This bike is just easier to pedal?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Berea, KY
Posts: 1,135
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 360 Post(s)
Liked 328 Times
in
186 Posts
This bike is just easier to pedal?
Do you have a bike (or bikes) that seems easier to pedal than others? I am not talking about faster. I have never been fast and I never tried to be fast (in fact, when I say I am slow, that is what I mean. I don't mean I am slower than I used to be). It just seems like it is not as hard to go up hills, etc. This morning, I chose my Raleigh International for the first time in a while and I had an easier time with all the hills and had more fun. Fit wise, it is set up similar to my other bikes in terms of reach, etc. I am not necessarily searching for answers to why I felt this way, but I am curious if you have a bike(s) that feel that way to you.
__________________
Andy
Andy
Likes For beicster:
#2
Freewheel Medic
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: An Island on the Coast of GA!
Posts: 12,885
Bikes: Snazzy* Schwinns, Classy Cannondales & a Super Pro Aero Lotus (* Ed.)
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1453 Post(s)
Liked 2,196 Times
in
963 Posts
Other than gearing, the weight of your wheels can make a big difference in pedaling effort. Lighter weight wheels, even when the gearing is the same from bike to bike, is probably what you notice. This is one of the reasons I prefer tubular tires for my vintage bikes.
__________________
Bob
Enjoying the GA coast all year long!
Thanks for visiting my website: www.freewheelspa.com
Bob
Enjoying the GA coast all year long!
Thanks for visiting my website: www.freewheelspa.com
#3
Junior Member
I only find this happens when I improve my fitness like dropping 10lbs or I stay on a training plan and I get stronger, easy to remember riding the same hill and now going faster on a single speed, or staying in a higher gear.
Sometimes on the moser I would get an almost euphoric feeling while putting the power down and then I try and stay in that zone, generally happens on a section with rolling hills or shorter climbs.
It could be an experience thing since it has only happened for me with one or two bikes I have ridden for 3+months at a time 3 days a week.
I used to get a similar feeling on my mountain bike(not c+v) in similar terrain just off road.
I too am slow. At best I made it to cat 3 in xc racing at high school....
Sometimes on the moser I would get an almost euphoric feeling while putting the power down and then I try and stay in that zone, generally happens on a section with rolling hills or shorter climbs.
It could be an experience thing since it has only happened for me with one or two bikes I have ridden for 3+months at a time 3 days a week.
I used to get a similar feeling on my mountain bike(not c+v) in similar terrain just off road.
I too am slow. At best I made it to cat 3 in xc racing at high school....
Likes For slow rollin:
#4
Groupetto Dragon-Ass
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lostin Austin, TX
Posts: 617
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 415 Post(s)
Liked 787 Times
in
372 Posts
It's Spring! Sometimes your bike is just happy to see you!
But I've flipped a bunch of bikes, and there can be a bunch of energy lost in the drive train.
Pull the chain and check it for movement. While it's off, check the spin of the crank and pedals.
Spin the front and rear wheels - Shimano used a white grease for a while that slowly hardened into plastic.
A lot of modern bikes also come with the wheel bearings way too tight as well.
Spin the rear wheel while holding the freewheel / freehub still - more hard grease possible there.
Check for wheel wobble dragging on the brakes.
(important!) Check the spoke tension. Bikes always have slack spokes, and they absorb energy. A spoke job usually made old bikes feel like new!
So if the drag is out of the drive train, check the rider position. Since you have a couple bikes, pick your quickest and set the others up next to it (aligned on the BB) and see if the bars, seat, and BB are all in the same relationship.
But I've flipped a bunch of bikes, and there can be a bunch of energy lost in the drive train.
Pull the chain and check it for movement. While it's off, check the spin of the crank and pedals.
Spin the front and rear wheels - Shimano used a white grease for a while that slowly hardened into plastic.
A lot of modern bikes also come with the wheel bearings way too tight as well.
Spin the rear wheel while holding the freewheel / freehub still - more hard grease possible there.
Check for wheel wobble dragging on the brakes.
(important!) Check the spoke tension. Bikes always have slack spokes, and they absorb energy. A spoke job usually made old bikes feel like new!
So if the drag is out of the drive train, check the rider position. Since you have a couple bikes, pick your quickest and set the others up next to it (aligned on the BB) and see if the bars, seat, and BB are all in the same relationship.
