Go Back  Bike Forums > The Racer's Forum > Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
Reload this Page >

Practical advantages of Carbon over Aluminum track frames (beyond aero)?

Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area Looking to enter into the realm of track racing? Want to share your experiences and tactics for riding on a velodrome? The Track Cycling forums is for you! Come in and discuss training/racing, equipment, and current track cycling events.

Practical advantages of Carbon over Aluminum track frames (beyond aero)?

Reply

Old 11-05-18, 02:09 PM
  #1  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Practical advantages of Carbon over Aluminum track frames (beyond aero)?

I'm struggling with the practical advantages of carbon over aluminium track frames, other than aero...which is an important factor no doubt.

First on me: I'm moderately experienced on road bikes, doing some road and TT racing, new to track racing, enjoying it immensely, geeking out on all of the gear, getting sucked down the rabbit hole. I generally build my own bikes, test and tune fit until things are dialed, and enjoy the process. I've swapped out nearly every part on my track bike, tweaking and tuning everything, the only thing stock (for the time being) is the seat post and headset.

I'm using a Felt aluminum track frame currently (current TK2/3 series, with the seatstays that join in a single aero-shaped vertical member which hides behind the seat tube).

The aluminum Felt frame is pretty darn stiff. The way the tube shapes have been formed and tapered for aero, it really looks influenced by modern tri or TT frame designs, pretty impressed with what they've done with a very affordable track frame. Looking at carbon track frames from Felt, Look, Cervelo, Avanti, BT, FES (gorgeous), etc, it would seem that the major advantage with those frames over aluminum ones (which are limited in tube shaping) is optimized aerodynamics. Beyond that, are they stiffer, or is there some other performance advantage that makes a difference?

Ride quality would seem to be more of an issue on road, as carbon tends to be better at absorbing vibrations with tuneable layup orientation, tube tapers and shapes, etc, but I would think that perhaps it's not such a strong factor on track (granted, outdoor paved tracks may have more surface variability than wooden/indoor tracks, and a frame which absorbs vibration better may be more of a consideration in that case).

Geometry can be an issue, but instead of being limited with the stock setup, I always swap out bars, stems, posts, seats, extensions and base bars, etc and dial in fit. I'm long-legged and armed (82.5 cm BB Center to Seat Surface), pretty flexible in the lower back, and am riding 58cm road and track frames, and Med TT frame. I can make nearly any frame fit with cockpit customization within reason, as long as I'm within a reasonable range with top tube length and front stack for my height, build and riding position. For now, I'm more focused on learning about practical performance differences in carbon VS aluminum frames (and definitely wanting to avoid quality problems as well, such as spreading rear dropouts on the DF4 referenced in another thread).

Goals for my track frame of the future, in no particular order:
  • All-in-one frame, to be used for sprint and endurance events, with stem/bar swap-outs for different race types.
  • Durable, easy to live with, racing on a budget, so no fragile, finicky frames that are best left to pros who get them at no cost.
  • Affordable as possible, sub-$1000 used most likely (or might be best bang for the buck to get a complete used bike, even though I'll swap out parts later).
  • Aero as possible within reason.
The conclusion might be that, being budget-limited, even though my road and TT bikes are carbon, there is no justification for racing track on anything other than the Felt aluminum frame I'm already on. It could be that the major life-changing advantage of a carbon frame for a racing hobbyist is more aesthetics and psychological/emotional satisfaction from beautiful carbon bike designs over practical performance? We shall see...

Thanks for your insights, really appreciate it. Fun learning about this.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 02:37 PM
  #2  
topflightpro
Senior Member
 
topflightpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,019
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Yes, carbon frames can be made stiffer, more aerodynamic, and more durable than aluminum.

Whether you need anything more than the aluminum frame you have is another question.
topflightpro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 03:09 PM
  #3  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by topflightpro View Post
Yes, carbon frames can be made stiffer, more aerodynamic, and more durable than aluminum.

Whether you need anything more than the aluminum frame you have is another question.
Is there bench-testing for modern track frames published anywhere, and additionally, have there been on-track tests comparing various racing frames? It'd be interesting to read such things.

Going to carbon from aluminum on my road bikes was a significant step forward in several respects including vibration dissipation, ride quality and handling (plus acceleration and climbing with lower mass). I would imagine that even with far fewer surface quality variables on track versus road, the aero and acceleration performance improvements alone could be important considerations.

I feel like this is somewhat of a recreational discussion, as the irrational gear-guy inner voice just says, "Who cares about proof of why they're better, they're obviously more aero, lighter and look killer, what more reason do you need? Just sell one of the kids and get carbon!"

Last edited by Super D; 11-05-18 at 03:15 PM.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 03:23 PM
  #4  
carleton
Elitist
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,270
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
I'm struggling with the practical advantages of carbon over aluminium track frames, other than aero...which is an important factor no doubt.
Your gut is absolutely right. There is no huge difference...or any difference at all. It's more on the manufacturing techniques than "X material is better than Y material in terms of Z characteristics."

There exist:
- Noodly carbon frames.
- Ultra-stiff steel frames.
- Wind-tunnel superstar aluminum frames.


Originally Posted by topflightpro View Post
Yes, carbon frames can be made stiffer, more aerodynamic, and more durable than aluminum.

Whether you need anything more than the aluminum frame you have is another question.
Exactly.

A rider who makes 1600W max doesn't need the same frame as one that makes 2,500W max.

I think many budget conscious riders would benefit from swapping the suffix "-est" for the phrase "enough for me", as in: "I want the stiffest frame!" vs "I was the frame stiff enough for me!"

There are no performance gains when a rider goes from a frame that is stiff enough for them to one that is stiffer. The only rider that gains is the one who goes from a frame that they personally flex to one that they cannot flex.

Super D, I'm sure you'd have an opinion on this:

Compare a CAT1/2 rider on a properly fitting and tuned aluminum Performance Bike bike with a 105 group with a CAT3 rider on a custom Madone with "the works" package. Who would perform better?

I mean, we've seen Jens do it in the TDF

(...and it wasn't even properly fitting!)


And I've seen countless elite racers do it at DLV and elsewhere.
carleton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 03:31 PM
  #5  
carleton
Elitist
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,270
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
Is there bench-testing for modern track frames published anywhere, and additionally, have there been on-track tests comparing various racing frames? It'd be interesting to read such things.

Going to carbon from aluminum on my road bikes was a significant step forward in several respects including vibration dissipation, ride quality and handling (plus acceleration and climbing with lower mass). I would imagine that even with far fewer surface quality variables on track versus road, the aero and acceleration performance improvements alone could be important considerations.

I feel like this is somewhat of a recreational discussion, as the irrational gear-guy inner voice just says, "Who cares about proof of why they're better, they're obviously more aero, lighter and look killer, what more reason do you need? Just sell one of the kids and get carbon!"
Unfortulately, I don't know of any empirical tests of track frames. I've been asking for such for years (or at least wishing for it here).

If it makes you feel any better, I've had more money than sense when I came to bikes. I've owned:
- 2 custom alu Tiemeyers
- Dolan DF3
- LOOK 496
- Felt TK1
- Felt TK FRD
- Custom Snyder Steel
- Planet X Stealth Pro Carbon
- Bianchi Pista
- Bianchi Pista Concept

And I can honestly say that the aluminum Tiemeyers and steel Snyder were on-par with the LOOK and Felts and the Dolan was soft like the Bianchis under my fat butt (and moderate torque output). But, it is to be noted that Mr. Tiemeyer and Mr. Snyder both took my weight and power output into consideration and beefed up the tubing accordingly to make them stiff enough for me. If I hopped on some other rider's Tiemeyer or Snyder, I might find them noodly as well.
carleton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 03:32 PM
  #6  
carleton
Elitist
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,270
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
Go to this thread and start at the most recent page and work backwards. 50.1 has some nice new offerings (I'm not affiliated).

Track Racing Frames and Complete Bikes
carleton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 03:38 PM
  #7  
carleton
Elitist
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,270
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
The biggest concerns when getting in to carbon track frames are:
- Proprietary seatposts that slip (even under lighter riders)
- Proprietary stem systems

The seatpost slipping thing is very real in the track world, even among some top frames. I've heard some chatter about it in the road world, but I'm not in those forums enough to know if it's at the same extent as track.
carleton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 03:42 PM
  #8  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by carleton View Post
...There are no performance gains when a rider goes from a frame that is stiff enough for them to one that is stiffer. The only rider that gains is the one who goes from a frame that they personally flex to one that they cannot flex.

