Bimmer69

I'm primarily a C&V-er and thinking of getting into a newer bike. Something with a carbon or aluminum frame and decent gear ranges to accommodate the hilly areas I bike in (lot of ravines in this city).

The reason is that I want to ride longer and farther this year. Ideally something like the Lake-to-Lake route here in the Toronto / Lake Simcoe area.

My classic Miele's are up to the task but I do find my Northrock SCR1 (I said the N-word!) more comfortable on longer rides.

My riding is mostly on MUPs and bike lanes but I do venture onto gravel. Plus the city has not maintained the MUPs very well and they're pretty rough in some areas.

So the question is, endurance with sturdy tires, or gravel with road-like tires? Which will have the more comfy, upright geometry? I don't want to be hunched over all day.



I've been reading up and it looks like I should get something with wider tires - say 32mm?

It looks like both endurance and gravel bikes will accommodate these widths but I'm not sure what will be more comfortable in regards to geometry and overall ability to avoid getting fatigued.


Also what sort of a budget should I set?

Is 2k Canadian enough?

I don't intend to compete or race, just enjoy long rides.

I've been looking at prices, and anyone in southern Ontario knows the market here is quite brisk.

joesch

I think the term endurance relates most to strong long lasting frames thus not carbon light weight road bikes.
Steel is the most enduring frame material and TI will never rust so probably the most.
My advice would be to get an "endurance" gravel bike so probably steel or TI if you can afford it.

Rolla

As long as you're getting a new bike, don't limit yourself; clearance for 32s would be the absolute minimum, but I'd opt for much more. I also wouldn't get overly concerned with the "endurance" vs "gravel" nomenclature.

I don't know anything about carbon or aluminum, so I'd recommend something like a Surly Bridge Club. It's a do-it-all steel bike that accommodates different wheel sizes and tire widths, and seems tailor-made for the kind of riding you're describing.

Bald Paul

"Endurance" refers to the geometry of the frame, not the material. Not as twitchy as a "Race" geometry bike.

Kedosto

I wouldn’t concern myself with labels but rather focus on the specific frame geometry you’re looking for. One mfg’s “endurance bike” could have similar geometry to another’s “gravel bike,” to within millimeters. A comfortable knowledge of what stack and reach numbers will work for you will go a long way in making meaningful comparisons. Once you’ve narrowed down the frame choices, you can eliminate candidates based on specs, gearing or tire clearance or whatever else you deem important.

bruce19

This

Iride01 

Endurance refers to the slope of the seat tube. That particular slope puts the cranks in the proper position for someone wanting to be in a slightly aero to very aero position and be able to pedal for hours on end. Increase the angle to a more vertical position and you have a time trial bike that is better for a very aero position giving you better power into the pedals. But the average cyclist won't want to ride them any longer than they must. Decrease the angle of the seat tube and you have a cruiser style bike that puts the cranks further forward and allows for a very comfortable very upright sitting position. But you probably will tire sooner trying to ride long distances. For certain, it'll take you longer with the drag of the frontal area sitting upright presents.

Carbon frames do endure time. The vast amounts of used carbon bikes from long ago show that they endure. Sadly unlike steel and aluminum, they don't recycle very well. Sadly, poor examples of steel bikes from the 70's and 80's and aluminum bikes from subsequent years flood the used market because people think them something great when they were cheap bikes even in their day.

MinnMan

Assuming that the endurance frame has clearance for sufficiently wide tires, then you could go either way. Or you could split the difference and go for what the bike companies call an adventure bike, like the Specialized Diverge

70sSanO

I would look at gravel bikes if you want a more relaxed geometry and be able to ride a variety of surfaces.

What Miele model do you have? It would be good to figure that out, especially if it is a triple. Not sure if anything is published geometry on the Northrock, but all you want to do is establish where you currently are.

The other part is gearing. Where are you now and what ratios do you need.

I would think $2k would buy you an improvement over what you have.

John

Bimmer69

I have a ~1989 Miele Alfa. So we're talking a 2x6 setup, Biopace chainring, Shimano Light Action gearing, and SLR brakes. Not sure what the exact tooth counts are on the sprockets.
The frame is 22.5"

The Northrock's specs are as follows:
Frame Size: 53.5.
A - Standover Height: 30.56" / 77.6 cm
B - Effective Top Tube: 22.24" / 56.5 cm
C - Seat Tube Length: 21.00" / 53.5 cm
D - Head Tube Length: 6.77" / 17.2 cm
E - Chain Stay Length: 16.53" / 42 cm
F - Reach: 16.35" / 38.64 cm
G - Wheel Size: 700 x 23c - I've replaced the rear with a 28mm Gatorskin.

I'm considering things like the
Canondale Synapse https://www.cannondale.com/en-ca/bik...napse-carbon-4
Decathlon (Triban) RC 520 https://www.decathlon.ca/en/enduranc...imano-105.html
Specialized Roubaix https://www.specialized.com/us/en/ro...=293286-184477

I know these are higher than $2k but that's why I'm asking. Should I budget more for my intended use? Or am I wasting money on things I won't need?

Bimmer69

Kinda funny that on their website they say "Diverge is the most capable gravel bike ever made."

Bimmer69

I think you might be thinking of "durability" in this context.

MinnMan

So they are dissing the Specialized Crux?

Bimmer69

You gotta love marketers. "The Crux is the lightest gravel bike in the world"

tyrion

Then gravel bike. You can put 32mm tires on a gravel bike, but you can't put 45mm tires on an endurance bike (usually).

Gravel bike gives you more options if you aren't optimizing for a single style of riding.

cyclezen

you gotta figure out what makes the Northrock more 'comfortable' for you, than the Miele. And then figure out 'why'.
'Comfort' is quite variable for all of us, and different. You have to define that, and then match a bike to those parameters. 'Endurance', 'gravel', all in play until you start defining what is comfortable.
I'll throw out a statement which WILL get a lot of blow-back. My Opinion, based on 58 yrs riding all sorts of bikes. materials, DIMS, purposes. Still have a bunch of bikes, which provide and confirm this comparison.
Based on purpose of bike, in this case a mostly road bike, I find 'Full Carbon' frames are the most 'compliant' (comfortable). Some feel 'stiffer' than others. But given similar purpose, carbon has the edge on most frame materials, the one exception being TI... This becomes increasingy obvious as time in the saddle and miles increase.
Finding a new, Full Carbon bike for 2K CAN is gonna be a unicorn. A carbon fork on a steel or Alu frame is a great improvement. Steel & Alu Frames offer great performance, and depending, a modicum of 'comfort'. But Carbon wins hands down. I can live comfortably without all my 'vintage' crap or non-carbon bikes.
BUT my Fav carbon bikes will be with me as long as I can turn a pedal...
Define your 'comfort' and you'll have a more successful process in finding your new bike.
Ride On
Yuri
EDIT: And if you've not yet done a number of rides at the 'longer' distance/time that you wish to do more regularly, then you prolly don;t really know what the 'Hot' spots/problems might prove to be... A good thing might be to do a few of those longer rides and see what develops...

70sSanO

I was curious if you had one of Miele’s touring models.

For an original 2x6 I’m guessing it is an ‘86, maybe an ‘87. From a review I found it seems to have short chainstays and wheelbase (38.5”), but 73* head angle. Probably fairly snappy without the twitchy criterium front end.

What you are looking at in endurance or gravel will be a more stable longer wheelbase with a slacker head angle. That will be better for riding in dirt or gravel.

John

Mtracer

I made this same decision recently. I needed to replace my Cannondale Topstone 105 gravel bike that was damaged in an accident with a car. It was my main bike, my other being a 25 year old hybrid "dad" bike. I ended up using it mostly on the road with a set of road wheels. So, when looking for a new bike, I had an itch to perhaps get more of a road bike. I then discovered "endurance" bikes and became very interested in a Trek Domane. It was pretty attractive because it can take up to a 38 mm wide tire.

