Comfort vs Performance Geometry
 

I'm having problems deciding between a comfort geometry type bike and performance geometry. I was hoping to pick some people's brains and get some different ideas. I'm used to riding mountain and hybrid bikes, so naturally I'm presently favoring a more upright riding position. However, my objectives in getting a road bike is so I can go faster and keep up with the road bike group rides. Some of the comfort type models I've either looked at or tested are: 1200c, Sequoia, and my LBS is going to get a Big Sky from their warehouse for me to try.

The sales guy at my LBS, tells me he can set up a performance type bike with a more upright riding position by adding spacers to the steerer, changing to an angled stem, and/or changing the position of the shifter hoods on the bar. Some of the performance type bikes I've looked at and tested are the Allez, 1500, and they can get a Tourmalet for me to look at. My LBS is a dealer for Trek, Specialized, and Lemond.

One other bike that seems to be between the two types is the Pilot 2.1. This bike is a bit more pricey that I would prefer, but I don't mind biting the bullet if there is a compelling reason to do so.

One thought is, setting up a performance type bike in an upright riding position might give me more options because once my flexibility improves and I get used to riding a road bike, I may want to drop into more of a lower riding position. Is this a viable option, or should I just go with the comfort geometry and plan on buying a performance bike if I want to change later on? Any thoughts on this subject are appreciated.

My personal opinion is if you purchase a bike with a short steerer tube you will regret it if you are a recreational cyclist. The Pilot is built expressly with this in mind. Everybody wants to look like Lance on a bike but few can endure that position without pain. Some can on the board but I cannot and I try to ride everyday. My new 61 cm c-t-t Bianchi has a slightly more performance oriented frame geometry compared to the Pilot but not much...pretty close. The steerer tube on my bike is big...a full 8" = 200mm...just how I like it and what the Pilot is all about. In the drops the bike is still very fast. If I want to go faster and my back and neck can take it, a simple stem change and I am down low. If you are young and aspire to race then I would say a more conventional road bike frame geometry Trek would be better. The Pilot is a hell of a nice bike for the recreational cyclist and can still go 30 mph with a good rider on it.
George

I'm 38 and have no aspirations to race. The Pilot looks like a very nice bike to me as well, but it also looks like it's about $200-250 more than other bikes equiped with similar components. This is my only reservation with the Pilot. My LBS doesn't sell Bianchi and I would just as soon stick with what they have if possible since they are less than 1 mile from my house. I've also bought other bikes from them and I'm confident in their ability to match me with the right bike and fit me properly.

If you are beholden to a particular bike shop and what they carry then chose another comfort model at your price point.
Good Luck,
George

comfort is number 1 priority.

You will ride more if you are comfortable.

The more you ride the faster you will get.

speed is priority number 1.

the more you ride the more comfortable you will get.

why compromise?

Even if you get a comfort road bike, the engine (YOU) is waht will keep you with the fast crowd.

Check out the Specialized Roubaix line. For the most part it's set up like a "performance" road bike, it just has a more upright geometry and slighter longer wheelbase.

It doesn't take much sometimes to make performance geometry a bit more comfortable. I recently put in a more angled stem on my Trek 1500 to raise the handlebars. Also, you are correct that your position will evolve as you get more used to road bikes. I am much more stretched out and infinitely more comfortable riding on the hoods than I was a year ago.

If you're worried about length of your steerer tube, you might see if they can get one that's cut a bit long to give you more room for spacers. If you find it's too long, you can always have a spacer above the stem.

For a recreational rider with no intention to race? What?

Not if the fit is bad or the geometry is inappropriate for the bike's use.

Excellent question! Comprimising fit and comfort for a marginal gain in speed is a bad comprimise.

I would agree, but my concern is going with a so-called comfort model and having more discomfort on longer rides due to too much weight on the saddle. It also seems that many people's definition of comfort changes after they've been riding road bikes for a while, so I'm just trying to get to know what other's experiences have been.

I looked at the Roubaix today. The base Roubaix definitely looks like a step up from a base Pilot, but it's also about $300 more and I'm already at the top of what I'm willing to pay with the base Pilot. My sales guy is checking to see if they have any of last years models at their other stores, but he said they were pretty popular last year so he wasn't optimistic about having any. In size 52, the geometries of both are very close with the only significant difference being the almost 1 degree greater seat angle on the Roubaix.

Get comfortable before anything else...! You'll ride more, and after you've done that, you'll want another bike to go faster with. Don't skimp on quality of either bike, and you'll be happy. For comfort, get yourself a '70s vintage sport-tourer with Reynolds 531 double-butted or Columbus SL tubes, a longish wheelbase, and 72-73 degree frame angles. For a racer, get any modern latest-greatest thing you want. Ride the sport-tourer until you're curious about going fast. My .02¢.

Isn't this about the point in the thread where someone posts the message that says "ride them all and go with the one that is most comfortable to you?" My perspective is that the dimensions really aren't tremendously different, and certainly can be tweaked (e.g., a different steerer and stem on a 'racing' bike can make the dimensions pretty much like a 'comfort' bike). But all of the measurements can't equate to a good feel. Find a bike shop that is willing to work with you to get the optimal fit. That will be more important than whether you choose a comfort or racing model.

I'm definitely not obsessed with speed. Right now, I average 15 mph on my hybrid on longer rides. My LBS has group rides leaving the store two times per week and the slowest guys average 17 mph over 30 miles. I'm basically just looking for something that's efficient enough to keep up with the slower riders. I'm just leary of anything labeled as "comfort" due to my experience with my hybrid. After 30 miles on it, my butt hurts despite the big puffy saddle and suspension seat post. My knees are also sore the next day.

I rode a Trek 2300 carbon/aluminum road bike w/ aggressive geometry for 12 years before I sold it and bought a Trek Pilot 5.2 two weeks ago. I'm turning 42 this month and found the aggressive geometry to be too uncomfortable now. I had added a high rise stem to my 2300 to try to get into a more comfortable position, but realized it made more sense to buy a new bike that was designed for a more upright position. So far, I'm amazed at how much of a difference it makes. Bottom line is unless you are a hard core racer (and young!), the additional comfort the Pilot or Roubaix gives you far outweighs the small loss of aerodynamics. Both the Pilot and Roubaix are still very light, nimble, and fast. The best benefit is that the added comfort allow you to ride LONGER.

I also turn 42 this month and not a hard core racer, just an average racer. And the bottom line for me is still all out racing geometry is both comfortable and aerodynamic. At our age I don't want to be giving anything up to the young guns.

This does not limit the length of my rides, just allows me to get to the end faster.

Your butt is sore BECAUSE of the big Puffy saddle. Search this forum for Brooks saddles. Your problem isn't your bike but rather your saddle. Big Puffy saddles= spongey but jabbers.

You need a early-mid '70s Raleigh International... Ask anyone who's had one. Another that comes to mind is a Holdsworth Mistral; very comfy, yet made for fast touring. Something a little more modern, yet a great sport-tourer is a Woodrup Giro Sport. I really like sport-tourers; they're something like the stage road race bikes were before the mid '70s. Here's a pic of one of my Woodrups; this bike can go nearly anywhere, and it's fast and comfortable:

I was in a similar situation. I'm 42, been riding a hybrid for the past few years but was ready for a rode bike. I was all set to buy the Roubaix for the "comfort". Then I started test riding more aggressive bikes just to make sure. At first they didn't feel very comfortable but surprisingly, the more I tested them the more comfortable they became. Eventually, after months of test rides, I purchased a bike with a more aggressive geometry because it actually felt better than the comfort bikes. I'd recommend test riding both types on at least 4 or 5 different occassions, to see if things start to change as you get used to the different geometries. After being used to the upright position of a hybrid/mountain bike, you will feel more comfortable on a comfort bike at first but that may change. Give the aggresive geometry bikes some time and see what you think.

I've test ridden about 10 bikes so far and I'm coming to the same conclusion. My first rides were on a 1500 and I didn't like it, but I'm starting to warm up to similar models. I took a good hard look at the Pilot today. It appears to have very similar geometry to agressive bikes with the exception of a higher bar. Simply removing some spacers and turning the stem over would produce a more aggressive riding position.

Speed is not always the number 1 priority... unless you are a racer, even then. There are some cyclists that like to do slower or longer rides and enjoy the scenery...

I have a very agressive handlebar to top tube angle and after about 30 miles my neck hurts, even in the tops. For longer riders I would even ride a more upright bike for training rides (in races I just endure the pain and be done with it). Of course as I get back to the longer rides the pain goes away slowly... but it does take time.

You can get rather aero on a comfort bike also. DO not let someone sucker you into a race bike when what you need is a comfort bike.

BTW the pilot is a nice bike... but there are other choices out there... :)

You don't necessarily have to go with comfort geometry to ride comfortably. For instance, if you normally ride a 54 cm bike, you could switch to a 56. This would mean that your seat would not be as high and the drop to the handlebars would not be as severe. You could then make up for the longer top tube by choosing a shorter stem. This will put you in a more upright and comfortable position even with a racing geometry.

Talk to your LBS owner and get his advice.

I think many of you are getting hung up on the "Comfort" description. The Roubaix and Pilot are still very close in geometry to classic racing bikes. Where they differ is in the ride quality and a more upright position. Lowering the stem will still give the rider an aerodynamic and aggressive position on these bikes. Don't be a cycling snob and assume the changes can't be positive. As I got older, my neck and back asked me to raise the stem on my Trek 2300 to a more upright position. I'm riding just as fast on my Pilot and am more comfortable. I also find that the Pilot handles almost as well as my "aggressive" geometry 2300. I guess if I was hitting 70 mph on a steep descent like some pros do, the higher head tube might have a detrimental effect on handling, but for fast recreational riding, and even some racing, the Pilot, Roubaix, or OCR, can perform well. If you haven't ridden one of these bikes, please don't make assumptions based on a close minded approach.

Back around 1980, a "Comfort Bike" and a "Performance Bike" were the same bike. It took about a minute to raise the bars to a rider's preferred height (and raising the bars also brings the bars back closer to the saddle. And, a minute to drop the bars to a low position, if that were ever necessary.

After all of the "improvements" that have been made on road bikes over the past decade, many middle aged riders are on bikes that have the bars three or four inches lower than the saddle, and they are in a lot of pain...crotch, neck, back, hands, wrists. Pain that come with pretending to be a 25 year old Pro rider.

However, you can still get a comfortable fit on a road bike. Buy the largest size you can comfortably ride. So, at 5'9", I am riding size 58 bikes, not the size 55 or 56 a bike shop would put me on. That makes it easier to get the bars up higher. Then, add a stem that brings the bars back closer to the saddle, and raises them up as high as the saddle.

The funny thing is, the bike with the best performance is also the bike that is the most comfortable. If you are comfortable, you ride more hours per day and per week. You get in better shape, and ride faster. A lot of "performance bikes" that don't fit well end up hanging in the garage...they don't perform well hanging on the ceiling.