Wow. And I see you have a 63cm frame, that sounds right for 6'5". The steerer tube is quite short.

Easiest fix for you will be a large angle stem in the positive orientation. Many good stems are available in the 17 to 20 degree range.

Wow, I'm glad I checked in here this morning. My wife and I have been test riding a lot of hybrids for the past couple of months. In the process we've come to realize that this is a great activity and we will eventually want to put in some good distances on our bikes. Since we don't have unlimited space to store several changes of bike we are now looking at road bikes as our first choice. We are looking at so called 'vintage' bikes at some shops in the area and have seem some that are in great condition. The problem with them for us is the placement of the gear shift. We've gotten accustomed to the shifters being on the handlebar and hope there are road bikes that incorporate that type of setup. I tried using shifters on a downtube and found it way out of my comfort zone. Does anyone have a suggestion about how to handle this? Any feedback is appreciated.

Yep. I had the same idea. Its a 120mm (+/- 10deg) stem angled down a the moment. I'm gonna start by flipping it over...though I reckon I'll end up going to a 100mm stem.

Wow, there is something out of wack here .... seriously.

Once you get used to STI shifting (common Shimano shifters/brakes) I like it better. Doesn't take that much getting used to, either.

Can't speak to other brands - I am using a Shimano 105 setup on a Specialized Roubaix Comp Compact.

Works great. I had shifters on the handlebar with my Trek 7.3 FX that I bought roughly a month prior to buying the Roubaix. The Trek has triple chainring and 8 speeds. The double chainring and 10 speed on the Compact work better for me. A lot better.

You and your wife will easily get used to whatever shifter you have on a road bike.

I would suggest non-vintage shifters. Modern shifters are integrated with the brakes. You can shift/brake from the hoods or the drops, but not from the bar.

Care to elaborate .... seriously?

I think I see Talldog's point. You were 19% faster on the hybrid by time and 23.7% faster by average speed.

Those are tremendous increases. I am also now wondering what else was different about the ride besides the bike..

- your effort; casual vs. going really hard (say 70% effort compared to 90%)
- any stops included in one trip and not the other?
- different method of recording time and speed?
- hybrid not optimized for speed-- fat knobby tires, panniers, rear rack, fenders, etc

Etc. I am not disagreeing with your basic premise that the road bike was significantly faster. I'm just joining Talldog in being surprised at how much better.

Yes, this is exactly what I meant. Couldn't say it better than that. The jump in average speed was too enormous to arise from a simple switch from flabars on a typically road oriented hybrid to drop bars on a pure road bike. The lightness of the bikes is not really a factor unless you were climbing the Alp d'Huez the whole way.

...but not exactly what you said...

No-one was more surprised than me when I got back home.

In response to Colin (who was actually able to articulate his point):

-effort may have been a little higher due to excitement
-no stops on either trip
-same method of recording time...in fact, because my Wiggle order hadn't arrived yet I took the computer off my hybrid and put it on the road bike so it was exactly the same computer..
-the hybrid has knobby tyres...but they're racing ralphs which are supposed to deliver pretty low rolling resistance

If your tires aren't the same size then your cyclometer won't be reporting accurate data, assuming it isn't a GPS model.

Not sure that's entirely correct...I think the computers calculate speed based on the number of revolutions the spoke magnet makes past the sensor on the fork...

I.e. this is based on wheel size...not tyre size. Both bikes have 700c wheels...one has 23mm tyres, the other 35mm.

If your hybrid tires have a taller profile, they are rolling a bit further with each revolution than a road tire with a shorter profile. This is the case even if the rim size is the same. So on the road bike each revolution you're not moving quite as far, and you'll have more revolutions to cover the same distance. You should be able to figure out the differential by looking at the odometer, assuming you did the exact same route on both.

I think I get it...but sort of not...

Point A to Point B was 80ish kms...I did the same route on both bikes...the computer has an allowance to change rim size but not tyre profile...the road bike took considerably less time to complete the same route...my top speed was considerably higher on the road bike.

