what is serotta's best climbing frame?

[Climb01742]

based on your experience, is it the legend or an ottrott, or perhaps for some the CSi? and if you won't mind, would you mind including your size and climbing style? thanks muchly. :beer:

and maybe for fun, what's the best climbing frame you've ever ridden?

[csb]

best climbing frame:

my spectrum super-ti compact
+
perhaps armstrongs trek, i've not ridden it.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . (mine) and a demo Ottrott, but based on that I liked the Ottrott better because of the noticeably more efficient power transfer. I was climbing hills one full ring higher on the back than usual.

BBDave

[zap]

Best climbing frame-Klein Q Pro Carbon. But I suspect the overall weight of the bike has something to do with it ;) Thats why the Look Monoblade didn't make the cut since it's 7+ lbs heavier.

I like stiff frames ;)

I either climb out of the saddle or stay seated.

Size-around 58

[vaxn8r]

Ottrott better than Atlanta. Same size of 56cm.

98% seated unless jamming up something or several miles long and I just want to get out of the saddle.

Most fun...you already know. Tetra Pro.

[Sandy]

I would think that the perception of which frame is the best climbing frame is perhaps more perception than fact. Given frames that fit equally well, are designed with the rider's desires, use the same set of wheels, tires, same psi, and same components, my guess would be that QUANTITATIVELY, times climbing are probably very close indeed, especially at the level at which most of us ride. Certainly one might enjoy climbing or sprinting or descending or riding the flats,..., better on one bike frame than another, and one frame might give such a better feeling that the cyclist might actually work harder with that particular frame.

If all teams in last year's Tour de France were randomly assigned bikes, do you really think that there would have been any significant difference (or any at all) in the results of the Tour, in any category at all??? Those guys certainly are at a different riding level than us.

I think I am about to be blasted away here. Sandy- duck for cover!

Quack Quack Quack Quack,

Sandy

[Jack Brunk]

Climb,
Out of my four Serotta's, my CDA climbs the best by a wide margin. Power transfer is great, it climbs great out of the saddle and weighs in at 15.75 pounds. Next with a tie for second and third is my CSI and Concours. My Ottrott ST comes in fourth. My CDA is a compact 56.

Jack

[zap]

Why do you think Jan U finished the TdF in 4th.

He was riding a Giant.















































Kidding

[Sandy]

Maybe he should have been riding a Super Small.








Kidding too

[va rider]

Climb - I can't say which Serotta frame is the best for climbing, but I can tell you that when climbing, I really like compact geometry. Maybe it is just in my head, but the compact geometry feels faster to me uphill. My CIII has a mere 4 degree tt slope, but it feels alot faster than my Giordana or old ti merckx uphill, both with standard geometry. I have had the opportunity to ride a Fierte on some good climbs and it also felt faster, especially as I stood up to accelerate.

Just my .02 cents.

[Russ]

....Hills or Mountains?

Anyway, IMO, the Legend.... I have ridden those little suckers (the Legend bikes, that is) in the high mountains of Colorado and the hills of Western New York. I think the Legend is the one.

But then again, I also liked the CSI a lot, but I could do fine without the extra weight....

[Climb01742]

Climb,
Out of my four Serotta's, my CDA climbs the best by a wide margin. Power transfer is great, it climbs great out of the saddle and weighs in at 15.75 pounds. Next with a tie for second and third is my CSI and Concours. My Ottrott ST comes in fourth. My CDA is a compact 56.


jack, what do you think accounts for your ottrott finishing fourth? and your CDA so much better?

[Jack Brunk]

The Ottrott is really stiff and I like you need to have some flex when i'm out of the saddle. I have never really warmed up to the Ottrott and if anybody wants it, PM me and we can make a deal. I do love my other Serotta's. To be fair, I did not custom order the Ottrott and bought it directly from my LBS. I just built a Seven Elium that rides and climbs just how I want my bikes to ride. I think the difference between the two is the Ottrott rides more like a carbon bike and the elium rides like a Ti bike. I happen to like the ride of ti better than carbon. Thats why I don't have any carbon bikes left in my garage.

Jack

[bcm119]

I would think it could be any model custom built for maximum climbing efficiency. The problem here is that climbing efficiency is a compromise between pedaling efficiency and weight. And we know that pedaling efficiency is a hot topic, illustrated by Kirk's claim that frames with a little flex actually track more efficiently. Too many variables. I think the best climbing bike is the one that begs you to go out and ride it up hills. Like Sandy said, its probably more feel than quantative.

Descending capability concerns me more. All modern frames will go up a hill if you pedal them, some a bit better than others. But screaming down the other side is when I put my life in the frame's hands. Especially where I live which has lots of twisty descents. And I think there is a larger discrepancy in high speed stability and handling amongst frames- not to mention that climbing ability is dependent on other factors more than the frame.

