The importance of bicycle weight for the fifty plus
02-17-23, 02:16 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,601
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked 908 Times
in
515 Posts
The way I look at it, it comes down to the reward/effort ratio - if the reward (the sensation of fast cruising across the countryside, say) is achieved for a lower effort, you are more likely to be motivated to do it more often or do longer rides. With greater effort required, you are less likely to be motivated to ride more or further.
And how does weight affect this? When climbing or accelerating, lower weight gives you the reward for less effort. When cruising on the flats, it makes between nearly zero and SFA difference to the actual amount of effort required, but a lighter bike will 'feel' a little more sporty and likely better. Even for hills, the added effort of riding a heavier bike is generally paid back with faster or longer coasting on the downhill side, but you are more likely to feel and remember and be influenced by the amount of effort you had to put out to get up the hill.
A difference in effort required to lift your bike on/off a hook and carry it up/down the stairs also fits into this, even if only a little bit in your subconscious.
And how does weight affect this? When climbing or accelerating, lower weight gives you the reward for less effort. When cruising on the flats, it makes between nearly zero and SFA difference to the actual amount of effort required, but a lighter bike will 'feel' a little more sporty and likely better. Even for hills, the added effort of riding a heavier bike is generally paid back with faster or longer coasting on the downhill side, but you are more likely to feel and remember and be influenced by the amount of effort you had to put out to get up the hill.
A difference in effort required to lift your bike on/off a hook and carry it up/down the stairs also fits into this, even if only a little bit in your subconscious.
02-18-23, 05:28 AM
#52
Standard Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brunswick, Maine
Posts: 3,884
Bikes: 1948 P. Barnard & Son, 1962 Rudge Sports, 1963 Freddie Grubb Routier, 1980 Manufrance Hirondelle, 1983 F. Moser Sprint, 1989 Raleigh Technium Pre, 2001 Raleigh M80
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1152 Post(s)
Liked 700 Times
in
351 Posts
My heavier bikes keep me honest on the up-hills, and remind me to get my miles (and stretching) in. They may cost less than carbon, but you have to pay for these bikes every day with due diligence. I suppose that is how it should be.
02-18-23, 05:59 AM
#53
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Hello again! Hmm 
maybe I exaggerated a bit when I said the bike was like a power lift to carry down/up a flight of stairs. No, it's not that bad, but at this age I feel like have some equipment I could only dream of as a 15-20 year old. That is not to say that I am a "showman", rather the opposite would probably be said by people who know me. Now, what holds me back a bit is bike fit, because regardless of own experience and the bike brand, it's easy to end up with a poorly fitted bike especially because where Im located its far between qualified bicycle fitters.
hsea17
maybe I exaggerated a bit when I said the bike was like a power lift to carry down/up a flight of stairs. No, it's not that bad, but at this age I feel like have some equipment I could only dream of as a 15-20 year old. That is not to say that I am a "showman", rather the opposite would probably be said by people who know me. Now, what holds me back a bit is bike fit, because regardless of own experience and the bike brand, it's easy to end up with a poorly fitted bike especially because where Im located its far between qualified bicycle fitters.hsea17
02-18-23, 09:08 AM
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2022
Location: USA
Posts: 2,138
Bikes: Cannondale - Gary Fisher - Giant - Litespeed - Schwinn Paramount - Schwinn (lugged steel) - Trek OCLV
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 929 Post(s)
Liked 1,163 Times
in
689 Posts
yes - bike fit is obviously important
some research may be warranted
some times a simple change - stem or whatever - change can make a significant difference
some research may be warranted
some times a simple change - stem or whatever - change can make a significant difference
02-18-23, 09:46 AM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 2,533
Bikes: 06 Lemond Reno, 98 GT Timberline mtn.bike
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked 662 Times
in
414 Posts
Weight is important-somewhat for me. I could probably lose 3-4 lbs. if I didn't carry so much stuff in my seat bag. Hardly ever use what is in it, and it's usually to fix someone else's bike when I do use it. But no doubt, if I leave it home, something will come up! Sometimes I'll ride my old chromoly mtn.bike, with "dual purpose" tires on the local mup, for a workout. I can tell the difference between it and my aluminum road bike. Not just tires, but the weight also. Isn't terrible though, which surprises me (might be worse if there were lots of hills).
