Originally Posted by
jlaw
Agreed - my heavily-updated '85 Trek is about as 'fast' as my carbon Spec. road bike. However, I don't think I'd have this opinion if the Trek still had it's original components.
Up until last year, I held this opinion. Wanting the ultimate retro-roadie, I installed Ultegra 2x11 on a Eddy Merckx Extra Corsa. I assumed that a high performance drivetrain on a highly regarded vintage bike would perform nearly as well as most of the Carbon fiber bikes I see. Well, it met that threshold. It performed almost as well as my low cost carbon frame with the identical drivetrain. There was very little difference on flat sections, but hills were another matter. With each hill I was losing significant time on each Strava segment. This was of no concern while riding solo, but losing time on every hill was disrupting my group rides.
Wanting a versatile bike for damaged pavement, chip-seal and crushed limestone trials, I added a Endurance bike with disc brakes and room for 700x32 tires. I was surprised to discover that this bike was better in every way to the vintage retro-roadie.
So last year I decided to build a true grand tour bike, a bike used by Andre Greipel on mountain stages, a Ridley Helium SLX. I wanted as light as possible and went for a rim brake version with carbon wheels. I also went with SRAM eTap. This bike is clearly a superior climber to both the Eddy Merckx or the less expensive carbon bike. Unlike the mechanical shifting of my other bikes, This bike allows the freedom to shift gears while mashing the pedals while standing. I'm able to maintain optimal cadence and power output, which makes climbs faster while helping to avoid endurance robbing surges. I'm constantly smashing older segment times even though I'm actually 5 lbs heavier than in the recent past.
