Comparing modern carbon frames

[AngryScientist]

I recently rented a Spec Tarmac - and didn't expect to like it as much as I did.

As i sit here waiting for my wife to finish breakfast, I find myself looking at carbon bikes again. I've been riding mainly steel, Ti and Alu for a few years now, though I do own two carbon bikes.

Now, this Tarmac fit me perfectly, and rode and handled brilliantly in the mountains. Climbed well, and descended fast competently. Anyone who has ridden with me knows that I enjoy going downhill fast and like to push the limits of traction. This bike was good for this.

I'm not even sure where i'm going with this rambling thread...

Anyway, I see that there are various levels of the Tarmac, including some S-Works models. How would one expect these to ride differently than the one i had? Is it just weight reduction? Stiffness improvement?

what about other carbon race bikes? the ones i have are now several years old, my Focus Izalco approaching 10 i think.

Assuming good fit - how can one compare the ride and handling of various race bikes without extended riding on them? how to pick a good CF bike that meets/exceeds expectations?

yes, i'm rambling. Just a stream of consciousness as i pour over internet bike options. daydreaming.

Breakfast is ready. I'll be back.

Share thoughts on how to pick a good CF bike and differences between them.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-F5oegEXGrQQ/WplVGPiVRjI/AAAAAAAAC-0/UPaGAa-Id6scLTPZVcE4PFH3mpBK8O0UgCLcBGAs/s1200/IMG_2128.JPG

[tigoat]

Unfortunately, unlike getting a "custom" frame/bike, most off the shelf carbon bikes are readily available to test ride at a LBS. Life is too short not to own everything that you can afford. Unfortunately, I have a pocket of money but none of these production bikes fit me the way I like them to be so I am SOL.

[Mzilliox]

I really want to buy the Canyon in the for sale adds, so I'm very much with you right now. Riding the carbon/ti Seven makes me wonder what good carbon is like now, 5 yrs after the last time i gave it a real look. And im not sure i rode any high end carbon back then, most likely mid range offerings.

but that Canyon... its so yummy:eek:

[tylercheung]

I’d totally want to test ride a Parlee,vs alchemy, vs Allied. But hesitant to buy for budget, space, and current frame loyalty reasons....

[eddief]

first impressions are just that on bike shop test rides. your pedals, your reach, your seat height, etc? Ultimately you have to get it home, dial it in with your fit requirements, put fat tires on at your preferred psi, and ride the heck out of it on a good day. then you can tell yourself yes or no.

my Domane went through this process after a half hour test ride. At home after much fiddling, parts swapping, 28mm tires at 85 psi and gobbler seat post, the ride equals or betters any I've owned. I'm not a racer but do like a fast-descent and out-of-saddle climbing machine.

[Clean39T]

My Emonda SLR is one of (if not #1) the best bikes I’ve ever ridden - and yet it still doesn’t give me the x-factor excitement of Ti or steel.

If I were a rational hooman, it’s what I’d ride.

I have however ridden lower end carbon...and found it to be dead and bloated.

[R3awak3n]

I have only been on 1 carbon bike, my parlee Z5, 2013 so not new but it is such a good bike. I cannot imagine carbon has gotten much better than that (and if it has please sign me up). I am actually interested in trying that canyon in less than a month and see how it compares.

Carbon bike I would like to try still are

Canyon
Cdale Evo
Sworks SL
Emonda

and of course a colnago C 59/60

[Gummee]

I worked for a Trek dealer for a few years. They've continued to improve their offerings. I'd buy another.

I'm about to receive a Cervelo R3 disc. I'll compare that to the other bikes in the stable and let you know my impressions.

The short short version: if you haven't ridden CF in a few years, you really should check out the new bikes. :nod

M

[Peter P.]

"...how to pick a good CF bike..."

Don't blow it-you rode the Tarmac, you loved it; so buy the exact level Tarmac frame and be done with it. Anything else is guessing.

[ripvanrando]

I've owned 6 carbon bikes going back over 30 years. I'm interested in the Cervelo R5 for comfort, light weight, good balance and the ability to take a decent sized tire. Parlee Chebacco probably makes more sense. In any case, I hope to be in a position to buy a light, fast carbon bike to ride in summer of 2019.

[mtechnica]

Two words: Lugged Carbon.

Also, I usually notice handling differences immediately then start to get used to them. My carbon bianchi for example has a distinctly different steering feel than the look it replaced, it also feels different standing and climbing. I think as long as the bike you're evaluating is fit exactly right it will be apparent what is different. Ride quality over bumps also shouldn't take a long ride to feel out. The biggest question mark is stuff like wheels and tires differing.

Priorities for me are:

1.) Handling feel - especially important on a racing bike, feeling in control in a pack
2.) Perceived pedaling efficiency
2.) Ride quality over bumps and bad surfaces
3.) How cool it looks.

[nmrt]

in 2012 i swore off carbon bikes after test riding many carbon bikes -- cervelo r3, r5; pinarello dogma, colnago m10, giant something etc etc etc. I was so disillusioned with their ride that after riding the seven axiom slx, i thought ti bikes will be with me all my life and carbon bikes will never enter my garage.

in november of 2017 i test rode a 2017 cannondale supersix evo himod. in short, and without using poetry, i was blown away.

the next week, i bought the bike. enough said.

i think one should have a ti bike for long comfortable rides (my axiom is much more comfortable than the supersix). and a carbon bikes for when one is feeling explosively fast. mind you, you may actually not be fast on the carbon bike, but boy, you sure do FEEL fast.

get a carbon bike. period.
but get the one that rocks your boat. i'd say test rides many others because they are all very different in geometry.

[pdmtong]

Tarmac is a great bike. anyone who doesnt think so hates carbon or specialized or both. I love metal likle you and many here but carbon is just fine with me

That bike you rode was probably laid up like their top of the line bike was three years ago. trickle down. unless you have $14k to burn on a 2018 s-works so you get it all, the sweet spot is their $3-4k bike (comp or expert) but the trick is you gotta resist massive upgrading, wheels aside. at least they stopped forcing sram down our throats.

as for picking...fit fit fit..all the big box will ride great.

[Clean39T]

Tarmac is a great bike. anyone who doesnt think so hates carbon or specialized or both. I love metal likle you and many here but carbon is just fine with me

That bike you rode was probably laid up like their top of the line bike was three years ago. trickle down. unless you have $14k to burn on a 2018 s-works so you get it all, the sweet spot is their $3-4k bike (comp or expert) but the trick is you gotta resist massive upgrading, wheels aside. at least they stopped forcing sram down our throats.

as for picking...fit fit fit..all the big box will ride great.

He speaks no lies. Plus, the Tarmac Expert of today is the S-Works of yesterday (more or less); so if it was good enough for Petey Sago in 2014, I'm sure it's still a great bike today (iirc, Fact 10r was S-Works then and is Expert now). Which brings up a good point - be leery of investing in a few year old top-line version - the mid-level now may be just as good (components aside).

[rnhood]

i got on the SL3 S-works Tarmac at the end up 2009, it was love at first ride and I've been on it since. About 82k miles and still rides and performs like it did when new. Only my opinion, but I think it's the best carbon bike on the market, all things considered. In reality though, just as others have stated, there are quite a few really good carbon bikes now. Trek, Giant, Cervelo, etc. Today you can buy based on geometry and not brand, and you're getting a really good bike. But that Tarmac...it's just an outstanding bike.

[shinomaster]

I'd wait a year or two and pick the same frame up on ebay ;)

[benb]

If it fits you perfectly that’s 99% of the way to it performing really well so there you go. All the levels of that frame likely fit the same so you just pick based on budget and aesthetics.

I went through this with my Trek a couple years (domane). I was just buying a frame. I got the 5 because it was $2k. The 6 was $2600 and I was told it was 50g lighter and slightly stiffer/more compliant, but the shop guys said they couldn’t tell them apart. Meanwhile the 6 only came in a murdered out black paint scheme so it made the 5 an easy choice.

[AngryScientist]

thanks for the thoughts guys.

i'm committed to buying no new bikes for the near term future, but i think it's an interesting question. the real differences between top(ish) end race bikes.

fortunately, i do get to travel quite a bit, and often have the opportunity to take some time off and ride, so i'm looking forward to renting/demoing some more and different bikes and see what i think.

[PaMtbRider]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say the Tarmac was one of the worst riding bikes I have ever ridden. It was an S-Works with Sram red. This would have been a 2013 so maybe they are a different bike today. I had the bike for a demo on Bicycling magazine's Gran Fondo ride. At the end of 62 miles I was glad to give it back. I thought it was a harsh ride and inspired no confidence in descending.

FWIW, I spent the following summer working in a Specialized shop owned by a friend. I got to ride all the Specialized bikes but not typically the S-Works because they were never stocked. Even thought the Roubaix had a ridiculous tall head tube at the time, I thought it was the better of the two bikes.

[thegunner]

the obvious answer is to reach out to nicrump...

[Bostic]

I bought this SL2 Rival Comp in 2010 in Reno while visiting family. Test rode it up and down some hills and said cut the steerer tube I’ll be back in a few hours to pick it up. It’s the best descending and climbing bike for sustained efforts that I have had. When it comes to just all out hauling it doesn’t match my Venge but that is to be expected. This was an 8R SL2 carbon so I expect the current ones are even better. My other carbon bikes over the last decade have been 2 Pedal Force (RS from 2007 & CG2 from 2011), Volagi Liscio, Venge and a Jamis Eclipse Steel/Carbon.

https://s7d5.scene7.com/is/image/Specialized/6799?$hd$

[weisan]

modern advancement in carbon tech only matters up to a point.

What do I mean by that?

Take an older 2012 carbon frameset and put it in the hands of someone like Clean39t pal, he would make it sing like a nightingale and look the part.

Take the latest and greatest 2019 pre-released carbon frameset that is not even available to the general public and give it to someone not as capable as Clean39t to set it up, that bike could suck so much that you won't keep it even if it's offered to you FREE.

What I am trying to say is this.

It's not just the frameset. Every little things add up and factor into the overall experience.

Choice of wheels, handlebar, tires, saddle, pedals...tire pressure, shape of shifter hood, angle tilt of saddle, types of bib shorts, shape and texture of chamois, how you seat on the bike, the weight distribution, are you a masher or a spinner, do you prefer to stand and climb or stay seated, are you well rested, what do you eat...so many things to consider.

When I add a new bike, it's not just copying over the contact points. I used to do that and has mistakenly write off a couple of bikes just because the first ride impression wasn't favorable. Now, whenever a new one comes in, I take the time to know its characteristics and experiment around a fair bit before settle down on a particular setup. I try to find the sweet spot for that bike. By experience, I know it when I hit it, not something I can easily describe in words.

So, to answer the question, it's not so much about comparing carbon frames but rather knowing how to set it up with complimentary parts to create the intended effect. It takes time and experience, not something that can be substituted by simply buying the latest contraption on the market or throwing in more $$ and get the most expensive one on the shelf or in the product lineup/catalog.

That's too easy and if that's what you (not referring to you, Angry pal) want to do, go right ahead. I have a different approach.

[John H.]

I hate to say it, But if a top end carbon frameset (like a Tarmac) fits you- it will ride really well.
They are light, stiff in all the right places, and they just "feel" right.

I have ridden a lot of stock and custom bikes- I seem to swing back and forth.

Right now I am in the stock bike camp. I recently got a Scott Addict RC Disc.
15.5 lb. with discs and DI2, and it takes 700X28mm GP 4000 tires-
This is a better bike than anything that I ever raced on when I was young.

Drawbacks to stock bikes are:
1.) Seems like everyone has one- they are not exactly unique.
2.) Limited tire size on most.
3.) Aggressive positioning on most.
4.) They tend to use proprietary and/or integrated type headsets and bottom brackets.

Specific to the Tarmac-
1st couple versions were nothing special. 1, 2, and 3. All had problems. BB issues, derailleur hanger issues. The 3 shifted terribly with mechanical drivetrains.
4 was nice but a really stiff bike-
5 even better-
6- the 6 is such a good all-arounder plus aero. It will kill the Venge.

[KonaSS]

I have an SL5 S-Works which I love, that being said, it is probably the last S-Works I will buy. The premium just isn't worth it.

As others have said, the new SL6 Expert seems like the sweet spot. If you need wheels, stepping up the the Pro wouldn't be bad.

[Andy sti]

I have the newest gen Cannondale EVO HiMod. It's an amazing bike. Just like the Tarmac, if these bikes fit there really is nothing out there that is better. Different, yes, but not better. They do everything well.

[Clean39T]

modern advancement in carbon tech only matters up to a point.

What do I mean by that?

Take an older 2012 carbon frameset and put it in the hands of someone like Clean39t pal, he would make it sing like a nightingale and look the part.

Take the latest and greatest 2019 pre-released carbon frameset that is not even available to the general public and give it to someone not as capable as Clean39t to set it up, that bike could suck so much that you won't keep it even if it's offered to you FREE.

What I am trying to say is this.

It's not just the frameset. Every little things add up and factor into the overall experience.

Choice of wheels, handlebar, tires, saddle, pedals...tire pressure, shape of shifter hood, angle tilt of saddle, types of bib shorts, shape and texture of chamois, how you seat on the bike, the weight distribution, are you a masher or a spinner, do you prefer to stand and climb or stay seated, are you well rested, what do you eat...so many things to consider.

When I add a new bike, it's not just copying over the contact points. I used to do that and has mistakenly write off a couple of bikes just because the first ride impression wasn't favorable. Now, whenever a new one comes in, I take the time to know its characteristics and experiment around a fair bit before settle down on a particular setup. I try to find the sweet spot for that bike. By experience, I know it when I hit it, not something I can easily describe in words.

So, to answer the question, it's not so much about comparing carbon frames but rather knowing how to set it up with complimentary parts to create the intended effect. It takes time and experience, not something that can be substituted by simply buying the latest contraption on the market or throwing in more $$ and get the most expensive one on the shelf or in the product lineup/catalog.

That's too easy and if that's what you (not referring to you, Angry pal) want to do, go right ahead. I have a different approach.

You're too kind. But one does learn by doing..

Maybe I should start a consulting service :rolleyes:

.
.
.

But seriously folks, Weisan is right. The frame is just the canvas. Put too-wide bars, too short stem, too much setback in the post, too narrow/wide saddle, and too narrow/wide tires on anything and it's going to drive like crap.

And that's what often kills stock bikes for me is I can't stand their proprietary bits and stock finishing kit.

By the time I get done replacing the bar, stem, post, tape, saddle, tires, tubes, and probably wheels - what's the point?

It is a blessing and a curse to have experimented enough to know what I like.

[.RJ]

I've owned an SL2 s-works and an SL4 pro. Great bikes. The SL4 was a little stiffer, which can be both good and bad. I preferred the ride of the older bike, all things equal.

If it fits you, and you're going fast on it... why question it? Roll with it.

[glepore]

I have the newest gen Cannondale EVO HiMod. It's an amazing bike. Just like the Tarmac, if these bikes fit there really is nothing out there that is better. Different, yes, but not better. They do everything well.

I have a HiMod as well, and while I generally agree with the above statement, I would add the caveat that these bikes tend to be a little more "agressive" handling than some other bikes that I love-say a traditional geo C40. While they are certainly the fast group ride bike of choice, and the Himod at least has a very nice ride for a full on race bike, they can skitter and chatter a bit on the rough stuff at speed in a way that some other bikes don't. If I'm riding solo I'm likely to grab something else, although if I was limited to just one bike I could be quite happy with the HiMod.

[benb]

Definitely agree.. < 1 cm in any of numerous fit adjustments off on the bike and it can ride/feel like crap. Plush carpet to bone crusher and ride it long enough that way and it'll hurt you.

Maybe you get your contact points right on a bike that really doesn't fit and it'll be a little bit wonky but it's nothing nearly as bad as a bike that does fit you but you've got it adjusted wrong.

Test rides are the worst. A good shop will let you adjust the saddle.. if you don't sit there and do the math to put the saddle in the right place (especially considering different STAs on frames) you won't get a good impression. Usually they're not going to swap the stem for you on a stock Specialized/Trek whatever and that's going to affect things somewhat. And then the saddle might not be right anyway too.

Late 2015 I test rode a Roubaix and it was amazing. Just got lucky and got the saddle in just the right place.

I proceeded to rent a Roubaix for a week in Feb 2016 and I never got it adjusted right and it never rode as well as the one I test-rode!

I've got my system down for getting the saddle just right a bit better now.

[AngryScientist]

.
.
.

But seriously folks, Weisan is right. The frame is just the canvas.

Of course the bike (any bike) needs to be set-up properly, with appropriate parts, but i do not agree with the above statement, at least according to my experience. The frame/fork combo is much more than just the canvas on which we hang our favorite parts, the frame plays a very large part of how the bike rides, handles and reacts to our inputs.

as an extreme example - a modern carbon fiber race bike is never going to ride the same as a surly pacer, even if the identical parts kit is used and fit numbers duplicated.

i guess that was the point of my original post that i was attempting to quantify/understand. what method to use to compare high end carbon frames. what subtleties and what differences exist between a Tarmac, S-Works Tarmac, Colnago C60, Trek Madone, etc etc.

i am in the Clean39T boat, and would never buy a bike complete (unless it was a screaming deal), as i have my preferences with bar shape, stem length, seatpost/saddle, etc. I know what works for me at this point, and there is little chance any complete bike is going to be perfect for me.

The body however, at least mine - is very adaptable. I rent bikes all the time now, and as described above, they never fit just right. stem length almost always wrong, bar width and shape never my favorite. sometimes saddles that are just ehhh. wrong crank arm length.

i've taken these bikes on some very challenging, lengthy rides, and have not yet died, crashed or permanently injured myself due to bad fit. after living with a poorly fitted bike for a little time, the body adapts and overcomes.

[benb]

We all have different tolerances/preferences.

I'm absolutely inane about fit stuff. But I'm not real picky about "frame riding characteristics". That said bar width & stem position are probably not going to get me too upset on a rental as long as I'm on the right frame size and can get the saddle in the right place.

We just had the semi-annual "why doesn't everyone obsess over tubulars?" thread. Clearly some of us get way more obsessed with equipment characteristics than others.

I do still tend to not buy complete bikes though. I have 3 bikes right now and only one was bought complete, my AC Space Horse. It's had everything changed out now to my preferences but I've had it 5 years.

[93KgBike]

in 2012 i swore off carbon bikes after test riding many carbon bikes -- Cervelo r3, r5; pinarello dogma, trek-specialized-fuji-giant something etc etc etc. I was so disillusioned with their ride-to-cost that I thought carbon bikes will never enter my garage.

cannondale supersix evo himod. in short, and without using poetry, i was blown away.
you may actually not be fast on the carbon bike, but boy, you sure do FEEL fast.


That is almost exactly what happened with me. Sueprsix EVO HiMod is n levels above for the average consumer, like me. Amazing frameset.

[Heisenberg]

i guess that was the point of my original post that i was attempting to quantify/understand. what method to use to compare high end carbon frames. what subtleties and what differences exist between a Tarmac, S-Works Tarmac, Colnago C60, Trek Madone, etc etc.


Most well-engineered carbon is going to come down to geometry, which is often a matter of preference. It's very VERY difficult to buy a bad, or even mediocre top-shelf carbon race bike in 2018. You'd have to make an effort. That said, I'd rather ride/race a bike with Trek or Pinarello's geo than with Specialized's. My 5th-gen Tarmac is/was a very competent carbon race bike, but didn't care a ton for the handling characteristics outside of a crit course or tight road race. It's also a bit of a porker, but I think the new one rectified that.

Is it stiffer than my titanium bike? Yes. Does it accelerate faster than my ti bike? Yes. Is it lighter than my ti bike? Yes. Does it ride better than my ti bike? No. Does it handle better than my ti bike? Not a chance in hell.

"Better", of course, is subjective. I prefer my "better" to be something that makes me giggle.

The Tarmac does not make me giggle. It is a tool. A very sharp, very good tool, but a tool nonetheless. Much like a Hyundai Sonata would be a very sensible vehicle for me to own to get groceries - but I'd never smile getting groceries in a Hyundai Sonata. Except maybe when the groceries were RAD. Or something.

[Black Dog]

I wonder why folks don’t bring their favourite wheels and saddle when doing a test ride. Certainly eliminates a couple of major variables when trying to compare a new bike to a current one.

[kramnnim]

I really wanted to like my Supersix Evo Himod. Traded it away and don't miss it. I wonder if the folks who love their Evos would dislike the frames I like... :eek:

[silentlight0]

after riding exclusively carbon for the last 8 years or so, i picked up a seven axiom slx last year and was mesmerized by the feel of Ti. i also have a ssx evo hi mod (current gen), which i think is one of the best all around bikes available but in some ways it feels like a bike that simply performs slightly better than my seven...i.e., it's lighter, snappier, and climbs better. but with a set of nice carbon wheels on the seven the gap is not as wide as i initially thought it would have been. so i don't know whether to keep the ssx evo now that i've gone to the dark side and built up a cervelo s5 to give the who aero road bike a try. i'm still dialing in the fit but so far it feels like a completely different animal than either of the other two. ideally i would keep all three but if the wife has anything to say about it, i'm leaning towards the ssx evo.

[mcteague]

I have ridden Ti since about 1991, Spectrum Ti road and then a Seven Axiom in 2002. A few years ago I started thinking full carbon. After a lot of searching, the Parlee Z5 seemed a good choice. The reviews were great and there was a dealer that had my size in stock about an hour away. They were great, the Z5 in L was already extremely close to the geometry of my Axiom and the shop took measurements from my bike to setup the Parlee as close as possible. They even had a demo saddle of the same model. I was told to take it out for an hour or so.

Well, when I ret'd from the ride I was not impressed. Sure it felt light and stiff but also really removed from road feel. Now maybe this had to do with the wheels and tires but there was something lifeless about the ride. Before I left, I did part of the course on my bike and it felt great. And, before coming to the shop I was so sure this would be my new bike I was already picking a custom color for it.

During my carbon search I had read comments about carbon bikes lacking ride feel but figured that was more down to mass market models. Well, in the end, I went part way carbon with a Seven 622 SLX. It feels light, stiff but still has the great road feel of the full Ti bike. I still ride my Axiom, from time to time, and come away thinking how nice it feels, close to the 622 but a not quite as good.

Tim

[dancinkozmo]

im looking at picking up a 2016 supersix 105 (not high modulus) thats on discount at a local shop.
are newer carbon frames significantly improved over this ???

https://static.evanscycles.com/production/bikes/road-bikes/product-image/969-638/cannondale-supersix-evo-105-5-2016-road-bike-silver-EV239390-7500-1.jpg

[silentlight0]

im looking at picking up a 2016 supersix 105 (not high modulus) thats on discount at a local shop.
are newer carbon frames significantly improved over this ???

https://static.evanscycles.com/production/bikes/road-bikes/product-image/969-638/cannondale-supersix-evo-105-5-2016-road-bike-silver-EV239390-7500-1.jpg



My hi mod is a 2016 and that’s when it was redesigned with a new fork and a few other refinements. I am not certain if the non hi mod has the same new fork but I know the standard has a BB30 while the hi mod and all the newer EVOs now run a PF30a.

I’m sure the 105 would be a great bang for your buck, especially if you can get a deal!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[adrien]

I ride carbon only when traveling. I use it as an excuse to rent the higher-end stuff, and give it a whirl.

I also typically send my fit diagram ahead of time, and travel with my saddle.

My regular rides are a lugged Ira Ryan road bike with a little slacker geometry and room for big tires, and a Firefly Ti with a much more aggressive fit and tubing. The IR is about 22 pounds, and the Firefly around 17-18.

Most of the carbon bikes i've ridden feel light, fast, stiff, and...largely devoid of any discernable personality. I've ridden Roubaix, Tarmac, Madone, Domane, Look, Merckx, and Pinarello. Of these, only the Pino tugged at my wallet, and it was a hot mess under about 15mph. The Merckx was stout and responsive, and rode the closest to my Firefly. But it was also mildly heavier, so it didn't seem to make much sense to lust after.

I found the Spesh and Trek offerings to be incredibly efficient and quick, but also light on personality. Great bikes, no doubt. I'd give a slight edge to the Spesh bikes because to me they look better. But I realized that I'm not just looking to ride a great bike. I'm looking to collaborate on a great bike with the person or people who are going to build it.

[Clean39T]

Of course the bike (any bike) needs to be set-up properly, with appropriate parts, but i do not agree with the above statement, at least according to my experience. The frame/fork combo is much more than just the canvas on which we hang our favorite parts, the frame plays a very large part of how the bike rides, handles and reacts to our inputs.

as an extreme example - a modern carbon fiber race bike is never going to ride the same as a surly pacer, even if the identical parts kit is used and fit numbers duplicated.

The body however, at least mine - is very adaptable. I rent bikes all the time now, and as described above, they never fit just right. stem length almost always wrong, bar width and shape never my favorite. sometimes saddles that are just ehhh. wrong crank arm length.

i've taken these bikes on some very challenging, lengthy rides, and have not yet died, crashed or permanently injured myself due to bad fit. after living with a poorly fitted bike for a little time, the body adapts and overcomes.

What I meant is the canvas sets the stage for the whole thing to come together, but without the right components all working together in harmony it can't be great.

A S-Works Tarmac with the "wrong" tires, stem, bar, saddle, etc. for me is not going to reach it's potential, and a lesser version with the "right" stuff may outpace the S-Works.

Or in the tortured analogy, a crap painter can hoze a quality canvas, a true artist can do something good with a crap canvas, and when given a quality canvas, the true artist can become legend...


Oh, and FWIW, I rented a Giant TCR that was on the small side for me, with too-wide bars, crap tape, a crap saddle, and a poorly tuned drivetrain turning heavy wheels and gatorskins ---------- and still had an epic ride up a mountain outside Boise...