First road bike - "relaxed" vs. "aggressive?"

I am in the market for my first road bike and want to use it for centuries/long distance road rides and maybe get into racing. I am looking for something I can ride for a while without the urge to upgrade.

I have limited myself to WSD as I am short (5'4') and have the stereotypical women's short torso/long leg combination. I have test ridden a Specialized Ruby Expert Compact, a Trek 5.2 C WSD Madone, and a Canondale Supersix 3 Ultegra. The people at my LBS explained that the Ruby has a more "relaxed" geometry which is supposed to make it more comfortable over long distances; the Amira is supposed to be more "aggressive" for speed. They did not have an Amira in my size to try so I still haven't ridden an Amira. I can post an update once I do. :)

I am confused though because I tried the Cannondale Supersix and found it more comfortable than the Ruby. Is there really a major difference between the "relaxed" vs. "aggressive?" What is the better choice for someone new to road cycling? Or does it just come down to personal preference in the end?

Ahhh...Cannondale doesn't actually have WSD geometry on any of their road bikes. What they often do is have specific smaller components (with Shimano brake levers...SRAM are all adjustable) and women's saddles. If you were comfiest on the SuperSix it makes me wonder if you really need WSD. Cervelo doesn't do any bikes with WSD. They have found that the differences between male and female proportions are not as great as the differences between individuals of either gender. I'm not convinced that WSD is anything more than marketing. I'm a short female and I'm all torso. The bikes that actually have WSD geometry wouldn't work for me, though they'd work for a guy with long legs and short torso.

My first bike was a women's Cdale Synapse. It was too relaxed, but it was my first bike and I didn't really know what I'd end up liking. My current bike is a Cdale SuperSix and I'm really happy with it (aside from crotch issues, which I would have on any bike, since I have a really anterior rotated pelvis). I've got good flexibility. Had I known I'd be so comfortable on a more aggressive frame and enjoy racing I would have gone with this sort of bike from the get-go. It's sometimes difficult to know what you'll like with a first bike, unfortunately.

I do need "WSD" (long legs, short torso, small hands), but I agree that a lot of it is marketing--as long as the top tube length is good, I can in theory swap out components to make any given bike work for me. I think Cannondale and Giant simply file a half-centimeter or so off the top tube of the unisex frames and call it good. ;) Specialized does actually seem a little different.

My current bike is Giant's equivalent of the Dolce. I haven't ridden a Ruby or the Amira (no one has my size!), but I've ridden the Dolce (a more relaxed road bike) and the women's CAAD10, which has the same geometry as the SuperSix, just different materials. I also recently had my Giant fitted, and I'm now in a more aggressive position. (I don't race. I just like riding as much as I can.)

My lower back, oddly enough, is a lot happier with the more aggressive position of my refitted Giant and the CAAD10. I'm looking for a new saddle, but that's the only unhappy part of me. I'm quite flexible, which helps. If I were to get bitten by the brevet bug, I'd look more closely at the Ruby. The handling is going to be a bit different--the CAAD corners much better than my Giant does, and it felt like it would be faster if I wanted it to be. They'll probably feel different climbing too.

Go with whatever fits and feels better. I'm not sure I could do very, very rides on the CAAD10, but I think my back might freak out on the Ruby. Of course, since I have yet to actually hit the 50-mile mark yet...uh...;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owlie

I do need "WSD" (long legs, short torso, small hands), but I agree that a lot of it is marketing--as long as the top tube length is good, I can in theory swap out components to make any given bike work for me. I think Cannondale and Giant simply file a half-centimeter or so off the top tube of the unisex frames and call it good. ;) Specialized does actually seem a little different.

---

When I bought my SuperSix the men's and women's of the same size had identical geometries (I went with a "men's" because the white and orange color scheme was hot and the women's colors were lame...I don't think they offered SRAM Rival on a women's frame, either, which was the component group I wanted). Maybe that's different, now. Though I notice with their mountain bikes that the #s are still the same in the same sizes...the handlebar width and saddles are simply different.

