LorenzoNF

Will a bike with 60.3mm of trail handle startlingly different than a bike with 56mm of trail? I'm looking around and see "race" bikes run the gamut from 53mm trail (CAAD9) all the way to a Storck (62.8mm trail!). The preferred seems to be around 56mm, but what does the BF Brain Trust say?

EDIT: This is assuming a bike in the medium/large range (55-59cm).

blacksquid

BF has a brain?!?

Campag4life

Your question is overally general but a couple of comments. Quickness of handling is the relationship between trail relative to wheelbase. This is why for a given model of road bike frame, frame manufacturers posture the head tube angle more vertical the longer the wheelbase (larger frames) because the turning arc of the bike is subtended over a larger distance between front and rear tire contact patchs. Longer frames therefore have more upright head tubes (reduced trail) to compensate for slower handling resulting in the difference in turning radius. There is no right or wrong when it comes to the right amount of trail for a racing frame. Further...this is the reason stem length matters less as trail relative to wheelbase trumps the contribution of stem length which can also be cancelled by choice of handlebar shape and reach.
Below is a chart showing a general guideline of trail relative to application. For racing, you want less trail for a quicker handling bike. Wheelbase matters a lot when choosing trail and again why manufactures incorporate a more upright head tube angle for larger frames.

Road Fan

Campag, I think those column headings are reversed. Many race bikes today, at least commercial bikes such as upper Treks, have trail in the 60 mm (56 to 62?) neighborhood. This can be acheived with fork rakes (aka offset) in the 40 mm (small frame) to somewhat less for a steeper frame.

I haven't checked any of your numbers, though.

Another problem with your table is that rather than exemplifying road racing geometry it shows trail values ranging from 50 mm to 66 mm, which I think is a hube difference. I can't say there aren't bikes like that, but it does mean it's real hard to see a trend or at least identify a typical value.

To answer the OP as far as I can:

I had my fork re-raked to reduce the offset by 8 mm. This resulted in an increase of trail of about 7 mm. It's hard to measure. I call the improvement noticable and positive, but not startling. You'll adapt to it in about 2 minutes of riding.

There's a good webpage with an illustration and a calculator at https://www.kreuzotter.de/english/elenk.htm. It's a good reference for the terms, and what goes into the numbers.

Road Fan