02-18-23, 03:04 PM
#56
Senior Member
Hauling my bike(s) of 21.5 pounds (9.7kg) up and down the basement stairs is no big deal, and hauling the 17 pound (7.7kg) high end carbon wonder bikes that I work on is no more or less a burden on my body than my own 21lbs bikes. It is still an awkward item to be climbing stairs with.
02-19-23, 05:32 PM
#57
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Bike weight controll checked yesterday 9.4Kg included Ultegra pedals, pump bracket and water bottle bracket.
hsea17
hsea17
02-20-23, 04:02 AM
#58
Junior Member
Thread Starter
I think I mentioned it before in the tread but this is the bike I should like to buy.......but but, top tube is 15mm-20mm longer and so are the head tube length compare to my exsisting bike which fit and is more endurance oriented than the one below. They have one left size M which on the paper and theoretically should fit me but Im skeptic about my flexibility at this age and a longer TT and HT 
Btw, isn't it always like this when first can get a decent offer
They have a sale on it where Im located for equal to GBP 1895,- approximate US 2285,-
TCR Advanced Pro Disc 2 (2021) | Giant Bicycles UK (giant-bicycles.com)
hsea17
Btw, isn't it always like this when first can get a decent offer They have a sale on it where Im located for equal to GBP 1895,- approximate US 2285,- TCR Advanced Pro Disc 2 (2021) | Giant Bicycles UK (giant-bicycles.com)
hsea17
02-20-23, 05:11 AM
#59
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 678
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 790 Post(s)
Liked 347 Times
in
194 Posts
Weight has zero importance at all at any age unless someone is worried about the speed they can go while riding uphill. If there are two 20 year-old riders, one an advanced rider who does thousands of miles each year and also races, and another who only rides on Saturdays a few miles for fun, they can both go up the same hills at the same comfort level as long as their bikes have the gearing to let them do so. If the non-serious cyclist weighs another fifty pounds, then he just has to use appropriate gearing to move the weight up the hill in his comfort zone. So as you or any rider ages and loses strength and stamina, which is natural, the only adjustment you will have to make is to go slower uphill in an easier gear, done.
Only those riders who are trying to keep the same speed up a hill as they age and lose strength and stamina will try to do it by dumping loads of cash into a light bicycle, which is a losing game because you are going to get slower on average every year when you are over 40 until you die, so by solving the problem with equipment you are talking about spending a fortune on the latest, lightest cycling equipment there is, and if you have already done that, then you are out of luck.
I think in the one book on cycling science that was published in England about forty years ago, it says a fit person who regularly exercises will lose half their ability to get oxygen by breathing between the age of 40 to 80, so being in my 60s, I may have already lost a quarter or more of my athletic ability and power. Am I going to worry about it and start panic-buying high-end bicycles? No, because I am still having as much fun, or more fun riding than when I was a teenager, and that is the only thing that is important. If going slower as you age ruins the fun you have cycling, then you have work to do not in making your cycle light, but lightening up your attitude.
Only those riders who are trying to keep the same speed up a hill as they age and lose strength and stamina will try to do it by dumping loads of cash into a light bicycle, which is a losing game because you are going to get slower on average every year when you are over 40 until you die, so by solving the problem with equipment you are talking about spending a fortune on the latest, lightest cycling equipment there is, and if you have already done that, then you are out of luck.
I think in the one book on cycling science that was published in England about forty years ago, it says a fit person who regularly exercises will lose half their ability to get oxygen by breathing between the age of 40 to 80, so being in my 60s, I may have already lost a quarter or more of my athletic ability and power. Am I going to worry about it and start panic-buying high-end bicycles? No, because I am still having as much fun, or more fun riding than when I was a teenager, and that is the only thing that is important. If going slower as you age ruins the fun you have cycling, then you have work to do not in making your cycle light, but lightening up your attitude.
Likes For beng1:
02-20-23, 08:01 AM
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,020
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7382 Post(s)
Liked 3,012 Times
in
1,610 Posts
Very utilitarian but face it, most of us don't live by a utilitarian philosophy. We don't ride for transport or fitness, but because we enjoy riding---even if we ride for transport or fitness. And bike weight Can matter in considering the enjoyment one gets from a ride. it is not the only factor, but we all have preferences and predilections and some people enjoy the feeling of a lighter bike---even if the rider performs almost exactly the same on a heavier bike, by the numbers.
For most of us cycling is about the way we feel when we ride, and also after we ride. Some of us gain a related sense of satisfaction from our bikes when we are not riding them ... it is not all rational and utilitarian, but it is real and important.
I weigh as much as one-and-a-half people but I built two ~17-lb. bikes ... pure waste and folly. But I love them regardless ... I am a proud and willing fool in this one regard .... (and an unwilling and ashamed fool in a lot of other regards, but this is about bicycles, not personal growth and development.)
For most of us cycling is about the way we feel when we ride, and also after we ride. Some of us gain a related sense of satisfaction from our bikes when we are not riding them ... it is not all rational and utilitarian, but it is real and important.
I weigh as much as one-and-a-half people but I built two ~17-lb. bikes ... pure waste and folly. But I love them regardless ... I am a proud and willing fool in this one regard .... (and an unwilling and ashamed fool in a lot of other regards, but this is about bicycles, not personal growth and development.)
Likes For Maelochs:
02-20-23, 08:36 AM
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 23,607
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7185 Post(s)
Liked 7,430 Times
in
3,757 Posts
I think I mentioned it before in the tread but this is the bike I should like to buy.......but but, top tube is 15mm-20mm longer and so are the head tube length compare to my exsisting bike which fit and is more endurance oriented than the one below. They have one left size M which on the paper and theoretically should fit me but Im skeptic about my flexibility at this age and a longer TT and HT Btw, isn't it always like this when first can get a decent offer They have a sale on it where Im located for equal to GBP 1895,- approximate US 2285,-
TCR Advanced Pro Disc 2 (2021) | Giant Bicycles UK (giant-bicycles.com)
hsea17
Btw, isn't it always like this when first can get a decent offer They have a sale on it where Im located for equal to GBP 1895,- approximate US 2285,-TCR Advanced Pro Disc 2 (2021) | Giant Bicycles UK (giant-bicycles.com)
hsea17
02-20-23, 01:15 PM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 6,321
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3215 Post(s)
Liked 3,522 Times
in
2,221 Posts
Weight has zero importance at all at any age unless someone is worried about the speed they can go while riding uphill. If there are two 20 year-old riders, one an advanced rider who does thousands of miles each year and also races, and another who only rides on Saturdays a few miles for fun, they can both go up the same hills at the same comfort level as long as their bikes have the gearing to let them do so. If the non-serious cyclist weighs another fifty pounds, then he just has to use appropriate gearing to move the weight up the hill in his comfort zone. So as you or any rider ages and loses strength and stamina, which is natural, the only adjustment you will have to make is to go slower uphill in an easier gear, done.
Only those riders who are trying to keep the same speed up a hill as they age and lose strength and stamina will try to do it by dumping loads of cash into a light bicycle, which is a losing game because you are going to get slower on average every year when you are over 40 until you die, so by solving the problem with equipment you are talking about spending a fortune on the latest, lightest cycling equipment there is, and if you have already done that, then you are out of luck.
I think in the one book on cycling science that was published in England about forty years ago, it says a fit person who regularly exercises will lose half their ability to get oxygen by breathing between the age of 40 to 80, so being in my 60s, I may have already lost a quarter or more of my athletic ability and power. Am I going to worry about it and start panic-buying high-end bicycles? No, because I am still having as much fun, or more fun riding than when I was a teenager, and that is the only thing that is important. If going slower as you age ruins the fun you have cycling, then you have work to do not in making your cycle light, but lightening up your attitude.
