getting older, still like to climb
 

So I'm looking for a new road bike. Most rides where I live will involve about 1000 feet of climbing and I'm not as strong as I used to be. I know I need a triple crank, but I'm wondering if I'd be happier on a lighter (carbon? aluminum?) bike than on the steel frames I've traditionally ridden. Any thoughts?

Probably not. A pound or two difference in frame weight is not that big a deal. The triple is a good idea, also think about getting a mountain geared cassette (11-34) and derailer for the rear. The lower gears will stand you in much better stead, and increase your climbing comfort, than a lighter frame in and of itself. That being said there's no reason not to try out a carbon or aluminum frame.

I just put 35/50T Veloce compact cranks on my wife's and my steel bike, which also have 28T max rear cogs, and the difference over the 42T small chain rings we were riding is huge. The silver ISO cranks were only $40 each on Ebay and are very attractive on an old steel bike. You might try this out with your current ride before investing in a new bike.

You will notice a significant difference between an older steel bike, and a CF bike. Several pounds of wieght, and the extra stiffnes will be very noticeable.

The difference between a high end modern lightweight steel bike, and a CF bike won't be as great.

So, decide on how much you want to spend. Identify the candidates in your price range, ride them and pick the one fits you and feels good to you.

1000 feet of climbing is hardly anything if you live in a hilly area. Even my "flat" training route has more climbing than that.

The most important feature of a climbing bike is how well it fits you. People tend to slack off on very flat roads, so efficiency losses due to poor fit don't have a big effect there. On a long climb, however, the difference between a good fit and a bad fit is very noticeable.

A stiff frame can be helpful on a long climb at higher speeds. If you use a granny gear, then stiffness is not so important.

As others have said, weight is not that important unless the climb is very long and the weight difference is several pounds or more.

Thanks!
 

Thanks, guys. those are very helpful suggestions. My steel bike is pretty old (Bridgestone) so I think I might look for something newer and lighter, but stick with steel.

p.s. Johnny, you may not have meant it this way but your comment really felt like a put down to me. A thousand foot unbroken climb is not insignificant. And even if you think it is I'm not sure why you needed to point that out.

My point is that a new bike will not make much difference on a 1000 foot hill. Gearing and bike fit and physical fitness are much much much more important.

1000 ft = a climb. 1000ft over 25 miles of rollers is just a ride. What really matters on the climb is over how many miles you pick up that 1000 ft. 2 or 6?

Anyway a lighter bike is not the answer, but a compact may work just as well as a triple.

Also, don't take the comments personally on this forum. Everyone's internet "member" is huge.

Thanks, KU. We pick up 1000 feet in under 2 miles in my neighborhood. But I'm not bragging. I'm lucky if I get out of my granny gear! ;-)