What are the basic differences?
 

I've been curious for some time about the characteristics of a road, track and racing bike that make them unique. Would some with the know please explain not the similarities but what specifically make these three style bikes different.

Geometry and possibly dropouts.

Road can encompass aggressive geometry (racing) or relaxed (touring) or something in between (sport touring). Usually utilizes dropouts.
Track (true track) is aggressive geometry paired with track ends.

In a nutshell touring bikes have longer wheelbases, more laid back seat and head tube angles for more stability, and lower wide-ratio gearing; "racing" bike have shorter wheelbases, more upright seat and head tube angles for quicker response, and higher closer-ratio gearing; and track bikes are much like a "racing" bikes with stiffer frames and forks to handle the higher loads, and a single fixed gear.

http://www.mytenspeeds.com/My_TenSpe...1_Comment1.jpg

http://www.mytenspeeds.com/My_TenSpe...e_Comment1.jpg

Sorry, but I don't have much on Track Bikes.

Also you need to take into account the era of the bike. My bike racing days were in the 70's. Early 70's racing bikes could probably be compared to 80's touring bikes. Large clearances and long wheelbase.

There was quite a shift around the mid 70's. Inspired by bikes like Colnago and Masi, American builders like Eisentraut and others started building tighter steeper angled frames. By the 80's the racing bike had shrunk by inches in wheelbase, and frame angles steepened accordingly.

A touring bike in the 70's was any bike you could throw some racks on. By the 80's we had fully outfitted touring bikes with racks attached to seatstay braze-ons.

The trend continued into the 80's and 90's with clearances getting really tight. Short reach brakes, vertical dropouts, and brazed-on everything were the norm.

Track bikes have one purpose, to go fast. Generally they have a higher bottom bracket for clearance on banked tracks. All the parts are beefier, including 1/8 inch chain/chainwheel/cog. Sprint bikes have steel bars and stems, pursuit bikes have alloy stem and bars.

Pedal, toe and heel clearance also have their place in the discussion. If you are pedaling a fixed gear bike around a turn, and your pedal hits the ground, the bike is leaving the ground, at least for a little while. And when it comes back down, it may not come down just the way you wanted it to, which can make quite a mess. Hence the high BB and often shorter crank arms on a track bike. On a touring bike, you have long chain stays to get the panniers as far from your feet as possible, because you don't want to hit the panniers with your heel every revolution of the pedals. Toe clearance is not such a big deal, but on a bike with tight geometry you can hit your toe against the front wheel in a tight turn... which is annoying but not life threatening.

The brakes are always a giveaway as well. Cantis with long chainstays- tourer, Cantis with short seatstays- cyclocross.

Also mentioning in those pics is the relative sizes of the two freewheels, the larges cog on the touring bike is MUCH bigger than the largest cog on the "racing" bike.

What about relative top tube lengths and MTB geometry? I assume that touring bikes would have a shorter top tube so you can sit more upright, while racing bikes would be longer to facilitate an aerodynamic position--but I'm just guessing.

Let's assume a MTB is the fully evolved sloping top tube type.

For example, I've always wondered if the effective top tube length of a MTB was also relatively longer to facilitate you're getting lower and thus having a lower CoG, but again I have no idea.

These questions have always puzzled me.

Also, trail: I assume that the frame angles in themselves don't make a huge difference to handling, though maybe a shorter wheelbase (which can be achieved with steeper angles) might make a bike more nimble.

I assume that a touring bike would have more trail for stability at speed, road racing bikes maybe a bit less, while track bikes, cyclocross, and MTB would have short trail for nimble handling. Is this about right?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...dimensions.svg

No Clearance

http://www.bikeforums.net/attachment...3&d=1333936050

This is a pretty extreme example of a race bike and was designed more for Criterium Racing thane road racing. uber steep angles (not unlike a track bike) and slightly high BB. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criterium


http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=244483

That's messed up.