"Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
Ned
Posts: 4
Joined: 27 Jul 2019, 4:28pm

"Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by Ned »

I am lining up to get a new road bike this year and would appreciate some real-world practical advice as to choices.

I am a reasonably fit 67 year old man, currently riding a 25 year old steel-framed race bike (Argos Racing Cycles) that weighs around 10.5 kgs, Campy groupset with 50/34 and 11-30 cassette. I do mostly 25-35 mile rides, alone, with partner and friends, or on short club runs. No real off road stuff (occasional cycle tracks/ ex-railway or canal paths). I am reasonably flexible for my age.

I am looking for a bike that will keep me smiling, get me up the hills (so compact chainrings and cassette with 32 or even 34), light, responsive but not too twitchy. I rented an older version Trek Domane in France last year (first time I had ridden carbon, and loved it), so something like that is a starting point. Manufacturers” “blurb” tends to steer me towards ‘Endurance” bikes like the Madone, but I was wondering whether something lighter and more towards the “race” spectrum might be better for me, considering that I have no ambitions to do more than 50 miles in general, and like to take on hills (and descend them!) with as much alacrity as age, courage, fitness and ability allow!

Would, for example, a Trek Emonda be more suitable than a Trek Domane (also looking at Cannondale, Giant, etc.) Any advice/suggestions ?
Last edited by Graham on 16 Jan 2020, 7:24am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: improved layout
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by Si »

Generally speaking, and there will certainly be exceptions, the enduro/adventure/gravel oriented bikes will have a slightly less extreme position, allow wider tyres for more comfort, and allow easier fitting of guards and racks, but will not be as aero or as light (for the same price). Question is, how much do these things matter to you? There are now a number of places that hire out these kind of bikes, so if there is one near you my suggestion would be to try both types of bike on day rides and see which you find the best.

And, of course, ask yourself if you've been using your current bike for that long without issue, do you really need to change? What is it about the bike that you don't like...and thus what is it that you are looking for in the new bike?

Personally I'd go for the enduro/adventure/gravel bike as although not quite as fast, they are more versatile.
Marcus Aurelius
Posts: 1903
Joined: 1 Feb 2018, 10:20am

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by Marcus Aurelius »

If it was me, I’d be looking at a Specialized Roubaix. Get one with the futureshock headset, they are very competent bikes, and comfy as well.
Brucey
Posts: 44522
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by Brucey »

one way you could go is to revise the current bike with the gearing you think you need before (if) you buy another bike. I don't think there will be a massive difference between so-called race and endurance bikes beyond the range of riding positions that you can have with each type, and whether or not you can fit mudguards (if that is important to you). A simple way of deciding what might work is how high you have your handlebars set; if they are always well below the saddle, a race bike will work. If they are well above, you probably need an endurance bike. In the middle, either could work for you.

FWIW it is easy to ride an unfamiliar bike and to like it, on unfamiliar roads, especially if they are good roads. A better test is to ride different bikes on the roads which you are familiar with, and to ride a given circuit under fairly controlled conditions, e.g. known level of effort, same weather conditions etc and just see which is faster or more comfortable. Big differences are easily seen but even small differences (e.g. in gearing) can skew the results a bit.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
dim
Posts: 348
Joined: 12 May 2019, 5:59pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by dim »

I'm turning 60 this year .... I've owned loads of bikes and my current bikes are a 1980's Miyata 1000 and a 2016 Trek Emonda SL6

My Trek has Dura Ace Di2, Stages Powermeter and Hed Belgium Plus rims with Chris King R45 hubs .... both bikes fit me like a glove and I have had the STT 3DMA bike fit to set them up:

https://primocycles.co.uk/2017/12/07/why-stt-3dma/

I am comfortable on both bikes for short or for long distance .... you need to have a proper bike fit and any bike will be both a race bike and an endurance bike

When I bought the Trek Emonda, I had shortlisted 2 bikes .... The Trek Emonda SL6 and the Specialized Tarmac .... I found a Trek in my size with all the extras so I bought it .... it's very light and a very good climbing bike

Previous to the Trek, I had a Giant TCR .... another very good bike

I see loads of people riding the Canyon Aeroad ...a fast bike ... take your time and do your research, but most importantly, buy one that fits you
User avatar
TrevA
Posts: 3551
Joined: 1 Jun 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by TrevA »

As others have said, race bikes have more extreme positions, and we get less flexible as we get older, so I would go towards the endurance end of the spectrum.

I’m 60. I made the mistake last year, of buying a carbon race bike on a whim (a Langdale Skyline - ex race team bike). I just couldn’t get on with the low handlebars and no way to raise them, without fitting an upward sloping stem, which would look ridiculous. Luckily, the bike fits my son in law who is slightly shorter than me and more flexible, so I swapped it for his Cannondale Caad 8, which fits me like a glove.
Sherwood CC and Notts CTC.
A cart horse trapped in the body of a man.
http://www.jogler2009.blogspot.com
mattsccm
Posts: 5101
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by mattsccm »

Consider what people are calling race or endurance. Eg the suggestion of a gravel type bike is many degrees from an endurance/ spotive bike. If you want something nippy don't buy one of them. Assuming you match spec for spec in a manfactures range the endurance version will usually have a sightly higher front end to give a marginally higher bar position. Sometimes the handling is a bit sharper on the race version but one companies race is anothers endurance.
Because of this all you can do is ride a few and see what feels best.
Remembering, of course, that we all have our own needs and preference, consider that even on this forum you have riders who regard sitting bolt upright as a good idea and others who are happy flat backed on their time trial bike. Because of this will be advisable to take opinions as comments at best. You have to ride what suits you.
The short answer, ride what feels right and make sure that when you compare race and endurance that you are comparing like for like. Price will be only one factor.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by mjr »

Marcus Aurelius wrote:If it was me, I’d be looking at a Specialized Roubaix.

I'd only look at it if I wanted to support lawyer harassment of small businesses and using topless women to sell bikes.

On the opening question, endurance unless you're going to race.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
peetee
Posts: 4292
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Upon a lumpy, scarred granite massif.

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by peetee »

Why change? It sounds like a good quality machine. Just make changes to the gear set by adding a triple crankset.
I am riding just that sort of bike on social rides and don't feel disadvantaged in the slightest. The difference in weight over carbon bikes is vastly exceeded by the increase in my own weight over the years.
The older I get the more I’m inclined to act my shoe size, not my age.
gxaustin
Posts: 890
Joined: 23 Sep 2015, 12:07pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by gxaustin »

If your Argos is comfy then you could see which sort of bike has similar geometry? I find that my older steel bikes are more akin to endurance than modern race geometry. Looking at old pictures the drop from saddle to bars is less than nowadays, albeit the drops tended to be deeper. Maybe you could experiment by lowering your bars (subject to stem availability)? There's also the matter of reach on an endurance as opposed to race fit bike. I'm old and fairly stiff so endurance it is for me but there again I ride audax distances.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by The utility cyclist »

I nearly pulled the trigger on an Alchemy Helios frame-set last year, it was on offer through a bike shop in the UK for a 1/3 of it's retail with standard warranty, it was a smidge on the long side due to it being a bigger frame than one would consider right for me, I generally do ride a bigger frame so that I can have an outright racing frame but I can easily set up the front end so it isn't too low down for me* without the need for a silly amount of spacers which to me just looks rather rubbish.
*I have old shoulder injuries from rugby and a bike crash that means my shoulders hurt when I'm low down for extended periods.

I didn't end up buying though regret it, as I didn't really want to buy and then find I needed to use a shortish stem but primarily because I already have an ex continual team frame from a few years back that I really enjoy riding. That was made by KTM, it's probably not as good as the modern mass produced stuff from the big names and I know the frameset is a good 200g heavier than similar sized (59cm) models - Scott CR1 SL in a 61 was 968g incl the DA BB cups + 328g uncut forks, but the model and the one after got great reviews at the time.
Despite the KTM being a bit porky compared to the really light stuff and a fairly large frame, with the kit I have on it she's 6.6kg including pedals + 50mm deep tubs (27mm tyres).

As mine was an unused team frame the supplier sponsor were selling them via ebay after season end though again with full warranty, they weren't really known in the UK so I got it for a silly amount of money (£430) which meant I could buy top end kit to adorn it and it still be thousands cheaper like for like.

If it were me, firstly I would buy an all out racing frame, there's not many caliper bikes that don't accept 28mm tyres these days and if you're going the disc route that's a non issue in any case. Second, I wouldn't buy off the peg as a built bike, I would find a frameset separately, whether that's one from the brands you named or not is up to you, but there are others out there, it depends on your pocket and if you're prepared to consider a previous seasons model which might get you virtually the same for much less.

It also means, and this was quite important to me, you get to buy precisely what kit/components you want to put on it, not what a manufacturer wants to sell you. You get to pick the right gearing, the right saddle and bars and the wheels + tyres that YOU want that suit your riding style and what pleases you aesthetically best.

Luck hunting/spending some dosh :D
dim
Posts: 348
Joined: 12 May 2019, 5:59pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by dim »

The OP is not happy with the bike he has ...that's why he posted the thread ....

you give it your best, and your results are crap .... even if they are good, you always 'wonder' how much faster you would have been had you owned a lighter faster better bike .... and you will never be happy until you upgrade and spend spend spend

thats the reality ....

but when you get older and poorer, you realise that by spending more money on the latest lighter bike won't make you very much faster ..... so you end up spending your money on Rapha and Oakley and all the expensive accesories

and during this time, you keep on upgrading your bike to better ones

then you get to a stage where you decide OK ...enough now, I only need 2 good bikes .... one fast one, and one for touring and commuting... so you upgrade to 2 really good bikes

then you spend your money on stages powermeters, expensive wheels, expensive tyres, Garmin satnav, Garmin radar, Hilleberg tents, Tubus racks, Son dynamo hubs and lights, Ortlieb pannier bags etc etc .... it never ever ends

and then by that time, you are old and slow so you just keep what you have

then you start looking at other things to spend you hard earned cash on

been there ... done that :oops:
mattsccm
Posts: 5101
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by mattsccm »

OP. Common sense says try a few but then buy what's fun. Stuff the silly idea of thing bring sensible, good value or whatever. If you have the cash spend it. If you hang onto it it will end up being used for your care home in your dotage. Why not do what so many do? Enjoy yourself and let someone else support you. Its the fashion.
Have some fun. Stuff the rest.
NickJP
Posts: 798
Joined: 24 Sep 2018, 7:11pm
Location: Canberra, OZ

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by NickJP »

I'm 66 - I bought a Dolan GXA frame last year and built it up as a comfortable bike for mainly riding on sealed roads. I chose it because it has a BSA threaded bottom bracket shell, takes a standard 27.2 round seatpost, has rack and mudguard mounts, and will take tyres up to 45mm in size (bigger if you fit 650B wheels). I'm using Panaracer Gravelking slick 700x38 tyres on it, which are basically a fat file tread road tyre. I've had it out on training rides with the local veterans racing club, and there's very little speed penalty from the fat tyres, and vastly increased comfort.

I haven't bought a complete ready to ride bike for many years - these days they all come with the steerer already cut too short for my liking, as for comfort over long distances I prefer having my handlebars only a couple of centimetres lower than the saddle.
slowster
Moderator
Posts: 4629
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: "Race" or "Endurance" bike ?

Post by slowster »

It used to be that what the bike manufacturers marketed as their top race frames were not necessarily always what their professional team riders rode. So when steel frames were the norm, it was not unusual for the frames to have been made by a custom builder and re-badged with the name of the sponsor. Similarly I think that when very light but excessively stiff aluminium frames were common, some pros were able to request a frame made from steel or titanium instead and with their preferred geometry (including domestiques from what I have read, for whom comfort was likely to be far more important than saving a few grammes, especially in a Grand Tour).

Obviously manufacturers want potential customers to believe that the standard off the shelf geometry etc. is the same as what their professional riders use, and I guess that is now likely to be true given that most carbon frames are monocoque and the cost of a mould to make a one off frame with a different geometry might be prohibitively expensive to do even for a (potential) Grand Tour winner.

Neverthless I am sceptical that that standard race geometry is optimum. I suspect instead that it is heavily influenced by a requirement from many customers (as opposed to pros) that the bike feel lively with relatively fast handling, qualities which are probably more desirable for relatively short distance races/rides or a quick blast out to the cafe and back than for a long and potentially tiring day in the saddle. Greg Lemond is a proponent of longer chainstays and relatively shallower seat tube angles not least because it improves the handling of the bike when descending at speed. Interestingly the carbon fibre C40 custom made by Colnago for Johann Museeuw looks like it had a similar geometry judging by this video which someone posted recently on another thread.

So in the OP's shoes my preference would be for a frame with probably longer chainstays and wheelbase than typical so called race geometry. I don't know if any of the major manufacturers offer that, or whether that is what you would get if you purchased their 'endurance' frame.

The other key factor is whether the geometry of a given frame will allow you to have the handlebars where you want them. In other words if it's a race frame is the head tube tall enough to get the bars at the right height with:

a.) no more than the usual maximum permitted 30mm of spacers below the stem (assuming a carbon steerer), and
b.) whatever maximum angle of rise of stem is aesthetically pleasing or acceptable to you.

Conversely, if you are flexible and have a fairly aero position on the bike, you might even find that the head tubes of some endurance frames are too tall for you to be able to get the bars where you want them.
Post Reply