Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Diseased Unicorn
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    50
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Track vs. road geometry?

    How would a frame with road geometry compare to a frame with track geo? More specifically, I'm comparing the iro phoenix to mark v.

  2. #2
    Gentlemen. ADSR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chico, CA
    My Bikes
    S-Works e5 Aerotech with 2009 Veloce and a Fulcrum 5s
    Posts
    1,517
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    track geo will be twitchier and less suited for riding longer distances. Road geo will be more comfortable on the road. That said, it's not going to kill you to ride a track bike around on the road. It's all your preference.
    The bums will always lose.

  3. #3
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    on the moon
    My Bikes
    Cinelli Mash
    Posts
    2,022
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    road: straight lines

    track: tighter turning

  4. #4
    Old fart JohnDThompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Appleton WI
    My Bikes
    Several, mostly not name brands.
    Posts
    12,984
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Road bikes come in a wide variety of geometries depending on the intended purpose. Touring and commuter frames tend to have slacker angles and enough clearance under the fork crown and brake bridge to mount mudguards. Stage race frames will have a shorter wheelbase, more upright angles and less clearance. Criterium frames often have a higher bottom bracket than stage race frames.

    In general, a track frame will have a tighter wheelbase, higher bottom bracket, less clearance under the fork crown and seat stay bridge, and a harsher ride on rough pavement than a typical road racing frame.

  5. #5
    * adriano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    My Bikes
    http://velospace.org/node/18951
    Posts
    6,883
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by solbrothers View Post
    road: straight lines

    track: tighter turning
    that is humorous.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    FYI, the Mark V's geometry is more relaxed than what you find on typical track bikes. It rides like a road bike.

  7. #7
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    on the moon
    My Bikes
    Cinelli Mash
    Posts
    2,022
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by adriano View Post
    that is humorous.
    why zat?

  8. #8
    沒有腳踏車的居民 PluperfectArson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    My Bikes
    Mericier Kilo TT Pro
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You want the geometry as steep as possible, for every occasion.

  9. #9
    Senior Member z415's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Gainesville/Tampa, FL
    My Bikes
    Trek 1000, two mtbs and working on a fixie for commuting.
    Posts
    2,347
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You can go in straight lines with a track bike too.....
    Falling is learning...[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]...learn to not fall in a box.
    Any good American will watch THIS -and- WHERE WAS MY BIKE MADE?

  10. #10
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    on the moon
    My Bikes
    Cinelli Mash
    Posts
    2,022
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by z415 View Post
    You can go in straight lines with a track bike too.....
    road bike: relaxed geometry, longer wheelbase(usually), and better for straight line riding

    track bike: shorter wheelbase, steeper geometry, and usually very nimble steering, good for track (not necessarily bad for street)

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Davis/Lafayette, CA
    My Bikes
    1984 trek 460 conversion, 2008 Lynskey R320, Peloton track bike, 1990's MBK trainer, 2004 Fisher tassajara, 70's Raleigh Gran prix. 70's moto mirage conversion (stolen), 80's Shogun Kaze (sold)
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    there isnt really a set track nor road geo. the geo changes depending on what event is being done in either type (sprinting, pursuit, touring, crits, etc)

    if you can try some bikes with steep geo, like older model pistas, some keirin frames, not sure what's new with steep geo. is the rush hour very aggressive? kilo's are an in between for steep "track" and slacker "road" geo.

    then try some bikes with slacker geo, like iros, se lagers/ dawes sst. etc.

  12. #12
    aka mattio queerpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    5,462
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by solbrothers View Post
    why zat?
    Because it's way too boiled down, and also it's incorrect. A lot of track bikes have more trail than many road bikes. There are a few different factors at work. One is head tube angle, which affects how fast a bike's handling is. The other is trail, which is a measurement that is the combination of rake and head tube angle. Trail is how far the contact patch of the tire lags behind the steering axis. Know how a shopping cart wheel spins around to the back? it's because it has trail. The more trail, the more self-correcting or stable a bike's steering is.

