PDA

View Full Version : most comfortable road bike?


brisox
06-09-2004, 09:19 AM
I have been playing around with the idea of buying a Serrota Ottrott or Legend (or other), Look 481Sl, or other road frame.
I am 6'1'' 220lbs. 39 years old, ride recreationally only, with an occasional century or local race. I currently own a 2003 LeMond Buenos Aires. I chose this frame because of my longer than average torso and the LeM ond geometry has a longer than average top tube. I am looking for a frame that is light, strong, durable, is more/as comfortable, though is more rigid on downhill corners and climbs. And possibly on longer rides if there are more comfortable frames. Please advise.

Smiley
06-09-2004, 09:29 AM
If you could find an Hors Categorie that fits you , you'd be in HEAVEN :banana:

Serotta PETE
06-09-2004, 11:46 AM
Smiley, I knew you were going to say HORS>>>>


I got to try a Legend STfrom the Serotta fleet the other week when they were at Cyclesport - - - Probably the best bike I have ridden in many years.


It was a great ride. Comfortable, Responsive, etc.......


We all know how good the Ottrott is, but you need to try that Legend ST.

Please no hate mail (unless it comes with a good bottle of red wine). Pete

Climb01742
06-09-2004, 11:55 AM
serottas are wonderful frames for larger riders. i'm a huge fan of ti, but also consider steel. a CSi is a sweet ride too. dropping $5k to get a wonderful frame isn't always necessary. (and in the spirit of the upcoming owner's weekend i won't even mention bikes built by 11 craftsmens in boston who do great things in orange...)

Serotta PETE
06-09-2004, 11:57 AM
ALL BIKES ARE WELCOME!!! Even the "11" craftmens products

Len J
06-09-2004, 12:07 PM
Just a clarification, Lemonds do not have longer "effective" top tubes than other bikes. Lemond has a slacker seat tube angle. What this means is that, With the same position over the bottom bracket, a 1 degree slacker seat tube needs a 1.2 cm longer actual top tube to put the riders reach in the same place. So a 73 seat tube angle and a 55 cm TT is exactly the same position as a 72 degree st angle and a 56.2 cm TT. In effect, positioning a rider on each bike, his seat would be 1.2 cm further forward on the rails on the 72 degree st bike compared to the 72 st bike.

Len

Marron
06-09-2004, 12:27 PM
I think that Lemonds are designed to be ridded like Merckx, Colnagos and other Euro style frames. The best fit comes from ignoring the whole KOPs thing and suspending the rider between contact points both further aft and forward on the bike. If you look you'll see many pros riding with slack seat tubes and relatively long stems. I'm not suggesting this works any better, it's just the way these bikes are designed to be ridden.

bostondrunk
06-09-2004, 12:28 PM
Softride!! Can;t get more comfy than those.

Ken Robb
06-09-2004, 12:35 PM
to state the obvious: the one that fits best for the way you intend to ride it.
Without naming bikes or even materials I'm most comfy on a bike that allows me to have the bars about the same height as the saddle. I like a bike with sufficient clearance in frame, fork, and brake calipers to allow at least 700x28mm tires. I have two very similar bikes and the one with longer chainstays is more comfortable. 44.5 vs 41cm. To understand why this is so picture yourself riding in the front seat of a Jep Wrangler. The ride is firm but not too bad because you are in the mid-point between front and rear axles so when the front hits a bump you only are affected by a fraction of the up-motion. Now get in the back seat directly over the rear axle. You will feel even less when the front wheels hit a bump but when the rear axle gets to that bump all that force will be driven right up your spine.
Other design tricks like the H'ors, ST, shocks, can also be helpful but you will be amazed at how much difference longer chainstays make.

Needs Help
06-09-2004, 12:38 PM
Just a clarification, Lemonds do not have longer "effective" top tubes than other bikes.

From your description, the Lemonds do have a longer top tube. I'm not sure what you mean by "effective". If you slacken the seat tube, the top tube has to get longer.

In effect, positioning a rider on each bike, his seat would be 1.2 cm further forward on the rails on the 72 degree st bike compared to the 73[edit] st bike.

It seems to me that if the rider were too small for the bike, that would be the case. On the other hand, a larger rider could leave the saddle in the middle of the rails or even move the seat back 1.2 cm. According to your explanation, it would seem that no bike has a longer "effective" top tube because if the rider could find a seat with rails long enough, they could always move the seat far enough forward to get positioned correctly over the bottom bracket. But moving the seat forward to get positioned correctly over the bottom bracket doesn't mean the top tube isn't longer.

Did I misunderstand your post?

Silverthump
06-09-2004, 12:46 PM
I have had Serotta CSI, Legend TI and now have the Ottrott ST. The Ottrott ST is the MOST comfortable bike I have ever ridden.
Each step up the from the CSI to the Legend to the Ottrott was positive. However the jump to the Ottrott ST was dramatic. Extremely comfortable and handles fantastic.

Ken Robb
06-09-2004, 12:49 PM
Let's say we have a common "square" bike 58cm x 58cm with 73 degree head and seat tube angles. Now we get a rider who would like to be farther behind the pedals and the bottom bracket without giving up this comfortable size. Couldn't we move in that direction with a 74 head tube angle and a "slacker" 72 seat tube angle. I think the top tube length would be about the same. Maybewe would lengthen the chainstays to compensate for the steeper Head tube angle or just change the fork rake.

Needs Help
06-09-2004, 12:55 PM
Hmmm...wouldn't you need a slacker HT angle as well. If you steepen the HT angle, you make the top tube even longer.

I have a question about your 44.5 cm chainstays: isn't there excessive flex in the rear triangle?

Ken Robb
06-09-2004, 01:09 PM
By "size" I was talking about the 58cm seat tube but you are correct if you wanted to keep a 58cm top tube. Since longer chainstays usually lead to a longer wheelbase which often means more stable or "slower" handling depending on one's perspective, I was throwing in the steeper head tube to compensate and retain similar handling to the original bike. I don't notice any rear triangle flex. These bikes are 62 cm frames, lugged steel. I guess the designer used tubes that are stiff enough for this frame geometry. I weigh 210-215lbs nekkid and I'll bet thereal frame designers are laughing their butts off at our ignorant ramblings.

Len J
06-09-2004, 01:34 PM
I was talking about any specific rider. Take me for example. on a 73 degree STA bike, with a 56 cm TT a 73.5 HTA with a 110 84 degree stem, I use a setback seatpost to get me positioned on the bike about 2 cm behind the BB. To emulate the same position on a bike with a 72 degree STA (all other the same), I would need a 57.2 cm TT to have the exact same position. The effective TT for me in both cases is exactly the same, the difference is that on the 72 STA bike, my seat is 1.2 cm furter forward compared to the center of the seat tube. I probably don't need a set back seatpost. My position doesn't change, the position of the seattube relative to me changes necessitating a longer TT to get my reach inthe same place with the same stem.

I agree that the actual TT is longer, but because the riders position doesn't change the effect of the longer TT is mitigated "effectivly" by the need to move the seat further forward to get in the same position relative to the BB (As he had on the 73 sta bike).

Hope that is clearer.

Len


From your description, the Lemonds do have a longer top tube. I'm not sure what you mean by "effective". If you slacken the seat tube, the top tube has to get longer.



It seems to me that if the rider were too small for the bike, that would be the case. On the other hand, a larger rider could leave the saddle in the middle of the rails or even move the seat back 1.2 cm. According to your explanation, it would seem that no bike has a longer "effective" top tube because if the rider could find a seat with rails long enough, they could always move the seat far enough forward to get positioned correctly over the bottom bracket. But moving the seat forward to get positioned correctly over the bottom bracket doesn't mean the top tube isn't longer.

Did I misunderstand your post?

Kevin
06-09-2004, 04:55 PM
I have an Ottrott St and a CSi. The Ottrott is far more comfortable. Go for the Otrott, you won't be sorry.

Kevin

bcm119
06-09-2004, 05:30 PM
You didn't mention the Couer d'Acier- you might want to test ride one because you may love it. I rode one once and it was incredibly comfortable- check it out if you'd like to save some coin over the Legend ST.

shaq-d
06-09-2004, 06:29 PM
The effective TT for me in both cases is exactly the same, the difference is that on the 72 STA bike, my seat is 1.2 cm furter forward compared to the center of the seat tube.

i don't get your point. the "efffective TT for me" is the same on a bike that's a 53cm or a 60cm, as long as the stem and saddle positions compensate. isn't that kind of obvious? :fight:

the point is that the lemond has a longer effective TT, relative to a bike that does not have a sloping geometry, and this is true/not really a point that can be argued.

