gundom66

I don't know if this is even worth a post to get some valid inputs, but is it possible to have both in a frame? I could've thought I've seen posts from Cervelo S Series owners that their bikes are not only aero, but also comfortable. However, what is considered as comfortable on both long and short rides? Reason I ask is because out of curiosity, I e-mailed Trek to find out if they are planning or working on an aero road frame. The response I got is that it's not even being considered on a road frame because in order to meet the standards of a Madone, it has to be comfortable on longer rides that is also lightweight, stiff, and strong. Now reading some info on the Bianchi Oltre, it has somewhat of an aero frame and fork. Not as aero as the Cervelo, but the almost diamond-shaped downtube I guess is to help the bike a bit on a crosswind, which some reviews I found in the Cervelo S Series is a bit of an issue. As far as comfort, one review says that it's not as comfortable as the Infinito because of the aggressive geometry, but with the Ultra Thin Seat Stays, it gives some comfort for extended rides on bumpy roads. I dunno... I came from frames of 20 years ago, and the wind issue is just that to me back then, an issue. Cross or against, it hits me, I have to fight it. And anything I test ride now that is a CF is comfortable compared to what I can remember from many many moons ago.

I know there are a lot of questions up there, but the concern is, is it possible to have an aero frame with long distance comfort? What are your thoughts on it?

recon455

Did you look into the Felt AR Series?

I love mine, but that doesn't mean other people would find them comfortable. People have different levels of tolerance. Find a dealer and see how you like it.

Garfield Cat

Valid inputs would be directly from the Cervelo web site. On the "engineering" page. Also you would notice that for the Kona Ironman, the Cervelo P3 is very popular. If you have been to the big island, you probably witnessed those trade winds.

https://www.cervelo.com/en_us/enginee...presentations/

Barrettscv 

If you want both aero & comfort, work with an advanced bike fitter. The cyclist, not the bike, is more than 90% of the aero drag.

Agave

Wait, one can be comfortable on a bike?

Who knew......

gundom66

I was just overtaken by the response from Trek about the aero frame design and their philosophy. They have an H1 fit which is suppose to be an aggressive geometry to get a "more aero" position. I guess you can do that (aero) to their H2 or H3 by bending your elbows, but just won't be as low as a position on an H1. I was just thinking that if the H1 is to get a more aero position, why not have an aero frame with? And if they claim that the Madone, in any fit, is a comfortable longer ride, then they should be able build an aero frame for up to the H2 fit incorporating that "comfortable longer ride" into it. Madones have thin seat stays just like the Cervelo S and Bianchi Oltre, and some other brands for sure. If those thin seat stays adds up to the comfort, then why can't they (Trek)? Or am I just being gullible here and not really taking the word "comfort" as part of a marketing scheme?

This is not something about Trek and their thinking process. I'm just questioning the matter and I know it sounds like a complain about them, but really it isn't. I'm just trying to understand the possibilites if any.

Triguy

I'd guess when I'm in my aero position, the bike is more like 33%ish of my aerodynamic drag. And when in my drops on my road bike I'd guess more like 20%. I agree that positioning is more important, but why not try and have an aerodynamic bike and a good aero position?

To the original poster. Diamond shapes are terrible for aerodynamic drag. Interestingly enough, Trek did a slightly more aero frame and customers didn't really care for it visually more than anything as I understand it. I don't think that the person at Trek answering your question knew the truth, more of just a marketing response. Damon Rinard(former Trek engineer), said creating an aero road bike was more a matter of market response:

"Quite often the market speaks louder than data. Buyers chose the "SL" (round tubes) over the faster but heavier original Madone (shaped tubes) by a large margin. We're trying to address that by getting the word out better. For example, the new Madone's mini-website is filled with data, and I'm here posting on this forum.

The new Madone was designed with a balance of performance characteristics, so a little more focus on strength to weight, vertical compliance, etc. and less on aerodynamics. For example, the new Madone has almost double the vertical compliance of the old one -- more than half an inch of "travel" in response to a 3 gee bump. "

That was a quote from the same year trek abandoned the "aero madones" like: https://www.productwiki.com/upload/im...madone_5_5.jpg

No one is ever completely satisfied. I've heard people say the S2/S3 are not that comfortable. I've also heard people say that the Felt AR series is too plush and not lively enough. I wouldn't really put the Oltre in the aero category...

gundom66

Now I'm beginning to understand... It's all a marketing scheme. I was actually been looking at the Oltre frame for a long time trying to understand why someone called it an aero frame. I know I read it somewhere and I kept on looking at it and all I see is a diamond-shaped which is definitely not an aero frame. Then I started thinking about crosswinds and probably the reason why it was dubbed as such.

Hida Yanra

Yes

Depends

no

incorrect

the frame doesn't have much to do with this, where you set your contact points, stem/seatpost/type of saddle/type of bars determine this

yes

now you know ;-)

There are very few companies which make truly aerodynamic frames... I can think of two or three,... everyone else is just pretending.
Stability & comfort are all based on the rider. If you set up your bike in an aggressive position - then it will be less comfortable. Less aggressive position = more comfortable.
Aero sketchiness.... mostly a myth. It can expose lack of handling skills - cdr has some good articles about that on his blog... but generally, this doesn't exist much (says the guy who rides an aero bike with deep wheels)

StanSeven

I have an aero frame (Cervelo SLC SL which preceded the S3) and it's very bit as comfortable as a custom Ti bike I have and a classic steel (Waterford). Tires and wheels also have a lot to do with comfort.

patentcad

I have a Cervelo S2, a P3 (TT bike) and a Scott Addict. The Cervelo bikes are considerably more comfortable on rough roads than the Addict. They're all fine for me, but the Cervelos do ride like buttah.

gundom66

Whoa! PCad actually posted in my thread! Such an honor... Okay, all jokes aside.

I have to admit that when I test rode the S2, it wasn't all that bad even if it was only a 2 mile ride. Like I said, I came from frames of 20 years ago. But because I've aged since and no longer fit, with a bad back and mostly the neck and shoulder, I will have to resort to a more sportive ride, but definitely not the Roubaix. Sorry Roubaix owners, but this is all based on my own opinion. I guess this "comfort" thing is all about the rider's condition and tolerance level. That being said, different individuals will have different inputs on Aero + Comfort.

Hida Yanra

fify