Hey guys: Can anybody give me a hand in helping me decide which bike to take to the Powerman Duathlon on March 24 in Birmingham, Alabama? I’ve heard it’s a pretty hilly 2 loop course. I am competing in the elite national championship on saturday, so it’s a 40k bike loop. Here’s what I got:
Choice #1: 2011 Felt B16 triathlon bike with some upgrades and Zipp 303 tubulars
Choice #2: 2010 Pinarello Prince Road Bike with superlight carbon tubulars
I have lots of racing experience (road) on the Pinarello, and zero race experience on the TT bike. I consider myself a very strong climber on the road bike, but again, do not have very much real world experience on a tt/tri bike. I have however spent many hours on the Felt on the trainer this winter. I bought the felt for triathlons/duathlons this year, but am concerned about the hilly/technical course there at Oak Mountain. Any words of wisdom?
I found this course profile, and I wouldn’t imagine that these hills are enough to worry about.
The clear winner here is the TT/tri bike.
Having said that, if it were me, and I didn’t have much road time on the TT bike I’d be putting the 303s on the Prince and riding that. As I read somewhere (Friel, maybe): “Fear isn’t aero”.
The elevation profile on the website is just plain wrong. It’s much, much hillier than you are led to believe. Everyone I talked to after the race last year that was new to the course felt that way. I actually brought the wrong cassette based upon the profile and was spinning out on the descents. Make sure you bring plenty of gears and pre-ride the course. That being said, it’s a no-brainer to ride the tri bike. The course is very non-technical handling wise, good pavement. You’ll be out of the bars climbing some but you will be in the aero position and cranking a whole lot as well. I can’t imagine a scenario that would make you want to ride a road bike rather than a tri-bike on that course.
Also, if you ride with a PM, be prepared to think that you are sucking because it is a hard course to apply steady power on. I was disappointed while I was riding because I just couldn’t hit my target wattage and when I saw the results I realized that I had had a very good bike split without knowing it. Of course, I am not an elite, but I heard some very good riders make similar comments after the race.
Double the elevation gain and it’s still not a hilly course unless you live somewhere pretty flat. Of course, I live in the mountains and my “fairly flat” 2.5 mile commute to work has as much elevation gain as that course indicates… My preference for a course like that would be a 53/39 (if I had a 54 I’d ride it) and an 11-25.
The only reason I suggested the Prince (with the aero wheels) was the OPs lack of familiarity riding the tri bike. Switching to aerobars for a potentially hilly, probably busy, ride isn’t a great idea. It’s probably doable, but climbing and fast descending won’t be comfortable, so may actually slow him down. A rephrasing: the the OP is confident that he’ll be climbing well and descending like a bullet train in the aero position then ride the tri bike. Otherwise I’d put the 303s on the Prince and save practicing on tri bike for a less busy, non-competitive environment.
I Was there last year. The bike is not hilly. I rocked a standard and a 12-21 on my CD0.1 . I am not a strong cyclist and I averaged 20 mph with a good run. 3 weeks later I did NOLA 70.3 in 2:27 (22.8 avg) and ran to my potential. Bring the tri bike, disc, and aero helmet.
The run was brutal. It was like climbing a ladder. They changed it this year. I can’t imagine it being much better at Oak Mnt, but hey had it in the absolute hardest area.
Either one is fine. If you choose the road bike, I would still use aero bars. My bike of choice on that course was a 2000 Litespeed Blade with a Zipp 404 front and a Corima Disc. It was hilly, but not so hilly that you can not be in an aero position most of the time.
Watch the bridge crossing in and out of transition. Surely they will change it, but it has a few deep grooves perfect for a front to slip in. Lots of folks wadded it up there. Just to the right is a pedestrian bridge that is much safer.
One thing this thread shows is that “hilly” is in the eye of the beholder. I live in WV. Every ride I do is “hilly” (unfortunately because I would love to have a long stretch of flat for 20 minute power testing, etc.) I was very suprised at how hilly this course was and when I sent the power file to a friend of mine his first statement was: “that course is nothing like the elevation profile on the site.” It’s a course that is hard to get in the flow. Unless you are very strong you will have to get in the small ring on the climbs, and as soon as you feel like you are in the groove, you’ll be doing something else–switching gears, taking a turn, in or out of your tuck. I just think it’s a hard course to ride well on and the bike splits backed that up. Look at last years posts after the long course du nats and you will see that a number of people commented that they couldn’t hit their target wattage on the course.
Here is my Garmin file: shows 2200 feet of elevation gain–I don’t call that flat. http://connect.garmin.com/activity/75826484 By ST standards of course this ride sucked. But in the real world it was good enough and I backed it up with 2 solid runs.
While the adjective may be in the eye of the beholder, the physics aren’t. I was riding a compact with a 12/27 and spun out on every descent. So whether you believe 2200 feet of elevation gain is hilly or flat, please at least take a spare cassette that gives you more gearing than a 50 x 12 or you will be pissed at yourself that you showed up to an important race with the wrong gears. when you pre-ride it, you can decide.