Please tell me if I'm missing something...cos if I need to change the computer setup for different tyre thickness to get an accurate reading I'd like to do it sooner rather than later.

If the total distance over 80km agrees, you don't need to recalibrate. If on the other hand the same ride measures 80 km on your hybrid and 79km on your road bike, you should adjust your computer.

So sorry to disappoint ... LOL. :rolleyes:

This. It's very weird that your cyclometer only accounts for rim size; I'd check the manual to validate that.

Best way to get average speed is distance over time, and not what the bike computer spits out. Your times are the accurate speed increase, and if the mph is from computer, that would be off.

Your big number jump is probably accurate, but there is a lot at play. I apologize for the non-metric, imperial numbers, but at the 14.6 mph average, you are primarily battling rolling resistance vs. air resistance, so things like tires and weight have greater impact. At the 18.1 mph average, you are overwhelmingly dealing with air resistance vs. rolling, like to the tune of 80%/20%. It doesn't change the numbers, but improved aerodynamics of drop bars becomes the most significant at speeds over 18 mph. Now of course you ride over those speeds in order to get the 18.1 average, so it absolutely helps. But probably isn't the sole cause.

I ride a flat bar hybrid, and have struggled to break the 20 mph average speed barrier. I can hit 19.9 over 12 mile course, 19.6 on 25 mile course, and 19.2 on 50 mile course. This is where aerodynamics is crushing me. I often wonder if drops would help me, but it is impossible to quantify.

Keep hammering though. Your speed will continue to grow.

It's not impossibble at all. If you ride the same bike but equip it with drop bars and ride in those drops, and using a 19mph starting reference, you will gain about 2mph solely from riding in the drops as opposed to the flatbar. Not significant in my opinion unless you are racing. That is a high level of output for a recreational rider to sustain. If going as fast as one can is the aim, and one has the prerequisite fitness level, then a dedicated TT bike is the best bet. 19 to 20 mph is still below the threshold of where wind resistance really rears its ugly head. After one hits about 22mph aerodynamics plays a much larger part, but in a relative sense, not too much before that point. That was the basis of my point when I offered the opinion that a drop bar rode bike would offer insignificant increases in speed over a good flatbar roadbike unless the rider was already very, very fit and already averages well over 20mph. This is where the drop bars would help (albeit TT bars significantly more). Once over 22mph and into the aerodynamic threshold, a cyclist needs much, much more output to sustain this speed, about 70% more output in watts to sustain 23mph as opposed to 19mph. That is a big jump and drop bars will not cover that gap on their own, not by a long shot. It takes an exceptionally strong rider to maintain 23mph + with no help from a paceline or group. Not many can do it for long, regardless of the type of bike or bars used.

No worries champ...everyone's used to it :rolleyes:

I totally agree with your earlier post about it being insubstantial under a given speed, and all of the technical detail that I abridged originally. I struggle with the thought that even at a 20mph average speed drops will add 2mph to your average speed. Top speed, sure. Cruising speed, probably close to it. But average, I struggle with.

The 50 mile group ride course that I ride 1-2 times per weekend has 2300 ft of hill climbing. If 30% of my time is spent climbing, drops will have no impact on that time. If 5-10% is spent descending, drops could have an impact, but since I descend at the exact same pace as the group already tucked in their drops, I doubt I will see improvement there (215 lbs of gristle makes for already fast descents). So the advantage would be on the flats and gentle grades, maybe 60-65% of the ride time. So to gain 2 mph average on the total ride, I would have to gain 3.6 to 3.8 ish mph on cruising speed, which I doubt. Since I already cruise, in general, between 22 and 25 mph, terrain dependent, that seems a leap too far.

Please take none of this as argumentative. I agree with all of your summary statements. I don't race against anything other than myself, and I would love to crush the 20 mph average as simply a personal goal. I just doubt that it would get me there.

I think we are in agreement. When I referred to it not being impossible I meant it is not impossible to quantify the difference.