Iride01 

Seems like the obvious answer would be for the OP to buy a very light bike and also a very aero bike of similar geometry and then ride them both on the same routes and see which they do better on. Then after a year or two of collecting data, they can decide which bike to keep and which to sell.

RChung

I think your post falls under #1 and #3.

genejockey 

These are MUCH more widely applicable than just cycling fora, though I think you may have missed "Anyone who disagrees with me is either an idiot or has been duped by Big [insert relevant industry ]"

PeteHski

I am sure there are many possible reasons for this. I find specific build spec can make quite a big difference to comfort e.
g wheels/tyres, saddle, bars and seatpost. For example my Giant Defy has the cheaper alloy bars and they are definitely less comfortable than the carbon bars on my Endurace. The wider rims on my Endurace (22 Vs 17 mm internal) also make a big difference

Branko D

Yeah, when I was looking at my size (S) it was about 15mm in both dimensions between the Endurace (which isn't a full out endurance bike like a, say, Trek Domane but something in between) and the Ultimate, and the latest Aeroad is just a few mm lower and same reach as the Ultimate.

The kind of bike depends a lot on the body type of the rider. I have a comparatively long torso and shorter legs, so despite being 179cm I'm generally at home on a S or a 53-54cm frame without any spacers under the stem.

RChung

Good point.

I may combine 5 and 6 into 5A and 5B, and perhaps yours could be added as 6.

Many threads could be shorter if we just replied with a number.

wheelreason

8. Lmao

big john

One of the more obnoxious ones I see on BF , (may fall under your #4) is "There is something wrong with you if you don't do what I do". Or possibly in genejocky's rule.

Something I found is people tend to oversimplify things they don't understand, or have a small amount of knowledge about, when in reality they have no idea how complex it is.

GhostRider62

It is easy.

Get your bike CdA down to 0.145 m^2 and power to around 280-285 watts and the 10 extra pounds are trivial. Now if you allow me a third wheel and additionally some carbon fiber, 35 mph becomes easy despite the extra 30 pounds.

bbbean 

Short version: Do you spend more time climbing or riding in the wind? There is your answer.

FWIW, while I am something of a weight weenie, I live in the Delta and most of my races are in the midwest and midsouth, so my primary bike is an aero road bike. If I lived and raced in the Rockies or the Alps, I might opt for a lighter bike.

It is worth noting that i recent years, aero bikes have been getting lighter and lightweight bikes have been getting more aero. Look at the latest TCR and Propel for example. The differences are getting smaller.

bbbean 

Races that use a front number plate are a pet peeve of mine.

Sy Reene

Really? As an average? Some stupid online calculator tells me that's a sustained 600 watts on flat ground for a 150lb rider. "Easily" .. really?

HTupolev

What assumptions are being made by the calculator as far as rolling resistance and aerodynamic profile?

Based on GhostRider62's claimed CdA, 30mph at sub-300W should be very doable in reasonable road conditions.

Dean V

It really depends on what give you the most enjoyment, as none of us here are getting paid to ride their bikes.I have had an aero bike (Trek Madone) and didn't really like it.Difficult to work on with awkward cable runs. Unique bars, stem, seat post. Press fit BB. Prone to rattles.Much happier on a good quality "conventional" bike. Silent, easy to wrench on and with good wheels and tires any speed I would be giving up to a full aero bike is small enough that it isn't worth it to me.

ZHVelo

The biggest factor for this is that the main reason endurance bikes are marketed as endurance is a more upright sitting position, but that that does not necessarily imply more comfort. After I got a fit on my aero bike, I became even more comfortable. The fit made my position more aggressive, not more upright.

ZHVelo

48 kmh on the flat at 280W? Sounds possible to me. I once did 42.5kmh at -0.9% with only 192 NP.

Wind plays a key role here though I would say.

