View Single Post
Old 08-04-22 | 10:29 AM
  #10  
70sSanO's Avatar
70sSanO
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 6,006
Likes: 2,286
From: Mission Viejo

Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970

Originally Posted by cormacf
Given the same tires/wheels, does a longer/slacker geometry like you'd see in a gravel bike any slower than a classic road geo? I mean, clearly, there's an aero component, if one bike has you sitting closer to straight up, but aside from that, unless you're running a crit or something where tights turns are a huge part of your game, is there any reason a roadie should be faster than a gravel bike, over, say, the course of a century?

Personally, I have short femurs and a long gorilla torso, so my weight winds up pretty far forward on most bikes, and a gravelly long front-center and slack front end lets me descend faster without feeling like I'm gonna endo, but I just wonder if there's an objective tradeoff I'm missing.

Thanks!
With everything else being equal, if you can do a 100 mile descent without turns and steep enough that you might endo, slacker geometry is better. For everything else it doesn’t matter.

John
70sSanO is offline  
Reply