Only those riders who are trying to keep the same speed up a hill as they age and lose strength and stamina will try to do it by dumping loads of cash into a light bicycle, which is a losing game because you are going to get slower on average every year when you are over 40 until you die, so by solving the problem with equipment you are talking about spending a fortune on the latest, lightest cycling equipment there is, and if you have already done that, then you are out of luck.
I think in the one book on cycling science that was published in England about forty years ago, it says a fit person who regularly exercises will lose half their ability to get oxygen by breathing between the age of 40 to 80, so being in my 60s, I may have already lost a quarter or more of my athletic ability and power. Am I going to worry about it and start panic-buying high-end bicycles? No, because I am still having as much fun, or more fun riding than when I was a teenager, and that is the only thing that is important. If going slower as you age ruins the fun you have cycling, then you have work to do not in making your cycle light, but lightening up your attitude.
Likes For PeteHski:
02-20-23, 06:06 PM
#63
Junior Member
Thread Starter
I have to make regardless of bike brand. Also been looking at Trek Domane Sl 6 which has more endurance oriented geometry but weighs more. Regarding the Giant TCR Advanced 2d I went to the shop and they weighed it with a Parktool bicycle scale and then and there it weighed 7.59 Kg. Officially, I think Giant has 7.70 as an indication.hsea17
02-20-23, 07:46 PM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 23,607
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7185 Post(s)
Liked 7,430 Times
in
3,757 Posts
Yes, I have looked at Defy advanced 0 and Defy Advanced Pro and as you mentioned they have more endurance oriented geometry but the cable routing of some of the models and more than a kilo heavier than Giant Tcr Advanced 2D Pro means that the weight reduction that I am looking for will more or less be minimal but presumably is that the compromise I have to make regardless of bike brand. Also been looking at Trek Domane Sl 6 which has more endurance oriented geometry but weighs more. Regarding the Giant TCR Advanced 2d I went to the shop and they weighed it with a Parktool bicycle scale and then and there it weighed 7.59 Kg. Officially, I think Giant has 7.70 as an indication.
hsea17
I have to make regardless of bike brand. Also been looking at Trek Domane Sl 6 which has more endurance oriented geometry but weighs more. Regarding the Giant TCR Advanced 2d I went to the shop and they weighed it with a Parktool bicycle scale and then and there it weighed 7.59 Kg. Officially, I think Giant has 7.70 as an indication.hsea17
Likes For big john:
02-20-23, 07:49 PM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 23,607
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7185 Post(s)
Liked 7,430 Times
in
3,757 Posts
He's trying to say buying bikes is stupid. He's softened his approach but the message is the same.
Likes For big john:
02-20-23, 08:05 PM
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2022
Location: USA
Posts: 2,138
Bikes: Cannondale - Gary Fisher - Giant - Litespeed - Schwinn Paramount - Schwinn (lugged steel) - Trek OCLV
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 929 Post(s)
Liked 1,163 Times
in
689 Posts
Yes, I have looked at Defy advanced 0 and Defy Advanced Pro and as you mentioned they have more endurance oriented geometry but the cable routing of some of the models and more than a kilo heavier than Giant Tcr Advanced 2D Pro means that the weight reduction that I am looking for will more or less be minimal but presumably is that the compromise I have to make regardless of bike brand. Also been looking at Trek Domane Sl 6 which has more endurance oriented geometry but weighs more. Regarding the Giant TCR Advanced 2d I went to the shop and they weighed it with a Parktool bicycle scale and then and there it weighed 7.59 Kg. Officially, I think Giant has 7.70 as an indication.
hsea17
I have to make regardless of bike brand. Also been looking at Trek Domane Sl 6 which has more endurance oriented geometry but weighs more. Regarding the Giant TCR Advanced 2d I went to the shop and they weighed it with a Parktool bicycle scale and then and there it weighed 7.59 Kg. Officially, I think Giant has 7.70 as an indication.hsea17
the gearing - rear cassette - could also account for some of the difference
this stuff can add up
Likes For t2p:
02-21-23, 02:41 AM
#67
Junior Member
Thread Starter
As I am not a specialist in bicycle geometry, I have a question for those of you who are well acquainted with bicycle geometry and modifications! As mentioned before, the relevant Giant TCR comes with a top tube of 550mm, stem 100mm and headntube 145mm.
