Netdewt

I am looking into new bikes, maybe just shopping for an incentive. $2000 price range. Not really interested in aluminum. Shimano 105 at least.

Pretty much every manufacturer has a competitive and an endurance style frame. How different are these frames? I am more interested in endurance and fitness riding than in doing crits and other structured races, but the endurance style bikes don't seem as high-end. Is it a given that I should look to the endurance style frame, or is this one of those questions that no one can answer?

There are many manufacturers with disc brakes available on road bikes. What is the reasoning behind this? Something like the Salsa Colossal Ti would be a nice (but expensive) century machine - is there a benefit to them on a road bike?

bengreen79

All of the big manufacturers make carbon endurance/relaxed-style road bikes. You already specified that you're looking for 105 or better. I'm not sure what you mean by "high-end". I didn't look but I'm sure you can dump 8 grand on a decked out Roubaix if that's what you really want.

There's lots of threads about disc brakes. I personally haven't been disappointed in my Allez's rim brakes, even in wet conditions. And they're just cheap tektro calipers. Maybe I'll change my tune deeper into the winter but I'll probably be commuting on my MTB by then anyway.

Netdewt

I think it's in my head. In any case, I'm sure there are plenty of people who ride long distance on comp style frames. I know it would be tough for me to choose.

black_box 

The geometry is a little funky at the low end of the size scale, but you can see some trends between the bike styles. See the attached for some numbers I pulled in the last week, should be all 2014 numbers (I hope). Except for the fuji cross pro, which is my 2007 model. Note that the "seat tube" number is the listed size, with the actual size in () for some of them. (I have numbers for sizes 49 through 52 of those models, if anyone would like them, nothing larger though)

icyclist 

"I'm sure there are plenty of people who ride long distance on comp style frames"

A bunch of them ride in the Tour de France and every other bike race.

You'll get use to any bike you own. I'm lucky enough to own a few, and they all have different geometry. I like all of them and it only takes a few minutes to get used to each of them. Certainly, if you want a comfortable bike for long rides, go for something like a Roubaix (which I have and love).

TrojanHorse

I don't know how you arrived at the conclusion that the "comfort" or "endurance" frames aren't high end... every manufacturer has different model lines for virtually every frame. Take the Specialized Roubaix for instance (I'm more familiar with them since I own one)... you have the top end S-Works frames decked out with SRAM red or Di2, then you have the slightly less top end SL4 frames with an assortment of expensive groups and then you start getting into the non-SL models with 105, apex etc. A bike at nearly every price point but the geometry is the same. The differences are the components, wheels and carbon layup. The comfort bikes will be just as fast as a race geo bike if that's what's most comfortable to you / fits best.

This roubaix is $10,500 msrp - https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bik...l4-duraace-di2

As for disk brakes, they seem to be popular on cross bikes because they probably work better when the conditions get sloppy but for road bikes I don't know that they're strictly necessary. I can lock up either wheel under most circumstances as it is so it's unlikely a disk will provide more braking power. The disk also affects the spoke angle in a not-good way but maybe that's trivial, I'm not sure. I don't think you'd need disks if you have your average set of aluminum rims but they might be The Answer for carbon clinchers. (carbon clinchers have trouble with prolonged braking on steep descents, typically)

Lots of generalizations in my post here but hopefully you'll get something out of it. As for endurance / race geometry, I'd suggest trying a bunch of bikes out and see what you prefer. Something like a roubaix is a godsend for older dudes with iffy backs Maybe you'd prefer a racier bike, maybe not. Go try some.

If you're limiting your budget to 2 grand I'd highly recommend checking out sales of last year's bikes and this is a good time to do it. You can get a nice discount off retail. Last year around now I saw some cannondale supersix bikes with 105 going for around 1600, which is a screaming deal on a sweet bike.

Bacciagalupe

As noted, there is no quality difference between a standard/race and endurance frames at equivalent price points. Most endurance frames absorb a little more shock, tend to be a little more upright, have a slightly longer wheelbase, and can use slightly wider tires (and sometimes are sold with wider tires). A few will have eyelets for racks.

Disc brakes perform slightly better in wet conditions, and offer better braking power and modulation. I for one would regard it as a nice touch, but not critical, unless you live in a wet area (e.g. PNW).

I see no reason to rule out aluminum frames. They're made very well these days, you barely save any weight in your price range, and the ride feel is nearly identical to CF in your price range. Manufacturers have gotten very good at manipulating the materials. You should at least do a test ride.

EnzoRWD

We're very lucky to have some great real-road bikes on the market right now. There are very light endurance road bikes that are sort of road bike mullets: stiff front ends with good handling and softer, compliant rear triangles. This means you get race bike handling and all-day comfort. Bikes like the carbon Roubaix or Synapse don't feel crazy-comfortable around the parking lot, but 30 miles in you can tell it's a different ride. Throw on some high-quality 25 or 28mm tires and you have a great ride without the weight. I'm sure that D-A Roubaix is at or close to the 6800g UCI limit. That's really light.

The other benefit, as mentioned, is a slightly taller head tube. This, too, makes a difference when spending all day on the saddle.

This is my "endurance" road bike, with a mega head tube and springy seat stays. Still light at 15.7lbs

bikemig 

Tire size matters if you want an all around road bike. I'd look for a bike that can take a long reach brake and that has eyelets like the Soma ES: https://www.somafab.com/archives/product/es. Or you could get a cross frame that takes discs. I built up a Salsa Casseroll (no longer available) recently as endurance road bike. I have racing bikes as well but I like running a 28c with a bit more forgiving gearing on long distance rides. I don't race anymore and I like a bit more comfortable bike:



I think that the Salsa Colossal 2 would be a good choice and it is within the OP's price range of $2k:

https://www.universalcycles.com/shopp...6&category=483

BaseGuy

You gotta go test-ride some.

I was in your shoes last year: I went into my new-bike-search leaning toward the endurance/plush/quick-but-compliant category. But once I tried some bikes, I ended up discovering that many current race/competition frames are pretty compliant, and just fine for me. (I ended up with a CAAD10.)

So I suggest you go test-riding. Compare each provider's race bike to their plush bike, back-to-back. Most manufacturers had the same components and price point with two different frames (a plush and a race), so this approach isolates the differences in geometry and compliance.

See what you think. You might find (like I did) that some "race" frames are actually really comfortable. Or you may find that you love the more relaxed geometry of the plush bikes. Go see.

NoTrail

Exactly. When I got my Roubaix, I had narrowed it down to either the Tarmac (more competitive style) or the Roubaix (more endurance style). I had already decided to go all out and get a high end bike and both came with full Dura-Ace which I wanted. So it basically came down to the frame.

I rode them both back to back, but in my short test rides I couldn't tell much of a difference. I just knew that I liked the more aggressive look of the Tarmac. And then I did something really smart ... I got a proper bike fit on my old bike.

What I learned is that in order to fit the Tarmac correctly, I would need a lot of extra spaces on the steer tube to get the handlebars in the proper position for me. With the Roubaix, I needed very few. That was enough for me so I bought the Roubaix. No regrets at all.

Since then I've put thousands of miles on it every year and I absolutely love it. If something were to happen to it right now, I would absolutely replace it with another Roubaix.

So that's my advice. Get the bike that fits you best. You'll be very happy you did as you rack up the miles.

Netdewt

Thanks for all the input. This helps.

On my list. When I get down to it, I will definitely be looking for deals. The $2k is not necessarily a limit, just a range. I.e. a $5k bike is out of the question, $1k likely won't be enough of an upgrade. It depends on what seems worth it after talking with your folks and others, and test riding.

Others I have noticed, probably all the typicals:
Specialized Tarmac/Roubaix
Giant TCR/Defy
Trek Madone/Domane
Cannondale SuperSix/Synapse (CAAD10?)
Bianchi Sempre/Vertigo
Felt F5/Z5 (F5 is very high on the list right now)
Cervelo R3
Orbea Orca B105
BMC GranFondo (in my dreams)
Salsa Colossal Ti

I plan on looking at Felt, BMC, and Cannondale at a LBS today.

I noticed these, and really like the Colossal, but I am not sure whether I would go steel or not. If I could afford the Ti, I'd totally do that, that thing looks amazing. I have a nice 80's steel bike, and it doesn't seem worthwhile to "upgrade" if I end up with another steel bike anyways.

I have not totally ruled out, but it seems that the general consensus is that carbon is ultimately more comfortable, more repairable, etc. so it seems worth the few extra $100. This is just from reading articles and talking to LBS people (who I know are not really reliable). The CAAD10 has a cult following here and I will ride one before I buy something.

bikemig 

No. 1 on the importance of bike fit. No. 2 is tire size (i.e., whether you can run a 28c if you want). Parts are expensive but can be changed out if need be. The frame material is somewhat oversold in importance; very, very good bikes are available in carbon, steel, aluminum, etc.

TrojanHorse

You're going to be busy test riding all those bikes!

At the end of the day, get something that appeals to YOU, not the rest of us... the bike that makes you want to ride the snot out of it (even if it's just the color scheme) is ultimately the right one.

adrien

Well, the thread is drifitng a little, but hopefully the advice is decent.

As for the original question -- the more "relaxed" bikes will steer a (very) little bit slower, have a slightly-to-a-lot more cushy back end, and somewhat taller head tube, and usually, a somewhat shorter top tube. As mentioned above, what is different about them has more to do with fit than anything, though they do handle and feel a little different.

Beyond that, these bikes are great for long distances if your fitness and goals (ir winning a race) don't necessarily dictate the more aggressive bikes. A little older? A little less fit? Want to be slightly more upright? There you go.

One thing that has only sort of come up is frame material. I think of the race and crit bikes as trying to use carbon to feel as much like aluminum as possibly (stiff!) with a little less edge to beat you up. I think of endurance bikes as trying to feel as much like steel as possible, but still with the (somewhat) lighter weight of carbon, and the modern look to carry all the decals to justify the spend on a production machine that needs to support massive marketing. Of course, you could always get a steel or aluminum frame, as pointed out by good examples above.

Looigi

With they way that bike climbs, heading for the elevator is a good idea.

Unless you have weird proportions or extreme fit needs, any decent road frame can be sized and set up to fit properly. Choose the bike with the characteristics you want and get it fit and set up properly.

Netdewt

1. I don't really have any special considerations. I'm 30 and skinny. I will do a side by side compare as soon as I find a shop that has enough in stock to let me ride both comp and endurance models in their line with the same components.

2. Right, but why if the price difference is negligible, and the benefits of carbon seem pretty compelling?

Carbon
Felt F5 - $1800

Aluminum
Trek Madone/Domane 2.3 - $1900
Cannondale CAAD10 5 - $1730
Specialized Allez Race - $1700

Steel
Bianchi Vigorelli - $2000
All-City Mr. Pink - $1900
Jamis Quest - $1800

Bacciagalupe

The Felt F5 is $1800 list. Its aluminum equivalent is the F75, which is $1350.

The CAAD10 105 is $1730 list, the SuperSix 105 is $2300 or so.

I'm not sure why the F5 has such a low price for a CF bike, could be the other components. But in most cases, CF adds several hundred dollars to the price.

BaseGuy

That's a great list. If you go ride some of those, especially doing the back-to-back, carbon/AL rides, you'll know what you like and you'll end up really happy with whatever you get.

adrien

Steel feels different. Yes, it's heavier. It's also livelier, and prettier to some eyes.

Ride this list. All of them if you can. Get whatever makes you want to ride it.

rebel1916

Carbon feels different. It is lighter, stronger, more comfortable and looks prettier to some eyes.

CLKKELLEY

You have compiled a great list. I rode most of these bikes with Ultegra Di2, but then read about and demoed the Volagi Liscio2 and my search was over! Www.volagi.com. The best ride with their patented rear suspension, racey when you get after it, disc brakes and all internal cable routing.

Smokehouse

I'm going to speak from my own limited experience...

last year I started road riding, I rode a borrowed 2009 Specialized Roubaix 105 and the bike felt fast and comfortable. (Being my first road bike, I had nothing to compare it to.) When the time came to buy my own however, due to quite a bit of research, reading and online discussions, I opted to go with the Tarmac (105).

knowing the difference between the "race-vs-endurance" of the two, I opted to take the faster, more aggressive of the two. I don't always have the time to ride 50+ miles...I can often squeeze in a <25mi aggressive ride.

right off the bat, the Tarmac "seemed" better; it was instantly faster, more responsive and easier to climb with. Out of the saddle climbing wasn't necessarily improved but sitting climbing was a big difference due to geometry differences. The handling is crisp and responsive...it makes the Roubaix feel numb. The seating position was also immediately different...far more aggressive. It is fast and feels so much more connected to the road than the Roubaix...I love it.

...but then came the endurance riding....not so hot.

On rides that last 3+ hrs I found myself having serious neck/shoulder pain. After much thought and analyzing, I found I was hunchback-ing, pushing off the bars with my arms and forcing my body in a more upright, endurance position, something the Tarmac just isn't designed for. To add to that, the Tarmac is so much stiffer and less forgiving...it will rattle the fillings out of your teeth on crummy roads.

talking with my LBS...it became apparent there is little fighting the bike. I've heard all kinds of people talk of swapping parts to make the "geometry" more endurance'ish but the fact is, it is NOT an endurance frame or riding position. Fighting the bike will not help. Changing the seat height will throw it out of whack with my legs, jacking with the bar height will make me out of whack with the saddle position. The fact is, it's a race bike with a more "race" seating position. If I want an endurance position, I should have bought an endurance bike.

i look at it this way, its like buying a Ferrari and then wanting to make it more like a mini-van for long road trips...you can try but that's not going to happen.

In the end, I've shortened my rides and turned up the volume on them. Instead of 16mph 65+ mile solo rides, ill shoot for 19-20mph over 25. I've found that now that I'm not trying to force a race bike to do endurance work, my rides are more fun and I'm actually beginning to push the bike harder and it's rewarding when you do that...it's designed to go fast.

Time and time again I read "buy what fits you best" but I disagree. If your body type dictates a certain size frame, then try out an endurance frame and a race frame. Neither will "fit" you better, they will "fit" your riding purpose...or not. You can properly be fit to either frame type but know it will put your body in a different position. If you want to ride fast and hard for shorter distances, get the race bike. If longer hours on the saddle rides are your thing, get an endurance frame. Pros will ride a race bike for 100's of miles or an endurance bike in a race...but we're not pros. Just because some guy can blast out 150 miles on a Tarmac doesn't mean ill ever be able to.

Me personally, Im going to save my $$ for a Roubaix (or whatever endurance frame feels best). I'm going to stop attempting to make my Tarmac an endurance bike because its not. After all is said and done, I adore my Tarmac and do not regret buying it for one second...I'm just not going to fight the geometry of the bike anymore.

softreset

Is this a 2013 model? I ask because that's a ridiculous price. I paid $100 more for the Domane 4.5 (carbon) with Ultegra/105 mix. The Madones weren't as marked down but all they had were H1 fit Madones and that's Trek's most aggressive fit style (H1->H2->H3). All of those Domanes are H3 and you can get the Madone in either an H1 or H2.

I've been absolutely thrilled with my Domane 4.5, it just joined me on my first metric century yesterday with over 4500 feet of climbing. I definitely could have used a triple for a few parts but being a 265+ rider no doubt was the much bigger factor.

I definitely don't regret my purchase, I'm extremely happy with the bike and the more upright position. It definitely allowed me to complete the course with virtually zero back/neck pain by the end (other parts of me, not so much).

Netdewt

Thanks for sharing. Best experience/advice so far. I will take the endurance frames more seriously I think!

Felt Z5 - $1700
Giant Defy Composite 2 - $1850

It's just the MSRPs listed on the websites, I'm trying to compare apples to apples. When it comes time to buy something, this way I will be pleasantly surprised to find deals.