RChung

GhostRider62 has a stable of bikes, and his CdA on those bikes range widely. On one of those bikes, his CdA is around half of what you were assuming with that online calculator; he probably does have a bike where his CdA would be around what you were assuming, or even higher. That was the point of his post: he was refuting the claim that bikes don't matter. They clearly can. That wheelreason (and you) don't have such a bike doesn't mean they don't exist, so I classified wheelreason's post under #6. (Also, he's not 150 lbs; my guess is that he can hold that speed on that bike on around 3 w/kg, which isn't an uncommon power output at all.).

burnthesheep

Let me guess, they started in on the recumbent stuff again?

It isn’t that big a deal but it just isn’t applicable to most riders in the chat. As most folks don’t own one. So it’s kind of like car guys who race different classes of scca comparing lap times.

In the end why do folks care so much what others buy? Just buy what ya want. Just don’t come “flexing” in the forum chat about it all the time after you do and you will be fine.

Maelochs

Sort of hesitant to get in here again, but .... apparently a cup-and-a-half of coffee isn't enough to wake up my brain so here we are ......

The aero bike is Likely but not certainly going to be more stiff .... which could but won't necessarily transmit more vibration and shock to the rider.

The endurance bike is likely but not necessarily going to be more compliant.

Neither frame is necessarily going to be more "comfortable" for this specific rider.

There is a long list of "all other things being equal" considerations here .... tire width and pressure being paramount.

Also it has to be assumed that on either bike the rider will find a set-up which is comfortable. "Long and low" is not inherently more uncomfortable and every person is different. "More upright" is obviously not necessarily more comfortable.

The only real answer here would be to buy both bikes, and test the rider's Cd at different points on his regular rides ..... does he start out aero then get tired and sit up more, does he sit up while climbing (lower speed, lower aero loss) and get enough rest that way, does each route have such a ratio of climbing to flats (or sitting up to getting low) that the aero benefit (as he rides it, not each bike's inherent drag) tilts in favor of the more aero position? Is his normal riding position such that whatever aero gain the frame offers is mostly negated by his own dragging body?

We all understand that in a wind tunnel, bikes are measured in either steady-state or occasionally (particularly when wheel-testing) with some yaw, but not (that I have ever heard) with a variety of riders on a variety of varying terrain at a variety of fatigue levels .... in other words, no manufacturer is testing its bikes to suit this guy's specific riding routes and characteristics.

I think the physics shows that In General a slight drag reduction offers more benefit over more of most rides than a slight weight reduction .... but whether this specific rider will notice that gain or even experience it, depends on this rider, his routes, his rides ......

Will he actually gain that two-watt advantage which a hypothetical slightly slicker bike gains over a slightly lighter bike .... yes, hypothetically. Will this hypothetical edge make him happier with his new aero bike? Will he enjoy riding more knowing he has the hypothetical possibility of going .01 percent faster on average with his new aero frame?

Well, now we have left the realm of science.

But isn't he really asking, Not the pure engineering question, but at root, "Which bike will make me happier?" When he says "best for me" does he really want the bike which is mathematically best over the exact rides he will take on said bike? No, because no one has that information anyway. What he wants is to Believe that his bike gives him more of an edge than some other bike he might have bought.

Being admittedly unscientific, I would wager that if someone could convince him that one of his options was "better," he would really enjoy riding it, and if someone else could convince him that the other bike was "better," he would enjoy riding that bike just as much.

If he really wanted the numerically,, mathematically, experimentally-verified "best bike" he would need to either build a portable wind tunnel and test at varying points along his ride for a year or so, or would need to ride for a year in a full sensor suit and then try to replicate each ride in a laboratory, to see who much power, how much heat, water intake, pedal revs, incline, wind speed, atmospheric conditions, traffic (in case it factored in) plus any effects of drafting on a group ride (which could negate any loss of the light bike if it even was less aero ...) ... and how much his output changed over the length of his ride, over the course of a week, over a month ..... And then if the next year he pulled a hamstring and took a month off, all his data would be invalid. And this would have to be done every couple of years to remain accurate ......

What he really wants, as i see it, is the assurance that "all other things being equal" (which is a state which never exists) that one type of frame would be "superior" by whatever measure, to another. He wants to be convinced. He wants to be "sold," by "experts" but in fact science only deals in either very narrow specifics (the observed results of a single experiment (however often repeated) and calculations based thereupon, or ... gross generalities, as in "Based on the results of our experiment we think this theory is supported" but of course it is only really supported in the precise conditions which obtained during the experiment. The rest is extrapolation and imagination ......

So, to the OP----get the aero bike. It will give you a slight advantage in every situation. You will be faster, you will be happier.

Funny thing about life is that you cannot approach it scientifically. You cannot have a series of "experiment" lives and a "control" life. There is no way to know if after buying on bike or the other, he would be more or less happy with the other. He cannot live the two lives side by side to compare.

Therefore .... buy the Aeroad, and ride it with the confidence born of knowing that you are doing less work for more result with every pedal stroke compared to the other bikes. Buy it and never look back.

RChung

It would have been shorter to write: "#3, and #5."

Maelochs

@RChung .... sorry if you fail to grasp much .... I have read a bunch of your posts and I know you are smarter than you are presenting yourself to be here, so I will take these responses as a form of humor.

Or .... #2.

DaveSSS 

To clarify reach and stack, both are measured from the center of the BB to the top-center of the headset bearing, not to the top-center of the stem or any part of the bars. The stack height on an endurace is 20-30mm greater than a typical race bike with a similar reach. A race bike could use more spacers and/or a different stem angle to achieve an identical fit. The Canyon website has all pertinent information, but I don't see stem angle. Stems are easy to swap out, but if a model has an integrated bar/stem, the stem can't be changed and stem angles are very limited. I have a lot of experience building bikes, so I know how much spacer I'll need with a known stem angle and stack height.

I've owned a lot of top of the line frames over the last 30 years, but the ridiculously high price on some brands led me to try Yoeleo frames. I liked my Yoeleo R12 so much that I bought a second one and swapped parts from a Cinelli Superstar to build it. I've also bought BTLOS wheels recently with a free freight offer. They've been great so far. I chose a less aero rim with a 29mm depth because my 45mm ZIPP 303s can be hard to handle on a windy mountain descent. I also chose a 25mm internal width and hookless, with no nipple access holes to eliminate rim tape. I can build a complete bike for a lot less money than any big name prebuilt bike, including Canyon. My bikes see speeds in the 55-57 mph range every week.

With my tire pressure in the 50-55 psi range, using 28-30mm tires. The impact of a stiff frame becomes scarcely noticeable.

Maelochs

I used to be a big Workswell fan ... I will look at Yoeleo .... but group sets have tripled in price too ...... building bikes used to be a lot of fun .....

PeteHski

By comfort, I was thinking more of ride compliance, although with wider, higher volume tyres it's maybe less of an issue than it used to be. All the same, if you compare bikes across a single brand (Canyon in this case), their endurance model will have the most compliant ride. In this case the Endurace with skinny seatstays, split seatpost, tapered seat-tube, wider rims, compliant bars etc. The Ultimate is going to be next best (in terms of ride comfort) - differences being a standard non-split seatpost (which is interchangeable with the split version), narrower (but still quite wide) rims, stiffer bars etc. But it's a very similar frame. Then finally the Aeroroad is going to lose a bit more ride comfort again with aero seatpost etc. This is their most focused race bike outside of Alpine climbs or TTs.

Whether any of this matters depends on the use case and rider. But it is worth mentioning and largely explains why these different bikes even exist in parallel. I find it interesting watching the Grand Tours and seeing some riders on the Ultimate and others on the Aeroroad on the same road stage. For me that says there isn't much in it overall and it largely comes down to personal preferences and trade-offs between aero/weight/ride comfort.

GhostRider62

You plugged wrong. Try again.

My original point to which you disputed was simply that bikes vary a lot.

For instance, there were many fat bikes starting Paris Brest Paris in 2019. Not a single one of them succeeded. There was a headwind each direction. It would not have mattered if those bikes were sub 5 kg. However, a 22 kg one with 0.145 CdA got to sleep 20 hours and finished 15 hours under the time limit. Horses for courses.