My existing bike has a 535mm top tube, 100mm stem and 160mm head tube. Is there any way I can compensate for some of this difference without it affecting the bike's cycling handling too much!
hsea17
My existing bike has a 535mm top tube, 100mm stem and 160mm head tube. Is there any way I can compensate for some of this difference without it affecting the bike's cycling handling too much!
hsea17
02-21-23, 07:37 AM
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,020
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7382 Post(s)
Liked 3,012 Times
in
1,610 Posts
With the much longer top tube and much shorter head tube, you will be reaching way forward compared to your current bike. the bars will be almost an inch further forward and almost an inch lower. I have found that there are close tolerances where my body can ride a longer frame for about an hour and feel good but after that it starts to hurt more and more .... your mileage is sure to vary.
Certainly you can get a stem which sweeps upward sharply (unless it is an integrated stem/bar, or a proprietary stem full of cables and hoses) and also a stem which is shorter .... 15 or 25 mm shouldn't hurt at all. Also, if you are not using short-reach bars, you would have that option.
I wouldn't worry about the handling going bad, I would make sure that there actually were parts that fit the bike .... stems used to be so simple, but now they are exceedingly complicated.
Or just lose the .00089 watts to aero resistance and run the cabless and hoses outside the stem, old-school.
Certainly you can get a stem which sweeps upward sharply (unless it is an integrated stem/bar, or a proprietary stem full of cables and hoses) and also a stem which is shorter .... 15 or 25 mm shouldn't hurt at all. Also, if you are not using short-reach bars, you would have that option.
I wouldn't worry about the handling going bad, I would make sure that there actually were parts that fit the bike .... stems used to be so simple, but now they are exceedingly complicated.
Or just lose the .00089 watts to aero resistance and run the cabless and hoses outside the stem, old-school.
Likes For Maelochs:
02-21-23, 04:28 PM
#69
Junior Member
Thread Starter
With the much longer top tube and much shorter head tube, you will be reaching way forward compared to your current bike. the bars will be almost an inch further forward and almost an inch lower. I have found that there are close tolerances where my body can ride a longer frame for about an hour and feel good but after that it starts to hurt more and more .... your mileage is sure to vary.
Certainly you can get a stem which sweeps upward sharply (unless it is an integrated stem/bar, or a proprietary stem full of cables and hoses) and also a stem which is shorter .... 15 or 25 mm shouldn't hurt at all. Also, if you are not using short-reach bars, you would have that option.
I wouldn't worry about the handling going bad, I would make sure that there actually were parts that fit the bike .... stems used to be so simple, but now they are exceedingly complicated.
Or just lose the .00089 watts to aero resistance and run the cabless and hoses outside the stem, old-school.
Certainly you can get a stem which sweeps upward sharply (unless it is an integrated stem/bar, or a proprietary stem full of cables and hoses) and also a stem which is shorter .... 15 or 25 mm shouldn't hurt at all. Also, if you are not using short-reach bars, you would have that option.
I wouldn't worry about the handling going bad, I would make sure that there actually were parts that fit the bike .... stems used to be so simple, but now they are exceedingly complicated.
Or just lose the .00089 watts to aero resistance and run the cabless and hoses outside the stem, old-school.
hsea17
02-21-23, 05:13 PM
#70
Senior Member
Would there be any benefits for a man well over 60 who exercises regularly but varies the week between slow jogging/swimming and cycling 3-5 hours with a lighter bike except when I carry it up the stairs? My current bike weighs about 9 kg + ! I can still cycle at a speed of 17 - 19 mph but then it's mostly flat road? I have a low/normal body weight versus height so not much to gain by losing weight and could actually like to gain a few kilos, but in muscle but that is not easy at this age.
