Road vs Mountain bikes and a question of speed (rant)
 

So i'm fairly new to this forum, started lurking a few weeks ago before making an account and i would like to bring up a subject that always comes up, whether it be here, cycling videos on youtube, LBS websites and the likes. This is, as the title suggests, the question of speed differences between road bikes and mountain bikes. It seems that no matter how much it's avoided, the topic will eventually arise, and it only ever seems to rest in a way that always baffles me. For this reason, i'd like us to take a moment and think about the ACTUAL differences between road and mountain bikes, and how they relate to speed.

Firstly, I wish to address the notion that whenever comparing the two, the person involved on either bike is, for some reason, never good enough. What i mean is, people will always jump to the conclusion that it's not your bike that makes you faster, it's you. Well excuse my brief language but no ****, Sherlock. Yes, practise makes proficiency. Everyone vested in any hobby knows this. However, thats not the topic being questioned. I'm sick of seeing people respond to this, saying that it doesn't matter which you ride on, as long as you're riding. This is pure bs. I'm much faster on my 70's Huffy road bike then i am on my '13 29er, and i have numbers to back it up. On my 29er, my PR on a segment i frequent was 2:04. Days after getting my road bike, and my first time doing that segment with it, i got it to 1:53. Clearly, the bike being used matters.

Next, i would like to discuss what makes a road bike definitely faster than a mountain bike. Now i'm no expert, far from it. I'm a novice cyclist with less than 2k miles under my belt who only recently found out what the word peloton means. Despite this, however, it seems to me that the #1 thing that sets apart a mountain bike and road bike in terms of speed, is geometry. Mtb's are all laid back and relaxed, while road bikes are aggressive and straight forward, literally. Geometrically, the difference between a Specialized Demo and a Specialized Shiv is monumental. It's not just about being aero. In my experience, being in a more aggressive geometry has allowed me to put a huge difference of power down. On my 29er, i would be struggling on 2-5 sitting up right, but if i clung to the forks, i'd be zipping by on 3-7 with 80+ cadence no problem. The difference in ability was astounding and all i had to do was change my geometry.

Lastly, i'd like to talk about marginal gains. I'm no Team Sky advocate, but i'll be damned if their view on marginal gains isn't spot on. This idea that speed is solely dependent on the rider is constantly proven nonsense day in and out by people around the world when they try different things on their bike. It may be a new position, it may be lighter wheels or perhaps clipless pedals. People are always trying to upgrade their ride because they realize that many little things make a big difference. A ten dollar road bike from a garage sale shaved 11 seconds off a PR on my favorite segment over my $200 mtb. Why? Geometry and the ability to effectively put more power down is one, but it's also marginal gains. A much lighter frame to push, much less rolling resistance, slightly more aero bike and available position. These small, marginal gains allowed for a big difference in results. Those 11 seconds might not seem like much over a 1 mile sprint, but taking advantage of those gains could lead to even more over a greater distance, leading to better speed. Thats the whole point here: going faster.

I realise that i've ranted a lot so far, so i'm going to put this into simple formulaic sense. X=rider at 145lbs Y= Strava segment, Z= 25<x lb 29er hardtail, Q= ~20lb crappy old road bike. So then:
X+Y+Z= 2:03
X+Y+Q= 1:53

This example is hardly scientific, but accurate. The mere change is bike adds gains. And when the question is achieving greater speeds, why is it that people always feel the need to fight gains? When Contador wins the TDF on a mountain bike, then we can say the bike doesn't matter. Until then, road bikes are faster than mountain bikes on the road, hence the ****ing classification.

TL;DR: A lot of little gains lead to big gains and if you think differently, you're not thinking right.

P.S I see one person saying it's the rider not the ride, and i will burn down an orphanage.

Tonight at 7: Bikes with lower drag and lower rolling resistance tires are faster than bikes with higher drag and higher rolling resistance tires.

no way i'm reading all that.

holy crap, summarize son.

A lot of it is a matter of fit. MTB racers run very aggressive fits, back angle about the same as a roadie. If you're sitting upright on your MTB it's either the LBS' fault for selling you the wrong size or model bike, or your fault for not insisting on an aggressive fit. You get an MTB with an aggressive fit, put narrow bars on it and 1" slick tires at 100 lbs and you're going up the road pretty good.

Back when I started doing long fast group rides, there was a guy used to come out with us on an old red steel rigid MTB with knobbies. He was over 6' and looked kind of funny over those little bitty wheels, but he had a flat back. He kept up just fine on 18 mph average centuries with 6000' climbing. Of course he would have been faster on a road bike or even the MTB with slicks, but he was dumbing the bike down to our level of riding. There's another local guy who competed on ultras who'd ride a full knobby rigid MTB on the one-day STP, just as fast as the roadies he'd paceline with. He wasn't particularly fast, never finished high up on the ultras, but he knew how to ride and how to fit his bike. He just thought a road bike was too easy. I could always tell he was around because of the sound.

Along that same line, there was a 2 who'd come out with us in winter on his fixie. He'd keep up fine on the hilly courses for a while, but eventually he'd have to break off after one too many 175 rpm descents. Something different for him to do in winter.

So there's more to it than just the type of bike. That said, of course most road bikes will be faster on pavement than most MTBs. But maybe not all. I've ridden some pretty sucky road bikes.

It's all about what you want to do, what your training goals are, what your expertise and talent is, and who you want to ride with. You want to go off the front of the Social ride on your new road bike? What's the deal with speed, unless you're riding with a group you can't keep up with? You're getting cups now but you want KOMs? Sometimes what you need is a slower group of friends.