Super D, I'm sure you'd have an opinion on this:

Compare a CAT1/2 rider on a properly fitting and tuned aluminum Performance Bike bike with a 105 group with a CAT3 rider on a custom Madone with "the works" package. Who would perform better?

I mean, we've seen Jens do it in the TDF
Good perspective. Not all bikes, regardless of materials, are created equal (my Cannondale Evo Hi-Mod road bike is far superior in several ride quality and performance areas compared to my previous/older Scott Addict, for example).

In terms of the topic of getting more than you need (or more pointedly, getting more than you can exploit), I used to do a little auto racing and ski racing in younger years, and the same thought process applied in those environments. What good is getting something which offers better performance, if you don't have the ability or capacity to make use of it? How many skiers do we see on racing skis who can't buy a turn, or drivers on track piloting killer sports or racecars getting passed by someone in a much lesser car who has actual driving skills?

For me personally, the road bike I ride (carbon framed) is:
  • More comfortable, handles better and is more predictable over variable road surfaces than aluminum was.
  • Faster climbing, accelerating and is more responsive (lighter and stiffer while absorbing small vibrations, amazing combo).
  • Quicker, lighter shifting (How the heck did Shimano make DA 9000 mechanical shift so telepathically over 7900? I was shocked..)
The reality is that I will never be able to impart the pedaling force a top sprinter can, nor will I need the best equipment, because I will never approach the output levels a top track racer can, and, I will never have the resources to get the most advanced frame. So, the hunt is for what is "good enough" for a guy like me, and what "good enough" actually is. If one can figure out his or her balance of needs, it'd be best for zeroing-in on what frame is a potentially good match. I think that's a worthy outcome to pursue in this type of conversation.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 04:10 PM
  #9  
79pmooney
A Roadie Forever
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,013

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1272 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
Good perspective. Not all bikes, regardless of materials, are created equal (my Cannondale Evo Hi-Mod road bike is far superior in several ride quality and performance areas compared to my previous/older Scott Addict, for example).

In terms of the topic of getting more than you need (or more pointedly, getting more than you can exploit), I used to do a little auto racing and ski racing in younger years, and the same thought process applied in those environments. What good is getting something which offers better performance, if you don't have the ability or capacity to make use of it? How many skiers do we see on racing skis who can't buy a turn, or drivers on track piloting killer sports or racecars getting passed by someone in a much lesser car who has actual driving skills? ...
Total aside but a fun story re: race car driving - my uncle race Formual Vees at Lime Rock, Conn when I was young. (Formula Vees are Volkswagon chassis and engines in an open wheel body.) Decades late, Audi came to Lime Rock to promote their race level hottest car by renting out driver time on the track. (Kinda like auto-school, with an instructor with override controls in the passenger seat.) The promoter got word of my uncle and looked him up. Offered him a ride. My unc got to seat himself in the hottest car he had ever been in to drive a track he hadn't seen for 30 years but that he knew better than the back of his hand. Took the first lap slow as he got used tho this completely different car. Next lap, faster, in fact a touch faster than the instructor had driven, Instructor didn't react but was clearly a little nervous. Next lap, my uncle just let it hang out. An ashen instructor asked him if he wanted a job doing what he was doing!

Ben
79pmooney is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 05:18 PM
  #10  
carleton
Elitist
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,270
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
Super D, the real bang for the buck in terms of things that definitely make one faster are:

- Skinsuit
- Bike fit with focus on aerodynamics
- Helmet
- Shoe booties
- (certain) Aero Front wheel (Zipp 808 seems to be the best verified bang for the buck)

4 of those 5 relate to one's body. The body composes 90% of the things that make drag. The aero front wheel is most of that remaining 10%.

The frame is mostly just the platform on which everything is attached. It must be stable. A frame being aero is only a small bonus when compared to the entire package.
carleton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 05:48 PM
  #11  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by 79pmooney View Post
Total aside but a fun story re: race car driving - my uncle race Formual Vees at Lime Rock, Conn when I was young. (Formula Vees are Volkswagon chassis and engines in an open wheel body.) Decades late, Audi came to Lime Rock to promote their race level hottest car by renting out driver time on the track. (Kinda like auto-school, with an instructor with override controls in the passenger seat.) The promoter got word of my uncle and looked him up. Offered him a ride. My unc got to seat himself in the hottest car he had ever been in to drive a track he hadn't seen for 30 years but that he knew better than the back of his hand. Took the first lap slow as he got used tho this completely different car. Next lap, faster, in fact a touch faster than the instructor had driven, Instructor didn't react but was clearly a little nervous. Next lap, my uncle just let it hang out. An ashen instructor asked him if he wanted a job doing what he was doing!

Ben
Sounds like you have a fun uncle!
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 05:54 PM
  #12  
gl98115
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
The conclusion might be that, being budget-limited, even though my road and TT bikes are carbon, there is no justification for racing track on anything other than the Felt aluminum frame I'm already on.
There's your answer.
gl98115 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 05:57 PM
  #13  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by carleton View Post
Super D, the real bang for the buck in terms of things that definitely make one faster are:

- Skinsuit
- Bike fit with focus on aerodynamics
- Helmet
- Shoe booties
- (certain) Aero Front wheel (Zipp 808 seems to be the best verified bang for the buck)

4 of those 5 relate to one's body. The body composes 90% of the things that make drag. The aero front wheel is most of that remaining 10%.

The frame is mostly just the platform on which everything is attached. It must be stable. A frame being aero is only a small bonus when compared to the entire package.
Sounds very similar to what I learned about time trialing, funny how those pesky laws of physics work!

It would be interesting to see for a given rider, with all of the elements you mentioned, which frame designs are additive in terms of aerodynamics in some meaningful way. And, for the same rider, which frames provide other advantages beyond aerodynamics, whatever measurable factors those may be. As you rightly pointed out, having an ultra stiff frame which can transmits energy from a massively strong sprinter isn't necessary for someone who doesn't put out that level of power.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 06:02 PM
  #14  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by gl98115 View Post
There's your answer.
That's what it seems like. I'm still curious learning about frames (because it's fun to understand how the different pieces of gear work, just like other speed sports), but I realize that the biggest factor in improving speed is improving me, and that will be the case for quite a long time, maybe forever.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 07:13 PM
  #15  
taras0000
Senior Member
 
taras0000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 43.2330941,-79.8022037,17
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
That's what it seems like. I'm still curious learning about frames (because it's fun to understand how the different pieces of gear work, just like other speed sports), but I realize that the biggest factor in improving speed is improving me, and that will be the case for quite a long time, maybe forever.


Not forever. Just when knowing what you want, desire, and have extra cash to make it "justifiable" to "upgrade". Part of the fun of track racing is dialling your race rig to what yiu want, as well as honing yourself. And as another reason to allow that, it drives the small economy behind the track equipment scene.
taras0000 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 07:25 PM
  #16  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by taras0000 View Post

Not forever. Just when knowing what you want, desire, and have extra cash to make it "justifiable" to "upgrade". Part of the fun of track racing is dialling your race rig to what yiu want, as well as honing yourself. And as another reason to allow that, it drives the small economy behind the track equipment scene.
Trackís gotta be the smallest segment of the cycling industry, I would guess. But I think it should be more well-known. Such a fun sport to participate in, and itís the best for visibility for spectators as well! I really enjoyed watching races at worlds, such a great view of strategy in motion up close.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 11:08 PM
  #17  
Godsight
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Qc,Canada
Posts: 152

Bikes: Felt TK FRD

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Originally Posted by carleton View Post
Super D, the real bang for the buck in terms of things that definitely make one faster are:

- Skinsuit
- Bike fit with focus on aerodynamics
- Helmet
- Shoe booties
- (certain) Aero Front wheel (Zipp 808 seems to be the best verified bang for the buck)

4 of those 5 relate to one's body. The body composes 90% of the things that make drag. The aero front wheel is most of that remaining 10%.

The frame is mostly just the platform on which everything is attached. It must be stable. A frame being aero is only a small bonus when compared to the entire package.
Shoe booties are illegal for indoor track racing IIRC
Godsight is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 11:29 PM
  #18  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Godsight View Post
Shoe booties are illegal for indoor track racing IIRC
I think you're right, only mid-calf socks are allowed. I use aero shoe covers in outdoor time trials only.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-18, 11:39 PM
  #19  
Dalai
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,107
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
I think you're right, only mid-calf socks are allowed. I use aero shoe covers in outdoor time trials only.
Godsight is correct. Been banned indoors a number of years now*...

*UCI focusing on the big issues in racing.
Dalai is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-18, 07:17 AM
  #20  
topflightpro
Senior Member
 
topflightpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,019
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Super D View Post
That's what it seems like. I'm still curious learning about frames (because it's fun to understand how the different pieces of gear work, just like other speed sports), but I realize that the biggest factor in improving speed is improving me, and that will be the case for quite a long time, maybe forever.
I'm going to disagree with this some. Track is the first place where I truly felt the frame made a difference, notably in the handling, which means I'm going faster.
topflightpro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-18, 09:30 AM
  #21  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by topflightpro View Post
I'm going to disagree with this some. Track is the first place where I truly felt the frame made a difference, notably in the handling, which means I'm going faster.
Okay, now I've got questions...

What you were riding at first, what did you switch to, what was different materially and structurally, and what did the new frame/bike feel like in detail versus the previous one? What do you like most about it, and (other than price if that's a friction point), is there anything you don't particularly like?

I've felt differences in road bike frames and tires, tennis racquets and strings, snow skis and boots, sports car suspensions and tires, skateboard wheels and trucks, etc. In track bikes, with such a limited range of surface variables, I would bet that the differences in frames could stand out to an experienced rider, so it's going to be interesting hearing your reflections on this. Now...I'm aware that I don't "need" a different frame, and my abilities as a rider are the most important things to improve, but understanding the differences in frames can help if I eventually try to find a better one during an irrational time of obsession...That never happens with bike gear for any of us, does it.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-18, 10:28 AM
  #22  
carleton
Elitist
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,270
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
Because of the *multiple* angled surfaces of the track, different head tube angles and fork offsets have dramatically different effects on handling. And thatís on a single velodrome. If the rider travels to other velodromes of different dimensions, there will be different experiences.

...then factor in rider speed.

I would imagine that this is similar to adjusting caster and camber on a race car. When itís right, itís awesome. When itís not, then confidence plummets.
carleton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-18, 10:41 AM
  #23  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by carleton View Post
Because of the *multiple* angled surfaces of the track, different head tube angles and fork offsets have dramatically different effects on handling. And thatís on a single velodrome. If the rider travels to other velodromes of different dimensions, there will be different experiences.

...then factor in rider speed.

I would imagine that this is similar to adjusting caster and camber on a race car. When itís right, itís awesome. When itís not, then confidence plummets.
Oh gosh, I'm going to cover my ears, can't think about the concept of getting different bikes for different tracks. My wife would kill me. She hasn't yet, but that would be pretty good grounds for it, I'd imagine.

This is an important point I haven't asked about, geometry. Looking at Felt for example, my alu frame VS the TK1 carbon frame, it's more than just a different animal with tube materials and structural design; the TK1 is long and low in its geometry, completely different handling. I'd imagine it's more stable at speed.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-18, 12:46 PM
  #24  
colnago62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,090
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Stick with what you have for now. You will know when it is time to purchase a new frame. I would take the money you would have spent on a carbon frame and buy a powermeter. That would be money well spent that could move from bike to bike.
colnago62 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-18, 01:00 PM
  #25  
Super D
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Super D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: San Diego
Posts: 100

Bikes: Scott Addict R2, DB mtb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Originally Posted by colnago62 View Post
Stick with what you have for now. You will know when it is time to purchase a new frame. I would take the money you would have spent on a carbon frame and buy a powermeter. That would be money well spent that could move from bike to bike.
Thatís a great reminder. Iím running power on road and TT bikes, havenít gotten to that yet on the track bike. Need to find a simple solution. I went for L/R power crank on the TT bike and it was overkill. But I was curious. Thinking either left arm only or pedals going forward. Left arm on road bike has been adequate, helpful, solid training benefit for the cost over the years.
Super D is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service