sd

dbrk
06-09-2004, 06:59 PM
Bikes can be many things but the best mix of comfort (first) and performance (a close second) in my experience is a Rivendell. You can have one made that is racy and it is still the most comfortable bike afloat. It works for large or small but the secret is in the fit solution, not just the fit. Of course, there are many, many answers to this sort of query and you would expect Serotta riders to prefer...well...Serottas! My issue with Serottas that use carbon forks is simply that you are limited by the clearances, this not being an issue particular to Serottas but to modern bikes that use these forks. I would much prefer a steel fork for the ride but also for the option to use much wider, more comfortable but just as "fast" tires. My Rivendell fastboy wears 27c Andre Dugast tubulars which are the sweetest ride of all I've tried. Wheels too can stiffen up a ride considerably and a fine handmade set of 3x on Open Pros will answer nicely if you want bullet-proof comfort, just use decent hubs and if you go with sew-ups use a quality rim that lets you use the wider tires. Fit is first for comfort but tires and wheels are a close second---frame material is a distant third in light of the two other considerations.

dbrk

BigMac
06-09-2004, 08:01 PM
My question to you or anyone looking for what they call "comfort" in a bicycle would be to describe exactly what you would define as comfort. I mean short of the Captain's recommendation of a DKS/Hors Cat, a Serotta ST model or the Moots road models with the rear shock, road bikes don't have suspensions. Not knowing what exactly you define as comfort, I can honestly say my Legend is smoother and better at dampening hf vibrations than any steel bike I have owned, that I suppose makes it more "comfortable" after several hours in the saddle. While I have never owned a composite or aluminum road, I have spent many hours on loaner bikes of this type and most composite bikes are even better than a Legend at dampening hf vibrations. Most aluminum frames I have ridden are not too "buzzy" either, but most would disagree with this generalization, likely a product of my size, weight and fact that I ride a very large frame, the average rider is on a considerably smaller frame. The best frame I have personally ever ridden for dampening hf vibrations, in fact any and all road feel was a Seven Axiom Ti, followed by a Kestrel 500EMS. The problem however is that neither of these frames I would consider "comfortable". A little hf vibration is a good thing, imo, it gives me feedback to what is happening where the tires contact the road. The Kestrel was a very poor fit so its tough to judge fairly, but a complete and utter lack of feel was not likely to improve if the tubes were lengthened considerably. This is in fact a common theme of every composite frame I've ever ridden. Some would in fact define these frames as "comfortable", I consider them lifeless and boring. The Seven was something totally different but that's another story altogether, suffice it to say, Seven is a little man's bike builder.

So what is "comfortable" to me? Fit accounts for 90% of my comfort. If I am able to stretch out, properly balanced and my feet and knees are in their proper saddle-pedal relationship, I'm 90% comfortable. Proper saddle choice, bar width and bar shape are also big contributors to comfort. Lastly, but certainly not least, I must be able to descend at moderately high speeds in total comfort and confidence. In short, comfort is being able to ride 10-15 hours at a time, w/o excessive cramping or pain and when i am completely exhausted and unable to completely concentrate on my riding, I still must be able to rip down a mountain road w/o it being a white knuckle, nerve-racking experience. By this definition, my Legend is the most comfortable frame I've ever owned or ridden, my Cucchetti, my old Masi 3v and my Merckx MXL (all custom lugged steel) would be close 2nd.

I am not suggesting these are or should be your defining factors in comfort, heck if you live in flatlands Nebraska, what the heck does high speed stability matter? I live-ride in mountainous area, I am a very large person by cycling standards, its a struggle to climb any serious grade, I damn well better be able to enjoy a bomber descent if I'm gonna bust a lung going up! ;) I do think no matter where you live and/or ride, proper tire/wheel choice will contribute as much or more toward a "smoother" (hf vibration dampening) ride than any frame choice. Ride sewups and the ride will be sublime. If you ride wire-ons, consider using 25C tires as a minimum width, 28C are even better -- but not as sweet as sewups :p !

Get properly fitted, find a saddle that feels right, some comfortable shoes, drop bars that really fit your hands, sewup wheelset or clinchers with reasonable width tires...then you are set to go...comfortably :D

Ride on! :banana: :banana: :banana:

Ken Robb
06-10-2004, 12:19 PM
yeah, what Mac said.