I used to run Ultegra and it was very good, but now I have 105 on 2 bikes and Tiagra shifters on another and I think they are just as good as Ultegra, may be heavier though.
What is the real speed difference between high to low end road bikes?
- Thread starter bonzobanana
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I used to run Ultegra and it was very good, but now I have 105 on 2 bikes and Tiagra shifters on another and I think they are just as good as Ultegra, may be heavier though.
You make a material point. Manufacturers will design the bottom bracket and bottom tube typically of carbon material to be more stiff so the power transmission is maximised for each stroke. And without increasing weight. More expensive the bike, more likely it be faster for the additional treatment.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
I took my one and only KoM on a £1000 Tiagra equipped, alloy framed bike, that actually cost me 600 sheets.
Everyone up to number 12 behind me is a competitive cyclist, or a coach/trainer, and all set theirs on their high spec plastic bikes, all doubtless costing much more, allmof which put my Felt to shame on paper and cost. Nuff said.
I think the goalposts will be in a different position for every rider. Im a heavy lump, with the aerodynamics of a Volvo estate in reverse, and all the etap and Ti in the world won't change that, so once im on a bike that reaches a certain level of competence then my attributes likely counter the benefits that more expensive bikes bring. Thats my theory, and the fact that im no quicker on my more expensive (at retail prices), higher specced carbon Boredom reinforces my thoughts in that vein.
Conversely, a small, lighter rider may benefit more.
And then there's the trickle-down aspect. The Tiagra on my Felt is visually, and in operation, almost identical to the earlier generation 105 on my Pinnacle, which is 4 years older. That 105 is certainly no better, flasher, lighter or faster when removed in time by only a couple of years - in fact, for all intents and purposes it is the same.
Therefore, its not even possible to say firmly that one spec level is the "sweet spot", as the next spec down is liable to be every bit as good as the comparator once the next update rolls around.
Everyone up to number 12 behind me is a competitive cyclist, or a coach/trainer, and all set theirs on their high spec plastic bikes, all doubtless costing much more, allmof which put my Felt to shame on paper and cost. Nuff said.
I think the goalposts will be in a different position for every rider. Im a heavy lump, with the aerodynamics of a Volvo estate in reverse, and all the etap and Ti in the world won't change that, so once im on a bike that reaches a certain level of competence then my attributes likely counter the benefits that more expensive bikes bring. Thats my theory, and the fact that im no quicker on my more expensive (at retail prices), higher specced carbon Boredom reinforces my thoughts in that vein.
Conversely, a small, lighter rider may benefit more.
And then there's the trickle-down aspect. The Tiagra on my Felt is visually, and in operation, almost identical to the earlier generation 105 on my Pinnacle, which is 4 years older. That 105 is certainly no better, flasher, lighter or faster when removed in time by only a couple of years - in fact, for all intents and purposes it is the same.
Therefore, its not even possible to say firmly that one spec level is the "sweet spot", as the next spec down is liable to be every bit as good as the comparator once the next update rolls around.
Last edited:
- Location
- The TerrorVortex
It really does depend on the engine, more than the frame, groupset, wheels or anything.
I've done exactly the same ride on a carbon roadbike with handbuilt wheels, and a Brompton (of all things). When I did the roadbike ride, I was on the form of my life, and a good 15kg lighter than when I did it on the Brompton. And a good deal less hung over.
Carbon bike -120 minutes. Brompton - 150 minutes.
The ride was to this cafe up Mont Ventoux.
I've done exactly the same ride on a carbon roadbike with handbuilt wheels, and a Brompton (of all things). When I did the roadbike ride, I was on the form of my life, and a good 15kg lighter than when I did it on the Brompton. And a good deal less hung over.
Carbon bike -120 minutes. Brompton - 150 minutes.
The ride was to this cafe up Mont Ventoux.
Ridgeway
Veteran
- Location
- Lausanne, Switzerland
Uphill, downhill, flat ???
- Location
- The TerrorVortex
Uphill. Very, very uphill. But downhill on the way back to Sault.
I can attest that Bromptons are a bit scary at 48 mph.
I can attest that Bromptons are a bit scary at 48 mph.
Cycleops
Legendary Member
- Location
- Accra, Ghana
Agreed, but you have to be able to take advantage of it
Ridgeway
Veteran
- Location
- Lausanne, Switzerland
, back down to Maulacene on 16" wheels must be fun.....
- Location
- The TerrorVortex
It was Sault. The easiest way up Ventoux, other than getting a bus.
The difference in speed between road bikes (in good mechanical condition!) is almost entirely down to rider position (from both an aerodynamic and biomechanical perspective) and tyres.
The rest is all a percent of a percent type stuff, and a well set up cheap bike can still be very quick.
The rest is all a percent of a percent type stuff, and a well set up cheap bike can still be very quick.
Ian H
Ancient randonneur
Michael Hutchinson has written about the discomfiture of a roadman who was soundly outridden by Dr Hutch on his Brompton.
HLaB
Marie Attoinette Fan
I've never took my Triban 500 on the same route as more expensive road bike. On the flat bus way the Triban although didn't feel slow resulted in a speed I'd guess 1-2mph lower than my better road bike would have. Perhaps if hills added it would be a bigger difference but bang for buck, the Triban could be ahead. Although I'd choose the better road bike every time for a leisure ride.
Ming the Merciless
There is no mercy
- Location
- Inside my skull
Alex321
Veteran
- Location
- South Wales
It isn't quite what was asked, not being a comparison between two road bikes.
But a few weeks ago I went from riding a Boardman MX sport hybrid (48/36/26 chainset, 11-32 cassette) SRAM X5 groupset (equivalent of Tiagra at the time, Sora now) which weighed 13.9Kg, to a Cube Attain GTC race, a road bike with 50/34 11-32 Shimano 105 groupset, weight 9.4Kg.
And I reckon my speed has increased by around 10% overall - the weight difference (rider plus bike) is about 4-5%. Part of that is bound to be down to the difference in position, part of it will be 28m tyres instead of 38mm, and I'm sure some of it is down to the increased stiffness in the BB area.
But a few weeks ago I went from riding a Boardman MX sport hybrid (48/36/26 chainset, 11-32 cassette) SRAM X5 groupset (equivalent of Tiagra at the time, Sora now) which weighed 13.9Kg, to a Cube Attain GTC race, a road bike with 50/34 11-32 Shimano 105 groupset, weight 9.4Kg.
And I reckon my speed has increased by around 10% overall - the weight difference (rider plus bike) is about 4-5%. Part of that is bound to be down to the difference in position, part of it will be 28m tyres instead of 38mm, and I'm sure some of it is down to the increased stiffness in the BB area.
