Thanks, I wasn't trying to be argumentative, I just hadn't heard that. It's like the guys that think their 1986 F150 will out dragrace a Corvette on pavement. Or like saying you can be as fast at the same effort wearing running shoes as you are wearing steel toe boots.

Two different issues. The what and the why. You don't need controlled power to see if you are faster in one bike than the other. And I think that there is a lot of value for this "real world" experience.

By comparing speed with controlled power you may find out that bike A is faster than bike B. But if bike A beats the crap out of you when you ride fast, you may very well end up riding consistently slower to avoid being beat up. Or you may find that for a given power output the difference in time on a climb is negligible for two bikes. But in the real world, the lighter bike will encourage you to attack and you will find yourself putting a bigger effort (GBN saw something like that happen on one of their tests. They had a guy ride without a meter display and he pushed himself harder without noticing)
I agree that if you are trying to invest in upgrades finding the weak link is important. But knowing the real world effect is important -and darned interesting too.

Do you have identical tires on both? There can be 20W difference at 20 MPH between OK and good tires.

Is your position identical (including bar width)? 75-85% of your aerodynamic drag comes from the meat bag on top of the bike.

Do you have similar wheels? There's a significant difference between classic box-section and even vaguely aerodynamic modern rim shapes.

all of them!!

First of all, two brand new identical bikes are not going to be exactly the same. Second, you need to see that 354 rides nullifies "breakfast" and "winds".

I realize I didn't put this in an earlier, I've been riding this segment for 4 years. This nullifies issues of tires, drive train, ... Many components have been changed out on these bike. The only bikes that doesn't apply to are the Pugsley and Mondonico since they are both new to me in 2015.

Yes, fit is a subject of interest. The Mondonico is more aggressive than the Felt and this has taken some time to get accustom to. This goes back to an earlier post about the Mondonico being new and need more time to get comfortable with it.

There are also issues around a 20 year old derailleur and shifters, and 20 year old wheels on the Mondonico. The wheel set is the most likely thing to upgrade because I love the first generation Campy Ergo shifters.

The slower I go, the more enjoyment I actually get out of a ride.

I can say that I honestly enjoy slow rides as much as I enjoy fast rides. Not every ride is a race. And by the same token, I love pushing myself to go faster. I enjoy pushing myself to go farther. Bikes are simply joyful.

Someone mentioned tires. What do you have on the two fastest bikes? They can make a difference. Also, somewhat worn tires are sometimes faster than new tires because the casing might be more flexible and there is less trad material

Like I said earlier, this thread is more about the method for analyzing bike performance. The question of "why" is less of an issue. As stated earlier, I need more attempts on the Mondonico to have better data - it's only had one year and I'm still getting comfortable with this bike.

To your specific question, the Felt has been through different set of tires (23 and 25) and the Mondonico is running my standard 700x25 tires. My next project to upgrade the Mondonico will be a wheel set, the wheels that are on it are a mismatch of 20 year old rims.

One thing you could do is to find another rider like you,ie.similar build, riding style and speed and ride the bikes and switch . If one of the bikes is consistently faster no matter who is iding, then it might be the faster bike.

This is the part that makes direct comparisons difficult. It is natural to choose a bike for a particular type of ride, and for particular types of weather conditions. Or at least be more likely to, resulting in more cold-weather commutes (for example) on one bike than on the other. The nature of the ride, as well as the bike itself, affects the speed. So unless you're choosing the bikes randomly I think that you need more granularity in your data or else normalize somehow.

I think you need a large government grant to continue with this vital research.

Your point is valid if comparing the Marin to the Felt, the Marin is a SS winter commuter and the Felt... is not. It is true that this comparison would be more scientific with a randomize to select the bike for the day. So, not all bike comparisons are valid. However, the Mondonico and Felt have the same conditions requirements (dry). Therefore, the comparison of the Felt and Mondonico is more interesting.

I also consider the top 20% across all bikes mildly interesting, since this only compares top performances when conditions are best. All six bikes have been commuter bikes, and this segment is on my commuting route. I make it a point to ride all six bike throughout the summer months - personal goal to ride every bike each month when there is no snow.

Look specifically at the Kona and how the average speed changes from the "total" to the "top 20%". Since this is the Kona is the work-horse bike and sees some tough conditions, removing the bad weather days makes the biggest difference in the statistics. This shows that the Kona is a faster bike than the total average speed would indicate, but it is still not a pure road bike.

IMHO it's interesting, but not much more than interesting.

Thank you for your insightful posts, they are very helpful.

As much fun all this is, I'm going to take my Pugsley out for metric century today, so you kids have fun while I'm away.

Maybe the range between the bike's average and the bike's top tranche average is an indicator of the bike's performance. My reasoning is that your top speeds are likely near your maximum effort, and the average of all rides likely reflects some comfortable range of effort, regardless of the bike. So the difference of speeds between the average and top tranche would represent similar differences of effort, regardless of the bike. Greater increases of speed for similar increases of effort would mean that the bike performs better.

I would suggest that the Mondonico is lazy and needs to work on improving ts pace.

Using spreadsheets for anything other than compulsive mileage tracking is just weird!

Speed. There is good breakfast speed, double espresso speed and friday pm, cold beer in the pannier( must drink before warm) speed. That's all I know, what's strava?

Just what I was looking for. Now if only you had a hybrid with road tires on it.

I'm gonna revisit this silly project this summer. I've added (and retired) a bike since this origianal post back in 2016. I'm up to 600+ rides on this segment, but it's no longer on my daily commuting route (I moved in 2018), but I'm still with in 5 miles of the segment. The goal for 2021 will be to ride a random-selected road bike (Felt, Mondonico, or new Bianchi) a couple times a month. I'm only looking for top end performance, so I'll target dry days and likely cherry-pick days with favorable winds. So some of my old data (commuting in the snow, rain, headwinds, ... ) will be included, but not really applicable. I plan to report all attempts, but focus on that top 20% stat. In addition to listing results by bike, I'll look at results per year too since I've been riding this segment for nearly 10 years.

The three bikes for this revisit:I'm interested to see how much different there is in these bikes that span 4 decades, and 3 different frame materials.

Some folks will find this interesting, and some will tell me it's all wrong and dumb (I'm sure they are right).

As a TT guy.........a ton of it is how the lump on top presents itself to the wind.

If I raised the stack by several inches and opened up my pad width on my TT "super bike" to a really really comfy more novice position I bet I would be slower on it than if I put my real good fit coordinates on an old tube framed fixed gear pursuit bike. No doubt. Basically 2019 TT superbike versus mid-90's tube frame pursuit frame.........the old school would be faster with the superior fit.

Agreed, rider's body position is a key to the time it takes to complete a segment. For the purpose of my analysis, I know the segment well and know that staying on the drops is the best option for speed with control, with a little time on the hoods for the short steep climbs. The bikes are set up as close as they can be, based on the different eras. All that being said, differences in the bike/rider aerodynamics is part of the test ... and the bike weight, and the shifter, and brakes. All these things are factors the time it takes me to ride this segment.

IMHO - Keeping the same rider on the same segment, riding the segment dozens of times, creates an interesting analysis.

Slam the stem on that Mondonico and I bet it would be a lot closer.

Data point one on the new Bianchi, weather was cold (50℉) and there was no tailwind ... Bianchi was 7th fastest of my 605 attempts, about 21 seconds off the fastest time ever (with a nice tailwind). I foresee the Bianchi having a clear advantage in this test.