    Track bikes don't need to corner; road bikes do. They may need to handle fast - hence steep head tube angles - but they also need stability at speed - hence less rake to increase trail (yes kids, less rake means more trail! were you paying attention above?).

    On the flip side, road bikes tend to have shallower head tube angles which are going to provide some more shock absorption and help neutralize the handling a little bit. You don't want fast handling when you're going 55mph. But before I hear jive about road bikes being made to go straight, dive into a 90 degree corner at 34mph and then talk. So they have more rake so that their trail measurement isn't too great. A little more rake can also help with absorbing some road chatter, as a lot of road forks do flex nicely.

    Resources -

    Dave Moulton's post on the subject of front end geometry:
    http://davesbikeblog.blogspot.com/20...le-bit-of.html
    Blog post with a bunch of links:
    http://nooneline.blogspot.com/2009/0...ube-angle.html
    Don Walker's write up of track geometry:
    http://www.urbanvelo.org/issue3/urbanvelo3_p44-45.html

    ...and to answer the OP's question, front end geometry is only a little bit of the general differences between road and track geometry - each of which vary enough to the point where there's overlap. There are some other differences in seat tube angle, chainstay length, and then other design factors that might not strictly fall under the "geometry" category; as well as rider set-up, fit and weight distribution variables.

    Don't make the mistake of thinking the steeper the better for all purposes. Steep track bikes are fun but are not the be-all and end-all.
    the hipster myth.

    i practice vagabondery.

  13. #13
    aka mattio queerpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    5,462
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnDThompson View Post
    Road bikes come in a wide variety of geometries depending on the intended purpose. Touring and commuter frames tend to have slacker angles and enough clearance under the fork crown and brake bridge to mount mudguards. Stage race frames will have a shorter wheelbase, more upright angles and less clearance. Criterium frames often have a higher bottom bracket than stage race frames.

    In general, a track frame will have a tighter wheelbase, higher bottom bracket, less clearance under the fork crown and seat stay bridge, and a harsher ride on rough pavement than a typical road racing frame.
    I was under the impression that stage race frames - like LeMonds and other bikes with "epic geometry" - had really long-and-back geometry, like parallel 72s with long top tubes.
    the hipster myth.

    i practice vagabondery.

  14. #14
    * adriano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    My Bikes
    http://velospace.org/node/18951
    Posts
    6,883
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by solbrothers View Post
    road: straight lines

    track: tighter turning
    Quote Originally Posted by adriano View Post
    that is humorous.
    Quote Originally Posted by solbrothers View Post
    why zat?
    Quote Originally Posted by solbrothers View Post
    road bike: relaxed geometry, longer wheelbase(usually), and better for straight line riding

    track bike: shorter wheelbase, steeper geometry, and usually very nimble steering, good for track (not necessarily bad for street)
    Quote Originally Posted by queerpunk View Post
    it's incorrect. A lot of track bikes have more trail than many road bikes.

    Track bikes don't need to corner; road bikes do.
    there we go.

  15. #15
    . bbattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Rocket City, No'ala
    My Bikes
    2014 Trek Domane 5.2, 1985 Pinarello Trevisio, 1991 Colnago Master, '06 Bianchi San Jose, 1987 Moulton Fuso, 1990 Gardin Shred, '82 John Howard(Dave Tesch)
    Posts
    11,965
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Test ride some bikes and see what you think. I didn't care for the Bianchi Pista geometry; liked the San Jose better. (also didn't care for the track bars but that's another thread)

    Your style of riding, what you use the bike for, should help dictate the geometry. Fashion also plays a part; how much is up to you.

  16. #16
    沒有腳踏車的居民 PluperfectArson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    My Bikes
    Mericier Kilo TT Pro
    Posts
    1,287
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by queerpunk View Post
    Don't make the mistake of thinking the steeper the better for all purposes. Steep track bikes are fun but are not the be-all and end-all.
    Surely you jest, dear boy!

  17. #17
    King of the Hipsters
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bend, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Realm Cycles Custom
    Posts
    2,127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I like what queerpunk said.

    I have a slightly different perspective on it, but just different and not more or less right.

    One can design a front end geometry that will produce a relatively neutral 60 mm of trail (neither "twitchy" nor "dead") by combining a steep head tube angle with a short rake, or by combining a less steep head tube angle with a longer rake.

    One can see this for oneself by downloading the Trail Calculator from Anvil Bikes:

    http://www.anvilbikes.com/images/1064634020.xls

    Using the above calculator, one might discover that a steep head tube angle of 75 degrees and a short rake of 28.5 mm will create the same amount of trail as a shallow head tube angle of 72 degrees and a long rake of 46.1 mm; or, a relatively neutral trail of 60 mm.

    However, in general terms (and disregarding wheelbase, rider position and rider weight), the steep head tube angle and short rake combination will handle better at lower speeds and the shallow head tube angle and long rake combination will handle better at higher speeds.

    So, since I value low speed (15 mph) agility over high speed stability, I ride a bike with a steep head tube, short rake, short wheelbase and a significantly setback (35 mm) seat post.

  18. #18
    * adriano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    My Bikes
    http://velospace.org/node/18951
    Posts
    6,883
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bbattle View Post
    Test ride some bikes and see what you think. I didn't care for the Bianchi Pista geometry; liked the San Jose better.
    the san jose has less trail.

  19. #19
    Senior Member beeftech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn finally.
    My Bikes
    Bianchi San Jose, fixed
    Posts
    832
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by adriano View Post
    the san jose has less trail.
    no one was arguing differently.

    but i think it is highly dependent of what Pista we're talking about, as the geometry has changed a lot over the last few years.
    Last edited by beeftech; 09-23-09 at 12:53 PM.

  20. #20
    * adriano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    My Bikes
    http://velospace.org/node/18951
    Posts
    6,883
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by beeftech View Post
    no one was arguing differently.
    i was just stating a fact.

  21. #21
    Old fart JohnDThompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Appleton WI
    My Bikes
    Several, mostly not name brands.
    Posts
    12,984
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by queerpunk View Post
    I was under the impression that stage race frames - like LeMonds and other bikes with "epic geometry" - had really long-and-back geometry, like parallel 72s with long top tubes.
    LeMond's have slack angles and long top tubes, but that's LeMond's preference for a stage bike. Look at e.g. the old Peugeot PX-10s for a more typical stage geometry. Plenty of TDFs were raced and won on PX-10s.

  22. #22
    King of the Hipsters
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bend, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Realm Cycles Custom
    Posts
    2,127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by beeftech
    ...it is highly dependent of what Pista we're talking about, as the geometry has changed a lot over the last few years.
    Bianchi discontinued the "track" geometry of the Pista on the 2009 and 2010 models.

    The Pista now has a head tube angle and rake similar to if not the same as Bianchi's road bikes.

  23. #23
    Senior Member beeftech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn finally.
    My Bikes
    Bianchi San Jose, fixed
    Posts
    832
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by adriano View Post
    i was just stating a fact.
    Back it up with numbers then.

  24. #24
    . bbattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Rocket City, No'ala
    My Bikes
    2014 Trek Domane 5.2, 1985 Pinarello Trevisio, 1991 Colnago Master, '06 Bianchi San Jose, 1987 Moulton Fuso, 1990 Gardin Shred, '82 John Howard(Dave Tesch)
    Posts
    11,965
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by adriano View Post
    i was just stating a fact.
    For what purpose?

  25. #25
    * adriano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Baltimore
    My Bikes
    http://velospace.org/node/18951
    Posts
    6,883
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i am trying to steal your eagle.

    in a previous post, i calculated the san jose to have 54.1mm trail, which is faster than most supposedly tight turning track geometry bicycles.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •