Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

Hi everyone

When you have 2 (or more?) road bikes but with different geometry (in my case, 1 endurance alloy and 1 race carbon ), how do you guys set it up? Do you go for same drop and reach and so on, or deliberately try to set them up differently? (Since the geo were designed for different things/priorities after all..)

There would be no point in having two bikes if you set them up identically, if that is even possible.

The geo of an endurance bike is intended to provide a more comfortable and relaxed position for longer rides. A taller stack and shorter reach is the norm.

I had two bikes, one race and one more for endurance (Specialized Tarmac vs Felt F4C) and had same handlebars,stem, saddle and seatpost and cranks/pedals and both had Shimano 10 speed groupsets. No problems with either. It felt (no pun intended...) a bit odd at first riding the Tarmac after riding the Felt all week but after a few kms you adapt and everything feels normal.

I have two- one set up for endurance purposes and therefore a little higher in stack and shorter in reach. The other is a little longer in reach and lower. The one thing that should not change is where your knee is in relation to the pedal so that you leg is moving exactly the same on both bikes.

This really is a first world problem were dealing with here

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

How did I set up my Specialized Tarmac (race geometry) and Scott CR1 (endurance geometry)? I got fitted up properly on each bike in their respective LBS. I assume they're set up different, apart from having both fitted with 100mm stems instead of the standard 110mm stem. I prefer the Scott over all, just a nicer ride for me.

Much like everyone else, mine where set up slightly differently.

I had two BMC Team machines.
The race one had a slammed stem that was a little lower, as it was mounted -6deg, and the handlebars had more reach and more drop. This allowed me to get down more... But I never really noticed the difference unless I was out front into a head wind.

The training bike / cafe racer was used more often, had shallow drop bars, with about 3cm of spacers on the stack and the parts were selected to be comfortable, colour matching and "pretty". Ie: double bar tape, softer heavier cheaper saddle. My stem was same length, but mounted +6deg.

If I'm honest I set the race bike up thinking it would make a difference and I'd go faster, because that's what the pros did and that's what the forums said. Frankly my strava times suggested that it was all smoke screens and mirrors (at least for my speeds and level - avg b/w 35-40km/h). Like I said, unless I was out front into a head wind or pushing for a sprint not sure I noticed any difference really.

I copied the set up off my S5 when I built up my Ribble 525 that I commute on. I've done 8 hr rides on the S5 so I figured I'm used to that position and there's obviously nothing too far wrong with it. If it ain't broke.....

The important part is keeping your foot-ass-knee positioning correct to keep your knees/lower back healthy. Then once that is right there are plenty of calculators out there to gauge changes in stack/reach to keep your upper body in a comfortable position.

as others said - difference is mostly in reach.

my endurance bike is a cheapie alloy Apollo with TIagra. i don't see the point in paying for Ultegra drive-line parts when just training/cruising around. ditto for tyres.

mind you the race bike still takes the biggest beating, courtesy of my tendency to bin it

I have one for each, both Ti, same saddle-handlebar-crank geometry so when I am on hoods my position is exactly the same on either bike.

For me, the crossover is at about 150 to 200 km. I choose a bike on the basis of wind and road roughness. The endurance bike has more fork rake, less drop in the bend of the bars, 700x25 tyres and lower gear ratios.

Here are my two bikes - the front is my CAADX CX bike which I ride 90% of the time and on all my endurance rides, and behind is my old Raceline road bike which I ride only occasionally.



You can see the setup is very similar on both with respect to riding position. The difference in ride comes from the geometry of the wheel position ie. chain stay length, front fork rake, steerer angle, overall wheelbase etc. The CAADX wheelbase is about 2-3 cms longer, runs a carbon front fork and is generally higher with greater ground clearance and room for larger tyres.

Obviously the CAADX is better for longer rides though with a newer seat I reckon I could ride the Raceline further than the 70-80 kms I usually limit it to. But the next day tells the tale - I usually need a day or two off after riding the Raceline. Well it is 12 yo and full alloy after all and I'm no spring chicken !!

cyclotaur wrote:The difference in ride comes from the geometry of the wheel position ie. chain stay length, front fork rake, steerer angle, overall wheelbase etc. The CAADX wheelbase is about 2-3 cms longer, runs a carbon front fork and is generally higher with greater ground clearance and room for larger tyres.

I like your thinking

briztoon wrote:How did I set up my Specialized Tarmac (race geometry) and Scott CR1 (endurance geometry)? I got fitted up properly on each bike in their respective LBS. I assume they're set up different, apart from having both fitted with 100mm stems instead of the standard 110mm stem. I prefer the Scott over all, just a nicer ride for me.

Throw the Tarmac to me!

Thanks everyone for your thoughts so far - very interesting!

schroeds wrote:This really is a first world problem were dealing with here

so true and guilty as charged

I set all my bikes up with the same bb to saddle height and distance behind the bb... Except my CX race bike and MTB... Saddles about 5mm lower on those. RR bike has a negative stem slammed ... Winter bike has same saddle tip to bar distance except bars are a couple of cms higher. Rear triangle geometry is different on all the bikes but position is pretty close on all of them. But bar tape thickness does vary a lot .

jasonc wrote:

briztoon wrote:How did I set up my Specialized Tarmac (race geometry) and Scott CR1 (endurance geometry)? I got fitted up properly on each bike in their respective LBS. I assume they're set up different, apart from having both fitted with 100mm stems instead of the standard 110mm stem. I prefer the Scott over all, just a nicer ride for me.

Throw the Tarmac to me!

Um, No!

My Scott got run over by a semi so I need something to ride for a while. Plus it's my commuter.

briztoon wrote:

jasonc wrote:

briztoon wrote:How did I set up my Specialized Tarmac (race geometry) and Scott CR1 (endurance geometry)? I got fitted up properly on each bike in their respective LBS. I assume they're set up different, apart from having both fitted with 100mm stems instead of the standard 110mm stem. I prefer the Scott over all, just a nicer ride for me.

Throw the Tarmac to me!

Um, No!

My Scott got run over by a semi so I need something to ride for a while. Plus it's my commuter.

We'll swap commuters

Le Mong wrote:The important part is keeping your foot-ass-knee positioning correct to keep your knees/lower back healthy. Then once that is right there are plenty of calculators out there to gauge changes in stack/reach to keep your upper body in a comfortable position.

Yeah but no...

Most often, you'll find that in a longer/lower position you'll want to move your saddle back slightly.

It's all about balancing your torso. Some of your weight is taken by your hands, of course, but a fair portion is supported by the force you put on the pedals. The flatter you get, the further forward you place your torso's centre of mass, meaning that you have more to support with your hands and feet.

Pay attention next time you're riding. If you move from the tops to the drops, you'll instinctively slide your bum back further on the saddle to help balance the body weight shifting further forward.

I set my carbon roady and alloy roady to be as close as possible - even so far as to match my carbon bar/stem and saddle with cheaper but same shape stuff on the alloy. I don't do long rides to often - my rides can be maybe 3hrs max. I use the alloy bike more often to commute and train, so to me it made sense to match geo's so I can plug straight on the carbon and feel at home straight away

barefoot wrote:

Le Mong wrote:The important part is keeping your foot-ass-knee positioning correct to keep your knees/lower back healthy. Then once that is right there are plenty of calculators out there to gauge changes in stack/reach to keep your upper body in a comfortable position.

Yeah but no...

Most often, you'll find that in a longer/lower position you'll want to move your saddle back slightly.

It's all about balancing your torso. Some of your weight is taken by your hands, of course, but a fair portion is supported by the force you put on the pedals. The flatter you get, the further forward you place your torso's centre of mass, meaning that you have more to support with your hands and feet.

Pay attention next time you're riding. If you move from the tops to the drops, you'll instinctively slide your bum back further on the saddle to help balance the body weight shifting further forward.

Sorry should have explained that better. Thats what I was getting at with using the stack calculations to keep your knees/ass where they should be on different front ends.

Sent from my GT-N7105T using Tapatalk 4