[spiderman]

climbs with ease.
on the one day ride across michigan...
...i kept looking forward to big hills.
i could catch leading riders with ease
and could pass any bike on the road...
...seated...while everyone else was
out of the saddle, working like crazy.
i can't speak for the standard geometry
on the ottrott st, and it's taken me
5 months to get used to the clown-bike
appearance of the compact geometry...
...but the bike shoots up hills
almost effortlessly...
...light years better than the demo cda
i used while my ottrott was being serviced
and the old crl that my wife is now riding...
...she's thinking maybe we should switch
just to make things interesting
and take away my 'unfair' advantage...

[Bruce K]

I have never riddden a Legend but between my Ottrott ST and my Concours the Ottrott is noticably better.

As I commented previously the Parlee I test rode climbed best of the three.

BK

[mavic1010]

Interesting thread. Could the disparity between the ottrott and other bikes be due to the size of the rider and climbing characteristics? Like myself, not huge in size (though the pics from the TdFL proved otherwise), prefer a stiffer bike to ensure every ounce of energy I exert in climbing mountains, that I'm not particularly good at, is used to propel myself up, while the DBRK like weasels (his words not mine folks =) ) prefer the rythm type of climbing and therefore prefer give in the their bikes.

Just a thought....

BTW, why is that every response from CSB is edited?? haha

[Matt Barkley]

Climb-

I am jonesing to have my very own OTTROT 54.5 ctr 73 or tad steeper seat angle with a 55.8 top. I really think it would be a great climbing bike.I just wish it was a whole lot less money. I cannot afford one.

Of bikes I've ridden, I would have to put down the Peg CCKMP as pretty darn nice of a climbing bike. The Hampsten Cinghale Pro I had was really a great in the saddle long day climbing bike. Colorado TG was great too.

Now we are talking climbing - real climbing by which I am thinking longer stuff - not power climbs. If we are talking power climbs - that is another story. Give me alu. light and stiff - or steel with serious spring. Two different animals I know - just got to get used to each and take advantage of their qualitites. Man I need some beer.- Matt

[David Kirk]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (a saying that will have little meaning very soon I'd guess) I would say that neither Serotta, or C'dale, or Vitus or (bike name here) makes a bike that would be considered "their best climbing frame". They might all make wonderful frames ( at least Serotta does) but I don't think one can say with any certainty that one is better at climbing that the other.

I feel it's too individual....one person might feel best on model X while another person might feel better on model Y. Riders all have their unique pedalling styles and techniques as well as completely different proportions and weights.

So I think a more appropiate question might be "what's the best climbing bike in the model line for someone like me?".

Does that make sense?

Dave

[Chief]

DK, prfectly good sense from a man that ought to know.

[Smiley]

Climbmo , the best Serotta climbing frame is the one you don't own YET , otherwise how would they get you wanting for a new bike from them . The new fall line up certainly will have you wanting for a new bike :banana:

[SPOKE]

DK hit the mark with his comment "what's the best climbing bike in the model line for someone like me?". the point is very simple.....Serotta's main focus is building CUSTOM bikes. if you can accurately describe the qualities you want and they get translated correctly by your fitter back to Serotta then i bet you get what you described. i just hope you use good fitter that truely understands what you describe. if you're not sure your fitter really understands what you're talking about, give the folks at Serotta a call. this will help insure that you get what you want.

[Sandy]

None of them-At least none of them when I am climbing...

King of The Mountains,

Sandy

[Andreu]

Good point earlier about hills i.e. what type of hills?
There is a big difference between hills you can "punch" over on the big ring or long hills where you have to maintain a comfy position at good cadence for long periods of time. Not that matters to me because they both hurt :rolleyes:
Just a thought.
A

[Climb01742]

I just built a Seven Elium that rides and climbs just how I want my bikes to ride.

jack, is your elium custom? if it is, did you ask for specific things to make it ride differently from your ottrott? it sounds like our experiences with an ottrott are similiar. if you ever have the chance, test ride a parlee Z1; i'd be curious your take.

[Climb01742]

Could the disparity between the ottrott and other bikes be due to the size of the rider and climbing characteristics?

mavic, i think you hit something. to also risk sounding like a broken record, in my experience, serottas are best loved by bigger riders, and/or powerful riders. from what i can tell, part of ben's build philosophy is to build things that endure, that can withstand rigors of many years of hard riding. which is a great, great thing. but it can result in some stout bikes. many i've ridden or owned seemed, for me, overbuilt. i'm certainly not advocating underbuilding, or fragile builds. but my IF, for example, is lithe. i want to believe a serotta can be built that way. in cars, mercedes are built to endure. but not really to be lithe. that does not make a benz a better or worse car. in just makes it a benz. ;)

[csb]

...

[dbrk]

If the TdFL is any indication then the Serotta that climbs best is the one on which you find Russ, dcotcamp, KeithA...

I have two completely different experiences of climbing. One is on a "light" bike (under 18lbs), the Hampsten Z1 comes to mind, and the other is on just the opposite, say, a fendered, lighted, steel bike like a Mariposa or Singer, both of which climb brilliantly. I think the key here is a kind of overall balance and fit added to the design features. The audax bikes are a lot heavier in lift-weight but on the road they feel is entirely different, which I say without the slightest bit of sentimentality.

Different kinds of cycling can provide great experiences under the same circumstances. Ride a properly designed 25lbs Audax bike up a hill and you can have just as great a time as on a racer's lightweight.

One more observation. The vast majority (apparently from all the bikes I've seen) of Serotta riders don't ride at night or often in the rain (unless they really don't care how wet they get without fenders). Others disdain fendered bikes as somehow PeeWeeHermanesque and not cool enough. It's fun to ride in the rain and the dark, preferably both, and for this a proper audax bike is really the reason. As for cool, that's in the heart of the rider but nothing is cooler in my heart than a Herse or a Singer or nowadays a Mariposa. These bikes are outside the appreciation of some but I can't tire of them both to ride and to gaze upon. To each his own, of course.

dbrk

[Climb01742]

douglas, i've never ridden a Mariposa or a Singer, but i do ride a pretty heavy bike quite often, an mx leader, as beautifully balanced a frame as there is IMO. i can actually climb quite happily on it, efficiently, smoothly, but just not nearly as quickly or as easily as i can on a much lighter bike, say my IF or team sc. i think the distinction i would make is, a heavier bike can climb nicely, as an experience, but not quickly, as an objective measure. i enjoy riding both my mxl and IF upward, they just don't get to the top at the same time. ;)

[dbrk]

douglas, i've never ridden a Mariposa or a Singer, but i do ride a pretty heavy bike quite often, an mx leader, as beautifully balanced a frame as there is IMO. i can actually climb quite happily on it, efficiently, smoothly, but just not nearly as quickly or as easily as i can on a much lighter bike, say my IF or team sc. i think the distinction i would make is, a heavier bike can climb nicely, as an experience, but not quickly, as an objective measure. i enjoy riding both my mxl and IF upward, they just don't get to the top at the same time. ;)

Fair enough and undoubtedly true for us all since physics is, well, physics. But as you well know, my dear Climb, sometimes it's even better to get to the top slower. This notion I find too rarely expressed. Like today: today it's not going to really warm up and I ride slower in the cool weather, plus the slower I go, the longer I get to be out. That all strikes me as waaaay better than going fast and getting it done. I got nothing to get done on a bike.

Sometimes going up fast is fun, sometimes slower is just funner as I know you would quite agree...

dbrk

[Climb01742]

we violently agree, sage one. which is precisely why i often grab my mxl...fun and speed are not synonomous. joy is often slower. our senses process perhaps far more at a slower clock speed. a wise professorial insight, good doctor. :p

[Sandy]

One can climb just as fast on a heavier bike and I will prove it to you.

I will meet you at dbrk's. You bring your mx leader and your IF. Dbrk will pick out a long steep hill. Mira will be the judge (I can't lose with that choice).You and I will race up that hill. You on the heavier mx leader, and I will be on the lighter IF or my Ottrottt, if you prefer. I promise to try as hard as possible.

I am willing to bet that you will be able to beat me up that steep long hill, even though you are on the heavier bike.

Case closed! Aren't science and controlled experiments wonderful?

Scientific Statistical Sandy

[dcotcamp]

And agree that -quantitative- differences between speeds climbing on different bikes are likely -very- small. Even a 5 pound weight difference doesn't mean much if the bike plus rider weighs 175-200 pounds. (And let's be honest here, folks: lot of us are well up in that weight range).

Now as to whether climbing -feels- different on one frame v. another: I suppose I can buy that. For me personally, though, I must say that as long as I can acheive the position on the bike that I want and do so comfortably, I am unable to perceive much if any difference between one frame and another. Sure, they handle differently, they transmit road buzz and shock differently, they certainly -descend- differently, but when I'm at my limit climbing, my suffering drowns out just about all other sensations.

I'm probably just an insensitive fool, but I have to admit my wonder at the ability of some esteemed forum members to feel the differences they describe. More power to them, I say.

Dennis

[Climb01742]

dennis, broadly speaking, i agree with you. there are many ride characteristics of a frame i am not experienced enough to fathom or feel. but for me, climbing is my thing. i'm 150. and not very powerful. i'm not saying there is a huge, huge difference, but there is a very real, noticeable difference in climbing on my mxl vs IF. i bet the same would be true for someone who loved to sprint, or descend...your favorite thing, you're very sensitive to.

[vaxn8r]

I'm a lot heavier than climb...about 180, more or less, and I'm a climbing idiot too for some strange reason.

I can tell a big difference on how bikes climb and even 1-2 lbs of weight is noticable. Don't ask me the physics because everything I read would refute that. I guess the physics that prove it to me is I can better keep up with the hot heads on certain bikes. Can't keep up on others. Interestingly, the latter are all heavy and stiff, the former all light and stiff. I don't ride any flexy bikes any more due to my size and riding style.

Finally, I switch my best wheels between bikes so that wouldn't account for any differences.

[Serotta PETE]

Spokes on his 996 Ducati :beer: