A lightweight hill climbing Aero bike - is there such a mythical beast?

[eldo0019]

Morning

Have been hit by a nasty case of bike upgradietus.............

Am based in Adelaide and looking for a "one bike fits all"........where I can use for the flat beach runs to Outer Harbour or Moana, but then something I can take thru the Adelaide Hills for 4 hour ride.

Have been looking at the Trek Madone SLR 9...........which according to all the publicity, could just be the bike that could be the "one".

Has anyone had any long term experience with one and how it handles the Hills?

Appreciate the feedback

Thanks

Eldo

[RobertL]

I'm watching this thread with interest. The Madone is one that I have thought of. Also the Wilier CentoAir. It seems to tick all the boxes.

[g-boaf]

I almost did use one overseas, only the cost of renting one deterred me - the other bike I could borrow was free of cost.

I would suggest to try a Canyon Aeroad CF SLX. That bike I do have experience with - two days of riding in the mountains with it (and I do mean real mountains).

It was set up like this:
Canyon Aeroad CF SLX 54cm
Mavic Cosmic Pro Carbon SL UST (I think, they also had Mavic Special Service Course decals on them - that confuses things)
Ultegra 11 speed mechanical 52-36 / 11-28
Fizik Antares saddle (avoid - horrible thing)

Aside from the discomfort of the saddle, it was pretty quick and not particularly heavy. The braking was better than I expected, carbon wheels, rim brakes and huge descents don't thrill me - but it was okay.

I don't know what cost your Trek would be, but the Canyon might save you some dollars depending on how you build it up.

[caneye]

how about this Cube?

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/editors-c ... c62-314626

https://www.99bikes.com.au/bike17-cube- ... lue-210074

[biker jk]

I found this an interesting comparison between a climbing and aero bike.

[MichaelB]

Interesting video, but had to laugh at "at 6%, that's big ring ..." Don't I wish ....

1st segment comparison, the climbing bike was done at 12W avg more (229 vs 241) - so not same.
Trash Truck hill - 242W avg for the climbing bike and 256W avg for the Aero - steep climb 8-9%, so weight would be the issue here ?
3rd segment - 173W avg for the climbing bike and 194W avg for the Aero - again, big difference in power
Last segment - 231W avg for the climbing bike and 230W avg for the Aero - spot on power but still bugger all difference


Like the GCN scientific tests - more interesting than real proof, but shows that there is SFA difference in the perceived aero.

[Ivanerrol]

I'm Biased - slightly.

I.M.H.O.
I had a Madonne 5.9 for three weeks - I didn't like it - second hand and had issues with the BB.

Bought a Wilier GTR Team Disc at a good price. I.M.H.O. climbs very well. A Cento should be a little better.
(a) A couple of issues with the Wilier - didn't like the saddle changed it out for a Specialized one.
(b) Other cyclists comment on it. At stopped traffic lights. Even a group who rode past me, slowed down to check it out.
(c) LBS staff comment on it even though they have rubbish on the floor costing much more.

[Derny Driver]

Like the GCN scientific tests - more interesting than real proof, but shows that there is SFA difference in the perceived aero.

Absolutely.
This whole marketing BS is just that. BS. Pretty sure you can buy any modern carbon bike you like, and the performance difference is sweet FA.
Not wanting to disrespect the OP, but the Adelaide hills are hardly the Swiss Alps. In fact nothing in Australia justifies the use of a term such as "climbing bike".
Just buy the bike that you like. My consideration when buying my son his last bike was that his favourite colour is orange. So I got an orange Bottechia. That was the important thing. Orange. His track bike is orange, training bike is orange. Kit is orange. The frame cost me $1200. Then $700 for mechanical Ultegra. He rides 2 man TTs with an ex Pro on a $16,000 bike and seems to have no problem swapping off turns.
Seriously. Buy what you want.

[g-boaf]

Like the GCN scientific tests - more interesting than real proof, but shows that there is SFA difference in the perceived aero.

I had similar experience with the Canyon I mentioned above and my own bike (which is non aero, and on just standard alloy wheels). I found very little difference going downhill - we are talking speeds of 70-75km/h, 85km/h on another descent. The Canyon was a beautiful bike, really stunning - but I couldn't find anything it did better than the bike I already had.

I should note I had the Garmin in my back pocket all the time, so I could only see after the ride what speeds I was doing.

If anything, it was just interesting to compare a couple of way different bikes, especially one that was much newer and very, very well tuned.