|
|
|
|
#1
09-20-2021, 11:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
All-Road Geometry: experiences? do you like it?
Greetings,
I’m curious if any Forumites have gone with all-road geometry and how they feel about their decision. Any regrets?? Any thoughts on design issues for a custom frame? I'm contemplating going to the "all-road" geometry on new frame. As I understand it AR is up to approximately 35 to 38mm tires which would work for me and the type of gravel riding I do. I really do like the new world of larger (28-32mm) tires on the road. I currently have a road bike and a gravel bike with almost identical components. Both are great but plan to purchase something new in the next year or two (and apparently that’s the que time for builders now). My thought is just one bike with something close to my gravel bike geo. I didn't think I would ever go this route until I purchased my gravel bike and found how very little performance is sacrificed with the geometry. 
|
|
#2
09-20-2021, 11:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What's "all road" geometry?
|
|
#4
09-20-2021, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I thought I had an all road geometry but I’m quite happy right now with 650bx50mm.
 This bike goes anywhere and I would not want less tire clearance. It looks like a road bike (if you can ignore the fat tires), feels and rides mostly like a road bike, is at home on trails and doesn’t hit limits till it gets very technical or super steep. 700 wheels with 32 and it’s mostly a road bike but I prefer fat tires and 650b so I can ride anywhere.
|
|
#5
09-20-2021, 12:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have a Niner RLT steel and the slack head angle that may have been used to reduce toe overlap due to bigger tires made the bike feel very stable at speed with 700 x 35c tires (almost too stable, by which I mean more effort than I was used to turn/move from a straight line). I put on 650x47 (mostly for extra comfort) and noticed a more neutral feel ( by which I mean I didn’t notice changes in direction and it just felt natural) which I really liked.
Also, chain stay length is longer on RLT steel than my other bikes to accommodate bigger tires so that may effect geometry/feel.
|
|
#6
09-20-2021, 12:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here's the geo of my old Alliance All-Road. This predates the "gravel" scene and can really only handle 35-38mm w/o fenders. My road bikes have a bit less trail than this ( 56-57mm) using a slightly steeeper head angle/rake, but have the same bb-drop
Note: the trail listed in the geo is for a 25mm tire. Fatter tire=more trail. This geo was pretty darn comfortable on long rides and handles quite well in hilly road races. Trail and low BB are pretty important considerations for the given intent IMHO.
|
|
#7
09-20-2021, 04:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Is it more marketing BS? Another type of bike we're being seduced into thinking we need? What's the difference between all road geometry and gravel geometry? And does it matter?
__________________
It's not an adventure until something goes wrong. - Yvon C.
|
|
#8
09-20-2021, 04:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Not BS, actually. In general have slacker HTA, more trail longer CS and WB. That is a difference to road, so how that is BS when actually different escapes me.
Endurance geometry some refer to it as. As far as if i like it equaling someone else liking it or not, pass. I will say less that 72.5 hta or more than about 55-6 trail is not my preference if not all off road bicycle.
__________________
This foot tastes terrible! 
|
|
#9
09-20-2021, 05:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
As with many monikers, all road can mean different things to various riders. To me, it means a bike that handles dirt roads (I'm a New Englander, we have dirt roads, not gravel) as well as paved ones (good and crappy pavement both.) My 1972 Bob Jackson, as many bikes BITD, will fit 700x32 tires and in a pinch 35s. My new Carl Strong build will accept 650b up to 48, though I'm running 38 and that's what we designed around. The key difference from most "gravel" bikes is in the geometry is still regular road geometry, as illustrated by the geo drawing Crankles posted. Both my Bob Jackson and the Strong have 73 HTA and 50mm of trail, so they handle as road bikes do. They just allow wider tires and are therefore suitable for poorer surfaces, but they're not intended as challenging replacements for a hardtail MTB - single track isn't the goal. I chose 650b to get toe clearance in a medium size frame (55cm ETT).
The bikes I've ridden with gravel geo - which I think of as in the range of 71 HTA and >60mm trail - aren't satisfying to me, they feel ponderous. Of course we all have different preferences and perceptions, so if you love slack, go for it! I had to get a custom to get a real all road according to my definition. One of the reasons I picked Carl is that his biases align with mine - take a look at Pursuit Cycles' Supple Road - its geo is similar to what he built me in Ti.
|
|
#10
09-20-2021, 05:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Allroad
I think that all-road geometry can mean different things to different people.
To me, it means room for larger tires. I have ridden multiple gravel bikes with head angles between 71-72 degrees. I find that a well engineered bike can work well both on road or offroad. Both my Open and my Scott had 71 degree head angles. Because the toptubes were relatively short, I ran 120mm stems and they were great as road bikes. I have also ridden bikes with a similar head angle, longer toptube and shorter stem. This also rides great but I think that it shines more on the dirt than the pavement. If you go for a steeper head angle- It might not be quite as stable off-road, and depending on the toptube length and stem combination it could have quite a bit of toe overlap when you have the larger tires on it. But everyone is different. Ideal geometry is a sum of your size, your fit, the specifics of the terrain that you ride, and also how you ride it.
|
|
#11
09-20-2021, 05:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Different builders and different manufacturers will have various terminology and interpretation of what "all road" geometry might mean and how that might be different than road, gravel, touring and anywhere in between.
i dont think you can make any blanket assumptions or decisions based on that phrase as a fixed variable.
__________________
http://less-than-epic.blogspot.com/
|
|
#12
09-20-2021, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Obviously, these things aren't well-defined. In my mind "all road" geometry is close to a convention road bike, but with room for bigger tires. "Gravel" generally adjusts the geometry further for handling over rougher terrain.
In terms of stock bikes, I consider something like the 3T Exploro or Trek Domane to be more "all road" in contrast to something like the BMC URS which is clearly in the "gravel" category. But again, these are not well-defined terms, so I'm just sharing how I interpret the terms, not that there is anything "right" or "wrong".
__________________
Instagram - DannAdore Bicycles
|
|
#13
09-20-2021, 05:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
By the way, as I mentioned in another thread, I think the definition of "road" should be clarified. I use a stock honda civic as a litmus test. if you can not drive down it fine with a stock honda civic, it is not a road. it is a track or trail or something like that. In that manner, "all road" bikes really dont need any super aggressive tire clearance or other non roadish characteristics.
Mike Zanconato pioneered the "Road-32" moniker, and it sticks with me to this day. If i'm on a "road" - i like a road bike that fits up to 32mm tires. anything fatter than that is gravel bike or mtb territory for me; though again, those subcategories and definitions are subject to interpretation. 
__________________
http://less-than-epic.blogspot.com/
|
|
#15
09-20-2021, 05:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
My experience with the same bike and wheel/tire changes was identical to Andy's. It was better on the road to me with the 700c, but feels better all around as a 650b setup. I'm ready to try out a narrower 650b to see how that works.
Quote:
|
 |
| Tags |
| all-road geometry |
|
|
Linear Mode