You know what I finally did? I said screw it and started riding a tandem with my newbie wife. Took all the pressure off trying to be in the front group and I like it better that way. We have a lot of fun and still ride with the same group, just not at the front. Took about 3 mph off my average speed. So that's a good thing: the same ride lasts longer and thus is even better training. I think a lot of people on here could benefit by moving in that direction.

Not worth reading; my summary of the story: A road bike is better on the road than a mountain bike.

A lot of effort in to the article, that is good I guess. An 11 second difference is most likely from a tailwind/lack of fatigue rather than the new $10 bike. A 30 pound bike has no noticeable speed difference when compared to a 15 pound bike of that with the same tires; this being on a flat surface.

Love this.

Yep. Newbie rant.

I will mop the road with you, me on my MTB and you on Contador's bike. But my rando bike and MTB both have the same riding position, but the MTB still looses about 2-3mph on the road and will loose in any sprint. That is a real but comparatively small difference.

If I want to win a race against 30 other guys that are within 1% of my fitness, I will take every .01% advantage I can get! I don't think anyone is saying the bike makes no difference, just that the riders strength is by far the biggest factor. You can't make a thoroughbread out of a donkey by buying him a fancy bike (EPO maybe). Don't waste your money on fancy bikes if the old lady on a trike is going to smoke you anyway.

Why is my MTB slower? Knobby tires, wide Q-factor, suspension fork, wider arm position. But it is still a lot of fun to ride, any time, any where!

I road my road bike yesterday on some single track and was slow as **** and about died several times. Don't know what the hell the OP is talking about.

Wait, you have a $200 mountain bike?

Too rich for my blood - I'm out.

Road bikes are indeed faster than mountain bikes and hybrids. It's a known fact that the wheels on a road bike are lighter, narrower, and have higher pressure. This alone gives significantly less rolling resistance. Then, there's the taller gearing of a road bike, as compared to a mountain bike with much lower gear sets that are designed to take on the steep upgrades demanded of them. Obviously, wider tires are required to cover loose surfaces that a road bike tire will sink into. Hybrids are the jack of all trades, master of none. They are designed for a variety of roads, from tarmac to loose gravel. A mountain bike is designed more for fire roads and trails, which the more aggressive knobby tires are designed for. Any of the three varieties can ride on pavement, but road bikes are best suited for the smooth surfaces due to their lower rolling resistance and taller gearing. Then, there's the question of aerodynamics, where the rider sits in a crouched position, giving less wind resistance. With either a mountain or hybrid, the rider sits upright, and efficiency is further reduced due to the wind pushing back on the rider and equipment, providing more resistance against the rider and bike's forward motion. There is a big difference in speed and efficiency between the three, and each type of bike is designed for its specific purpose.

I'm still running training wheels on my balance bike. It's wicked fast though.

Why is it so hard to accept that a road bike is actually faster on the road than a mountain bike of similar quality? Noone would argue the opposite off road.

Sure, it's possible to adapt a MTB for the road, but then you no longer have a MTB, you have a road bike wannabe that's still not as good as the real thing.

Because nobody who jumped on the bandwagon in that other thread wants to admit that they were wrong

And there we have it. Z-Q=41

I ride a hybrid. When I switched the tires from 35s to 28s, I noticed a significant difference. When my friend did the same, she noticed a big difference. So based on this experience, tires can make you faster. I rode my mountain bike during an event this fall that included a combination of dirt and paved roads. I wish I had ridden my hybrid (Giant Escape 1). The mountain bike (Schwinn MOAB) was way too slow for me. THe weight is about the same, but I feel the front suspension fork on the mountain bike really killed performance.

No, you would still have the MTB, but one with narrower smooth tires for pavement. You can get an extra wheel set, one for trails and the other for roads. In fact, there are dropped bar conversions for those beefier frames, which work very well for some people, especially commuters. But even with the slick tires and dropped bars, the MTB would still not have the same efficiency as a road bike. And this is again, due to the differences in geometry, heavier frame, and lower gearing.

It's about using the right tool for the job.

Nah, this is BF, it's about hammering a square peg into a round hole. :)

and you better use a $4000 carbon fiber hammer, or gtfo

This post is exactly what my rant is about. People like this who insist on talking about body types and personal fitness when that isn't what the topic is about. My rant isn't about shaping up and doing 200 miles a day, it's about being realistic about what is definitely better for your speed, bike-wise.

A Perfect bike fit, maintaining the same watts over the same course, and you'll be going much faster on a SuperSix than you are on some wal-mart brand bike. Thats the point my post was getting at, that and the simple-minded crap that people like you try to push onto others. Some bikes are just better than others and instead of shying away from this, we should be embracing it. If it's "the engine", than why is it that people on long boards zipp past cyclist on descents without breaking a sweat? Is it possibly because their mode of transportation is faster and more efficient? Or do you want to argue that their superior fitness allows them to produce more power?

You are bringing nothing new to the table. OMG it is so crazy a $2000 road bike is faster than a $150 Walmart mountain bike. If a person with a power of 75w over an hour rides the road bike, there will be maybe 1 mph improvement over the $150 bike.

Wtf was all that?

So many words........

all noob threads should be screened by a moderator.

I was chased by a Chihuahua yesterday. Yap, yap. Yap,yap, yap.....

Long board faster & more efficient than bike, you say?