I think the relaxed or aggressive has to do with the angles of the bike like the seat tube and the head tube angles. The steeper the angle, the more aggressive it is.

Too bad there isn't a program that does an overlay of the bikes you want to look at to see the differences.

All the bikes look nice, but I like the look of the Cannondale.

I had the original Ruby, which was more relaxed than a true race bike, but not as relaxed as the current Ruby.

I now have an Amira and contrary to my fears it is more comfortable (for me at least) than my old Ruby.

I am small 5'nothing, with short torso/arms. I still have to put a short stem on my tiny (44cm) bikes....

but that is just my experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bethany1

Too bad there isn't a program that does an overlay of the bikes you want to look at to see the differences.

All the bikes look nice, but I like the look of the Cannondale.

---

I tease my DH about his Roubaix. He had an early Roubaix and it was stealthy and sleek looking. A few years later it developed a crack in the carbon and he ended up with a new Roubaix under warranty. He still loves it, but he admits that it's kinda funny lookin' with all the swoops and curves. My SuperSix has more traditional and simple lines.

A program that would overlay bikes would be awesome. Some running store websites do something like this with shoes--seems to me that something like that would be perfect for bikes and saddles and cycling shoes.

Like Eden, I am very short (5' 1"), with short arms and torso; my main bike is a men's Kuota Kebel in an x small (48 cm), with Specialized short/shallow bars and Ultegra short reach levers, 165mm cranks. It feels quite comfortable compared to other bikes I have been on. I also still need a teeny stem. So, while it's a little twitchy, I feel really comfortable on it. I have a new custom Guru road bike, which has a more relaxed geometry... no more teeny stem, but I feel way too upright. In fact, I am going to move the position of my bars, so I can be in a more "aggressive" position.
I'm not an "aggressive" rider, but this is what I am used to and what my body likes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bethany1

I think the relaxed or aggressive has to do with the angles of the bike like the seat tube and the head tube angles. The steeper the angle, the more aggressive it is.

Too bad there isn't a program that does an overlay of the bikes you want to look at to see the differences.

All the bikes look nice, but I like the look of the Cannondale.

---

Seat tube angles, head tube angle and length, chainstay length (and therefore wheelbase length)...I think. Any expert on frame geometry want to chime in? ;)


Zoom, I think the biggest difference between C'dale's road bikes (men's vs. women's) are the paint jobs and choice. There are far fewer options in the women's bikes. Maybe it's because the world has moved on from 'race-quality' aluminum (and that's what my budget will allow), so the market's not there for either CAAD10 frame. I haven't looked at the SuperSix, but I don't think there's much choice in terms of componentry for women either.
ETA: Okay, maybe that isn't quite true. There are some differences: Wider spread of sizes, and the sizing is a little teeny bit different. The top tubes on the unisex frames are a little longer, at least this year. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owlie

Zoom, I think the biggest difference between C'dale's road bikes (men's vs. women's) are the paint jobs and choice. There are far fewer options in the women's bikes. Maybe it's because the world has moved on from 'race-quality' aluminum (and that's what my budget will allow), so the market's not there for either CAAD10 frame. I haven't looked at the SuperSix, but I don't think there's much choice in terms of componentry for women either.
ETA: Okay, maybe that isn't quite true. There are some differences: Wider spread of sizes, but the sizing is a little teeny bit different. The top tubes are a little longer, at least this year. ;)

---

Interesting...when I got my road bike in late '10 the geometry was identical (I really analyzed the charts, since my bike had to be ordered and I couldn't do a test-ride, first). The women's rides were different colors and went as small as 44. Men's started at 48. I'd still likely end up on a unisex frame, since Cdale doesn't appear to offer SRAM (aside from Red...too spendy) on any of their women's frames...and the colors are lame-o (IMO). I may try to pick up a new mountain bike once the 2012s are clearanced...but I'd probably go for a men's, since they come in cool colors (and size S is the same for both men and women, with the exception of saddle and handlebars, which can be chopped-down on a men's bike). The women's options are navy and white or white and red in the models I'm eyeballing, IIRC. *yawn* The men's come in cool colors like charcoal with orange or white with lime.

Maybe somebody can double check my math on this: I just compared the Ruby and Amira base models in a size 48 and size 51. The ONLY differences in geometry between the two bikes is that the Ruby has a longer stem (which would arguably make it less, not more relaxed, but in any event is easily changed) and the Amira has a shorter seat tube by 10mm.

This just further confirms my opinion that a lot of bike manufacturers use words like "relaxed" and "aggressive"--at least when it comes to women's bike--as marketing gimmicks. There is nothing substantive behind those labels. And because they use those labels, LBS employees end up throwing them around, too. Heck, I've worked with LBS employees who insist--even after I show them the respective geometries--that a WSD label means that the bike is substantially different from the unisex/men's version. They often aren't, as others have pointed out in this thread.

So, my advice is this: put the labels aside as you test ride. Is the bike comfortable at every hand position? Do you feel balanced on the bike? Do you like how it handles? Does it feel like an extension of your body or do you feel awkward on it? Remember that you should consider a professional fitting no matter what bike you choose. Changes made during that fitting can influence whether you set the bike up for comfort or speed or a compromise between the two.

Don't convince yourself that you have to ride a WSD bike or that a bike labeled "relaxed" or "aggressive" is what you need. Look at the geometries themselves as you compare one bike to the next. Granted, you may not understand what the numbers mean at first, but look at enough of them, and you might start to see some differences worth considering.

ETA: Please see my later post. I mistakenly compared to current Amira to an older version of the Ruby--when the Ruby was less relaxed than it is now. I apologize for the mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indysteel

Don't convince yourself that you have to ride a WSD bike or that a bike labeled "relaxed" or "aggressive" is what you need. Look at the geometries themselves as you compare one bike to the next. Granted, you may not understand what the numbers mean at first, but look at enough of them, and you might start to see some differences worth considering.

---

Especially if you are able to actually test ride the bikes...had I been able to do this I may have ended up on an "aggressive" bike from the get-go...but maybe not. Even my Synapse felt scary twitchy when I first started riding, since I was going from a low-rent mtn. bike to a road bike. Then when I upgraded to my SuperSix it was like starting all over again--the first half-dozen rides on that bike were SCARY!!! ;)

I'd say if you feel good right off the bat on the SuperSix (or any bike), then that's a sign that you're on the right bike for you...regardless of labels, as Indy points out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indysteel

Maybe somebody can double check my math on this: I just compared the Ruby and Amira base models in a size 48 and size 51. The ONLY differences in geometry between the two bikes is that the Ruby has a longer stem (which would arguably make it less, not more relaxed, but in any event is easily changed) and the Amira has a shorter seat tube by 10mm.

---

?? I'm at the low end of things. I can't comfortably ride a 48 in any model - top tubes are just too long. Comparing the 44 Amira to the 44 Ruby they are substantially different. The Ruby has a shorter seat tube, shorter top tube, longer chain stay, different seat/head tube angles and fork trail, longer wheel base and longer head tube. That certainly sounds like it makes it a more relaxed, more upright bike. The 48 in the Ruby is not the same as the 44 in the Amira either.

My Ruby was the original Ruby - somewhere in between a Roubaix and an S-Works on the aggressive/relaxed scale, when I bought it. I understand they've gone more towards the Roubaix since bringing out the Amira. It had the shortest top tube on the market - good for my short arms, not to mention it was, I think the only carbon bike that came small enough for me at the time. I was a bit concerned that the Amira would feel too long, but the cockpit actually feels a bit shorter to me and it is actually more comfortable for my neck and shoulders than any bike I've had thus far.

Ugh; I'm such an idiot. I did a Google search for Specialized Ruby Comp and Ruba Amira in two separate windows on my computer. I just rechecked the years models I was comparing and realized that they were of two different model years. I am so sorry for my blathering on about this. Apologies all around.

I stand by my other advice though. I think labels will only take you so far....