Dr1v3n

This topic is about the different types of road bikes and what may be a good second bicycle for a relative beginner. I see a lot online about different types of bicycles such as mountain bikes, road bikes, beach cruisers, comfort bikes, ebikes, gravel bikes, etc...

What I do not see that much of, is explanation of the different subclasses within just road bikes. After reading some manufacturer's websites and watching some GCN videos, I gather there at least:

1. Endurance bikes
2. Triathlon bikes
3. Race bikes
4. Commuter bikes
5. Gravel bikes

Right now, I understand that endurance bikes tend to have larger geometry, allowing the rider to spread him/herself out across the bike longer, which often results in improved comfort. Perhaps the handlebars are also in a more comfortable position? Tri bikes I've heard have a sharper angle, forcing the rider into a more uncomfortable, but aero position. Race bikes I've heard tend to be the lightest and not necessarily built for comfort either etc... Are there any other types? Am I fairly accurate here?

At this point, I have a Giant Contend 3 that I actually really like, but I'm trying to also think about the future, what I might like to try out. Again, don't get me wrong, I'm not in a rush. The Contend is no slouch, and I've been doing some very long rides, and even brought the thing up to 40mph recently. I cycle purely for exercise and riding experience - I do not commute but sometimes I throw a backpack on and go on store runs. Likewise, I also do not currently "race" and may never participate in competitive races with others. However, I do like speed. I would say that in terms of road bike I value in this order:

1. Comfort
2. Gearing (including smooth shifting) and brakes
3. Reliability
4. Performance/speed

The reason is that since I bicycle for exercise and sight-seeing/experience, I don't necessarily have to go balls to the wall fast all the time in order to keep my heart rate up, especially on hills. The way I look at it - the more comfortable it is, the more likely I am to ride, and since I love riding, I value that highest. But I am also the kind of person who finds riding in "the drops" to be the most comfortable position to ride in.

So I figure, the "endurance" class of road bike is probably most well suited for me. I do 2-3 hour rides, and this is after I've only been bicycling for 3 months, so I imagine that could go up significantly at times. Is that a fair assumption?

After that, my knowledge completely drops off. I'm aware of groupsets such as Shimano Claris and Ultegra, and I think someone talked about a 110. But I have no clue what I may look at for my next road bike and why. I can tell you that what I would like out of it is hopefully to not be cross-chaining as much. On my current Claris setup, I have 2 big rings and 8 in the casette and what tends to happen is one of my favorite/most natural places to be is on the high end of the small ring, or the low end of the big ring, both of which are cross-chaining. I wonder if there is a more suitable gear setup for me? I'd still prefer a reliable setup though, and I've heard the ones with 13+ casette gears may be less reliable due to the squeezing of so many gears back there, etc...

Anyway, appreciate any advice.

WhyFi

If you're not in a hurry, then I'd take a step back and not get lost in the weeds.

I wouldn't rule out any category of bike just yet. Many people, myself included, can happily ride for several hours on "race" bikes. Or maybe your preferences drift and you get gravel-curious. You've just started your journey - be open to letting it wander while you find your legs.

​​​​​​​At this point, I'd think about the practical: considering gearing changes for your current bike. This may be as easy as a new cassette or it may be as simple (but not easy!) as getting stronger. Take a look at the tooth count for both your chainrings and your cassette cogs, consider the terrain that you ride and go from there.

Broctoon

Dr1v3n , you’re pretty close in your analysis.

As a beginner, you probably should not be considering triathlon bikes (also called time trial bikes; the biking leg of a triathlon is a TT). They are built for one thing: speed on relatively flat courses, with no drafting. Aerodynamics is their number one design concern, and that should be low in your priorities if you’re just getting into road biking. These bikes have relatively narrow gearing range, since they’re not really intended to be ridden on steep hills. They are built with very specialized components, like aero shaped seat posts, very tall rim profiles, etc. They put the rider in a very low, forward position.