Likes For Chuckk:
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Delaware Sea Shore
Posts: 533
Bikes: There is always room for one more.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked 391 Times
in
226 Posts
Sometimes, the same bike can feel faster on any given day. I think it has more to do with me, the weather, road conditions, etc. than the bike.
__________________
Don
Don
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 4,478
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1829 Post(s)
Liked 3,376 Times
in
1,580 Posts
My guess is that it is partly due to being 2 or 3 pounds lighter than my other vintage bikes. The Team has been fitted with some weight weenie parts, such as the Brooks Swift with titanium hardware, the Phil BB with titanium axle, etc. Modest changes in weight really don't affect top speed, but they do have a small effect on acceleration. The frame is built with Reynolds 753 tubing, which is a bit lighter and thinner gauge. The extra flex does seem to improve the ride.
The other factor in how it feels is that the frame is a bit small for me, which puts the handlebar a bit lower than on my other bikes. This is going to improve the aerodynamics, which can make it a bit easier to get up to speed.
Of course, it's also a fact that red bikes go faster.
Steve in Peoria
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,047
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4513 Post(s)
Liked 6,388 Times
in
3,673 Posts
Yes!
Nothing short of amazing, may be just the Kool Aid talking but......
I firmly believe that when you get the right fit, frame, build and it all comes together like no other.
Nothing short of amazing, may be just the Kool Aid talking but......
I firmly believe that when you get the right fit, frame, build and it all comes together like no other.
Last edited by merziac; 03-18-24 at 10:13 AM.
Likes For merziac:
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 3,452
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 877 Post(s)
Liked 2,293 Times
in
1,281 Posts
What pastorbob said is correct. I rode my 1972 Mondia for years with a set of 27" x 1 1/4" tires . It was nice being able to fly through sand or soft dirt roads but the bike felt sluggish on the road , where over 90% of my riding is done. I found a set of Super Champion 700c wheels and mounted some 700 x 25 tires and the bike now feels like my others .It is more responsive and I still can manage a bit of dirt when needed. I still run clinchers but the difference was amazing! Joe
This is how I rode this bike with heavy tires
with the 700c wheels and 25mm tires, it feels like a different bike!
This is how I rode this bike with heavy tires
with the 700c wheels and 25mm tires, it feels like a different bike!
Likes For Kabuki12:
#9
ambulatory senior
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Peoria Il
Posts: 5,998
Bikes: Austro Daimler modified by Gugie! Raleigh Professional and lots of other bikes.
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1955 Post(s)
Liked 3,661 Times
in
1,679 Posts
What I notice is how well some bikes coast, and I swear a well broke in sturmey archer aw hub seems to roll better than anything.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bastrop Texas
Posts: 4,483
Bikes: Univega, Peu P6, Peu PR-10, Ted Williams, Peu UO-8, Peu UO-18 Mixte, Peu Dolomites
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 968 Post(s)
Liked 1,631 Times
in
1,047 Posts
And then again, our Baby Blue Ted Williams Step-Though is often the most favored bike in our little stable. It easily weighs more then 5 pounds more then any of the other bikes. And being built out of the Parts Bin it is a true Franken. When my boy's visit its the first bike they grab even though they have their gravel rides at home set up nothing like it. Still, it is a fast sleeper...
Why is it so easy/fun to pedal? DUH!
I dont think I could take it on a long ride...
__________________
No matter where you're at... There you are... Δf:=f(1/2)-f(-1/2)
No matter where you're at... There you are... Δf:=f(1/2)-f(-1/2)
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Concord, NC
Posts: 701
Bikes: 1984 Bianchi Tipo Corsa, 1985 Cannondale SM600 (24/26)
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked 349 Times
in
190 Posts
I hate to admit this this, but a couple of years ago, my wife and I had a couple of rental beater coaster brake cruisers out at Hilton Head S.C. It was one of the easiest pedaling rides I'd had in a long while. Do I want to do significant distances on it or set speed records? No. But it brought me back to why I started riding bikes... fun.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1641 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 831 Times
in
540 Posts
Tires can also make a difference. Some tires just have more rolling resistance and less good a ride than others. I found this out when I "graduated" from Vittoria Rally tubs to Vittoria Corsa G Graphene tubs on a few of my bikes. The difference in ride quality and speed is like night and day. I wasn't really expecting such a big difference but it was certainly a great surprise.
Last edited by Chombi1; 03-19-24 at 02:04 AM.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,159
Mentioned: 481 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3811 Post(s)
Liked 6,715 Times
in
2,613 Posts
In addition to good tires, the right tire pressure can make a big difference, I have found.
Likes For nlerner:
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,047
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4513 Post(s)
Liked 6,388 Times
in
3,673 Posts
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Kingdom of Hawai'i
Posts: 1,201
Bikes: Peugeot, Legnano, Fuji, Zunow, De Rosa, Miyata, Bianchi, Pinarello, Specialized, Bridgestone, Cinelli, Merckx
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 430 Post(s)
Liked 476 Times
in
219 Posts
Better tires at a good pressure usually does it for me.
At the same time, for whatever reason...some bikes feel more slippery than others.
At the same time, for whatever reason...some bikes feel more slippery than others.
#16
Me duelen las nalgas
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,513
Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4560 Post(s)
Liked 2,802 Times
in
1,800 Posts
All my road bikes are set up as similarly as possible, considering they range from a 1980s steel frame to early 1990s carbon fiber to 2012 or so carbon fiber. It's fairly easy to set up the first two comparably because both are traditional diamond frames. The 2012 bike has a compact frame with sloping top tube and took more fiddling to set up to suit myself.
The main differences I notice have little to do with the frames but more to do with wheels, tubes and tires, and gearing.
The old Suntour GPX rear derailleur on my Ironman always felt draggy until I replaced the sintered bearing jockey and pulley wheels with sealed bearing wheels (same or similar composite material, something like nylon I think -- Bullseye aluminum wheels are similarly smooth but a bit noisier). That fixed the draggy feeling -- sintered bearings, dry or lubed, just can't compare with sealed ball bearings. So now all my road bikes have some version of sealed bearing jockey and pulley wheels.
Crank length might make some difference. With age and arthritis I notice more slight hitches in my pedaling, depending on how stiff I am on any given day. Maybe some minor differences in shoes, cleats and pedals too -- I have Look Delta on the older bike, Shimano SPD-SL on the others. Very similar floating cleats but not identical.
Another difference I can feel and measure to some extent is the diameter of the chainring and rear cog in my preferred gearing for a given route -- mostly roller terrain in my area, no serious climbs but no extended flat and level terrain either. It feels more efficient when I'm in the big ring and middle cog -- which pretty much meshes with the current conventional wisdom in the pros that larger diameter chainrings, cogs and jockey/pulley wheels are slightly more efficient, enough to offset the slightly heavier components.
And I've noticed that using any rear cog smaller than 13 teeth feels like grinding coffee. The 11 and 12 tooth cogs in my newer bike never feels smooth. It's just a mismatch between the chain design and cogs (I forget the term best used to describe this but there are techy articles discussing this). The standard bicycle chain link length seems to lose efficiency quickly with cogs smaller than 13T.
Overall I'd say my smoothest feeling road bike is my 1989 Centurion Ironman with the current 50/38 chainrings and 13-25 or whatever freewheel. Mostly because the 50T chainring happens to work best with the three middle cogs in the freewheel on my usual 20-35 mile route, so there's little deflection of the chain, no sharp bends around small cogs. And maybe the 172.5 cranks suit me a bit better than the 175 cranks on my 2012 carbon fiber bike. I also liked the 170 cranks on my 1993 carbon fiber Trek 5900 -- not a huge difference, but pedaling felt smoother than with the 175 cranks.
It's all very subjective and none of my bikes shows any significant advantage over hundreds of rides on the same familiar routes. Some of my fastest Strava times and PRs were on the Ironman back in 2017 when I was probably in my peak conditioning (for an old dude). I've beaten the Ironman times on a few roller coaster segments with the carbon fiber bikes, so maybe there was a small edge to the lighter overall weight.
But there are so many variables it's tough to pin down to any single factor -- frame design and composition, wheels, tires, tubes, gearing, drivetrain, etc.
I will say that as my neck pain worsens (arthritis and cervical spine stenosis and spondylosis) I'm preferring the 2012 Diamondback mostly because I have it set up with the least drop between saddle and handlebars, maybe an inch drop. My Ironman has closer to 1.5" or 2" drop even with the stem fully elevated to the limit line, and the top tube is slightly longer so I'm more stretched out. And the early '90s Trek 5900 is set up much more aggressively so it's a real chore to ride now with a bum neck. Bike fit plays a big part in overall ergonomics and how a bike "feels" to pedal, especially with an aging body that's beat up from injuries and the usual aging stuff.
I'll probably replace the current 120mm horizontal stem on the Ironman with either a 90mm stem I have in a box, or an angled riser stem, and possibly a newer compact drop bar with less reach and drop. That might bump the Ironman back into my favorite spot. It was always pretty comfy on rougher roads as the frame is slightly more compliant than my road racing oriented carbon fiber bikes.
The main differences I notice have little to do with the frames but more to do with wheels, tubes and tires, and gearing.
The old Suntour GPX rear derailleur on my Ironman always felt draggy until I replaced the sintered bearing jockey and pulley wheels with sealed bearing wheels (same or similar composite material, something like nylon I think -- Bullseye aluminum wheels are similarly smooth but a bit noisier). That fixed the draggy feeling -- sintered bearings, dry or lubed, just can't compare with sealed ball bearings. So now all my road bikes have some version of sealed bearing jockey and pulley wheels.
Crank length might make some difference. With age and arthritis I notice more slight hitches in my pedaling, depending on how stiff I am on any given day. Maybe some minor differences in shoes, cleats and pedals too -- I have Look Delta on the older bike, Shimano SPD-SL on the others. Very similar floating cleats but not identical.
Another difference I can feel and measure to some extent is the diameter of the chainring and rear cog in my preferred gearing for a given route -- mostly roller terrain in my area, no serious climbs but no extended flat and level terrain either. It feels more efficient when I'm in the big ring and middle cog -- which pretty much meshes with the current conventional wisdom in the pros that larger diameter chainrings, cogs and jockey/pulley wheels are slightly more efficient, enough to offset the slightly heavier components.
And I've noticed that using any rear cog smaller than 13 teeth feels like grinding coffee. The 11 and 12 tooth cogs in my newer bike never feels smooth. It's just a mismatch between the chain design and cogs (I forget the term best used to describe this but there are techy articles discussing this). The standard bicycle chain link length seems to lose efficiency quickly with cogs smaller than 13T.
Overall I'd say my smoothest feeling road bike is my 1989 Centurion Ironman with the current 50/38 chainrings and 13-25 or whatever freewheel. Mostly because the 50T chainring happens to work best with the three middle cogs in the freewheel on my usual 20-35 mile route, so there's little deflection of the chain, no sharp bends around small cogs. And maybe the 172.5 cranks suit me a bit better than the 175 cranks on my 2012 carbon fiber bike. I also liked the 170 cranks on my 1993 carbon fiber Trek 5900 -- not a huge difference, but pedaling felt smoother than with the 175 cranks.
It's all very subjective and none of my bikes shows any significant advantage over hundreds of rides on the same familiar routes. Some of my fastest Strava times and PRs were on the Ironman back in 2017 when I was probably in my peak conditioning (for an old dude). I've beaten the Ironman times on a few roller coaster segments with the carbon fiber bikes, so maybe there was a small edge to the lighter overall weight.
But there are so many variables it's tough to pin down to any single factor -- frame design and composition, wheels, tires, tubes, gearing, drivetrain, etc.
I will say that as my neck pain worsens (arthritis and cervical spine stenosis and spondylosis) I'm preferring the 2012 Diamondback mostly because I have it set up with the least drop between saddle and handlebars, maybe an inch drop. My Ironman has closer to 1.5" or 2" drop even with the stem fully elevated to the limit line, and the top tube is slightly longer so I'm more stretched out. And the early '90s Trek 5900 is set up much more aggressively so it's a real chore to ride now with a bum neck. Bike fit plays a big part in overall ergonomics and how a bike "feels" to pedal, especially with an aging body that's beat up from injuries and the usual aging stuff.
I'll probably replace the current 120mm horizontal stem on the Ironman with either a 90mm stem I have in a box, or an angled riser stem, and possibly a newer compact drop bar with less reach and drop. That might bump the Ironman back into my favorite spot. It was always pretty comfy on rougher roads as the frame is slightly more compliant than my road racing oriented carbon fiber bikes.
Likes For canklecat:
#17
Mother Nature's Son
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Sussex County, Delaware
Posts: 3,118
Bikes: 2014 Orbea Avant MD30, 2004 Airborne Zeppelin TI, 2003 Lemond Poprad, 2001 Lemond Tourmalet, 2014? Soma Smoothie
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 853 Post(s)
Liked 1,437 Times
in
819 Posts
I recently mounted a DA 9000 group set, with C24 wheels, on an Airborne Zeppelin titanium frameset. The bike is right at 17 lbs. with no accessories mounted. It is light, fast, and, to me, feels as effortless to pedal as a bike can feel. I switched wheels to a set of Hed Belgium wheels with 32 spokes, 6800 hubs, and 28mm gravel king slicks with latex tubes. The DA wheels had 26mm gk and Aerothan tubes. The switch added 1.6 lbs. to the bike. When riding, I can definitely feel the extra weight when accelerating, the handling is not as quick, and the Hed with 32 spokes catches the wind a lot more than the C24. The wheels and tires make a huge difference. The bike has more of a touring bike feel to the ride. At speed, it is just a bit softer of a ride.
Likes For delbiker1:
#18
aged to perfection
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: PacNW
Posts: 1,817
Bikes: Dinucci Allez 2.0, Richard Sachs, Alex Singer, Serotta, Masi GC, Raleigh Pro Mk.1, Hetchins, etc
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 839 Post(s)
Liked 1,258 Times
in
663 Posts
I rode my old Masi today and it has this. Glides along effortlessly and always brings a smile.
/markp
/markp
#19
www.theheadbadge.com
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Posts: 28,514
Bikes: https://www.theheadbadge.com
Mentioned: 124 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2422 Post(s)
Liked 4,396 Times
in
2,093 Posts
Other than gearing, the weight of your wheels can make a big difference in pedaling effort. Lighter weight wheels, even when the gearing is the same from bike to bike, is probably what you notice. This is one of the reasons I prefer tubular tires for my vintage bikes.
Tires (and tire pressure) also contribute, as do bearing adjustments at the axle. Too tight will be (somewhat) noticeable if you do an A-B comparison test to properly adjusted cones, same if the bearings are gritty and haven't been repacked.
-Kurt
Last edited by cudak888; 03-19-24 at 05:42 AM.
Likes For cudak888:
#20
Master Parts Rearranger
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Portlandia's Kuiper Belt, OR
Posts: 4,403
Bikes: 1982 Trek 720 - 1985 Trek 620 - 1984 Trek 620 - 1980 Trek 510 - Other luminaries past and present
Mentioned: 221 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1556 Post(s)
Liked 2,024 Times
in
989 Posts
I've been doing some longer range rides (for me right now) on Monday nights in addition to fitting riding on warm enough and dry enough evenings. 36 miles split in half by a destination for just under two hours before heading home, with a backback with a few things in it. Last Monday was 47° and rain the entire way over and I took my '85 Trek 620 as it is set up for rain etc. 1h16m with a good bit of elevation gain along the route over. Yesterday was 71° and dry and I got onto my '82 Trek 720. Wind situation was the same for both trips over. The 720 is lighter by a few pounds, with faster wheels (MA2s, 7400 hubs, butted spokes, Compass 35mm tires) and the 620 with heavier wheels (TB14s, 6500 hubs, 14ga spokes, Donnelly gravel 40mm tires). The 620 has a slightly more upright seating position. It could have been the freshness after a few weeks vs the one week 'rest' with the 720, but the 620 just rolled and I found myself in the top gear combos more easily in the faster sections. Those same top combos seemed a little harder to get to on the 720, even if I 'made sure' to make good time. The 720 clocked the same trip in 1h15m or maybe 1h14m depending on how one looks at stoplight time.
Both bikes will coast forever, and I think there is something to be said for the flywheel effect of the 620's heavier rolling gear once at speed. I might give my very-easy-to-pedal 510 the chance, but there is just so. much. gravel. on the sides of the roads left over from our ice and snow that I'd really like to spare the 30mm 32s the annoyance. That and all the sewer grates in the bike lanes that would swallow them. 35s were fine, but no smaller. The 40s just did not care and felt great rolling over everything.
Maybe the TL;DR here is that a more upright/open seating position will give efficiency gains and feel better (abdomen, IT band, knees) over a more aggressive position that gives slight aero (and thus time) gain, things being fairly equal. OR: the 620 is just an efficient bike to pedal.
Both bikes will coast forever, and I think there is something to be said for the flywheel effect of the 620's heavier rolling gear once at speed. I might give my very-easy-to-pedal 510 the chance, but there is just so. much. gravel. on the sides of the roads left over from our ice and snow that I'd really like to spare the 30mm 32s the annoyance. That and all the sewer grates in the bike lanes that would swallow them. 35s were fine, but no smaller. The 40s just did not care and felt great rolling over everything.
Maybe the TL;DR here is that a more upright/open seating position will give efficiency gains and feel better (abdomen, IT band, knees) over a more aggressive position that gives slight aero (and thus time) gain, things being fairly equal. OR: the 620 is just an efficient bike to pedal.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 13,047
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 267 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4513 Post(s)
Liked 6,388 Times
in
3,673 Posts
I've been doing some longer range rides (for me right now) on Monday nights in addition to fitting riding on warm enough and dry enough evenings. 36 miles split in half by a destination for just under two hours before heading home, with a backback with a few things in it. Last Monday was 47° and rain the entire way over and I took my '85 Trek 620 as it is set up for rain etc. 1h16m with a good bit of elevation gain along the route over. Yesterday was 71° and dry and I got onto my '82 Trek 720. Wind situation was the same for both trips over. The 720 is lighter by a few pounds, with faster wheels (MA2s, 7400 hubs, butted spokes, Compass 35mm tires) and the 620 with heavier wheels (TB14s, 6500 hubs, 14ga spokes, Donnelly gravel 40mm tires). The 620 has a slightly more upright seating position. It could have been the freshness after a few weeks vs the one week 'rest' with the 720, but the 620 just rolled and I found myself in the top gear combos more easily in the faster sections. Those same top combos seemed a little harder to get to on the 720, even if I 'made sure' to make good time. The 720 clocked the same trip in 1h15m or maybe 1h14m depending on how one looks at stoplight time.
Both bikes will coast forever, and I think there is something to be said for the flywheel effect of the 620's heavier rolling gear once at speed. I might give my very-easy-to-pedal 510 the chance, but there is just so. much. gravel. on the sides of the roads left over from our ice and snow that I'd really like to spare the 30mm 32s the annoyance. That and all the sewer grates in the bike lanes that would swallow them. 35s were fine, but no smaller. The 40s just did not care and felt great rolling over everything.
Maybe the TL;DR here is that a more upright/open seating position will give efficiency gains and feel better (abdomen, IT band, knees) over a more aggressive position that gives slight aero (and thus time) gain, things being fairly equal. OR: the 620 is just an efficient bike to pedal.
Both bikes will coast forever, and I think there is something to be said for the flywheel effect of the 620's heavier rolling gear once at speed. I might give my very-easy-to-pedal 510 the chance, but there is just so. much. gravel. on the sides of the roads left over from our ice and snow that I'd really like to spare the 30mm 32s the annoyance. That and all the sewer grates in the bike lanes that would swallow them. 35s were fine, but no smaller. The 40s just did not care and felt great rolling over everything.
Maybe the TL;DR here is that a more upright/open seating position will give efficiency gains and feel better (abdomen, IT band, knees) over a more aggressive position that gives slight aero (and thus time) gain, things being fairly equal. OR: the 620 is just an efficient bike to pedal.
Likes For merziac:
#22
Master Parts Rearranger
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Portlandia's Kuiper Belt, OR
Posts: 4,403
Bikes: 1982 Trek 720 - 1985 Trek 620 - 1984 Trek 620 - 1980 Trek 510 - Other luminaries past and present
Mentioned: 221 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1556 Post(s)
Liked 2,024 Times
in
989 Posts
It's fun. On the 720 yesterday, I was wondering how in the world the 620 was rocking a 53-11 combo as well as I did with the larger tires (higher gear ratio), in the rain and relative cold (resistance, not ideal), and with a heavier bike with heavier rolling wheel mass compared to the 720.
Likes For RiddleOfSteel: