Performance, Bike Geometry, and the "Placebo Effect."

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by eddief

it's about your wallet / placebo. i used to call it newbikeitis. you spend a bundle on something and you want to / need to justify the expense. so your brain goes into overdrive to make it so. if, indeed, this is a newer bike, get back to us in a few thousand miles and see if the feelings are still the same. i honestly hope so. the combo of blowing a bunch o money and being satisfied is a great experience. bike love is a complicated thing with so many variables it can be a challenge for all the stars to line up and ensure your brain and body know what they're feeling and have your words align.

it seems Firefly knows what they're doing and they do the most gorgeous of machines, but that does not mean it translates when you are on the streets of the East Bay. HOPE IT DOES!

Really interesting post. And spot on in many ways - although the caveat being this was a dinosaur (AKA rim brake bike) I was able to get it for much less than its disk cousins. It's a compact frame with a slightly sloping TT, so I'm not gaga about the aesthetics. But the ride itself is so immaculate that it trumps everything. And I'm very shallow when it comes to aesthetics

[John H.]

At the expense of derailing this thread, does anyone else think it is not cool to chase someone down and "race them"? Especially during COVID times?

I don't go for bike rides to show other how fast or not fast I am- I would hope that others would do likewise and keep their space.

[tomato coupe]

Originally Posted by John H.

At the expense of derailing this thread, does anyone else think it is not cool to chase someone down and "race them"? Especially during COVID times?

That was my first thought.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by John H.

At the expense of derailing this thread, does anyone else think it is not cool to chase someone down and "race them"? Especially during COVID times?

I don't go for bike rides to show other how fast or not fast I am- I would hope that others would do likewise and keep their space.

Unless the previous responders felt bashful about articulating their opinions, perhaps that wasn’t foremost in their thoughts. I don’t think you’re derailing the thread, necessarily, but you might get it locked if it devolves into a COVID rant.

[Kirk007]

"I do believe that when all the stars line up, a well fit bike is magic."

This and a lot else as Weisan says. I don't think you can separate out one factor, I think even paint and aesthetics make a difference as it impacts how you feel about that bike which can translate into effort exerted, motivation, what have you. I can say that my Peg Marcelo wanted to go fast, even after a decade of ownership. The Dogma I picked up is the same; my average speed over a given course is faster, and my average heart rate is higher. I'm not setting out to go faster when I'm on the bike, it just seems to happen. My steel Spectrum is as perfect a bike as I've ridden even though it's steel frame, steel fork (i.e not light). Some bikes just suit you better than others. Call it what you want but don't doubt what you feel.

[Latestart]

6’4’ and 83~84 to saddle. Your legs are long...

[happycampyer]

From my own experience, I find that geometry makes a big difference in my confidence while descending. I discovered this more or less by accident. When I started riding seriously again 15 or so years ago, my first high-end road bike was an Orbea Orca. I never felt great descending on it, and could barely ride it no-handed. As I experimented with different bikes, I discovered that some gave me much greater confidence descending, and I could ride them no-handed for miles. I didn’t really understand bike geometry at the time, but became more aware as I tried to understand what the differences were from one frame to another.

I came to realize that pretty much all the frames that “agreed” with me had similar geo characteristics—shallower headtube angles, higher trail than average, more bottom bracket drop, etc.

So for me at least it wasn’t just a function of getting my contact points in the same place, rather, it seems to be a function of where I am situated relative to the wheels, etc.

[dgauthier]

It's not that a good fit and good geometry makes you faster, it's that a bad fit and bad geometry makes you slower.

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by biker72

I'm 6'2'' with a relatively short inseam at 73.8 cm.

Goes to show everyone is different. I’m barely 6’ and am comfortable at 780-785mm.

Anyway yeah the fit is important but honestly get the saddle height correct, slam the stem, 110-130 stem and most racing bikes are good.

[Clean39T]

I'm right there with you. Since I've gravitated back to smaller frames, more drop, etc., I'm feeling so much better on the bike. I'm more confident descending on a smaller frame, and climb best when my hands are well below my saddle. I've also found that I like a bit longer chainstays than "normal" and with that a bit longer wheelbase and rake on the fork to balance things out fore/aft. I also like a frame that gives a bit, but not too much - one that is appropriately built for my weight and level of power output. The Seven I'm on right now is pretty dang perfect on most counts there - silliness of the 380mm seatpost be dam'd. Like Kirk007 said, it inspires me to ride hard, and so I'm pretty fast on it. And I find it inspiring because it fits and feels so good.

[mj_michigan]

Wheels (and tires) play an important role too.
My Lynskey transformed into a faster bike after I "upgraded" wheels to hand built HED Belgiums. But HED's were only marginally lighter and probably less aero then the old ones. They are more comfortable, though.

[colker]

If we were talikng about mountain bikes then.. yes: geometry changes the game. There is geometry for descending east coast technical , west big rocks, open fast trails etc..
A good, well designed road bike is capable for descending.. rim or disc brake.

[carpediemracing]

Throwing another number into the ring, 5'7", 67.5 cm height. And I run a 75.5 STA, 56.5 TT, and a 135 stem.

I have to double check but I think my wheelbase is at least 10mm longer than the OP's pictured geometry - it's 102 cm or so. Wheel base can make a bike feel a bit more stable - longer wheel bases make it harder to turn sharply.

Another thing that can make a bike feel really stable is BB drop. If you have more it'll be more stable. But 67mm seems a bit low actually, like not a lot. 70-74mm would be more of a drop.

The thing with the long stays is that if the OP was riding "normal" 405mm stays, the extra 10mm would get the rear wheel just a bit more out there, centering his weight between the wheels just a touch more.

I'm the opposite. Witha forward position, a 405mm stay is too long, so long that just coasting through a fast turn I might skitter the rear wheel across the pavement. I commissioned another frame with the same geometry except I wanted 390mm stays and it was great. Then I had the builder shorten the first frame "as much as possible". He got it to 393mm and the otherwise same bike suddenly became great in corners and out of the saddle. A blast on a descent as well.

The second frame is still better accelerating out of the saddle - I often lift the front wheel for a pedal stroke or two when I jump hard, and the bike is incredibly stable even with the front wheel off the ground (no one has ever commented on it - I don't think anyone realizes that is happening). On the modified frame that never happens. I can't imagine the 3mm makes that much of a difference. It's got to be something else but I don't know what.

[pdonk]

I'd suggest the performance improvements are partially fit and partially placebo/wanting to use the tool to its fullest ability.

I'm similar with my sv. It has made me a better rider as I am riding it more. I have tried to replicate its position on my moots, but still feel faster on the sv.

As for geometry and physiology, I'm 6'2 with a 79cm saddle height and a 60 cm nose of saddle to bars with 10cm of bar drop.