hour centuries!:D

If you are so tired that you can't handle your bike it's time to get off and get some rest
I said nothing about "can't handle".


...since when did race geometry bikes stop tracking straight?
I didn't say this either. Why do people put words in other people's mouths? It doesn't appear you understand what "tracking" is. Certainly, all bicycles can go straight (but I wasn't talking about that).


Mines not that old and I can ride it with no hands. Even at the end of a 1200k!
Old? Who was talking about old? Why is it better to have use a bicycle that is harder to ride no-handed?

If manueverability or showing off your mad no-handed skillz is important, maybe you should use a unicycle!

You throw a vague comment like this out there and what do you expect????? Let's try again. :)


I would think that "crisper" handling, in itself, provides no advantage for long distance riding. You are implying that a lax geometry bike does? Depending on how you plan to use the bike it sure does have an advantage. If you are out there carrying a load around then No it doesn't.


It might be that a bike that tracks a bit straighter... Lax geometry bikes don't "track" any straighter than a race geometry bike. The only thing the geometry difference does is change the ease(or difficulty) required to initiate a turn. It has nothing to do with the bikes tracking.


...might make things a bit easier if one is tired.
Like I said before, if you are so tired that you can't handle your bike (or that handling your bike is an issue) you need to get off the bike!

You say you didn't say this and you didn't say that, maybe you should explain what you did say...

The only thing the geometry difference does is change the ease (or difficulty) required to initiate a turn.
This is "tracking".


Like I said before, if you are so tired that you can't handle your bike (or that handling your bike is an issue) you need to get off the bike!
Again, I said nothing like this.

didn't we just cover this? or do we cover it every other week?

Who has fast LD bikes and what do you love about them relative to the option of "comfortizing" a racer.

a bike isn't fast.
a bike and rider combination can be fast, pending a whole host of variables.


folks always call my custom IF my 'go fast' bike...
but compared to most folks on this forum, its my 'go moderately paced to finish the ride' bike. :thumb:

I am looking at the Masi Special Commuter frame as it has longer chainstays which, whether you want to argue about it or not, do make the bike track straighter. This frame also has provisions for racks and the longer reach brakes so a larger tire can be used, say up to 32mm with fender.
The Salsa Casseroll has similar characteristics but I am trying to get one or the other on a budget, I beleive the Masi frame can be had for less.
I understand the Surly Pacer has less tire clearance and I would prefer horizontal dropouts. First things first though I have to do some rehab on my knee.

didn't we just cover this? or do we cover it every other week?

Great! Do you have any links or suggested search terms from those threads you remember? I am assuming your comment was meant to be helpful?

Remember that this forum is still building its readership (myself included). I don't think it is realistic to expect that everyone here knows what was discussed last week or every week. Moreover, I personally think there is a lot of value in re-hashing topics for more up to date information or different insights. If a given topic bores me, I simply don't participate. :)

I know that when I do a search for a given topic, I love to see lots of relevant threads pertaining to it. So, for me the discussions we have here have probably even more archive value than day-to-day value. To that end, the more the better, imo.

The 58 has a virtual toptube of 575 which should be quite OK for most people around 6 feet. Angles are parallell 73 which also should be fine.

That geometry sounds very similar to the Lynskey Cooper (M). Bobby, can you explain why you think this is a bad set up for you?

Great! Do you have any links or suggested search terms from those threads you remember? I am assuming your comment was meant to be helpful?

Remember that this forum is still building its readership (myself included). I don't think it is realistic to expect that everyone here knows what was discussed last week or every week. Moreover, I personally think there is a lot of value in re-hashing topics for more up to date information or different insights. If a given topic bores me, I simply don't participate. :)

I know that when I do a search for a given topic, I love to see lots of relevant threads pertaining to it. So, for me the discussions we have here have probably even more archive value than day-to-day value. To that end, the more the better, imo.

Sure, but the LD forum isn't all that old - several recent threads should still be within the first 20 - 30 posts. And the same 4 topics will get reposted about 3 times a month - go fast bikes and 'comfort', carbon or steel (or ti, or bamboo), how to climb faster, and whether or not a 45 mile ride is 'long distance'. :thumb:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=577456

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=569382

Sure, but the LD forum isn't all that old - several recent threads should still be within the first 20 - 30 posts. And the same 4 topics will get reposted about 3 times a month - go fast bikes and 'comfort', carbon or steel (or ti, or bamboo), how to climb faster, and whether or not a 45 mile ride is 'long distance'. :thumb:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=577456

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=569382

Great links. Thanks BMike!.....
Agreed that a reader should read the first couple of pages of titles and usually even search before posting....

If one want's to try something over to the other side one can't get much more comforatable than a recumbent. At the age of 62 I did my first Long Distance attempt (longer than a century) on a budget LowRacer. Was not out to set any speed records but completed the 830 miles within the 4 days required. I went unsupported but did stay in motels 3 nites. Anyway I was suprised that at end of ride I had no aches or pains whatsoever. Was pretty tired but otherwise felt great.

I did manage one 420 mile segment in 34 hours which only included a few laydown rests along the road and some stops to eat at restaurants and convenience stores.

http://www.gutcheck212.com/2009-participants/

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n314/fluffypeanutcat/gutcheck/Gettysburg1.jpg
http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n314/fluffypeanutcat/gutcheck/Wyomingborder1.jpg

a bike isn't fast.
a bike and rider combination can be fast, pending a whole host of variables.

2007 PBP, Jan Heine rode a 1973 Alex Singer to a sub-50hr finish. It's definitely not about having the lightest, newest, fastest equipment.

Although, a few guys from the Seattle Randos were saying that carbon fiber is much more prevalent in the European rando groups than it is here in the States; with many people asking the Yanks, "Why do you guys all ride those heavy steel bikes?"

That geometry sounds very similar to the Lynskey Cooper (M). Bobby, can you explain why you think this is a bad set up for you?

Over the years, I've gravitated toward more and more laid-back seat angles and long top tubes. If I were to design my own LD frame today, it'd have a seat angle of around 71 degrees, and top tube of at least 61 cm (that's with a 63cm c-c seat tube). I find that a more forward position puts more stress on my knees, limits my power output, and just plain feels awkward. Funny thing is, most of the frame-fit formulas I've tried put me on a 74 degree seat angle, based strictly on femur length. Just goes to show ya, you need to look at the whole picture, not just one element.

SP

2007 PBP, Jan Heine rode a 1973 Alex Singer to a sub-50hr finish. It's definitely not about having the lightest, newest, fastest equipment.

Although, a few guys from the Seattle Randos were saying that carbon fiber is much more prevalent in the European rando groups than it is here in the States; with many people asking the Yanks, "Why do you guys all ride those heavy steel bikes?"

This is exactly what I've been trying to say, the bike isn't as important as your fit on that bike!
Don't be too fooled by Jan's bike it wasn't that heavy. I believe he said it was 24 lbs (unloaded) for PBP. My bike was 27lb loaded so we weren't too far apart! Jan is a superior athlete as well. He's going to go fast no matter what he's on.

At PBP it was pretty easy to tell where in Europe they were from by looking at their bike (in general terms!). Just like here in the states. Most of the riders from areas with lots of bad weather like England/Scotland and the Netherlands were on steel bikes with lots of bags to carry gear and riders from warm areas like Italy and Spain were on carbon bikes and carried hardly anything!

My thought is that if you are doing 5:15 centuries in a group, then why change the bike? Find a faster group, a 5:00 century group.:p

I myself don't draft on centuries and have done several at 5:45 solo. If I wanted a 5:00 century, I'd suck wheel like crazy but it's not my style. I like my claims to be my own efforts!:D

I use descent stuff, nothing highend with Heavy Deep V rims. I'm pretty sure that if I used a $10,000 bike, my centuries wouldn't automatically become 5 hour centuries!:D

Solo is the only real test.

If one want's to try something over to the other side one can't get much more comforatable than a recumbent. At the age of 62 I did my first Long Distance attempt (longer than a century) on a budget LowRacer. Was not out to set any speed records but completed the 830 miles within the 4 days required. I went unsupported but did stay in motels 3 nites. Anyway I was suprised that at end of ride I had no aches or pains whatsoever. Was pretty tired but otherwise felt great.

I did manage one 420 mile segment in 34 hours which only included a few laydown rests along the road and some stops to eat at restaurants and convenience stores.

http://www.gutcheck212.com/2009-participants/

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n314/fluffypeanutcat/gutcheck/Gettysburg1.jpg
http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n314/fluffypeanutcat/gutcheck/Wyomingborder1.jpg

No small feat!

This has been a great thread and I have learned a lot. I feel a lot better about just relaxing and enjoying riding my "fast" bike for LD. It is clear that plenty of folks are doing just that and have no problems with it. Since I ride mostly in fair weather and carry very little, I see no reason why not to enjoy the race bike geometry that I know well and am comfortable on.

In fact, I am going to test ride the tarmac Sl. The more I think about it, the more I realize that I already have a great frame in my TCR so to get another steel frame that does not allow for any bigger tires does not really add any value.

Bottom line, I will continue to ride my racer and not worry about it. if I get another bike, it will be race geometry with room for bigger tires or a no-holds-barred racer.

So what am I missing?Probably not much - if your only spec being considered is actual fit and "comfort."

For the status of "real" LD bikes, thinking requires a few more variables - like whether you want the enough frame length for rack space. How your lights attach, innate frame/steering qualities, you know other stuff besides, comfort.......

This has been a great thread and I have learned a lot. I feel a lot better about just relaxing and enjoying riding my "fast" bike for LD. It is clear that plenty of folks are doing just that and have no problems with it. Since I ride mostly in fair weather and carry very little, I see no reason why not to enjoy the race bike geometry that I know well and am comfortable on.

In fact, I am going to test ride the tarmac Sl. The more I think about it, the more I realize that I already have a great frame in my TCR so to get another steel frame that does not allow for any bigger tires does not really add any value.

Bottom line, I will continue to ride my racer and not worry about it. if I get another bike, it will be race geometry with room for bigger tires or a no-holds-barred racer.

Newbie to this forum.
I've done lots of long stuff on various race-style bikes. Past few years I have been having fun by buying and riding whatever catches my eye off Ebay...Keep a couple of bikes built at any one time, re-selling when another one catches my eye or I get one that is not especially suited to my bod or my usage. I do about 200m/wk. most of the year and race in Masters events. I have done some Epics, too, like the LOTOJA (208mi.) the Everest Challenge and some 12hr time trials like on this page
http://www.raceacrossoregon.com/
A couple of bikes stand out (from the 15 or so high-enders I've ridden in the past few years) as good long distance bikes. I had a Ridley Damocles recently that was very nice on long rides. Pretty standard "Euro" frame angles and a nice durable compromise..not super light but still a race bike. Ridleys come sized quite large...I'm about 6'1" and my M Ridley fit well. I currently have Ridley Noah that is my time trial ride for short (< 40k) TTs, but with it's 'seat mast' frame, it is not that forgiving on long rides. My SO rides a Ridley Excaliber that I've tried some. Nice, but I find the sound of it is not relaxing for my ears. Good deals to be had on these frames, BTW.

My current ride is really outstanding for exactly what you're talking about. Our club racing team is on these this season and everyone comments on what a comfortable and able Stage Race frame the CX-1 Colnago is. I like the fact that these are very durable. Again, not a featherweight frame (my race bike weighs about 16.5lbs ready to ride with a Selle Italia Flite saddle) I've had some really light frames (Scott CR-1, Look 585, etc) which were ok on long rides, but pretty fragile and fussy to work on. The CX-1 has alloy inserts in the places that need em..Seat tube, headtube, BB. You do not absolutely need a torque wrench to keep from breaking bits off this one if you must make an adjustment away from your shop. A very comfortable ride..Pretty tall headtube and again, traditional 'Euro' frame angles. Best all around frame I've found so far.

http://internationalbike.com/page.cfm?pageID=633

The competators I see at Ultra races...a few have special "Long Distance" customs but more are riding normal off the shelf bikes. Of course, fit is the most important thing. After fit, I look now for 'ease of use'. By that I mean a bike that never requires any 'special attention' from me when I am away at a stage race or traveling or bumping elbows in a Criterium..A bike that 'dissapears' and leaves me free to concentrate my attention on the ride.

Don Hanson

Thanks for the good advice Don. I will take another look at that CX-1.

You are playing in some pretty impressive venues. I have not done LOTOJA but have ridden a good portion of that route on a training ride out of Logan to Montpilier and back (165 miles). That day was a puker to be sure. What a great climb Strawberry Pass is!

For some crazy reason, I can't bring myself to pony up the $ for LOTOJA when I know that most of the support there is voluntarily provided by the community and the promoter is pocketing most of that cash (I may be wrong: hope so, in fact). I just can't stomach paying almost $200 for a self-supported 200 mile race.

This is exactly what I've been trying to say, the bike isn't as important as your fit on that bike!
Don't be too fooled by Jan's bike it wasn't that heavy. I believe he said it was 24 lbs (unloaded) for PBP. My bike was 27lb loaded so we weren't too far apart! Jan is a superior athlete as well. He's going to go fast no matter what he's on.

At PBP it was pretty easy to tell where in Europe they were from by looking at their bike (in general terms!). Just like here in the states. Most of the riders from areas with lots of bad weather like England/Scotland and the Netherlands were on steel bikes with lots of bags to carry gear and riders from warm areas like Italy and Spain were on carbon bikes and carried hardly anything!

With the Italians and Spanish being more fashionable than the British, I thought not carrying much was a style-conscious decision. :)