Brodie01

I have two road bikes that I ride regularly, a brand new Windsor Wellington 3.0 and a 1987 Trek Elance 400. The Trek is faster than the Windsor by about 10 to 15 %. On my regular daily ride which is about 10 miles, I am 2 to 3 minutes faster on the Trek than I am on the Windsor. I average about a mile per hour more on the trek. I recently had the wheels trued on both bikes and I have looked at everything I know about their working condition (though I confess that I am recently new to the mechanicals of bicycles other than what I learned as a kid working on my bikes). I can't see where the speed the trek has over the Windors. Maybe someone can give me some better ideas about what to look for. I will post pictures of the two bikes.
This first picture is the Windsor.


The second picture is the Trek.


They are both completely stock.
I wish I knew more about the differences between good and bad tires, chain, pedals, bearings and what ever else could be a factor in this situation.
I realize the Windsor is a basement bargin level of bike and the Trek was a higher end bike in its day. How much can that factor in to this?

pdedes

The older bike isn't faster, you are faster on the older bike

rpenmanparker 

Windsor looks much smaller than the Trek. In fact the Trek looks way too big for you by current standards. But even so Trek looks sizes bigger than the Windsor. The Trek looks like a 61 or even 63 cm bike while the Windsor looks like a 57 or so. Big difference. Don't know how this would cause the difference your speed, but....

zymphad

Bike fit and your position on the bike. My guess if you get fitted for your Windsor you would move just as fast if not faster. #1 improvement for aero is getting your head down lower. Mark Cavendish is best sprinter because his torso and legs are short, he can get down so low on his bike and has so little mass that others cant slipstream behind him.

buffalowings

throw the bikes onto a stand, or flip upside down, give the pedals a spin, if the tires, pedals, etc spin freely, then it is a issue of setup. Are they setup with exactly the same dimensions? (seat to center of crank or the center of the pedals, reach from saddle to handlebars, etc. By the way, I want to say.. from the pictures, I have a feeling the windsors seat is lower then the trek.

datlas 

Something looks terribly wrong about your handlebar position/rotation on the windsor...or is it just me??

Anyway I agree most likely fit and/or position (ie efficiency and aerodynamics).

Brodie01

Very interesting. I would never have thought about fit.

The comment about the Trek being a bigger bike is very true. The Trek is about a 64cm and the Windsor is a 59cm. I am a bit of a odd porportioned body, I have a short or normal torso but very long legs for my height. Because of legs I feel more comfortable on the trek which my neighbor gave after I bought the Windsor. I ordered the Windsor by the size that was supposed to be the best fit for me. Additionally, I am 63 years old so that might lead to my comfort on the Trek over the Windsor, due to the bigger frame with a lower positioned seat in relationship to the handlebars. I like this feature. I have spent a lot of time adjusting my fit to the bikes. The seat to the pedals is as close to being the same on both bikes. I would say the major difference would be the height of the handlebars, the Trek being higher.
It just feels like the pedalling effort is easier on the trek in similar gears.

hueyhoolihan

unless you know the gear ratio and the tire size and make an apples to apples comparison between them in all the gear combinations and guarantee that you use the same gear for your commute at the same point for the same length of time, well, your timings, IME, would not be of much use.

if you are serious about making an attempt that might be of some use, i would suggest googling "gear inches", find out what GI's you have on each bike. find comparable GIs on each bike. do your commute using that gear and only that gear, no coasting, account for red lights, etc, for the entire commute. then do same thing on other bike and compare times.

perfect? no. conclusive? no.

BTW, i have a TREK Elance 300, '85. among my 6 road bikes, it's the heaviest of the bunch by a pound or two, but does not suffer by comparison as to riding enjoyment among the others. it's neither, IMO, faster or slower than the others, but i do run a little lower gear on it than the others. about 67 GI, others are in the low to mid 70's.

Bah Humbug

Obviously, the Trek is stiffer.

Brodie01

You're right, at the time I took the picture, the Windsor seat was lower than it is now. From the center of the crank to the top of the seat it is 31 inches. On both bikes I have moved the seat forward to position the center of my knee's pivot to directly above the center of the ball of my foot on the pedal at the 3 o'clock position.
I'm not trying to be "Mr everythings correct" here, I'm just giving as much information about what I have done (wrong or right).

And yes, I do appreciate all the feed back. I am learning much already.

hueyhoolihan

PLEASE!!!!

Brodie01

At first I played around with different handlebar positions, eventually I settled on the top to be flat with the ground. I was looking to make a higher handlebar position, but eventually decided that I would have to get used to bending over in the riding position.

buffalowings

Sounds like you have the seat height dialed in, now you just have to measure from the center of stem to the tip of the nose of the saddle. Or where you place your hands on the lever to the tip of the saddle. it's a matter of getting the handlebar height and distance from saddle to bars.

shoota 

Sell them both and buy something that fits and is set up properly. Then you'll be faster than either of those bikes.

datlas 

Imagine you are sitting in a chair you know someone is about to pull out from under you. What position are you in?? That's roughly the position you want on your bike.

Brodie01

Here are some questions about the two bikes I have, are the Trek rims better quality and could they have better rolling quality? Could the bearings on the Trek be a better quality and roll better? Can chains be crappy enough to create additional cranking resistence?
The Windsor pedals give me concern because when I put the bike together, I had to regrease them. The didn't spin well.

Bacciagalupe

I'd get both bikes tuned up. Eliminate mechanical issues as a variable.

If you haven't done so already, you should also look into getting a real bike fit, and figure out what geometry will work best for you.

gregf83 

It's not the bike or the gears but your position on the bike. My first guess would be that you're more stretched out on the larger bike and a little more aero. You said the bars were higher though so perhaps its simply that you can make more power in the position on the Trek.

It would be a good idea to carefully measure the position of the three key contact points: BB, Seat and Handlebars. Put the rear wheel up against a wall and measure the horizontal distance to the wall for the center of the BB, tip of the seat, center of the bars (top tube). You can then subtract to get the relative distance from the BB to the seat, seat to bars etc. Do the same set of measurements from the ground and compare the fit between the two bikes. Since you prefer the Trek, see if you can adjust the Windsor to match.

StanSeven

Just take your time, enjoy riding, and read some of the things here people post about bike fit. You'll learn a lot.

Meanwhile post a picture of yourself on each bike and people can give you feedback.

Brodie01

Fantastic replies everyone, I am amazed at the suggestions. I really really appreciate all the comments.

I basically took up this sport for the exercise I need to control my blood sugar levels, I had no idea I would like it as much as I do. My biggest regret is that I didn't take this up many years ago.

darb85

its the meta physical field generator.

rm -rf

Yes. either your position on the bike, or able to pedal more efficiently, or some of each.

A mile an hour faster is a lot. For instance, on this bike speed calculator, taking the default settings and with hands on the top of the bars, it takes 130 watts to go 16 mph, and 153 watts to go 17 mph. That's 17% more power at 17 mph.

It's not bad bearings. If you lift the bike in the air and spin the wheels, they wouldn't even do one revolution if they were using up that much power.

The only other difference might be in the tires. Flexible, high thread count tires take less energy than thicker, stiffer tires that are aimed at puncture resistance or low cost. But probably not that much difference.

TexMac

Finally someone else has same issue I had.
I had a 12 Cannondale supersix Di2 and 13' Felt F5. Both Carbon and exact setup, exact weight.
The Felt F5 was always faster anytime anywhere!

Good luck getting help with this.

zymphad

Or you could Google bike fit and try to do best job you can if you don't want to pay. Generally want 15 degree angle at your knee when your leg fully extended and in position on the bike on handlebars. Then position seat so your torso center of body is slightly in front of the BB. And then measure the stem and handlebars so your arms are at 45 degrees at shoulder to your body. Probably better to pay for a fitting though.

aprieto28

I'm definately faster on my Rodriguez than my 83 Univega. Rodriguez is about 56 cm and is made with Reynolds 725 tubing and 700 wheels with 10 speed cassette. The Univega is a 54cm made with Tange Champion Crmo and 27 inch wheels with 6 speed freewheel.

Is a professional bike fitting worth the cost?. I just got the Rodriguez. As you can see in the picture, the fork steerer is still uncut and I been adjusting saddle position and handle bar height as I go.