Does this bike exist?

I am considering having my Trek Pilot 5.0 WSD gearing changed to mountain gears in the back for some of the monster hills we climb. My 30x25 gear just does not cut it for a lot of the places we ride, so I end up riding my Bike Friday on really hilly rides. I love my Bike Friday but am just not as fast on it -- I want to be able to keep up with my DH better and prefer the comfort and light weight of carbon. So, I might have a shop re-configure my bike to handle mountain gearing, assuming this can be done. However, the bike is a 2006, so I am possibly considering the possibility of a new road bike.

It's been so long since I've been in the market that I honestly don't know what is out there these days. Here are my requirements:

Full carbon frameset
Small frame (44-47 cm depending on how measured and frame geometry)
Short top tube
Drop bars
Nothing too aggressive -- I need to be a bit more upright for comfort
I like 650 wheels but think they aren't used as much as they used to be. I can live with 700s though usually end up with toe overlap with those.
Really low gears for climbing mountains

Is anything like this even made, or am I looking at custom if I were to go new? I don't know what my budget would be at this point. If I do this, it will be next year, since we bought the motorhome this year and budget will not allow for a new bike.

Would appreciate any suggestions of manufacturers/models to look at.

Yes, yes, yes! You do not have to go custom. The industry is responding to the needs of those like us. The only difference is that these bikes have compact doubles. It is fine, believe me.
My Trek Silque has an Ultegra rear 32, road derailleur (although I had to have a a 34 mountain derailleur put on my custom Guru, as it was before they made lower road gears) and now they make a 34 rear road derailleur. There are Silques at many price points, so you have to really research to decide what you want. I have 47 cm, with a short top tube, WSD narrow bars (although I swapped the Trek bars for Specialized). It is an endurance road bike, so more upright than traditional race bikes. The 47 cm has 700 wheels and I have never had toe overlap. I cannot say enough about how happy I am with this bike. Before I got the Silque I had swapped my rear derailleur on my Kuota from a 25 to a 27, then to a 28...
The Specialized Ruby is very similar and also comes in small sizes.

Thank you, Crankin! I was really hoping to get a response like this. I would be happy with another Trek. I didn't realize there were compact doubles that handled that low a gear. My old Aegis Swift, which I had built up from the frameset in 2004, had a compact double, but the largest cog in the rear was 29. Still, much better than my current 25-tooth cog (especially when coupled with the Aegis' 650 wheels, making the effective gearing even lower). But I could certainly handle steeper climbs on that bike than on my Trek, and I was a lot younger then as well.

I will take a look at the Silque (and the Ruby) and dream...thank you! :)

Crankin -- I am finding the Trek site very hard to use. I couldn't find anything about gearing at all. I googled and found out some information, but it doesn't cover all the models. For example, for the 2015 Silque SL, this site (http://road-bikes.gearsuite.com/l/67...Trek-Silque-SL) states: "The Silque SL has a minimum gear ratio of 34/28 (35 gear inches). This minimum gearing is pretty high and will make climbing long stretches or steep ascents very tiring." Uh, yeh, that is what I am trying to avoid. :D

Did you have to spec out the 32 inch rear cog, or did that come spec on your SSL? I know they have some new models since then, but I can't find that kind of detailed information on their site. They sure are pretty, but the website is crap IMO. I want to know all the techie stuff!

ETA: I just found the Silque SSL on the same website, and they say the same about the gearing (34/28).

Ooops, sorry, one more edit: Now I wonder if that site is even right. I found a review of the SL on Bikeradar, and they state a 32-cog in the back. http://www.bikeradar.com/us/road/gea...-womens-50094/.

It sounds like a wonderful bike!

The Silque comes with the 28, but I opted to have the 32 put on. I don't think it cost any more. Yes, the Trek site is very difficult to use. My suggestion is to go to an LBS and have the person look in the "big book" from Trek to find what you want. I had written down the geometry of the older WSD Madone I had on my tour in Portugal. That was the predecessor to the Silque. By doing that, the LBS owner could look in the book and find the newer Silque version. It took some work, but what you want is not difficult to get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crankin

The Silque comes with the 28, but I opted to have the 32 put on. I don't think it cost any more. Yes, the Trek site is very difficult to use. My suggestion is to go to an LBS and have the person look in the "big book" from Trek to find what you want. I had written down the geometry of the older WSD Madone I had on my tour in Portugal. That was the predecessor to the Silque. By doing that, the LBS owner could look in the book and find the newer Silque version. It took some work, but what you want is not difficult to get.

---

Thanks, Crankin. If and when the time comes, I will certainly seek out a Trek shop. It sounds like I could get what I want by going Trek. I can't recall, did you get the Di2 shifting? I didn't know anything about it so did a little research, and I must admit, it sounds realllllly good. I was a skeptic until I started reading some of the reviews.

I also looked at Specialized Rubies, but in the price range where I'd probably end up (middle of the road for a Ruby, I'd want Ultegra), the bikes are white, and I don't want white since I've had a white Bike Friday. They show every speck of dust and grease, and I'm tired of that. Of course, by next year they may change up the color! They also go from a 44 cm to a 48 cm, so I don't know if either size would work as I've never ridden anything as large as a 48, but the 44 might be too small. Depends on the geometry, though.

I guess because I've had a Trek, and my DH has enjoyed his Trek 5200 since 2002 :eek: (he is also very ready for a new bike and more deserving than me with all he rides), I am just more comfortable with the idea of Trek. His has done so well for him for so long that I know the quality is there. But I know a lot of women love their Rubies as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muirenn

Try one of the Pinarello Easy-fit models, too. Not sure which model, as they change them from year to year, but they actually make very good women's bikes. Easy Fit have higher head tubes and shorter reaches. :)

---

Thanks, Sheila! I'll look at those too! :)

Emily, I'd be very surprised if your bike shop couldn't do better than a 25 on your Pilot's cassette. They should be able to at least go with a 30. My 2013 Domane WSD compact 10 speed came with a 30 and I recently had my bike shop go to a 32 on one of my Tiagra 10 speed compact bikes and it works, fine. A lot of the new 11 speeds come with a 30 on the cassette, too, and have heard of folks going with a 32 on those, also. Of course, if you want another bike, I get that. :)

I am a firm believer in going with a WSD when, possible. Until WSD came out, I was constantly changing out handlebars, stems, seats and all the other tricks needed to get standard bikes to fit me the way they should. Fortunately, I am on the tall side - almost 5' 10" - so I have a lot more options bike sizing.

I love drop bar bikes. The lowest geared drop bar bike I have is a Salsa Fargo. It has a 42-28 front and an 11-36 in back, so it does get me into MTB gearing. Not what you're looking for, what with those big 29er 2.3s for tires, but mentioned it to show that there are drop bar bikes out there with real low gearing. Was wanting the similarly geared Salsa Vaya which is a touring bike with 700x42s, when I went shopping, but it was out of stock. (May still get one.)

I like carbon, too, but being the old gal biker that I am, my favorite remains steel. Just like the feel better than any other material. Each to their own, though, as always.

Emily, I did not get the Di2, but DH did get it on his new Time, which he got after the settlement from his crash. I used it on my tour in France last year. Fun, but I don't see as necessary. DH loves it.

Thanks for the replies!

NWG, I will definitely look into what could be done to lower the gears on my Trek. I have a triple crank, not a compact, btw. It seems like the last time I researched it, it would require changing the rear derailleur for a long-cage and some other mods as well. But it certainly might be doable, and I'd like to see what it would cost vs. a new bike. Since it's a 10-year old bike, even though it fits me, I'll have to decide how much more to put into it vs. buying new. I do like steel (and that is what my Bike Friday is made out of), but I don't want a touring bike or a cross bike or a utilitarian bike (I consider my Bike Friday to be all of those things and will always keep it for those reasons), I want a performance road bike (with a more comfort geometry, tho) that is as lightweight as I can afford. I am petite and weigh < 105 lbs myself, so the lower I can get my bike as a % of my body weight the easier I can climb and attempt to stay with my DH, who still climbs like a mountain goat at 62, darn it! :D

Sheila, I looked at the Pinarellos briefly, but the gearing isn't low enough. One really nice women's model I was looking at was a 36/50 (or 52) compact in front and only a 25-tooth large cog in back...eeek. I know that can be switched, but often at an additional cost, especially since I'd want both front and rear to offer lower gears. I found their website fairly hard to navigate, though, so I might have missed a bike with lower gearing.

Crankin, I agree that the Di2 is not necessary, and it will probably be out of my price range too, but it does sound pretty sweet!

Yeah, at a certain point, it is probably better to invest in a new bike. I lowered the rear gearing on my triple Kuota twice, but I after I got the Guru, with the 34-34, I wanted lower on my other bike, too! Plus, as you do, I wanted more endurance geometry. My bike is smooth as silk, which is why, I am sure, it's called a Silque! I also love the feel of steel and my Guru, which is titanium is smooth, but even though it is custom, I don't like the geometry as much.

For sure, it is always more cost effective to get the gearing/group set you want, up front, rather than adding, later. I would like to see the bike manufacturers offer more lower geared performance/endurance class bikes like Emily wants. Seems like they just assume that if someone wants a high end road bike, they must be Tour de France competitors. Or maybe they think we're all young males. :)

I do okay with a standard compact double 50/34 up front and 11-30 on the back on my Domane WSD for the country we have here, on the roads I bike, but I still find myself bottomed out on some of our steeper hills, even now after getting back into prime bike shape. Be nice to have an extra gear or two in reserve. If heading out into new, unknown territory, though, I opt for my Fargo with its more MTB like gearing. Out in real mountain country, though, I'd only go a triple up front and I'd still be looking hard at the gearing on any particular model.

Best of luck, Emily. I may be doing the same kind of shopping at some point. Be very interested in what you find.

I can't imagine having to recharge my bike… I can't remember to recharge my phone or my lights (which is why I have at least one that uses AA batteries at all times..) on particularly consistent basis… I'd be stuck with no shifting or not being able to ride too often. I think I'll stick with cables.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muirenn

I'm iffy on gearing, at best. I live at sea-level, and not much applies. That's why I thought a frameset would be better, but that can be a pain. :)

FWIW, Trek has great women's bikes. Dialed in, backed by a lot of research.

---

Very true. My Domane 4.3 WSD is one of the very few bikes I've owned that fit me right, no mods or ad ons needed. All I had to do was adjust the seat height and start riding.

Eden, it's not a big deal according to DH. I think he only recharges it a few times a year, and he rides about 3k a year. If you don't keep tabs on it, there's a yellow warning light and it puts the bike into a low gear, so you can get up hills without having to shift. I didn't get it because I thought the extra money was frivolous, but he says it eliminates any having to mess around with fixing temperamental shifting. My Ultegra is perfect, so it's just not an issue.

Yes, from what I read about Di2, there is plenty of warning, and even once the low battery warning comes on, you have 500 miles in reserve! I'm pretty fastidious about charging my electronics, so for me, I don't think that would be an issue. As Crankin says, and as I read, the battery life is crazy long. Still, not a bad idea to take a backup battery on every ride, just in case.

After breaking a shifter cable on one of our long rides and having to limp back to the hotel for 40 some miles in a single-speed mode, I can see the virtues of Di2. Among others, this article by a female triathlete made me lust after it:

http://angelanaeth.com/once-you-go-di2/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by north woods gal

For sure, it is always more cost effective to get the gearing/group set you want, up front, rather than adding, later. I would like to see the bike manufacturers offer more lower geared performance/endurance class bikes like Emily wants. Seems like they just assume that if someone wants a high end road bike, they must be Tour de France competitors. Or maybe they think we're all young males. :)

I do okay with a standard compact double 50/34 up front and 11-30 on the back on my Domane WSD for the country we have here, on the roads I bike, but I still find myself bottomed out on some of our steeper hills, even now after getting back into prime bike shape. Be nice to have an extra gear or two in reserve. If heading out into new, unknown territory, though, I opt for my Fargo with its more MTB like gearing. Out in real mountain country, though, I'd only go a triple up front and I'd still be looking hard at the gearing on any particular model.

Best of luck, Emily. I may be doing the same kind of shopping at some point. Be very interested in what you find.

---

Thanks! Like I said originally, this is a next year thing for me, but I will certainly be posting about it when/if I decide to pull the trigger either way.

I do get what you're saying. A 34 front, 30 rear is still not the lowest gear around. I am hoping for at least a 32 in back, and I'd love a 30 in front, but I am not sure how many performance road bikes even offer triple cranks any longer -- probably not many. And we don't ride monster hills all that often, but when we do....

This one we've been riding daily here to get back to the campground after visiting town looks like this in Google maps:

Attachment 18066

Even in my lowest gear on my Bike Friday (30t front, 32t or 34t, can't recall which, in rear), I am in my easiest gear and tacking like crazy (plus panting) to get up it. Today we rode our MTBs, and it was a leetle easier with a 22t front ring. My legs are fine, it's more the cardio that is so tough. I did determine that I can go 3.9 mph without falling over, however!

Fortunately, these kinds of hills are few and far between in our riding. Normally they're either steep and short or long and gradual. Those I can handle. It's the steep and long ones that kill me, and since we're traveling all over the country, we never know where we may encounter them. My DH thinks I just need to train more and harder, and I am sure he's right, BUT sometimes we go from very flat areas (say Florida, or parts of the midwest) to very hilly areas in just a couple weeks of traveling. That makes it hard to train for the hillier areas.

That looks like a ... yummy, hill. :)

I have several hills on each my daily bike routes that bottom me out on the gears, but, fortunately, none of them are all that long, quarter mile or so. I've actually given my hills names. I know exactly what gears I need on each bike for each hill, too, and the exact spot on the hill where I'll need to shift. That kind of familiarity really helps to tame the hill in my head. I don't go out of my way to find them, but I don't avoid them or fear them, either. Just a part of the ride. It's those new hills I've never done that make me a bit nervous. I do admire you for all that exploring the both of you are doing.

Mostly I sit and spin to get up hills, but now and then, I just say the heck with it and stand and pedal, kind of a throwback to my younger days and also something I've always done in my MTB biking. Standing to pedal is probably a big no no in the roadie world, but I get lazy, sometime, and just don't want to shift. Now that I'm back in shape, I can handle it, physically.

Speaking of the Di2, I was in my local shop last week and one of the guys was working on a Di2 equipped bike. Since all the guys in the shop know me for the bike nut I am, he invited me back to show me how the Di2 worked. Well, wow! Basically push button shifting far as ease of use. That setup would spoil me, big time. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by north woods gal

It's those new hills I've never done that make me a bit nervous. I do admire you for all that exploring the both of you are doing.

Mostly I sit and spin to get up hills, but now and then, I just say the heck with it and stand and pedal, kind of a throwback to my younger days and also something I've always done in my MTB biking. Standing to pedal is probably a big no no in the roadie world, but I get lazy, sometime, and just don't want to shift. Now that I'm back in shape, I can handle it, physically.

---

Thanks...you're right that what you don't know CAN hurt you. :D However, sometimes it's just as well not to know, so you don't build up any anticipatory stress over having a massive hill to climb. I know after I climbed the one here I've been talking about the first time, I was really dreading it the second and third times, since I knew how tough it was.

You're wrong, though: in the roadie world, it is actually very much encouraged to stand some while climbing. Helps pull in different muscle groups so you don't get as fatigued. The usual advice on a long hill is to alternate sitting in a lower gear, then shifting up a gear or two and standing for a bit. Definitely helps keep you strong. I do stand from time to time, especially to get over short hills, and on longer ones I'll sometimes stand for a certain number of pedal strokes, then sit when I get too exhausted. Nuttin' wrong with that!

What you don't know can hurt you, for sure. The closest call to cashing it in was while biking in upstate New York. The sign said steep grade coming up. Wasn't all that steep a grade, probably 8% or so, but what I failed to estimate, properly, was the long half mile distance down the hill. Instead of going down, cautiously, I gunned it right from the start, hoping to build up enough speed to climb the other side. By the time I woke up and realized I was in trouble, it was too late. Last check on the bike computer showed 38 mph and gaining. I was now into a serious wobble. Tried feathering the brakes, but it just made it worse. No choice but to ride it out. I was praying, now, and holding on for dear life.

I made it to the bottom, though. Pulled off to the side of the road and had a good cry. I was so lucky. That's a lesson I will never forget. Really the stupidest thing I've ever done on a bike. Believe me, my attitude about going down hills has never been the same, since. (The computer showed 42 mph for a top speed. )

Good to hear about the standing thing, for sure. Pretty much what I do, too. Just recall, back in the 90s, when some local roadie expert told me, otherwise. Not that going against the grain has ever stopped me, anyway, and, for sure, notions on what is correct in biking change over time.

I'm surprised a roadie told you that - maybe that particular person didn't like it. I don't remember a time when standing on hills was frowned on, that I was aware of. And I know I've seen in done in every Tour de France I've ever watched on tv.

