C_Heath

I wouldnt own one unless it was nude finish, the Ti look is awesome.

slvoid

Arrggg... I told you! I could've saved you so much grief and anguish. Admit it, you haven't been able to sleep for weeks!
Congrats, welcome to the club!

14max

I wish I'd done it sooner, honestly. I had the Firenze contingency build in the back of my head for a while...

fmw

I havent tried the new Firenze with the compact geometry. I'd be interested in your experience with it. I find the Firenze just a tiny bit "touchy and twitchy" for my taste but it sure is a comfortable ride. I have a preference for the geometry of the classic steel frames. I don't know what you call it but they feel more like a steady road sedan than a sports car. The Firenze feels more like a sports car.

Don't mistake me, I ride my Firenze more than any of my other bikes. It is an excellent road bike.

Patriot

I have to say, I have also truly fallen in love with my new Ti bike. This USA made TST frame ROCKS!!! It performs beatifully, and is such a strong ride. Very stiff, when you put the hammer down, yet unbelievably comfortable to ride. I honestly think I way prefer riding this one next time I do the STP. It is the kind of roadbike you can ride all day, and ride fast.

slvoid

That stem/handlebar looks like a whale tail. I love it!

Patriot

^^^ There is no substitute.

14max

Patriot, I love that bike. The stack height still freaks me out. The stack on my Firenze will be 1/2 that. Still, I think your rig has so much personality. Can't beat that for Ti...

slvoid

Maybe it's me but I find the ride of m frienze to be extremely plush and overall "good enough" but when I start sprinting, when I get to around 35-37 mph, things start to get a bit "touchy and twitchy", I'm not sure what it is. Could be either the handle bars, bottom bracket, or my cheap wheels. But at lower speeds, it's a great ride if you're not cranking it. It doesn't climb as well as it should (due to the wheels) but that's ok.

14max

What wheelset and components are you running?

Crash Test

I've been riding the 2006 Firenze model since March and like it. Just so everyone's on the same page, Litespeed changed the frame for 06 to be the same as the 05 & 06 Teramo. You can't compare the 05 Firenze with the 06 since the frame is totally different: round tubes & classic geometry in 05 and shaped tubes with slightly compact geometry for 06.

In 06 the Teramo and Firenze are different only in the component level with the Firenze being generally Ultegra and the Teramo with some higher level components.

In response to those who said the Firenze was twitchy, was that for the 05 or 06? My 06 is very stable at all speeds.

A few impressions....
- very stable, as I said, with a comfortable but firm ride
- stock FSA wheels the weakest link and should be upgraded
- stock saddle is the fi'zi:k Aliante Sport Ti. I could never find a comfortable position and finally swapped mine for something better. I've only heard bad things about the sport version of the Aliante.
- compact double FD - love it
- stock tires are the Vittoria Rubino Pro Slicks, which I liked

Funny thing about the tires. For some reason my LBS changed my tires to Vittoria Rubino Pro TECH during a tune-up. Don't know why. But what happened is that the ride changed to something similar to an aluminum bike. After a few weeks I changed the tires again, this time to Michelin Prorace2 and the ride returned to the comfortable ride one expects with Ti. The moral of the story is that the tires can affect the ride as mcuh as the frame, so be careful.

fmw

Mine is an '05. I don't mean it isn't stable. It is. I mean it has "twitchy" handling characteristics that are common to almost all currently made road bikes - shorter chain stays, more radical fork rake etc. I'm not comparing it to other current bikes. I'm comparing it to the older classic steel frames that guide themselves down the road. An example is my Basso Gap which rides better and handles with more grace than anything made today that I've ever tested. I'd like to see the makers make road bikes with that kind of geometry again. It's just a personal thing. It isn't a negative comment about current cycling fashions.

ViperZ

As much as I love my Tuscany and the way it handles and feels, I actually think I like my Trek 5000 slightly more because it does handle faster and "twitchier". It's a lot shorter in wheel base and has a lot of toe/clip over lap, however I really like that in a bike, as it feels quicker and snapper in directional changes, and in out of saddle romps. I always feel faster on the Trek, because of the smaller frame and tighter geometry. Additionally, I think it actually rides smoother with less buzz than the Tuscany due to carbon's inherent dampening, with out feeling dead...

It's close, but they are different. I really noticed this on a certain stretch of road our club rides. Some of the other riders were complaining about the rough road buzz on their aluminum and steel bikes, but I barely felt it with the Trek. I then rode that road a week later with my Tuscany and sort of felt what they were talking about.... The Tuscany still felt smooth, however, not quite as dampened as the Trek felt.

Don't get me wrong, the Tuscany is smooth in response and handling, and is plenty fast enough, I just have always liked stiff Criterium style bikes with tight upright geometries. It's like a BMW M5 versus a BMW M3, both are fast however one feels sportier than the other because it's slightly smaller, more tossable thus more responsive.

killsoft

I'm with you. Does anyone make an off the rack Ti frame with more of a classic geometry? Something with chainstays around 42cm and a ~72 degree head angle?

KS

iansir

Habanero? https://www.habcycles.com/road.html

Not quite but closer.

fmw

I submit that bikes aren't fast. Cyclists are fast. If you have the same gearing and about the same weight on two bikes with slightly different geometry, they will perform speed wise about the same. The differences will be apparent in other characteristics. Because one bike takes a corner smoothly and with grace while another one takes it with clenched fists, doesn't make the speed of taking the corner any different. That's determined by the clearance of the pedals from the pavement, the power transmitted to the pedals, the pull of gravity etc. and those things are same regardless of the length of the chain stays.

I think the operative point you made is that your Trek feels faster. I doubt it actually is faster. I would bet you get the same performance from both if they are geared the same. The Litespeed might feel faster to another rider. I think current bike geometry has more to do with how it makes riders feel rather than how it actually performs. Computer aided design has replaced reports from a rider on a road. That is an opinion, by the way, not a statement of fact. I said I think.

The road feel is pretty subjective too, I think. On rough roads my steel bikes feel more comfortable and smoother to me than the Ti does or my CF bike did. It might be the more comfortable geometry. I don't know. Reality is that bike frames are all pretty much the same. The differences are subtle and trivial. They have to be so that the bikes will sell to the greatest number of people. They were all the about the same as each other 20 years ago too but they were a little different than they are now.

slvoid

The bar and stem's an ITM millenium oversized and I'm running mavic cosmos. A lot of people tell me it's the wheels that are noodling up when I start sprinting. I suppose it's also the BB. I'm no expert on frame design but I can definitely feel it flexing heavily underneath me when I lay it down during the final sprint of a race, but I don't race so that's ok.

14max

Depending on the size the Dean El Vado might work: https://www.racycles.com/sdrb/catalog...03_3810094.htm

Or an Indy Fab Club Racer in Ti: https://www.ifbikes.com/frames2/steelclubracer.shtml

ViperZ

As I stated, the Trek just feels faster because it's handling is more responsive and quicker. Additionally it also feels faster because I feel lower to the road, and places me in a deeper tuck. Then 3, 10km Time Trials have indicated that I am faster on the Trek, even with out aerobars (12:24, 12:17 vs 12:32). Both times I was faster on the Trek, both are geared 53/12 top, So while it maybe coincedental, and I can agree somewhat, I'm also building empirical data that shows it is a faster bike when I'm on it due to the frame, geometry, the color, what ever placebo as you are so indicating.


I beg to slightly differ, bike frames are the same in that they perform the same function, however there is a total difference in feel, be it due to material, geometry, component selection...etc. If there was no difference, how does your steel frame feel more comfortable or smoother to you than your CF or Ti bikes? Try riding an older Klein Quantum Pro or Cannondale R600 Aluminum bike and telling me you don't feel a difference, those bikes will allow you to take a corner tighter and deeper than any other bike around, but the stiff unyielding frame will rattle your fillings out on rough roads. Take an older Columbus SLX steel frame for a ride and tell me it doesn't seem to just soak up the road with the utmost of silkiness. Take a high tensile steel bike with stretch geometry out for a ride, you may find you do not like cycling so much, and cut the ride short, it certainly does not corner with the same speed (I have one and it is a bear). I contend the frame matters more than you would like to think, if those things matter to you. It all depends on what you want out of them. Sure if you are riding at a pedestrian pace going for a tool around the block, or for ice cream, most bicycles will feel the same, however after 60-100 miles with or without heart pounding paces, you know they are different, and you begin to say what you like or dislike about a lot of things, not just the frame, but the components as well... The frame is the conductor of the orchestra, and it will determine how all the parts function as a whole. If you can not say your stable of bikes are different, then I suggest you ship them to somebody that does.


I agree that the differences between my bikes can be stated to be subtle by some, some would argue that they can not feel a difference, and the differnces really don't amount to anything in the "Real World", however I can't ignore the response of the subtle differences I feel during my rides and how one seems to always make me say to myself "Damn I love this bike", more than the other one does. I try to say to myself that they are the same, but each ride tells me other wise. Is it the geometry? The components? The material? The color...? Using your thoughts I guess I don't know, but I do know one does make me feel faster, one does make me feel more in control in a tight pack ride, one does make me ride more aggressively and has been showing itself to be faster against the clock... However I can submit, it may not be the bike, rather it's all in me, for the human machine is a strange thing at best.

Right or wrong, I do like one more than the other for various reasons. I have tried to capture in words, but somehow it's gets loss in a forum thread. I know what you are eluding to and yes I can even agree, a bike is a bike is a bike, however if it were as simple as that, would we be here?

rufvelo

Well said, most accurate too! It is a point I constantly make or try to, especially with newer cyclists just starting to obsess with gear and upgrades.

ViperZ does have some good points too. You can measure differences in bikes and determins the resulting consequences in performance/handling.

But the single biggest performance factor being the cyclist, bikes close in specification hardly matter. Which is why pros will perform on any top of the line product, with minimum fuss, even though frame flex and weight COULD, differ quite a bit even at that level.

Given the performance-recreational kind of riding I do, I'd take any RELIABLE properly shifting bike in the 18-25lb range and can be very happy with it, the only poor rides more often than not caused by my own lack of mental preparation for the ride. Frustating day at work, poor BigMac lunch on the fly etc ruins my ride later in the evening. Also, for some reason you will always ride better on bikes whose aesthetics you line, well we know the reason. I always climb better on red bikes (which may also explain ViperZs performance on that pretty Trek)

ViperZ

Thanks Ruf

I can buy into the fact most cyclists can perform the same on any given bike and it does not matter in the end, however I'm a different animal, I require mental stimulation in various forms that trigger my synaptic nerves to want to over exceed

Again, if all the subtle differences did not matter for what ever reasons, we would all just own one bike, and they would all be the same. I would not like cycling as much, I would still enjoy it, but not as much.... But thats just what makes me tick

fordfasterr

I ride a steel tank.


Ok I'm starting to troll here.. lol

Damn those bikes are nic3. Some day, when I have gobs of money to spare I'll shoot for one of these Ti machines !

ViperZ

And you are a better man for it

Crash Test

There is always so much talk about carbon versus steel versus Titanium and how they ride. My own experience as posted above is that by choosing the "wrong" wheels it's easy to make Ti feel like Al.

ViperZ

While there is truth to that, my experience is these are 2 very different bicycles, and it's not so much the wheels or tires, rather the some of many parts...