What's faster & Why? Road Bike or MB w/Slicks?
 

My best time commuting 17 miles to work was on my MB with slicks. I was surprised it took longer on a new hybrid with 700c wheels. I thought the bigger diameter wheels would make me faster. So then I tried an old road bike thinking the drop bars and geometry would send more power to the wheels and shorten my ride even more. However, I have yet to beat my best time on that MB! AGH! What is going on?

A properly fitted road bike should be faster than an mtb with slicks... it's that whole lighter, more aero, taller gears thing.

Mind you, I used to run slicks on my mtb and could make some pretty excellent times... I had re-geared it to help with that.

What was your NORMAL time on your MTB? We all have days when the stars align, the lights are all green, we have a constant tail wind and it seems our cranking is effortless. Times set on those days are the stuff of legend and should be chersihed, not compared to normal riding. As noted above, a road bike should be faster on average (I know it is for me).

The one you pedal harder is the faster bike. :lol:

My normal time on the MB? Hmm ... my best time was 50 minutes. I think maybe my normal time was 55 minutes - always under an hour. The hybrid and road bike were always OVER an hour. I was really hoping to cut my time to 45 minutes. Is that a crazy goal? to cut 10 minutes over 17 miles?

A road bike should be faster than a mtb with slicks. Although it depends on many factors, I would say that maybe your gearing is making the hybrid seem slower...

Yeah, don't know what's up with that hybrid. Might be the tires & geometry but it is NOT fast. I think I'll save it for vacationing with the kids.

1) You're not necessarily any more aero on a road bike (especially if you're riding the hoods)
2) taller gears are rarely the limitation of the typical rider. So you don't max out your speed going down a hill... you rest and have more power for the climb up the other side.

My MTB position was very similar to my position IN THE DROPS on my road bike and my speed was very close - especially on a commute. Wider tires actually speed up the commute since I could ride over instead of around obstacles.

Assuming position can be whatever you want it to be on either bike, the only advantage I'll give the road bike is weight... and in certain situations gearing.

The road bike is an old '70s era Schwinn with steel wheels. The MB is much newer but also an old beater. But I believe it's wheels are aluminum. I should compare their weights. I guess the best way to do that is stand on a scale while holding the bike? Then subtract my body weight?

A pro-racer is faster. A mtn bike w/ slicks vs a roadbike from the same commuter, not such a great difference relative to traffic, lights, etc...

Something else to consider is that you are accustomed to the mtb and not the hybrid. Over time your results might change.

This question seems to come up over 'n over; over 'n over I'm surprised that people are surprised that, for commuting purposes, slicked mtbs are nearly as fast/as fast/faster for a specific rider on a specific route under specific conditions than 700c road bikes or hybrids. There's just too many variables to say, as many do with great certainty, that a roadbike is 'faster' than a slicked (I would say 'roadified') mtb.

We're not talking about riding long distances under 'open' conditions here, possibly in a group. Under those conditions, yes -- a roadbike will travel further/faster for a given rider output; that is primarily down to the more aerodynamic riding position, which comes into play at higher sustained speeds. Except at (near) road racing speeds, where the factor is wheel aerodynamics (i.e. narrow), it has nothing to do with wheel diameter, except insofar as that affects effective gearing.

So, to the OP: doesn't surprise me at all that you found a 700c hybrid 'slower'; the hybrid could very well have a more upright (less aerodynamic) riding position than your mtb; and its wheel/tire combination could very well be heavier, and have higher rolling resistance, than your mtb wheelset. Of course, you might also simply have been feeling better on the day of your personal best, which just goes to show once again 'it's not about the bike';)

Tire pressure may be a factor too.
The slicks on MY MTB are 26 X1.25 and 100psi as compared to my hybrid's 700 X 35 tires rated at 60psi.

Perhaps you're less aero on the hybrid.

Old Schwinns can be real tanks. Weight on the wheels makes more difference than probably anyplace else on the bike. You most likely have got 1.25" tires on there which may not be much narrower than the tires on your MTB. The steel wheels definitely hurt you.

