RIP: Venge
Rumored to be discontinued: SystemSix in favor of the more aero all-rounder SuperSix.
Seemingly discontinued: Timemachine in favor of more aero all-rounder Teammachine.
Switched from all-out aero to more “holistic” design: Propel, Gen 8 Madone (released very recently).
Still with us among the bigger manufacturers are the S5, Aeroad, Foil.
It seems like a lot of the big major brands have gone or are going to the one bike solution. While the “smaller” brands will and are sticking to the pure aero and pure climbing bike. I was listening to a podcast and they were talking about this exact thing. Seems like a lot of the driving factors for this are the growth of gravel and dwindling sales.
Aerodynamics within the UCI road rules have largely been solved. There’s not much optimization left to be done, and that optimization needs to cover a collection of similar but different riding/body types. So what’s left for companies to do? Update their current aero bike to one that tests 3w faster at specific yaw angles? That’s not gonna be a big seller. May as well launch a new model with comparable aerodynamics and lower weight with some soft statements like “increased comfort”.
This is probably also driven by shifting cycling demographics. Road racing isn’t as popular as it once was, and recreational riding is more popular than ever.
RIP: Venge
Rumored to be discontinued: SystemSix in favor of the more aero all-rounder SuperSix.
Seemingly discontinued: Timemachine in favor of more aero all-rounder Teammachine.
Switched from all-out aero to more “holistic” design: Propel, Gen 8 Madone (released very recently).
Still with us among the bigger manufacturers are the S5, Aeroad, Foil.
i don’t think it’s a market thing. canyon was very successful selling the aeroad. their pro teams still ride it. but you do see cannondale, trek, specialized, colnago and others edging away from pure aero and i will just ask you this: do you have a pure aero road bike? is this what you prefer?
because, i’m going to wager the answer is that you preference is for an all-rounder. the tarmac SL8 is just a better bike than the venge. riders will like that riding and ownership experience more. i have a friend of mine, very seasoned rider, very good rider, intuitive rider, tech-minded, and when he comes to visit he always asks to borrow one of my road bikes when we ride. (rather than his fully integrated aero bike.)
pro riders who have aero bikes with integrated handlebars and buried hydraulics are happy with those bikes, because they don’t have the bike shop experience. one way or the other they’ll get their bikes set up exactly as they want. not so when the customer buys one of these from a shop or - worse - mail order. they don’t fit, the ride experience is bad, and they’re practically unfixable if you don’t have a full time mechanic working for you who has access to all the inventories of that bike brand + special and custom make-ups when what they make just won’t work for you.
In defense of aero bikes:
How much of this do you think is guys seeing the flagship model in the TdF and assuming that must be the best bike for them? If I had a dollar for every $10k full aero race bike with a full setup of spacers…basically riding endurance geometry.
I can’t help but think part of the issue is that no one wants to buy a bike for “slower riders”, everyone is a champ in their own mind. You’re completely correct that the user experience for a full-aero bike is a PITA for anything outside of racing. Maybe the disconnect is in the purchase process. You’d be happier with an all-arounder/endurance/relaxed bike, but it’s really hard to justify getting a “slower” bike.
Have to imagine next year’s Classics riders on the S5, Aeroad, and Foil (and VAM?) are smiling right now.
In a Performance Process podcast this year before Paris Roubaix, the pro tour teams were saying the riders want more aero. In the latest Performance Process podcast with Lachlan Morton, Lachlan was saying he fully expects us to see steeper sta’s and longer reach, sharing sentiments from the Performance Process podcast where I sat in with Ronan. I facetiously propose that riders disadvantaged by all-around bikes like the sl8 and new Madone will cause a return to creative solutions at Paris Roubaix, but rather than creativity applied to increasing compliance and comfort on the cobbles, we see guys taking their team’s TT bikes with room for 32mm tires and sta’s of ~76deg and long frame reach, tossing on drop bars with upward angled stems to close the gap from hands to face (examples below) and taking matters into their own hands to seek competitive advantages …
Two major brands, Specialized and Orbea still have dedicated climbing bikes in the Aethos and Orca.
What goes around comes around. Back on 2005-2010 era I rode for Fuji and a popular change was to ride their Aloha TT frame as a drop bar road bike. But in those days the trade was round aluminum tubes for airfoil aluminum tubes.
Geometry, steering angle, twitchyness, all of that is cool, but a faster bike is just faster in a race setting. I’d much rather ride a road race bike that’s overly twitchy but 10w faster than the opposite (in a race). You can get virtually any bike to fit your stack/reach coordinates. The world tour guys are at the long/low end and the consumer is at the high/short end. I don’t envy the bike brand trying to toe that line.
In defense of aero bikes:
How much of this do you think is guys seeing the flagship model in the TdF and assuming that must be the best bike for them? If I had a dollar for every $10k full aero race bike with a full setup of spacers…basically riding endurance geometry.
I can’t help but think part of the issue is that no one wants to buy a bike for “slower riders”, everyone is a champ in their own mind. You’re completely correct that the user experience for a full-aero bike is a PITA for anything outside of racing. Maybe the disconnect is in the purchase process. You’d be happier with an all-arounder/endurance/relaxed bike, but it’s really hard to justify getting a “slower” bike.
i don’t know about you, but in my own riding - and i think if we all still ride road bikes a lot we tend to repeat a lot of the same routes - i don’t see any evidence that speed attaches to aero bikes. speed attaches to bikes that are set up correctly and that your body resonates with. that might in fact be an aero bike. but the chances of that bike being a bike that is unadjustable are slim.
look, i think most of us who’ve been around are generally predisposed against specialized as a brand because of a history of petty, imperious litigations; a spend and grab followed by slash and burn approach to triathlon sponsorships; and so on. but for that checkered history of questionable office behavior specialized is, right now, in my mind, killing it in bike design and in particular road bike design. the latest tarmac (SL8) appears to be an all-rounder hit and i don’t see any sprinters in the pro peloton complaining about it. to me, this is the future of road bikes.
Nowadays you have great, relatively light and comfortable aero road bikes with tire clearance for 30mm tires. Aeroad and S5 have been consistently smoking off competition in big tours and classics, even if the riders had a choice to ride Ultimate or R5.
Personally I never sat on a Madone, but SystemSix felt like a tank to me. So maybe only the less-then-optimal aero designs are being decommissioned?
a lot of the new all rounders are more aero than climbing bikes, almost as aero as aero bikes, but lighter than aero bikes. some really great bikes on the market these days.
In defense of aero bikes:
How much of this do you think is guys seeing the flagship model in the TdF and assuming that must be the best bike for them? If I had a dollar for every $10k full aero race bike with a full setup of spacers…basically riding endurance geometry.
I can’t help but think part of the issue is that no one wants to buy a bike for “slower riders”, everyone is a champ in their own mind. You’re completely correct that the user experience for a full-aero bike is a PITA for anything outside of racing. Maybe the disconnect is in the purchase process. You’d be happier with an all-arounder/endurance/relaxed bike, but it’s really hard to justify getting a “slower” bike.
i don’t know about you, but in my own riding - and i think if we all still ride road bikes a lot we tend to repeat a lot of the same routes - i don’t see any evidence that speed attaches to aero bikes. speed attaches to bikes that are set up correctly and that your body resonates with. that might in fact be an aero bike. but the chances of that bike being a bike that is unadjustable are slim.
look, i think most of us who’ve been around are generally predisposed against specialized as a brand because of a history of petty, imperious litigations; a spend and grab followed by slash and burn approach to triathlon sponsorships; and so on. but for that checkered history of questionable office behavior specialized is, right now, in my mind, killing it in bike design and in particular road bike design. the latest tarmac (SL8) appears to be an all-rounder hit and i don’t see any sprinters in the pro peloton complaining about it. to me, this is the future of road bikes.
Agreed about setup and fit - a non-aero bike with a good position will be faster than an aero bike with a poor fit. But if the same fit is achieved then the aero bike should be faster. One of the biggest reasons race bikes are faster is that they facilitate a long/low position. The current generation of endurance bikes are difficult to setup in such a position.
I’m generally skeptical of what pros say about bikes. Ironic that they have the least choice of equipment when their equipment is the most important. If a bike brand is providing bikes for my team I probably won’t open my mouth to say that they’re anything other than great.
In defense of aero bikes:
How much of this do you think is guys seeing the flagship model in the TdF and assuming that must be the best bike for them? If I had a dollar for every $10k full aero race bike with a full setup of spacers…basically riding endurance geometry.
I can’t help but think part of the issue is that no one wants to buy a bike for “slower riders”, everyone is a champ in their own mind. You’re completely correct that the user experience for a full-aero bike is a PITA for anything outside of racing. Maybe the disconnect is in the purchase process. You’d be happier with an all-arounder/endurance/relaxed bike, but it’s really hard to justify getting a “slower” bike.
i don’t know about you, but in my own riding - and i think if we all still ride road bikes a lot we tend to repeat a lot of the same routes - i don’t see any evidence that speed attaches to aero bikes. speed attaches to bikes that are set up correctly and that your body resonates with. that might in fact be an aero bike. but the chances of that bike being a bike that is unadjustable are slim.
look, i think most of us who’ve been around are generally predisposed against specialized as a brand because of a history of petty, imperious litigations; a spend and grab followed by slash and burn approach to triathlon sponsorships; and so on. but for that checkered history of questionable office behavior specialized is, right now, in my mind, killing it in bike design and in particular road bike design. the latest tarmac (SL8) appears to be an all-rounder hit and i don’t see any sprinters in the pro peloton complaining about it. to me, this is the future of road bikes.
