Budget Aero Road Frames
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: yongkun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110

    Budget Aero Road Frames

    After wrecking my bike frame due to an accident. I am looking for a new frame. Narrowed down to Cervelo S1 2010, Felt F5SL and Kestrel Talon SL 2010 with my budget of around US$1200.

    Also in the budget range are Fuji SST 2.0 and Excalibur 2009.

    I do alot of criteriums and sometimes short courses triathlons. I

    Does the weight difference of Felt F5SL outweight the aero factor the S1 brings, sometimes i just find that the aero factor of the soloist are kinda over-rated. Maybe it has a higher power transfer ratio compared to the rest, i am not really sure of that too. But it is indeed a winning machine in both road and triathlon world. However it is also quite old too, an 2001 design. Got a feeling that they might revamp the S models in next year, thereby reducing the resale value if i were to sell it.

    Maybe someone can give me advice on the bikes, never rode any of them before. Welcome to new frames suggestion as well.
    Last edited by yongkun; 09-14-2010 at 02:09 PM.

  2. #2
    T K
    T K is offline
    wasssabi
    Reputation: T K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,080
    The aero factor of all frames is overated.
    I read some numbers by a leading expert in the field and the frame made the least difference. Aero shoe covers are a lot cheaper and make a bigger diff.
    I'd rather have a stiffer frame.

  3. #3
    Sucker for carbon
    Reputation: skaruda_23's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by T K
    The aero factor of all frames is overated.
    I read some numbers by a leading expert in the field and the frame made the least difference. Aero shoe covers are a lot cheaper and make a bigger diff.
    I'd rather have a stiffer frame.
    +1 on this. Unfortunately an aero frame can only do so much to help out the inherently poor aerodynamics of the human body.

  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: yongkun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    Any suggestions? I've heard S1 has one of the better power transfer from the legs to the bike.

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    165
    If you're looking at the S1 take a peek at the Neuvation F100. Not sure if he still sells framesets but worth asking.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    9
    I had a Soloist Team (same as S1) frameset. I regret selling it. It was the most responsive feeling frameset to hard inputs I ever rode. I don't know the data on comparative response in framesets including the S1... I don't know how they would be able to quantify it. All I know is I could feel more "jump" when sprinting or hammering a climb with this frameset more than any frameset I ever rode. I have a CAAD 9 which is a great frameset too... very responsive and solid but the Cervelo S1/Soloist Team feels like it has more "jump".

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    479
    I have one old s1, nice frame, stiff at bb.nice power transfer I use it for some races and some training. has about 50000 klm.

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by T K
    The aero factor of all frames is overated.
    I read some numbers by a leading expert in the field and the frame made the least difference. Aero shoe covers are a lot cheaper and make a bigger diff.
    I'd rather have a stiffer frame.
    Since I don't know how you rate the aero factor, I can't tell whether it's over- or under- rated. I do know that switching from a standard to an aero frame can lower the drag of the bike+rider by about 10%. This is comparable to what a good set of aero wheels will do and much greater than shoe covers (cf. Cobb and Martin in High-Performance Cycling).

    On the other hand, all parasitic losses in the bike amount to only about 2% which in addition to frame flex includes drag in the bottom bracket, jockey wheels, pedals, and the overwhelming contributor, the chain. But even ignoring all those contributions, the 10% reduction from the aero frame is significantly greater than the 2% maximum that could be going to frame flex.

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    2,078
    Quote Originally Posted by asgelle
    I do know that switching from a standard to an aero frame can lower the drag of the bike+rider by about 10%.
    Drink the Kool Aid much?

    They presented hypothetical data from mathematical calculations and based it on shapes that are not UCI legal so are not comparable to current frames on the market.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by ewitz
    Drink the Kool Aid much?

    They presented hypothetical data from mathematical calculations and based it on shapes that are not UCI legal so are not comparable to current frames on the market.
    That's not the only source for that number (just the one that popped into my head). It's been shown through repeated testing, both wind tunnel and field to be the consistently observed value. I also recall Cobb and Martin did field testing as well.

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by ewitz
    They presented hypothetical data from mathematical calculations ...
    Interesting language http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/cycl...formance-40874
    Note the "hypothetical data" refers to the time saved in a 40 km TT not the drag on a frame.

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    420
    If it were me, I'd bag the aero hunt and pick up a Cannondale caad 9. With the caad 10's just coming out, you should be able to get a good deal on one, and it will be WAY less than the cervelo. Killer frame, great for crits. Use the money you saved to get some other aero gear for your tri's, namely good wheels, helmet, etc.

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by ewitz
    They presented hypothetical data from mathematical calculations and based it on shapes that are not UCI legal so are not comparable to current frames on the market.
    As I thought, the data are from actual wind tunnel testing on frames which are still available for sale today (with perhaps some updates) and are certified UCI legal.

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    479
    I dont know if aero really works. I know that I had porbs on really really strong winds. sudden hard cross gusts have made me get some scares

  15. #15
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by malanb
    I dont know if aero really works.
    I'd stay off airplanes then.

  16. #16
    T K
    T K is offline
    wasssabi
    Reputation: T K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,080
    Quote Originally Posted by asgelle
    Since I don't know how you rate the aero factor, I can't tell whether it's over- or under- rated. I do know that switching from a standard to an aero frame can lower the drag of the bike+rider by about 10%. This is comparable to what a good set of aero wheels will do and much greater than shoe covers (cf. Cobb and Martin in High-Performance Cycling).

    On the other hand, all parasitic losses in the bike amount to only about 2% which in addition to frame flex includes drag in the bottom bracket, jockey wheels, pedals, and the overwhelming contributor, the chain. But even ignoring all those contributions, the 10% reduction from the aero frame is significantly greater than the 2% maximum that could be going to frame flex.
    No freakin way!
    If there is a 10% reduction I would believe that is from one frame to the next and not in overall savings. And I doubt the frame itself is even 10% of total drag. So if I switched to an aero frame, instead of going 20 mph would I be going 22 mph? That 10 percent is probobly less than 1% in the total number.
    Len Brownlie, Ph.D says in a 40k ITT an aero frame compared to a non aero frame will save you 17 seconds. Aero shoe covers will save you 30.
    In a crit, unless you are on some mad solo breakaway, hardly makes a diff. I'd rather have a stiff bike for the final sprint.
    To the OP, I think the Cervelo would make a great crit bike.
    If I was to do it over again, I would seriously be looking at the Van Dessel Hella Faster. I do love my Caad 9 though.
    Last edited by T K; 09-17-2010 at 07:28 AM.

  17. #17
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,348
    Quote Originally Posted by T K
    No freakin way!
    If there is a 10% reduction I would believe that is from one frame to the next and not in overall savings. And I doubt the frame itself is even 10% of total drag. So if I switched to an aero frame, instead of going 20 mph would I be going 22 mph?
    All I can say is read the chapter. Cobb and Martin present it much better than I could. But I would also politely suggest that if you think a 10% reduction in drag results in a 10% increase in speed, you have a lot of reading to do on the physics of bicycles.

  18. #18
    T K
    T K is offline
    wasssabi
    Reputation: T K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,080
    No, I don't think that. I was just throwing that out there, trying to say that I don't think there will be much of a difference to the average guy out on the crit course.

  19. #19
    Adventure Seeker
    Reputation: Peanya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,114
    Get the 2009 SL01 from competitive cyclist. $699 won't hurt as bad when you wreck it in a crit. It's also a very nice frame, super stiff bottom bracket for acceleration, but not overly harsh in a ride. I'm very happy with mine.
    I have a single track mind

  20. #20
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by heffergm
    If you're looking at the S1 take a peek at the Neuvation F100. Not sure if he still sells framesets but worth asking.

    Do you know how the two compare? I've considered an F100 or FC100 with full red of force for crits mainly.

  21. #21
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: rbart4506's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,052
    I have a Tarmac Expert and a Blue AC1...

    Used both for 15km TT's....Times were better with the Tarmac...

    I prefer the Tarmac, better fitting bike for me!

  22. #22
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    187
    I have a 2009 Ridley Noah, it's aero, stiff, fast, responsive, looks great and is comfortable enough to ride for hours. I'ts a great frame that few know about and is equal to a Cervelo S2. Plus it's different, not the same Specialized, C'dale, Trek and Felt frames that you see everywhere.

  23. #23
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: yongkun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    110
    The Noah isn't budget, but Ridley came out with the new Phaeton, with similar aero properties as the Noah and its in the aluminium form, however it weighs a heavy 1.5k and more than the S1, turns me off.

  24. #24
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lou3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    251
    The S1, aero or not, is a great frame. I don't know why people seem to act like it is an either or. You can get a great frame that happens to be aero and the properties will be extremely similar. The S-series may be stiffer and less comfortable than the R3 series, but you aren't losing anything by going aero.

    That said, I think all Cervelos are way overpriced. For a few hundred more you can pick up the full carbon Felt AR5. It is super aero and carbon.
    "I'm a real athlete, I'm not trying to be the best at exercising." - Kenny Powers

  25. #25
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    798
    Assuming that all of the marketing hype backed by bike company sponsored "science" is true, then one brand of bikes should be so overwhelmingly superior that it cannot be defeated, right? Cervelo Test Team should not be folding because anyone riding their aero frame with Rotor Q Rings, the lightest SRAM Red components, and Zipp wheels should be invincible? Sastre should have won the last two Tours simply because Contador was riding an inferior POS, right?

    I like Cervelo so this isn't a knock on them. I have to laugh at those who blindly believe that a riderless bike bolted to a platform in a wind tunnel and measuring 10% less drag than a similarly specced Brand S or Brand T bike is suddenly the "superior" bike and all who buy it get automatic Cat upgrades, contracts, and too many palmares to count.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.