Even in terms of geometry the Schwinn may offer no advantage. I'm suspecting this bike is more recreationally oriented than performance oriented given the steel wheels.

You also have to consider the relative condition of the bikes and the quality of the components. If the Schwinn has low end hubs that haven't seen new grease in 30 years, it's going to be that much harder to get it up to speed and keep it there.

Yes, the Schwinn has larger diameter wheels but that doesn't necessarily make the bike faster. High end Triathlon bikes often have smaller wheels than typical road bikes.

FWIW, I have a decent but not high end road bike from 80's and a slightly better quality MTB from the 90's. The road bike was intended to be a low end competition bike so it has an aggressive geometry.
I get to work on that bike in 25 to 30 minutes vs. 30 to 40 minutes on the MTB. The MTB time suffers worse when there's a headwind. Thirty minutes is a REALLY good time for me on the MTB while I can get home on the old road bike under 30 minutes pretty consistently.

I have a newer road bike now and that is a couple minutes faster than the old one.

Thanks everyone for this discussion. My goal of course is to go fast, take less time, not work as hard, and never get passed. :-)

Can't wait 'till spring so I can get the MB back on the rode for a testy test. Also, I may not have to buy a new old bike. Darn, I was getting better at shopping. Maybe I'll just shop for new wheels for the old Schwinn - but would still like better hardware. What's the oldest (least expensive) road bike I can look for that would have modern shifters built into the hand brakes on the drops?

+1 to all that.

Weight is a grossly overestimated factor. 1) People make a big deal out of a pound or two on the bike while it's inconsequential in the total weight of the bike plus rider. 2) It's on the bike and rolling down the road - it's not like you're riding around holding that pound out in front of you nor are you lifting it vertically. You can push a lot more groceries around effortlessly in a cart than you can lift over your head at one go. 3) Weight slows down acceleration and climbing accentuates it, but once up to speed extra weight helps maintain that speed and helps overcome aero drag going downhill. It's a non-factor on a commute for the most part. A time-trial up l'Alpe d'Huez? Sure. "Jumping" to catch the wheel of a breaking-away rider? Sure. Your flat or rolling ride to work? Nope.

If you hang around BF long enough, you will learn that whichever bike costs more, will always be the faster one.:D

Fill your tires with helium and pedal faster

Well, I wouldn't call 17 miles of up & down grades a flat or rolling ride to work. It's more of a "cross-country" marathon, albeit relatively short. But you make good points about "weight" & another rider made an interpreting point about wheel diameter - (bigger isn't necessarily faster).

At the same tire air pressure, my ancient steel hybrid (which weighs probably 10 lbs more than my road bike, easily) costs me about 3 mph or so when cruising, and about 4 on hills. I guess it's up to the individual as to whether that's significant enough to care about.

3 or 4 mph matter ...? Hell yeah! Especially if the commute takes about an hour! Who can do math? If a 17 mile ride takes 50 minutes on one bike, and another bike is 4 mph slower, how long would the trip take on bike #2?

Oh and while you're at it ... How much faster would the average speed have to be to make the trip in 45 minutes?

When I started commuting to work I was riding my Giant MTB with knobbies 12.1 miles in 40:09 minutes. At the time I was just riding for the hell of it but as time went by I wanted to go faster. I put 1.70 slicks on it and wrecked (broken nose) on the way home on the first day. The wreck was caused from going so much faster when I entered this one tight turn that I had been through many times before. With the slicks my best time was 34:12. In a quest to go even faster I bought a road bike and my best time so far is 31:03.

I have decided to start riding the MTB more often when I do get to ride again to see if my time will improve. I have been out-of-commission for two weeks so far due to rotator cuff surgery. :(

The other issue you may be facing is with the narrower racing tires you are having to dodge crap in the street, where as with the MTB and slicks you may be focusing more on traffic and simply pushing harder.

While I like drop bars, I find MTB straight bars work better for commuting when I want to maintain a heads up view of traffic.

SSSTANG - Great info! See - those slicks make a big difference don't they? But your rode bike was faster - where mine was not. You probably got a good one.