Agreed about setup and fit - a non-aero bike with a good position will be faster than an aero bike with a poor fit. But if the same fit is achieved then the aero bike should be faster. One of the biggest reasons race bikes are faster is that they facilitate a long/low position. The current generation of endurance bikes are difficult to setup in such a position.
I’m generally skeptical of what pros say about bikes. Ironic that they have the least choice of equipment when their equipment is the most important. If a bike brand is providing bikes for my team I probably won’t open my mouth to say that they’re anything other than great.
our industry has in some ways found the right way of interpreting what’s aero, and in some ways has gone off the deep end and has gotten it all wrong.
in my opinion, and over my time in this industry, here is what i think is the role of aero: you figure out what your imperatives are, and then you “aero” them. for example, you figure out your bike position, and your position is the best mix of comfort/aero/power. so, you have that position. then you “aero” it. you tilt the forearms, roll the shoulders, tuck the chin, and you build a set of aerobar extensions that comes as close to fairing that position as you legally get away with. without compromising the comfort and power of your position.
second example: you choose the tires you want to ride. then you build a wheel that accommodates those tires, and forks and stays that accommodate that wheel system.
in those examples above you have made system choices that include power production and Crr, and then you make that all aero. the industry has gotten or is getting that right.
where the industry goes off the rails is with “aero” road stem/bar systems, and aero frame tubes in road bikes. you made a frame that’s uncomfortable and unadjustable. you violated your “first, do no harm” operating principle, if you operated by that principle, which bike makers often don’t. this is why specialized ditched the venge and stuck with the tarmac. it was off doing stupid stuff and then got back on the right track.
do you have a pure aero road bike? is this what you prefer?
I did for a long time. 1st generation Felt AR to 2nd generation Cervelo S5. Both of which I loved.
After that it was Vroomen’s 3T Strada. Which my opinion is the Strada, while certainly “aero,” was 3T leading the way to a more balanced bike. I still have the Strada for one location. Though it’s not my favorite bike for little design reasons, not the overall concept. (Worst seatpost wedge and saddle clamp systems I’ve ever had).
My other location is the 2022 Cannondale SuperSix. Which was a revelation to me. Aero touches (D-shaped seatpost, etc), but the least “aero” bike I’ve had in a while. But I love it in every other way. It opened my eyes in how comfortable a road bike can be (though the fact it can take 32mm tires is a huge part of that), and the way it handles above 45MPH on descents is unlike any bike I’ve had. I have a confidence with it I didn’t have with the AR or S5. And though I only do recreational masters racing, I do just fine with it. It’s the best overall bike I’ve ever had.
I’m not in any way anti aero road bike. And I may get a “pure” one again. But it’s no longer a requirement.
Has it though? The $13.5K Madone only gets down to 7kg in size small. It’s laughable that manufactures have pushed to lower the 6.8kg barrier when they can’t even hit that at $13.5k. Let alone get within 1.5kg on a $2000 aluminum rim brake bike (which IMO should be mandatory before the UCI even considers dropping the weight limit).
105 builds at $3.5k, frame only at $3k. Seems like there is a big, gaping hole below that. The Cervelo Soloist of 20 years ago was able to do it…
In defense of aero bikes:
How much of this do you think is guys seeing the flagship model in the TdF and assuming that must be the best bike for them? If I had a dollar for every $10k full aero race bike with a full setup of spacers…basically riding endurance geometry.
I can’t help but think part of the issue is that no one wants to buy a bike for “slower riders”, everyone is a champ in their own mind. You’re completely correct that the user experience for a full-aero bike is a PITA for anything outside of racing. Maybe the disconnect is in the purchase process. You’d be happier with an all-arounder/endurance/relaxed bike, but it’s really hard to justify getting a “slower” bike.
i don’t know about you, but in my own riding - and i think if we all still ride road bikes a lot we tend to repeat a lot of the same routes - i don’t see any evidence that speed attaches to aero bikes. speed attaches to bikes that are set up correctly and that your body resonates with. that might in fact be an aero bike. but the chances of that bike being a bike that is unadjustable are slim.
look, i think most of us who’ve been around are generally predisposed against specialized as a brand because of a history of petty, imperious litigations; a spend and grab followed by slash and burn approach to triathlon sponsorships; and so on. but for that checkered history of questionable office behavior specialized is, right now, in my mind, killing it in bike design and in particular road bike design. the latest tarmac (SL8) appears to be an all-rounder hit and i don’t see any sprinters in the pro peloton complaining about it. to me, this is the future of road bikes.
Do you see the needle moving more and more towards ‘endurance’ bikes for non-super hard core roadies? I’m in the market for a road bike, and recently threw a leg over a tarmac in my size. Just was not comfy for me, guess I am too far removed from road racing now (and getting older…)… I’m likely getting an Enve Fray.
I am the first one to bemoan the lack of price conscious bikes.
But the market has voted with their dollars. And it’s not at the “budget” level of the marketplace.
I bought my first tri bike for under $1,899 in 2010 (a Felt B16 with 105). That bike runs you $2,499 today. To get a “modern” bike with disc brakes from Felt with 105 is $3,699.
And guess which one sells better? Hint: it’s not the less expensive one.
do you have a pure aero road bike? is this what you prefer?
I did for a long time. 1st generation Felt AR to 2nd generation Cervelo S5. Both of which I loved.
After that it was Vroomen’s 3T Strada. Which my opinion is the Strada, while certainly “aero,” was 3T leading the way to a more balanced bike. I still have the Strada for one location. Though it’s not my favorite bike for little design reasons, not the overall concept. (Worst seatpost wedge and saddle clamp systems I’ve ever had).
My other location is the 2022 Cannondale SuperSix. Which was a revelation to me. Aero touches (D-shaped seatpost, etc), but the least “aero” bike I’ve had in a while. But I love it in every other way. It opened my eyes in how comfortable a road bike can be (though the fact it can take 32mm tires is a huge part of that), and the way it handles above 45MPH on descents is unlike any bike I’ve had. I have a confidence with it I didn’t have with the AR or S5. And though I only do recreational masters racing, I do just fine with it. It’s the best overall bike I’ve ever had.
I’m not in any way anti aero road bike. And I may get a “pure” one again. But it’s no longer a requirement.
compare that supersix will serve you well, and for a long time.
In defense of aero bikes:
How much of this do you think is guys seeing the flagship model in the TdF and assuming that must be the best bike for them? If I had a dollar for every $10k full aero race bike with a full setup of spacers…basically riding endurance geometry.
I can’t help but think part of the issue is that no one wants to buy a bike for “slower riders”, everyone is a champ in their own mind. You’re completely correct that the user experience for a full-aero bike is a PITA for anything outside of racing. Maybe the disconnect is in the purchase process. You’d be happier with an all-arounder/endurance/relaxed bike, but it’s really hard to justify getting a “slower” bike.
i don’t know about you, but in my own riding - and i think if we all still ride road bikes a lot we tend to repeat a lot of the same routes - i don’t see any evidence that speed attaches to aero bikes. speed attaches to bikes that are set up correctly and that your body resonates with. that might in fact be an aero bike. but the chances of that bike being a bike that is unadjustable are slim.
look, i think most of us who’ve been around are generally predisposed against specialized as a brand because of a history of petty, imperious litigations; a spend and grab followed by slash and burn approach to triathlon sponsorships; and so on. but for that checkered history of questionable office behavior specialized is, right now, in my mind, killing it in bike design and in particular road bike design. the latest tarmac (SL8) appears to be an all-rounder hit and i don’t see any sprinters in the pro peloton complaining about it. to me, this is the future of road bikes.
Do you see the needle moving more and more towards ‘endurance’ bikes for non-super hard core roadies? I’m in the market for a road bike, and recently threw a leg over a tarmac in my size. Just was not comfy for me, guess I am too far removed from road racing now (and getting older…)… I’m likely getting an Enve Fray.
there are 2 things here. there’s “endurance geometry”, which i wholly reject as a thing, and there’s endurance frame features. i have no problem with the geometry, i just have a problem attaching that geometry to use case. it should be attached to morphology. show me a race bike made for a leggy guy, and i’ll show you a bike with so-called endurance geometry, made with race features. otherwise, that leggy guy is buying 80 percent bike and then 20 percent of his money is going for headset spacers and angled-up stems. give him or her a bike all the way up.
endurance features, okay, but i still think these are iffy. i get all my endurance features out of my tire choice. my everyday rides on my road bikes are ridden on 32c tires that actually measure 34mm on the rims they’re on. they’re plenty fast for everything but my fastest efforts. i don’t need nor to i want my frame to be spongy anywhere and i certainly don’t want that in the front of the bike. so, honestly, yes to the geometry, no to the features. just give me a standard road geometry, making that geometry as aero as is possible without giving up ride quality (e.g., tarmac SL8), and i’m happy. this is where i think the industry ought to go. i don’t know where it will go.
I think you’re all burying the lede. Trek reduced their sku count on high end road bikes by around 60%, and turned it into a story about their great new bike.