A road race bike, often called a race bike or just a road bike, will have light weight as a major design consideration. It will have fairly steep frame geometry for a somewhat aero position (just not as much as a tri bike). Its geometry will represent a compromise to allow for good performance in climbing, descending, fast cornering, and long distance rides, but with rider comfort not a major consideration. Also not a focus are accessory provisions or rider's visibility. (By that, I mean the rider may be visible to others, but probably won't have an easy time watching traffic or scenery him/herself.) For a long time, practically all road bikes had more or less the same geometry as what we call race bikes today…

…Then, starting a few decades ago, bike makers realized not everyone is flexible enough to ride comfortably on that geometry, nor does everyone need to. Endurance bikes came onto the scene. They are similar to road race bikes, but with everything relaxed just a little. It isn’t about spreading the rider’s body out so much as setting him or her more upright. If you see what looks a lot like a race bike (drop bars, lightweight components, somewhat aero fork, etc.), but with a top tube that slopes upward, that is an endurance bike. Your Giant Contend fits more or less into this category. Many people who are into serious road riding opt for one of these. They are even used for long races in all but the most elite world class levels. They don’t look exactly like the bikes ridden by pros in really high profile events, but they can be very capable.

Gravel bikes are a lot like other road bikes in terms of geometry. A little more relaxed than a race bike. They have room for bigger tires, and typically come with very wide range gearing. They often have handlebars that are wider, higher, and/or flared out at the ends. A few years ago, the inclusion of disc brakes was considered one of the main features to differentiate a gravel bike from other road bikes, but now everything has disc brakes. Gravel bikes will often work very well for a new rider.

Touring bikes have the most relaxed geometry of all road bikes. Long chain stays give a smooth ride and room for luggage. Angles are shallow for the same reasons. Steering geometry likewise favors comfort, stability, and luggage space over agile handling. Steel is still the most common material for touring bike frames, because it rides smoothly, it’s durable, and it’s easy to repair if it gets damaged. These bikes have lots of built-in accommodations for accessory mounting (racks, fenders, bottles, etc.). They also have clearance for fairly wide tires (similar to gravel bikes) and for fenders. Some bikes marketed for commuters have a lot in common with touring bikes. A beginning rider who wants versatility, durability, and comfort would do well to choose a touring bike, with the understanding that it will not be light or agile, so even amateur racing is not really viable. Some touring bikes come with flat bars, or the option for either flat or drop bars. Many come with widely flared drop bars, and sometimes bar-end shifters. Touring bikes are usually set up to give an upright riding position, both for comfort and visibility.

There is a whole range of designs similar to road bikes but with flat or riser handlebars, wide-ish gearing range, and often various comfort and convenience features. These are called hybrids, fitness bikes, city bikes, and perhaps other designations. They are not suitable for spirited group rides and won’t work very well for long rides on steep terrain. They are a really good choice for casual rides of short to medium distance, especially when rider comfort is a primary concern. They can be great for a first bike, assuming the rider has no aspirations of racing, even in informal clubs/groups.

The only time you really need drop bars is for organized races (or club rides where everyone intends to ride in a pace line or otherwise in close formation). Drop bars are great for descending steep hills, and many people find them comfortable, with the hand positions made possible by modern lever mounts (a.k.a. "hoods"). For your next bike (an upgrade from your Giant), if you just want to ride fast, but you also put a premium on comfort, even for rides exceeding two hours, a good hybrid/fitness bike might be just the ticket. A gravel bike or another endurance bike could also work well for you.

Dr1v3n

Dang Broctoon , that should be in one of the sticky threads! Very helpful and useful info on an otherwise complex topic.

WhyFi I appreciate the gearing changes suggestion!

Cyclist0108

@Broctoon gave an outstanding answer, as you note.

One very small additional point I would make is that many so-called "Endurance Road" or "Adventure Road" bikes now permit rather wide tires (eg: Trek Domane), which gives a rider the ability to use gravel-friendly tires (or simply more comfortable wide supple tires on paved roads). In other words, if you get an "Endurance" bike that can take 38mm or even wider tires, it maximizes your options rather than restricting them.

Bah Humbug

Yes to all the above (though many TT bikes now come with relatively wide gearing as well, and can certainly be changed like any other bike). For a beginner I would absolutely start with a gravel bike, which I would include the above-mentioned Domane in. The ability to run wider tires makes rough roads more comfortable, and the more-stable geometry makes it easier to learn the handling. If they’d been available when I started riding they would have made that process much easier for me. They also give you the freedom to try most routes in your area.

SoSmellyAir

With a more expensive groupset, e.g., Shimano 105, Ultegra, and Dura-Ace (in order from least to most expensive), the front derailleur has 4 positions: high, high trim, low, and low trim (from outboard to inboard). When properly setup, the high trim position is optimized for riding the big chain ring and the larger rear cogs, reducing chain rub and noise. However, riding in these combinations is still hard on the chain because of the cross-chaining chain line.

On a separate note, if you never (or very seldomly) use the big chain ring with the smallest cassette cogs or the small chain ring with the biggest cassette cogs (which are the ends of your overall gear range), then maybe a smaller range cassette will give you more useful gear combinations in the range you use the most. When I first bought my road bike it came with a 11-32 cassette, so I pretty much only used the big chain ring. But the relatively large range of the 11-32 cassette means the gap between each cog is larger and harder for me to maintain my cadence and (meager) power. Eventually I settled on an Ultegra 12-25 cassette.

Broctoon

This is good advice for the OP, and lots of riders. Some folks focus too much on the extremes at the top and bottom of their cassette, when they should be looking at the increments. For many, I suspect a good approach would be to go with a reasonably large cog at the top or reasonably small one at the bottom (usually the former), and get the smallest possible increments at each step. The size at the opposite end of the the cassette would then be dictated by how many speeds you have, and that's okay. Not saying this would work for everyone, but I believe a lot of riders see those insanely wide range cassettes you can get on mountain bikes and even some gravel bikes now, and they think that's what they need. With (only?) 12 speeds or fewer, there's a pretty big jump at each step, and probably three or four cogs near the middle are used most of the time.


I think about the 12-28 range that was quite common just a few years ago, and even the 12-25 that prevailed for a long time prior to that. It would work just fine for me on most of my rides. I've got a mid-compact crank and 11-32 cassette on my road bike. So my highest ratio is 125 gear inches (52x11). My lowest is 30 g.i. (36x32). I *occasionally* get into one of those ratios when I find myself in an extreme situation, and at those times I'm glad I have it. But most of the time I'm on the big ring and right in the middle of the cassette. Probably 60% of my riding is on one of two cogs, and 90%+ on one of five.


Dr1v3n , you might solve one of the little problems with your current bike by taking the advice to simply change your cassette. Alternatively, there might be something in your shifting strategy that you can change to keep from getting into a "dead spot" where there doesn't seem to be a combo that gives just the right ratio. I can't tell what's really going on from your explanation above. I don't doubt there's a valid concern with the gear ratios you have now. It's just that sometimes you can resolve it by developing your skills--and by that I don't mean your fitness level. I mean how you manage the gearing combinations that are available to you.

SoSmellyAir

I think about the 12-28 cassette every time I am riding up the biggest hill in my area in the 34 x 25 gear combination (50/34 chain rings, 12-25 cassette), and how I almost bought the 11 speed version, which is only available in Dura-Ace, when it was < $200. Then I also think about the Ultegra 14-28 "junior" cassette, and how I should have bought that (instead of the 11-28 cassette in a failed attempt to combine it with my 12-25 cassette to make a 12-28 cassette).

Broctoon

Yeah, there are those times when three more teeth (or even seven more) would be a godsend.

Lately I've been riding mostly on very flat terrain, and I sometimes wonder why I even have those really big and really small cogs. But now and then I'll head up the canyons--maybe even during a race--and then I remember.

scottfsmith

I upgraded my bike a few years ago and got one of these so-called “endurance” bikes after having a “race” bike for 20+ years. I got it because I had back issues and didn’t really consider getting another race bike because of that. I have been super happy with it: I love to go fast but need to stay comfortable, and it really delivers on that. Endurance bikes also sound like the right thing for your needs.

I have an 11-speed 11-34 in back and 50/34 in front and this setup has been amazingly good for me as a 3-4 hours per week rider that wants to go fast. At about 7 degrees or more of uphill I am in the 34 on the small front ring, and anything 4 degrees or more downhill I am in the 11 on the big ring. I could optimally use a bit more range for the few 10+ degree uphills or long 5+ degree downhills, but those are not common so I get by just fine. I don’t know how people in hilly areas get by with so few teeth on their cassettes, I guess there must be a lot of low rpm grinding on the climbs. Or they have a lot more watts than I do.

