Bikes-N-Drums

Even though I am interested in a new road bike I shall spare everyone the tired "which bike should I get?" threads. After all, mostly these companies all seem to put the same decorations on the same cookies and put their own brand name on it. I'll find the best fitting machine ultimately.

Manufacturers seem to have launched themselves a line of "relaxed geometry" road bikes and/or this principle is inherent to the tradename (Giant's OCR series comes to mind). I've heard a lot of rhetoric going around regarding the pros/cos of such bikes, standard geometry being "better" than the relaxed geometry or vice versa. Some of the stuff I hear floating around out there is "relaxed geometry is easier on your neck but will cost you speed", or "standard frames are better for tall people". Manufacturers claim the relaxed geometry allows a "more upright position for comfort" (basically). Although, the same companies make "comfort bikes" which are comfortable as long as your riding it to the end of the driveway to fetch the mail. .... So, relaxed geometry: a benefit? a hindrance? makes no difference at all? just a marketing scheme?

StanSeven

Search and you'll find a whole lot of discussion here on that subject. It really boils down to what kind of riding you plan on doing - a lot of easy paced riding including touring, or fast paced club rides and racing. Since you're looking at new bikes, try out and test ride differenet bikes with varying geometry and see how it affects you.

Patman1776

I have a 2005 Trek Pilot 5.2 which has the compact ("Relaxed Geometry") of which you're speaking. Componentry, frame (OCLV 120 Carbon), and overall weight is almost identical to the Madone 5.2 which is the more conventional geometry. For me, the Pilot's geometry is easier on my lower back and neck without compromising much speed (I rode a sub-5 hour 20+ mph Century on it last year). I swapped out the stock 25c tires for 23c and flip the stem for racing. Handling-wise, the geometry of the Pilot is fine for road racing. For Crits, a more conventional geomtry frame would be best. Overall, I feel I get the best of both worlds with the Pilot's "Relaxed Geometry". The Roubaix and OCR bikes are a bit more "Relaxed", which is why I chose the Pilot. For reference, I'm 43 yrs old, 6'1", 180 lbs, and ride a 58cm frame. Hope this info helps.

Dad: 2005 Trek Pilot 5.2, 2005 Trek 7500FX Commuter
Mom: 2006 Trek 7.5FX
Son1: Specialized FUSE IV BMX
Son2: Gary Fisher Gamma Ray 16" w/Trng Wheels
Daughter: Trek 12" Pink Bike w/Trng Wheels

HAMMER MAN

believe it depends on what the rider/purchaser is looking for.
Europeon geometry is more relaxed more along the lines of long distance road racing instead of short races/critriums bikes.
American Mfgs. on what I have read base their geometry on short distance races like crits,

CyLowe97

Can someone define "Relaxed Geometry?" What exactly does it entail regarding seat post angle and top-tube length? Does "Relaxed" mean less-steep?

Always hear and see the term, but never see it defined....

AnthonyG

Well you have asked THE right question. I can't say what THE right answer is though. To me the number one factor to relaxed geometry is a slacker seat tube angle, ie 72º instead of 74º but that's not the whole story either and some of the so called "relaxed geometry bikes have steeper seat tube angles anyway, paticuarly in the small frame sizes which have steep seat tube angles regardless. Slacker head tube angles along with forks with longer rake could be incluided. Taller steerer tubes, longer chain stays and shorter top tubes could all be incluided.

I'll take a stab in the dark here and say that anything that's considered "relaxed" should alow a rider to be positioned at KOPS or behind KOPS where as racing geometry would be KOPS or infront of KOPS but even this may not be correct.

Regards, Anthony

Bikes-N-Drums

Note the uppermost tube is parallel to the ground with standard road bikes:



Note the uppermost tube on this frame is pointing downwards ("relaxed"):

CyLowe97

I'm not sure this is it. This is just standard v compact frames. That does not change angles and effective top tube length....

botto 

that would be:

Bikes-N-Drums

Hmm. I guess I have misunderstood somehow. Bike lines such as Trek's Pilot and Giant's OCR are frequently advertised as having a relaxed geometry, yet don't seem "compact" in terms of size. Perhaps I am just confused on the terminology. So then what is the definition of "relaxed geometry"? Anyone?

shokhead

Longer WB,longer CS,taller HT,relaxed.

merlinextraligh

Bikes like the OCR, tend to set up with less drop between the seat and the handlebars, which is more comfortable for lots of people, but less aerodynamic. However, as Patman points out if you flip the stem and move some spacers from beneath the stem, you can increase the drop and get more aero. Of course to some degree that defeats the set up the manufacturer was going for in the first place. If going fast is the priority, get the racier verison (i.e. TCR v OCR, Madone v Pilot, ) If you're willing to sacrifice a small amount of speed for a little comfort then go the "relaxed route".

As it appears to be shaking out in the market place, very few racers are buying bikes like the ROubaix, but they are very popular amongst reasonably fast club/rec riders.

lotek 

Bikes-N-Drums,

For starters let me say "welcome back" been a while since you've been around.
Shokhead got it right, the relaxed geometry is more like a French radonneur bike
then say a full on racing bike. Don't confuse compact (slanting top tube for lower stand
over height) with relaxed geometry, a compact frame can be either.
Lemond Bicycles has some good discussion of it here:
https://www.lemondbikes.com/why_lemon...classics.shtml
and they also discuss sloping/compact design.
my thoughts on relaxed geometry is it's about time. Not everyone
(hell, everyone who is not racing for that matter) needs race geometry.

wagathon

I could show you two bikes allowing identical rider geometry although one is a "comfort" design and the other is in the classic tradition. The big difference is that the downward sloping top tube fit a larger number of riders with fewer frame sizes.

Bikes-N-Drums

Thanks! I hurt my back pretty badly a few years ago and had to stop riding. I'm feeling better and off the painkillers. I realized that my current road bike is old, expensive or impossible to upgrade - so time for a new one. Lo and behold, road bikes' shapes and features have changed.

Relaxed geometry/slanted tube.... better for the back/neck? Or doesn't really make a difference?

WheresWaldo

Marketing hyperbole! Again the confusion over geometry, the sloping top tube is a characteristic of compact frame design, not "comfort." The "comfort" design is just a rehash of the frame geometry that used to be called "touring." It is about angles, fork offset, head tube length, chainstay length. It is not about whether the top tube slopes or is parallel to the ground. It can have a traditional shape, or a sloping top tube "compact" shape. Compact design came out of manufaturing's desire to reduce inventory, why produce and stock bikes in 10 sizes when you can "fit" them all in S,M,L,XL!

lotek 

yah, I think relaxed geometry really does make a difference. I know alot
of the radonneur (touring) bikes have a more stretched/relaxed geometry and
they are designed for long rides (100miles or more), not a comfort bike (and yah
they are not comfortable for serious riding).
my suggestion is LBS (maybe the bicycle link) and talk to the fitter (serotta shop)
about geometry after back injury.
My other suggestion is Yoga for stretching muscles for both on and off bike.
Check the classic and vintage forum re old bike, we love that kind of stuff
there.

marty

johnny99

Compact geometry (sloped top tube) is *not* relaxed geometry. Many aggressive racing bikes have compact geometry, especially in the smaller sizes.

Traditionally, relaxed geometry meant a slacker seat tube angle so your seat is farther back. European touring bikes (and stage racing bikes) have used this design for decades.

Lately, several brands have been selling bikes with a taller head tube, apparently because the classic relaxed geometry wasn't relaxed enough. The Giant OCR, Trek Pilot, Specialized Roubaix, etc. use the taller head tube to give you a more upright riding position. Some of these also have a shorter top tube to reduce your reach even more.

Bikes-N-Drums

Thank you for clearing up the misunderstandings!

Bikes-N-Drums

Thank you for clearing up the misunderstandings!

bbattle

Madone:
54cm head tube angle: 73 deg seat tube angle: 74 deg effective top tube 54.6 cm




Pilot:
54cm head tube angle: 72.4 deg seat tube angle: 73.8 effective top tube 54.5 cm



Giant TCR (T-Mobile edition) compact road frame

small frame head tube angle: 72 deg seat tube angle 73.5 deg eff. top tube 53.3 cm


Giant Sport OCR

Small frame head tube angle 72 deg seat tube angle: 74 deg eff. top tube 53.1



Torelli Nitro Express

54cm frame head tube angle: 73 deg seat tube angle: 74.5 deg eff. top tube 54.5 cm

marqueemoon

Fit, frame design, and geometry are separate concepts. A taller head tube is a frame design feature. A steeper head angle is geometry. What kind of stem you choose is a matter of fit. You should start with the correct size frame, find the geometry that gives you the handling you want, and finally fine tune the fit of the bike so it helps you get the most out of riding. Here are two extreme examples.

This is Italian sprinter Allesandro Petacchi's bike from 2004. Notice the huge drop from the saddle to the bars. When in the drops his back is flat for better aerodynamics and power transfer. He's also running a very long stem which enables him to fit on a smaller frame (easier to flick the bike around when sprinting).



This is a Heron Randonneur - designed for comfortable distance riding. Note the shorter stem, fork with more rake, and bars higher than the saddle.



These bikes serve very different purposes and are designed and set up accordingly. The Heron will track straighter without correction, but if you're racing in a tight pack with riders constantly jockeying for position, this may not be a good thing. And, or course if you have back issues, a setup like Petacchi's might be fast, but it's going to be torture after a few miles.

jackb

Does the frame geometry matter all that much? Can you make adjustments in seat and handlebar position to compensate for differences in geometry. After all, there is not a whole lot of difference between a 72 and a 74 degree angle.

WheresWaldo

Frame geometry is what it is, and cannot be changed by changing components. Frame fit can be changed by use of components. They are too very different concepts. And yes, frame geometry does matter. As an example look back a few years at Cannondale, before the CAAD frames, they had a Crit bike whose geometry made for a very jittery feeling bike, no amount of component changes could tame her. Look at the old Trek 520 and compare it's geometry to the CDale Crit, very relaxed and no amount of component changes could make her more lively. But component selection in either bike would make that bike a perfect physical fit for a rider, even if they could not handle the twitchiness of the Cdale or the go to sleep while riding feeling of the Trek.

marqueemoon

A fork with a different rake will definitely change the effective geometry, and some people consider a fork a "component" (I don't).