Any input welomehsea17
02-21-23, 05:17 PM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 4,387
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 2,112 Times
in
1,193 Posts
With the much longer top tube and much shorter head tube, you will be reaching way forward compared to your current bike. the bars will be almost an inch further forward and almost an inch lower. I have found that there are close tolerances where my body can ride a longer frame for about an hour and feel good but after that it starts to hurt more and more .... your mileage is sure to vary.
Certainly you can get a stem which sweeps upward sharply (unless it is an integrated stem/bar, or a proprietary stem full of cables and hoses) and also a stem which is shorter .... 15 or 25 mm shouldn't hurt at all. Also, if you are not using short-reach bars, you would have that option.
I wouldn't worry about the handling going bad, I would make sure that there actually were parts that fit the bike .... stems used to be so simple, but now they are exceedingly complicated.
Or just lose the .00089 watts to aero resistance and run the cabless and hoses outside the stem, old-school.
Certainly you can get a stem which sweeps upward sharply (unless it is an integrated stem/bar, or a proprietary stem full of cables and hoses) and also a stem which is shorter .... 15 or 25 mm shouldn't hurt at all. Also, if you are not using short-reach bars, you would have that option.
I wouldn't worry about the handling going bad, I would make sure that there actually were parts that fit the bike .... stems used to be so simple, but now they are exceedingly complicated.
Or just lose the .00089 watts to aero resistance and run the cabless and hoses outside the stem, old-school.
02-22-23, 03:41 AM
#72
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Some 30 plus years ago and more flexible
I could probably used the bike in both small and medium but today with a smaller size head tube on the Giant TCR I will get a head tube at 130mm and on my existing bike its 160mm so I anyway will need another stem and likely raised.hsea17
TCR Advanced Pro Disc 2 (2021) | Giant Bicycles UK (giant-bicycles.com)
02-22-23, 08:16 AM
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 23,607
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7185 Post(s)
Liked 7,430 Times
in
3,757 Posts
The UCI weight limit for road race bikes is 6.8kg, or 15 pounds. Nearly all bikes at UCI governed events will be 6.8kg, although some are indeed a bit heavier these days with aero considerations, discs, etc.
Of course, you can buy a production bike in the 15 pound range or even lower. Just takes $$$.
For someone like me, 200+pounds who bashes around on bad pavement for 1000s of miles, super light stuff won't work.
Last edited by big john; 02-22-23 at 08:51 AM.
02-22-23, 08:26 AM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 23,607
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7185 Post(s)
Liked 7,430 Times
in
3,757 Posts
As I am not a specialist in bicycle geometry, I have a question for those of you who are well acquainted with bicycle geometry and modifications! As mentioned before, the relevant Giant TCR comes with a top tube of 550mm, stem 100mm and headntube 145mm.
My existing bike has a 535mm top tube, 100mm stem and 160mm head tube. Is there any way I can compensate for some of this difference without it affecting the bike's cycling handling too much!
hsea17
My existing bike has a 535mm top tube, 100mm stem and 160mm head tube. Is there any way I can compensate for some of this difference without it affecting the bike's cycling handling too much!
hsea17
Also, you say your bike has a 160mm headtube. Are you using spacers under the stem? If not, a 130mm headtube could be fitted with spacers to achieve the same height.
Then again, if the stack is 30mm greater on the frame with the shorter headtube the height will be the same. Check the stack.
Last edited by big john; 02-22-23 at 08:30 AM.
02-22-23, 08:49 AM
#75
Junior Member
Thread Starter
For comparison, look at stack and reach of frames to see how they might fit. Most geometry charts include these numbers and I think it can be more accurate than just top tube/head tube.
Also, you say your bike has a 160mm headtube. Are you using spacers under the stem? If not, a 130mm headtube could be fitted with spacers to achieve the same height.
Then again, if the stack is 30mm greater on the frame with the shorter headtube the height will be the same. Check the stack.
Also, you say your bike has a 160mm headtube. Are you using spacers under the stem? If not, a 130mm headtube could be fitted with spacers to achieve the same height.
Then again, if the stack is 30mm greater on the frame with the shorter headtube the height will be the same. Check the stack.
hsea17
