I’m looking at buying the above frame. I primarily want a frame that is stable on the descents. To anyone who owns this bike how does it descend?
Thanks
I’m looking at buying the above frame. I primarily want a frame that is stable on the descents. To anyone who owns this bike how does it descend?
Thanks
Descends well enough for pro tour riders… If you want to know how a bike descends, you need to look at two things (basically): trail (the biggie) and front center. Head tube angle also makes a difference. But the first two will tell you what you need to know.
What are “trail” and “front center”, and what should I look for in them?
Thanks
This would be a good place to ‘start’ learning - check the curriculum and frame building classes, there is a schedule. From there, I would suggest a ME degree or what not…only then will you begin to understand such things to the level Jordan and a few other folks here do. But, you can rest assured that there is not one mass market frame that your legs (or balls) will be able to out decend. Your skills on the other hand…this of course assumes that you dont put a 240mm stem with 15cm of spacers and a “hipster townie” cut off handle bar and a Shriners Circus bouncie wheel.
Well I have an ME degree.
i road raced on an sl2 all year and it descends just fine. luckily it climbs very well too since that’s what gets you to the descents. while i love the bike, there’s a lot more than just the frame to being able to descend well & with confidence.
Here is why I ask. I had an aluminum road bike with a carbon fork for a 2 years. My first road bike I owned. Most every time I would descend over 30mph I’d get a speed wobble. I rarely pedaled on descents because I would wobble and always rode the brake. I thought it was just me. None of my riding buddies had the same problem.
Then I bought a felt DA. In one ride I was more confident on that bike then I was in two years on my road bike. I easily descend on my felt and never feel uneasy. The first time I descended this certain hill on a local ride without braking and continuously to pedaling, I was amazed. Crazy I know, but being a new cyclist I associated descending with speed wobbles and fear. I used to fear descents, now I look forward to them.
So I want to get a new road frame that will make me as comfortable as my Felt DA.
I had the exact same problem with a bike that was and is ‘The best’ you can get here on ST. No question that it was an issue with THAT frame…not all of em. If you have an issue then worry about it. That bike (The Specialized) is proven…now, when I was a pup racing and was on the old carbon Allez Epic Pro from the Giant factory…well, those were the starting days of carbon.
If that is the bike you like - buy it.
If the SL2 fits you and that is what you fancy, that is a proven frame. One of the local teams here with many Cat 1 studs ride em’ (shop sponsor) and it doesn’t slow them down since I’m constantly chasing em’!
As was mentioned, there is much more to high speed wobbles. Headset/fork adjustment probably the biggest. Wheels/bearing next.
Keep the rubber side down.
The “pros ride them” thing is a total copout. Pros have to ride whatever s**tbox the team gives them.
Guys have won big races on bikes that are total crap. FWIW the SLC, SLC-SL and S3 frames are some of the worst riding bikes out there. You can still go fast and win races on them.
Back to the SL2- as Carl said They descend just fine. Not a magic bike, just a solid and predictable one. Climbs well, corners well, descends fast wide open and switchbacky stuff equally well.
The “pros ride them” thing is a total copout. Pros have to ride whatever s**tbox the team gives them.
Guys have won big races on bikes that are total crap. FWIW the SLC, SLC-SL and S3 frames are some of the worst riding bikes out there. You can still go fast and win races on them.
Back to the SL2- as Carl said They descend just fine. Not a magic bike, just a solid and predictable one. Climbs well, corners well, descends fast wide open and switchbacky stuff equally well.
With TT bikes, I agree with you, but that generally refers to geometry and aerodynamics. Road bike geometry has been pretty well established. The problem comes when companies try to make TT bikes with road bike geometry (and questionable aerodynamics). Now, pro cyclists will do a lot of things, but one thing they would not do is ride a bike that can’t descend for shit. We’re not talking about the “best” bikes, the question was, “do the bikes descend well,” and I think that if you take ANY bike out of the pro peloton, it will handle reasonably well in tactical situations.
As for the carbon Soloist bikes being “some of the worst riding bikes out there,” that’s just plain false. So you don’t like the ride, personally. Change the tires, tire pressure, and saddle and suddenly you’ve got a different bike. But beyond that, I know far too many folks that would say just the opposite of what you’d say. Opinion is not fact. If you had a road bike with 70mm of trail, THAT would be a shit handling bike…
What are “trail” and “front center”, and what should I look for in them?
Thanks
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=09Tarmac → Geometry
I think the 61 might be a bitch twitchy and the 49 might be a bit sluggish (but very nice for descending). Other than that, they are pretty much bread-and-butter road geometries.
I’m looking at buying the above frame. I primarily want a frame that is stable on the descents. To anyone who owns this bike how does it descend?
Thanks
Geometry – front-center and trail, as mentioned by BaconSTAR – is not the beginning and end of the story. Flexy toptubes also lead to high speed wobble and poor descending. For example, in the mid 90s I rode and raced a Raleigh 753 Competition. The geometry was very middle of the road Euro, but the undersized toptube and glued-together-at-the-lugs construction made for a flexy frame, that was scary on descents (and, highspeed cornering… this was maybe the worst crit bike ever, despite the fact Johnny Tomac won the national crit championship race on one).
I don’t think a flexy toptube will be a problem on the S-Works, as those bikes are known for being stiff. But a lot of stiff bikes, are in actuality stiff in the BB only.
I’m looking at buying the above frame. I primarily want a frame that is stable on the descents. To anyone who owns this bike how does it descend?
Thanks
Geometry – front-center and trail, as mentioned by BaconSTAR – is not the beginning and end of the story. Flexy toptubes also lead to high speed wobble and poor descending. For example, in the mid 90s I rode and raced a Raleigh 753 Competition. The geometry was very middle of the road Euro, but the undersized toptube and glued-together-at-the-lugs construction made for a flexy frame, that was scary on descents (and, highspeed cornering… this was maybe the worst crit bike ever, despite the fact Johnny Tomac won the national crit championship race on one).
I don’t think a flexy toptube will be a problem on the S-Works, as those bikes are known for being stiff. But a lot of stiff bikes, are in actuality stiff in the BB only.
The probability that he rode the same frame that you could buy was probably pretty low. That used to be the norm. It still happens, but not as much as it used to. Now “Team Issue” bikes are often just different geometries (usually lower headtubes), and they are also available to the public.
I’m looking at buying the above frame. I primarily want a frame that is stable on the descents. To anyone who owns this bike how does it descend?
Thanks
Geometry – front-center and trail, as mentioned by BaconSTAR – is not the beginning and end of the story. Flexy toptubes also lead to high speed wobble and poor descending. For example, in the mid 90s I rode and raced a Raleigh 753 Competition. The geometry was very middle of the road Euro, but the undersized toptube and glued-together-at-the-lugs construction made for a flexy frame, that was scary on descents (and, highspeed cornering… this was maybe the worst crit bike ever, despite the fact Johnny Tomac won the national crit championship race on one).
I don’t think a flexy toptube will be a problem on the S-Works, as those bikes are known for being stiff. But a lot of stiff bikes, are in actuality stiff in the BB only.
The probability that he rode the same frame that you could buy was probably pretty low. That used to be the norm. It still happens, but not as much as it used to. Now “Team Issue” bikes are often just different geometries (usually lower headtubes), and they are also available to the public.
Maybe, I don’t know. I saw the bike (or at least what was supposedly the bike) and it looked like a glued together Raleigh, weirdo lugs and all. I’m sure JohnnyT could rail on whatever bike he found betwixt his thighs … kind of like Sean Kelly killing the Classics on a Vitus, wettest noodle of wet noodles.
And, to the OP, fork also matter. After the Raleigh, I raced a TIG-welded Serotta. The Serotta came with a cheap-ass junk Kinesis aluminum fork. With the Kinesis fork, the bike descended and cornered poorly (though not as bad as the Raleigh). I replaced the Kinesis fork with a straight-blade steel IF fork with a touch more rake. This made all of the difference, and transformed the Serotta into a very capable cornerer and descender.
So you mean this may not have been made in the Ohio Huffy plant?
So you mean this may not have been made in the Ohio Huffy plant?
Whatever it is, that’s bad-ass.
It is most probably a Yamagucci.
While your at it, try out a Roubaix SL2, more stable in the front than standard road geometry but still very fast.
Soloist carbon bikes are known for having front ends that are not torsionally stiff- sniff araund on bike forums and you will find that is a common cervelo knock. Other things that make the bikes whack are 1.) Short front centers on bike 54 and below 2.) higher than ave bb height 3.) super short chainstays. 4.) 73/73 angles on all sizes of bikes.
None of these things will stop a fast and fit rider from winning on the bike.