Random11

...Depends on how and where you ride, but I switched from an 11-34 cassette to 11-28 and it was a big improvement because of the smaller increments from gear to gear.

jaxgtr

I have no hills to speak out in my area, so my cassette of choice is the 14-28 as I have a lot of wind to deal with, so I like having the ability to drop one tooth at a time if needed. Works perfect for my needs. I don't race and the 11-13 are useless to me. The only time I use an 11-28 to or 11-30 is if I am riding in the hills of GA or SC, or using the Trainer.

Branko D

I wouldn't get too caught up in details. Bikes themselves aren't comfortable or uncomfortable - you can be comfortable on a certain bike or not, and as your body changes, that will also change.

Over time as I started riding more, the amount of spacers under my stem went down and the stem went to a -17 degree one. I didn't get less able to ride for many hours as a consequence, but rather the opposite. Suppose I ignored the bike and strength training for a while and put on some weight, I would become less comfortable riding long distance on the same bike.

Tire width is similar. If I started plowing over rough patches of asphalt, potholes and speed bumps firmly planted on the saddle with all my weight on it, 23s and 25s would become a torture device.

It’s more about you and what currently suits you, and that will change over time.

Also, another thing - all road bikes, race bikes included, are inherently endurance road bikes (for someone, anyway) . The format of road racing at the highest level is riding for multiple hours for days and days on end and having to deliver lots of power on demand. That is not really possible on a bike which is actually uncomfortable.
​​​​​​

Bah Humbug

And some, of course, just don’t live in hilly areas. I’m in central Texas and only have a single hill that requires my lowest couple of gears… but it’s the one I live on, or I’d be fine with a 46/11-28.

rivers

I have 3 bikes: an aero road bike, a gravel bike, and a TT bike. My everyday go-to is my aero road bike. It has a more aggressive geometry than my gravel bike, but not quite as aggressive as my TT bike. I use it for long days out with friends, club runs, commuting and sometimes turbo sessions. But all the rides outdoors are on the road. It's my favourite bike to ride, and I have ridden many rides over 100 miles on it, half a dozen over 150 and one over 200. Even though it has more aggressive geometry, it's still comfortable for long days out. Gearing wise, it has a 50/34 chainset and 11-28 cassette, shimano 105. My gravel bike has a more relaxed geometry, and a more upright position compared to my aero road bike. It has 2 sets of wheels, one with 40mm knobblies for a bit of off road fun, and one with 32mm slicks for the road. It doubles up as my wet weather bike because it has disc brakes, which I'm just more comfortable with in the wet and the winter. I also use it for bikepacking. It is also running mostly shimano 105, with a 46/30 chainset and an 11-32 in the back. Because of this, it doesn't have the top end speed, but it doesn't bother me. It's more important that I can make it up hills when I'm fully loaded or that are comprised of dirt/gravel (or make it up a gravel track fully loaded). My TT bike is running mechanical ultegra (though I would have been just as happy with 105) with a 52/36 up front and an 11-28 in that back. It is good for going fast on flattish roads and not much else. I have done a few long TTs (50 and 100 milers) on it, and things start to get uncomfortable after about 3 hours. It is not an everyday bike. I have used it for commuting- it isn't practical. But, I needed time on it for my long TTs and a commute is an easy way to get time on it (I also occasionally will go straight from work to a club TT, which means a full on aero commute with skinsuit, aero helmet, and aero overshoes. Not a good look). My TT bike also spends a bit of time on the turbo.
If I were going to get a second bike, my preference would be for a gravel bike as they are more versatile. Even with lower gearing, you won't lose much top end speed (basically spin out a bit quicker on a long descent). With two sets of wheels (or even just a second set of tyres if you're not running tubeless), you have the option for a bit of off-road fun and on road fun. They also come with loads of ability to carry a load. Many have rack mounts, as well as fork, downtube, seat tube, and various other mounts for luggage carrying capabilities.

PeteHski

The obvious next step from the Giant Contend in terms of moving toward a more focused road endurance bike is the Giant Defy. But at 3 months in I would just keep riding your Contend and not worry. It's a very capable road bike. As for gearing choice, this depends a lot on your riding terrain. Most endurance road bikes now come with compact chainsests (e.g.50/34) and wide range cassettes (e.g. 11-34) which work well in most situations. If you are riding only on flat roads then a narrower range cassette is better, but if there are significant hills then you will be thankful of the wider gear range. Don't rule out a 1x gearing setup either. I'm seriously thinking of going that way myself on my next road bike. But these are all details for now. Just keep riding and enjoy!