Which road bike?

[Alex321]

My annec-data suggests the stop/start thing isn't all that is at play. I've done plenty of longer rides using the various bikes and still don't seem to get the difference between bikes that is being discussed.

I'm not going to say there is NO difference, but the unscientific comparisons we are all making just do not seem to be backed up by reality when comparing the different bikes being used efficiently (i.e sensible gearing, tyres and position on the bike).

The bikes are not the chalk and cheese difference that many people claim, once you rule out the external influences that change ride to ride and the silly comparisons like fat bike v carbon race exotica.

I agree they aren't all that massive a difference.

The difference in times I find between my road bike and hybrid are I think a combination of weight when doing a reasonable amount of hills (adding together the weight of me and the bike gives about 4% difference in overall weight), and aerodynamics caused by a much more upright riding position.

But it is still only about 7-8% difference at most. And while neither of those bikes are extreme, they are pretty different.

 

[T4tomo]

weight being a disadvantage also depends where it is, inparticularl weight stacked around a wheel rim will make more difference than an extra pork pie in your packed lunch box.

 

[drkash]

Thanks all for the advice and discussions. It seems there are many factors in play that could make a difference to speed / times.

I've shortlisted my options now, and 1st choice is the red Cannondale based on the unanimous advice on this thread. I'm hoping to get it on Friday but in case it sells before then I will make a move on my 2nd choice asap. Do you agree this is probably the best order to go down? I am not looking for a racing bike, but something comfortable as a first road bike. I generally prefer more of an upright position based on my hybrid but do hope I will get used the more aerodynamic position soon.

Thanks!

1st: Cannondale synapse carbon 105

• 2018
• £400-£450
• Speed: 22
• Cassette: Shimano 105 5800, 11-speed, 11-32
• Crankset: FSA 50/34
• Shimano's 105 groupset
• Carbon fork

2nd: Boardman Team Carbon

• 2015
• £250
• Speed: 20
• Cassette: Shimano Tiagra, 10-speed, 12-28
• Crankset: FSA Gossamer 50/34
• Shimano's 105 rear derailleur
• Rear derailleur Shimano Tiagra - 2 Speed
• Carbon fork
• 
  
  
  

3rd: Cannondale Synapse

• 2016
• £300
• Speed: 18
• Cassette: Shimano HG-50, 9-speed, 11-32
• Crankset: FSA Vero 50/34
• Shimano's Sora 3500 groupset
• Carbon fork

 

[Jon in Sweden]

Of those three, definitely the Cannondale Synapse 105. No question.

 

[Venod]

Do you agree this is probably the best order to go down

No, based on your preference for a more relaxed ride, I would put the other Synapse 2nd, look at the difference in seat to handlebar drop in the pics, and the Boardman has no scope for fitting spaces under the stem.

 

[Jameshow]

No, based on your preference for a more relaxed ride, I would put the other Synapse 2nd, look at the difference in seat to handlebar drop in the pics, and the Boardman has no scope for fitting spaces under the stem.

The boardman isn't a particularly racy geometry tbh.

 

[drkash]

Also just thinking about the frame size of the Canondale - I have been looking at 56cm but not sure if 58cm would be better?
I'm 184cm (6ft). Inseam is 87cm.

Current Canondale website suggests 56cm for 175-185cm and 58cm for 182-193cm.
Also not sure if they changed the Synapse geometry for previous models as mine will be several years old.

Any advice before I go and look at the red Cannondale bike?

 

[T4tomo]

Also just thinking about the frame size of the Canondale - I have been looking at 56cm but not sure if 58cm would be better?
I'm 184cm (6ft). Inseam is 87cm.

Current Canondale website suggests 56cm for 175-185cm and 58cm for 182-193cm.
Also not sure if they changed the Synapse geometry for previous models as mine will be several years old.

Any advice before I go and look at the red Cannondale bike?

you're betwixt sizes and usual advice is go down as you can always add a longer stem etc but its harder to shorted your top tube if teh reach is too long.

I'm 5'11' and find a 56 fine, you're an inch taller but you have 2" longer IL, so actually an inch short body, so i reckon 56 will actually be your size as you are leg long if anything from average.

also bikes pictured all have plenty of spacers under the stem, i.e they haven't been cut and slammed low, so i dont think going smaller will give you an over aggressive saddle to bar fall.

there is only one way to find out......

 

[vickster]

I seem to recall that Cannondale come up a bit larger than some brands

 

[drkash]

you're betwixt sizes and usual advice is go down as you can always add a longer stem etc but its harder to shorted your top tube if teh reach is too long.

I'm 5'11' and find a 56 fine, you're an inch taller but you have 2" longer IL, so actually an inch short body, so i reckon 56 will actually be your size as you are leg long if anything from average.

also bikes pictured all have plenty of spacers under the stem, i.e they haven't been cut and slammed low, so i dont think going smaller will give you an over aggressive saddle to bar fall.

there is only one way to find out......

Thanks for the detailed advice!!

 

[drkash]

I've compared my current Whyte Shoreditch hybrid large frame, which I find is a good size, to the Cannondale 56 and 58cm. The measurements are different but which do you think would be a closer match? Can any amendments be made to the 56cm to make it closer to the Whyte?


Thanks again!

 

[Venod]

The Whyte has flat bars, so the shorter reach and top tube length will be somewhat eliminated by a longer stem and drop bars on the Cannondales.

 

[T4tomo]

The Whyte has flat bars, so the shorter reach and top tube length will be somewhat eliminated by a longer stem and drop bars on the Cannondales.

absolutely this, you can compare two road bikes, but not a road bike to a hybrid. for one reach is measured to the steerer top cap so doesn't take into account stem and bars, and also your body position is very different on a hybrid so comparing geometry to road bike is futile.

one thing the above tells you is that there is only 7mm between the reach on the 56 and 58 synapse and stems cm in 10mm incremental lengths and on 14mm difference in stack, which is easily vaired by moving spacers above and below the stem attachment anyway, plus all the 56cm pictured have lots more than average spacers under stem, so chances are you'll get comfy on either.

Meant in the nicest possible way: Stop fannying around and go and have a test sit / ride on the red synapse.

 

[drkash]

absolutely this, you can compare two road bikes, but not a road bike to a hybrid. for one reach is measured to the steerer top cap so doesn't take into account stem and bars, and also your body position is very different on a hybrid so comparing geometry to road bike is futile.

one thing the above tells you is that there is only 7mm between the reach on the 56 and 58 synapse and stems cm in 10mm incremental lengths and on 14mm difference in stack, which is easily vaired by moving spacers above and below the stem attachment anyway, plus all the 56cm pictured have lots more than average spacers under stem, so chances are you'll get comfy on either.

Meant in the nicest possible way: Stop fannying around and go and have a test sit / ride on the red synapse.

Haha. I am going to see it tonight. It's just that I once bought a bike that was too large and didn't really notice it until I rode it a few times. I just don't want to make the same mistake in buying this bike, having a short ride thinking its ok then realise later on a long ride that its too small.

 

[lazybloke]

My annec-data suggests the stop/start thing isn't all that is at play. I've done plenty of longer rides using the various bikes and still don't seem to get the difference between bikes that is being discussed.

I'm not going to say there is NO difference, but the unscientific comparisons we are all making just do not seem to be backed up by reality when comparing the different bikes being used efficiently (i.e sensible gearing, tyres and position on the bike).

The bikes are not the chalk and cheese difference that many people claim, once you rule out the external influences that change ride to ride and the silly comparisons like fat bike v carbon race exotica.

Bikes are very much chalk and cheese if you design a test of their differences, (eg high speed riding will expose a massive performance gulf between a tt bike and a boris bike).

On casual/social rides, not so much difference.

Whether that has any relevance to your everyday cycling is highly individual, as can be seen by reading different experiences on cyclechat.