Fast backup bike...
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 230
Fast backup bike...
Okay, so I've posted about my Frankenstein backup TT bike. It's built around an old aluminum Motobecane frame. The frame is almost 20 years old, but is of excellent quality; light and very stiff. I threw a set of cheap 50mm SuperTeam wheels on it, which are very nice. I have a COVID-era 9-speed Sora RD and converted it into a 1x9, fit it with Specialized short-reach "comp" bars, a single bar-end shifter, and Zipp Vuka Aeros. I recently inserted an Omni zero set-back seat post, which for $35 is super high quality, and a Selle SMP Dynamic saddle. I got the saddle off eBay for $115 and it's essentially new ($290 retail.) I had Conti GP5000 clincher tires (23 of front, 25 rear), which I had problems mounting, but which are all good now. I took the bike for a quick spin this evening. I have to take a more scientific approach, but I believe that for my purposes, it's almost as fast as my Cannondale Slice with deep DT Swiss wheels. I actually finished a 2.5 mile loop in less time on it than on my Cannondale.
I don't know how to feel about this??? I spent lots of time and money on my TT setup.
I don't know how to feel about this??? I spent lots of time and money on my TT setup.
#2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 907
Far from an expert here but my guess is that if you're as fast or faster on a road bike than on a dedicated TT bike, then your position on the TT bike is off. But there are, of course, other factors that come in to play such as crank length, gearing, etc. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison.
#3
Sr Member on Sr bikes

Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 3,075
Likes: 1,251
From: Rhode Island (sometimes in SE Florida)
Bikes: Several...from old junk to new all-carbon.
Just wondering what the weather conditions were on that 2.5 mile loop. Were they similar during both rides? What is the aero comparison between the two bikes? I have a very aero Specialized Venge that I almost never ride because here in coastal RI we almost ALWAYS have wind (Newport, RI is the sailing capital of the world). And I’ve found that riding the thing in a crosswind is difficult, and a real effort to keep straight. I and think would be slower than a non-aero bike. — Dan
#4
Senior Member


Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 1,455
From: Saratoga, CA
Bikes: 1981 Bianchi Specialissima, 1971 Bob Jackson. 2012 Kestrel 4000. 2012 Willier. 2016 Fuji Cross 1.1, 1950 Hetchins, 194X James Fothergill, 1971 Paramount P15, 1973 Paramount P12, 1963 Legnano (x2), 1951 Hetchins, 2024 Canyon Endurace
Far from an expert here but my guess is that if you're as fast or faster on a road bike than on a dedicated TT bike, then your position on the TT bike is off. But there are, of course, other factors that come in to play such as crank length, gearing, etc. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison.
#5
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 907
Yes, like I said though, there are a number of variables involved. Hip angle is a big one too.
Now, thanks to the arthritis in my back and neck, I just can't do the whole "get low, get aero" thing like you see a lot of people doing out there in triathlon. My position, so far as my back is concerned, is really not a whole lot different than my position on a road bike down in the drops. But I'm noticeably faster on a TT bike, even with a relatively similar position. I think there are two factors that account for that. First and most important, is hip angle. TT bikes do tend to have steeper seat tubes, plus I have my seat cranked absolutely as far forward as I can get it. This helps open up my hip angle a little bit for better breathing and better leverage on the pedals. Second is I just presenting a smaller frontal area to the wind. Yes, I have aero bars on my road bikes, but I'm higher on them because of the built in geometry of a road bike. I can get lower out on the drops, but that opens me up more and presents a larger frontal area.
So it's a balancing act. I've been passed more times than I can count by people chugging along on a road bike. They have it set up well for them. Me, I'm not nearly as comfortable on any of my road bikes as I am on my TT bikes. They just fit me better.
Now, thanks to the arthritis in my back and neck, I just can't do the whole "get low, get aero" thing like you see a lot of people doing out there in triathlon. My position, so far as my back is concerned, is really not a whole lot different than my position on a road bike down in the drops. But I'm noticeably faster on a TT bike, even with a relatively similar position. I think there are two factors that account for that. First and most important, is hip angle. TT bikes do tend to have steeper seat tubes, plus I have my seat cranked absolutely as far forward as I can get it. This helps open up my hip angle a little bit for better breathing and better leverage on the pedals. Second is I just presenting a smaller frontal area to the wind. Yes, I have aero bars on my road bikes, but I'm higher on them because of the built in geometry of a road bike. I can get lower out on the drops, but that opens me up more and presents a larger frontal area.
So it's a balancing act. I've been passed more times than I can count by people chugging along on a road bike. They have it set up well for them. Me, I'm not nearly as comfortable on any of my road bikes as I am on my TT bikes. They just fit me better.
#6
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 230
Thanks all. I have a short vacation coming up. But when I get back I'm going to comparison-test the bikes and will report back. Also, I'm heading to Wisconsin, where my $400 Craigslist Felt S32 awaits its first ride in 10 years! I'll report on that also.
#9
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 230
Okay, just had another spin. How can I describe this bike? Oh, I know....SLOW. It is the slowest bike I've ever ridden, outside beach cruisers. It's a 54, which is my size, but it's too small. I'd have to get a saddle that I can set further back and a longer bar stem. It's really light, but has these stock Felt TTR4 aluminum wheels that do nothing in terms of speed. The roads here in bucolic farmland Wisconsin are rolling and climbing well is an impossibility. That's because of the undersized frame and atrocious wheels. By comparison, my Stan's Alpha 400 aluminum wheels feel like space age technology. The wheels came with new Vittoria Zaffiros, which are a grippy, reliable tire, but which are slower than my 81 year old mother. It wouldn't be so bad, except the bike is supposed to be ridden in a race. It's also a super harsh ride. I've always heard about aluminum framed bikes being excessively "harsh", but my aluminum road bike is a joy. With this Felt I now know what everyone is talking about. I can't remember the last time I got a sore lumbar on a ride. 10 miles today and I feel my age. I can make this bike work with significant upgrades, but I won't do that. I have an Oly that I looking at in Oconomowoc in late July. I think that I'll just pack up my back up TT and fly it out. On the up side, it's a pleasure riding this beautiful countryside. The roads are well kept, I saw lots of wildlife, and a rooster chased me! What a joy. So, all in all, Im glad I got the bike. I'll give it to one of my short nephews.
#10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 907
Ya. Looking at it, I think it has potential, but to get there you would need to change a lot of things. I find it interesting that you want to sit further back. For me, I can't find a bike I can sit far enough forward. I guess that's just the differences we individually find comfortable.
#11
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 230
Ya. Looking at it, I think it has potential, but to get there you would need to change a lot of things. I find it interesting that you want to sit further back. For me, I can't find a bike I can sit far enough forward. I guess that's just the differences we individually find comfortable.
#13
Senior Member


Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 1,455
From: Saratoga, CA
Bikes: 1981 Bianchi Specialissima, 1971 Bob Jackson. 2012 Kestrel 4000. 2012 Willier. 2016 Fuji Cross 1.1, 1950 Hetchins, 194X James Fothergill, 1971 Paramount P15, 1973 Paramount P12, 1963 Legnano (x2), 1951 Hetchins, 2024 Canyon Endurace
I want to lean forward too. But with this bike it seems that I can't get my arse back far enough to get into a comfortable position. It's too small, even though it's a 54. And there's just no "ummph" to it. With my other bikes I hit the cranks and take off. This bike doesn't react. I think it's because of shorter seat stays? And climbing? Forget it. Oh well, I had a really nice time riding though.
I would change the tires and the stem, then pass judgement on the bike.
#14
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 230
Mike.....yes, I would have to get a 120mm stem, minimum. The saddle rails are also somewhat short, which limits the positioning. My Selle Smp saddles would work nicely. No doubt a set of GP5000s would increase the speed. But this bike just doesn't want to "go". Even with Vittoria Graphenes that I used in an actual event on a different bike, will allow me to take off when I really hit the cranks. Not this bike. I'd have to place around with shorter cranks, new wheels and tires just to see if that will work. But alas, I'm not willing to invest the time and money into it.
#15
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 907
Man, I'm sorry to hear that. It's a decent enough looking bike. I do think it could use a lot of clean up work with the cabling and bars. I mean, it looks like it has potential, but you would likely end up dumping far more money into it than you could ever justify. And that would be one thing if you, for whatever reason, just loved the bike. But if it doesn't move you, better to sell or donate it and find something that's a better fit.
#16
Sr Member on Sr bikes

Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 3,075
Likes: 1,251
From: Rhode Island (sometimes in SE Florida)
Bikes: Several...from old junk to new all-carbon.
#17
Sr Member on Sr bikes

Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 3,075
Likes: 1,251
From: Rhode Island (sometimes in SE Florida)
Bikes: Several...from old junk to new all-carbon.
I’ve never actually owned a triathlon specific bike. I had mostly stepped away from tris when they revolutionized (due to injuries). When I did race more, like most, I was still using road bikes that were set up for use in tris. And, I will say that the bike pictured is a nice looking bike, and I wouldn’t say “no” to it. But, that being said, I will point out a few things that I see about it with regard to using it in triathlon. These are just my opinion. First, by what I see of tri bikes around today…the seat tube angle doesn’t seem as aggressive. Some of the bikes I see look like they have almost a vertical seat tube. Not that that really affects the bike's speed…becasue that aggressive angle is supposed to be a ‘leg saver’ for the run. Most everything else is weight-related:
— The “cockpit” just seems a bit bulky (excessive length of the clip-ons could be trimmed).
— With the seat lowered as much as it is, I’d cut off whatever amount of the seat tube that isn’t needed for safe insertion length. I know it’s a CF tube (according to the manufacturer specs). But weight is weight.
— The crank set seems a little ‘meaty' with lots of metal, and looks like it weighs more than other thinner cranksets that could be used. Same goes with the chainring. There’s certainly lighter ones with less metal available.
— The wheel reflectors, “dork disk,” and blinking light aren’t required.
— Use a less bulky, lighter seat.
— And, if in a sprint tri with a bike segment of only 15 miles or less, I just didn’t bother with hydration on the bike (and would consequently take a little more fluid in T1 and T2 to offset). So…the water bottle and mount could be eliminated.
Dan
— The “cockpit” just seems a bit bulky (excessive length of the clip-ons could be trimmed).
— With the seat lowered as much as it is, I’d cut off whatever amount of the seat tube that isn’t needed for safe insertion length. I know it’s a CF tube (according to the manufacturer specs). But weight is weight.
— The crank set seems a little ‘meaty' with lots of metal, and looks like it weighs more than other thinner cranksets that could be used. Same goes with the chainring. There’s certainly lighter ones with less metal available.
— The wheel reflectors, “dork disk,” and blinking light aren’t required.
— Use a less bulky, lighter seat.
— And, if in a sprint tri with a bike segment of only 15 miles or less, I just didn’t bother with hydration on the bike (and would consequently take a little more fluid in T1 and T2 to offset). So…the water bottle and mount could be eliminated.
Dan
#19
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 230
I’ve never actually owned a triathlon specific bike. I had mostly stepped away from tris when they revolutionized (due to injuries). When I did race more, like most, I was still using road bikes that were set up for use in tris. And, I will say that the bike pictured is a nice looking bike, and I wouldn’t say “no” to it. But, that being said, I will point out a few things that I see about it with regard to using it in triathlon. These are just my opinion. First, by what I see of tri bikes around today…the seat tube angle doesn’t seem as aggressive. Some of the bikes I see look like they have almost a vertical seat tube. Not that that really affects the bike's speed…becasue that aggressive angle is supposed to be a ‘leg saver’ for the run. Most everything else is weight-related:
— The “cockpit” just seems a bit bulky (excessive length of the clip-ons could be trimmed).
— With the seat lowered as much as it is, I’d cut off whatever amount of the seat tube that isn’t needed for safe insertion length. I know it’s a CF tube (according to the manufacturer specs). But weight is weight.
— The crank set seems a little ‘meaty' with lots of metal, and looks like it weighs more than other thinner cranksets that could be used. Same goes with the chainring. There’s certainly lighter ones with less metal available.
— The wheel reflectors, “dork disk,” and blinking light aren’t required.
— Use a less bulky, lighter seat.
— And, if in a sprint tri with a bike segment of only 15 miles or less, I just didn’t bother with hydration on the bike (and would consequently take a little more fluid in T1 and T2 to offset). So…the water bottle and mount could be eliminated.
Dan
— The “cockpit” just seems a bit bulky (excessive length of the clip-ons could be trimmed).
— With the seat lowered as much as it is, I’d cut off whatever amount of the seat tube that isn’t needed for safe insertion length. I know it’s a CF tube (according to the manufacturer specs). But weight is weight.
— The crank set seems a little ‘meaty' with lots of metal, and looks like it weighs more than other thinner cranksets that could be used. Same goes with the chainring. There’s certainly lighter ones with less metal available.
— The wheel reflectors, “dork disk,” and blinking light aren’t required.
— Use a less bulky, lighter seat.
— And, if in a sprint tri with a bike segment of only 15 miles or less, I just didn’t bother with hydration on the bike (and would consequently take a little more fluid in T1 and T2 to offset). So…the water bottle and mount could be eliminated.
Dan
#21
Sr Member on Sr bikes

Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 3,075
Likes: 1,251
From: Rhode Island (sometimes in SE Florida)
Bikes: Several...from old junk to new all-carbon.





