I guess some bikes are slower than others

[mtechnica]

Now that I've been using strava a lot more and doing a bunch of rides with the same person, I've concluded that one of my bikes is significantly slower than the other one. The quality of build is similar, fit is basically the same, and weight is within 1.5lb, yet I'm seeing considerable average speed differences, consistently slower times up climbs onthe slower bike, and the only time I seem to get into difficulty chasing my riding partner is on the slower bike. I've even tried different wheels and tires on the slower bike and it didn't really change anything. I guess the data doesn't lie. The slow bike is reynolds 853 steel with an ouzo pro fork and the fast bike is a caad10. I guess it's time to try some carbon?

Not much of a point to this thread, really, but I'm curious if anyone else has similar experiences that are backed up with hard data.

[josephr]

hard to say really....when I ride my "heavy" bike, my regular bike is a lot faster.

[Ken Robb]

The difference might be due to minor variation in fit.

[guido]

Could it be that the fast one planes?

[Ray]

I've had the same experience in the past, but with bikes with notably different geometry. There was never enough weight difference to make me think that mattered. But my old RB1 and Riv Road and then my Spectrum ti were the bikes I'd take on fast-ish club rides that were a little over my head if I wanted to hang. If I rode my Rambouillet or Poprad on the same rides, I'd just bail out within the first few miles because it felt too much like work. I don't know if some bikes are ACTUALLY faster than others, but some sure as hell FEEL faster, or more efficient or something, and that probably makes a psychological difference that can turn into a real difference.

-Ray

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by Ken Robb

The difference might be due to minor variation in fit.

Saddle height and setback are the same though, as are crank length, drop, and reach. The frames have different geometry though but they're both racing frames. The only thing I can think of is that I can feel the steel frame flex some and that's the difference.

[makoti]

Different wheels? That'd be my first guess.

[Cicli]

I bet my bike is slower than yours.

I am going with wheels, or not.

[drewellison]

Sorry, no hard data to backup my interpretation of my experience ...

I have and have had a bunch of steel lugged racing frames over the years. Early in the year when my legs are "soft" (yes, I eat donuts over the winter, just like Ullrich), my flexible frames (mostly SL and 531) feel great, springy, and I feel faster than I really am. When I ride my stiffer frames at the same time, they feel dead and they tire my legs out a bunch and I feel beat up after a ride.

Later in the year when my legs have a little more punch to 'em, the stiffer frames seem to have much more zing and the flexible frames seem a little too wiggly.

I have had occasional very fast (for me) rides on both my flexible and stiff frames. In truth, I think direction of the wind makes more difference than just about anything on my speed.

Alas, I end up selling my stiffer frames more often because my legs are more often in the "early season" state.

I chock it up to "planing". YMMV.

Drew

[Mzilliox]

I agree with this, and I don;t know why. I had a race frame, lighter than either of my current steel frames, with early 2000 dura ace 39-53 9 speeds. When i got my Serotta, I instantly started to go faster on every ride. the frame is a touch heavier, its an ultegra triple with a 52 big ring and 9 speeds.

In theory the racey bike had better lighter wheels, but I would say the serotta is a touch better in the fit department, but not that different.

Sold the racey frame after a few weeks of having the serotta, it was that significant. I told my favorite mechanic the story and he looked at me like what? the dura ace racey setup was slower than this?

who knows, the race bike was even orange, you'd think it would be fast.

[ultraman6970]

you have to add geometry too... The caad is a bike built for a low budget racer that sponsor himself.

Remember an EM in aluminum and a pinarello aluminum aswell... dead rides... great reviews in both but were dead rides to me, coudlnt figure it out if it was the frame or the fit, asked other people and the some had the same opinion about the same bikes.

Which bike is the reynolds one?

Originally Posted by Ken Robb

The difference might be due to minor variation in fit.

[makoti]

Originally Posted by Mzilliox

When i got my Serotta, I instantly started to go faster on every ride.

NBS. New Bike Syndrome. A new bike will make you 15% faster. Unless it doesn't.

[mgm777]

I have experienced similar. I have two bikes, both Ti, with similar wheel sets, a Seven Axiom and a Serotta Legend. Both bikes are have very similar geometries, except the Serotta has a slightly shorter HT(14.65 vs. 16) and a slightly longer ETT(55.5 vs. 55). I use the same computer on both bikes, a Garmin 500, and the data clearly shows the Serotta is always about 1.5 miles/per hour faster(avg). Not a lot faster, but enough to be noticed. my position on the Serotta is slightly lower and longer. This is the only thing I can attribute the increased speed to. Otherwise, I simply can't explain why one bike is consistently, measurably faster. Strange.

[Scuzzer]

I have experienced something similar but haven't actually noticed it myself. I don't use a computer or any other device to track my riding, I just go out and ride. My riding partners starting making comments like "Oh great, he's on the blue bike" because I guess I ride harder/faster on it than my other bikes. To me the effort feels the same but they feel the difference. I swap wheels between my 3 road bikes so it can't be that.

BTW, the "blue bike" is a 1983 Columbus tubed custom my dad had built for him. Although we're roughly the same height we're not the same build so that bike doesn't feel like it fits me all that well. I've started to question if I actually know what a correct fitting bike should feel like. When I put 32s on it to go for a gravel ride my neighbor hates me.

[Tickdoc]

With vastly different bikes.

Your bikes don't sound nearly as different as mine in some key areas, so fit would be the likely culprit for the majority of your noticed differences.

I am slower by a fair margin on my old steel ciocc San Cristobal than I am on my cervelo s3.

May be a silly comparison, I know, but it is valid.

Ciocc has tubulars on mavic reflex rims, the cervelo has enve 3.4 clinchers on dt Swiss 240s.

Haven't weighed either, but there is a good five pounds difference between them.

I am significantly faster on the cervelo, but I much prefer the ciocc.

The differences are in feel. My cervelo is well setup, with sram red, and dialed in. It is all day comfortable, but lacks the solidity of the ciocc. Smooth for what it is in all carbon, it just can't compare to the ciocc in confidence.

The cervelo is twitchy, but fast. It has a huge aero, weight, and spin up advantage over the ciocc, but the whole time I am on it, I am always wishing I was on the ciocc.

Ciocc is strong like granite with a campy mix that shifts like butter. Both are comfy for the long haul, but any ride over fifty and I choose the cervelo.

I find myself wrestling over which to ride constantly and usually narrow it down to who I am riding with and how far I am going. My main riding bro is slower than me so if it is just the two of us the choice is easy, ciocc (weather permitting) on group rides when I ride with the big boys and the ride is fifty or over, cervelo.

Everyone asks where my steel ride is when I am on the cervelo, but no one ever asks where the cervelo is :-(

The thought that pops in my head each time I ride in the old steel is always the same....what have we done to lose this feel?