But then I started looking at some specifics. I like to always use a top tube bag and like that I could bolt this on my Topstone. The Domane doesn't have frame mounts other than bottle cage mounts. I then got to thinking about gearing. I'm a relatively new rider (< 3 years), 60 years old, and I have to do some climbing in my area. I'm also more of a Clydesdale (pretty heavy at 210 lbs). So, compact gearing like a 50/34 didn't really fit me well. I'd basically never use the highest gearing other than blasting down a few long descents.

So, I ended up getting a Trek Checkpoint gravel bike. The Checkpoint is very similar to the Domane except it comes with sub-compact chain rings, and has frame mounts all over the place. And of course being a gravel bike it can handle relatively wide tires. I still plan to build up a set of road wheels for it. But I'm very impressed with the wheels it came with. I got the SL 5 version which has a carbon frame but still alloy wheels. Though the rims are shaped like shallow aero rims. It's actually pretty hard to tell they aren't carbon rims by looking at them.

So while I got a gravel bike, I'll be using it almost exclusively as an endurance road bike.

Bottom line, I would give serious consideration to getting a gravel bike for use as an endurance bike if you need the lower gearing and want the option to run some wider wheels. And getting a set of road wheels gives you a bike with a lot of versatility.

What do you give up? Gravel bikes will be a bit heavier. They are built a little more sturdy and are slightly larger to handle wider tires. Some like the Trek Checkpoint have aero designed frames that are essentially the same as their road bikes.

If you want a true endurance bike, give the Trek Domane a close look. I think it may be the only road endurance bike that can take up to 38 mm wide tires. But again, I think all endurance bikes are going to come with compact chain rings (50/34) and most gravel bikes are now coming with some version of sub-compact chain rings (48/32 or 46/30). There are of course 1X gravel bikes, but I don't think that's appropriate if you want to also use it as a road bike.

FYI, I got my Checkpoint in about 6 weeks. But factory lead time is about a year. I got it through a Trek store and they said they get them faster because the Trek store system has been ordering them for their warehouse which feeds all their stores. So, likely my bike was ordered from the factory many months ago. Point is, you may be able to get any bike faster if you go through a large retailer that stocks bikes using a warehouse system rather than your local small bike shop. I like to support the small guys, but waiting a year for a bike isn't very practical for most riders.

Random11

I have two bikes, one of each. I have a Specialized Diverge gravel bike with 700x38 tires and a Cervelo Caledonia with 700x30 tires. Both are good road bikes and I ride them interchangeably when riding solo. When riding with a group, I'll take the Caledonia because it's faster. When riding off road I'll take the Diverge. Riding on pavement by myself, both are equally enjoyable. If I had to keep only one, I'd keep the Diverge, the gravel bike. The Diverge is very good as a road bike.

wolfchild

Marketing BS that's all it is....The truth is that a bike is only as capable as the rider on the bike.

PeteHski

There is a lot of overlap between road endurance bikes and gravel bikes. Geometry is often very similar, but gravel bikes tend to have more tyre clearance. 40 something rather than 30 something mm. Gravel bikes also tend to come with lower gear ranges. As you are not racing and riding on mixed roads, I expect you will find a gravel bike more versatile. Tyres are consumables, so it's not that important what tyres are fitted from new. If you bought a gravel bike and found that it was a bit "over-tyred" for your use you could easily swap to something a bit narrower and faster rolling. Going the other way on an endurance bike would be more limited.

Bimmer69

Seems the Alfa was marketed as an entry-level racer, and I do find it fairly quick. Just not very comfy on longer rides. But that probably has to do with the 25mm Conti Ultrasports it's wearing.
And you're right - it's earlier than 1989.
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...a-86-87-a.html

Bimmer69

Looks like I'm getting a gravel bike.
Thanks everyone for your advise and input.

Ghazmh

Get an aero endurance gravel bike.