I love speed on downhills, although much more so on roads I'm familiar with. It's the unknown pavement patches, curves and possible gravel that I'm concerned about. I know I'm stupid that way, assuming everything will be fine. Once toward the end of a 100-miler on a course I'd never done before, I just tucked (okay, skier term) and went for it on what turned out to be a 40 mph downhill I'd never been on before. Afterward my friend said "did you see those deer by the edge of the road?". Nope. That was dumb.

If it's good enough for the TdF folks, it's good enough for me. :)

Good point about being alert to animals popping out in front of you. This year, already, had a wild turkey explode out of the ditch and I actually had a wing nick my helmet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by north woods gal

If it's good enough for the TdF folks, it's good enough for me. :)

Good point about being alert to animals popping out in front of you. This year, already, had a wild turkey explode out of the ditch and I actually had a wing nick my helmet.

---

:eek:

Closest call we've ever had was deer running out on the road right in front of us. Thankfully, they were faster than we were, but it was still awfully scary.

It's hilly enough around here that I've been hitting 35 mph on some of the descents, and that is even with feathering the brakes ever so often. Then I'll grind up at 4-5 mph. Brutal.

I hate descending and I am extremely cautious. Thus, my highest speed downhill has been 32.5. DH, on the other hand has hit 55-60 mph, but he no longer does this; too much risk involved. He doesn't get above 40 now.
I've given up on the descending thing. I am a little better than I used to be, but I just don't feel comfortable descending in the drops, despite the fact it all fits perfectly. For some reason, I have more difficulty turning right, so I slow down on these turns. If I find a straight hill, I am much more comfortable. I do use the drops on flats or smaller hills, but I think it's an issue of feeling out of control, and once my body has muscle memory for something, it's almost impossible for me to shake the bad habit.

I actually enjoy descending, but being aware of the risks, am pretty cautious these days and brake a lot more than I used to. I don't care for going over 30 mph! When we used to have tandem bikes, we used to hit much higher speeds on the descents, and those were super scary since I couldn't even see where we were going. I much prefer descending on a single bike!

Ha, ha. This is why we will never have a tandem. I do not want to be under the control of someone else, even DH.
I once said this to the wife of a colleague of DH's who ride a tandem, when we were at a party... I know they do the tandem because she can't keep up with him (and he won't slow a little). That was a mistake. She made a face at me and turned away, when I said I would never be under anyone's control! A few months later, we saw them riding the tandem when we were out riding with our former exchange student son when he was here visiting us. She wouldn't look or talk to me!

30 mph is where I like to keep it as a max on a descent, these days, too, all the more so because I am out on remote roads by myself, so not worth the risks of going faster. My one close call was enough to last me for life. I'm on no schedule or specific training regimen, anyway, so I don't feel the need to pad my average speed number for a ride.

Me and my hubby on a tandem? I have a hard enough time just keeping my mouth shut when he drives our car. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crankin

Ha, ha. This is why we will never have a tandem. I do not want to be under the control of someone else, even DH.
I once said this to the wife of a colleague of DH's who ride a tandem, when we were at a party... I know they do the tandem because she can't keep up with him (and he won't slow a little). That was a mistake. She made a face at me and turned away, when I said I would never be under anyone's control! A few months later, we saw them riding the tandem when we were out riding with our former exchange student son when he was here visiting us. She wouldn't look or talk to me!

---

Ooops. Well, it's true, though. We had a tandem very early in our marriage & cycling days, and the control thing didn't bother me then, as I was a very weak cyclist (which is why we got the tandem). I actually enjoyed DH taking the lead. But as time went on, and I became stronger and more independent-minded as well, I really started chafing at the tandem experience. It was tons of fun to ride (fast!) when everything was clicking, but if we disagreed on something, it was a very uncomfortable place to be (physically and emotionally).

Part of our problem was that DH was so used to riding alone that he didn't like having to call out everything to me. A tandem captain needs to be a really good communicator for it to work. So, the very last time we tried tandeming, it was pretty much a disaster. I hated not being able to see, to determine shifts and braking, and relinquishing control after I'd been single cycling for so long was verrrrry difficult. We only kept that tandem (our third over the years) for about 6 months.

He talks about trying a tandem again one day since he is a faster rider, and it is nice to help equalize our speeds, but I am not enthusiastic, as I don't see him being a better communicator than he was last time around, and I certainly will be no more willing to relinquish control!