New bike = slow, slow, slow

[rubywagon]

I am boggled. I recently upgraded from a Trek 1.2 aluminum frame bike (triple) to a Specialized Ruby carbon (compact). I am feeling very discouraged as I feel I am working so much harder to power the Ruby, and seem to be moving at a much slower pace. A ride that I normally average 15.5 mph, has been in the 14 mph range since I have made the switch.

I read through some of the compact vs triple threads here on TE and I am not sure it is the compact that is causing the issue. The cassette on my Trek was an 11-26, 9 speed and my Ruby is a 12-27, 10 speed.

I am scheduling a fit with my LBS, as that seemed to make a huge difference in my performance on the Trek, but is there anything I should look at in the meantime, that could cause such a huge difference in my riding between the two bikes? Here are the specs on the two bikes:

http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/bikes..._series/12wsd/

http://wheelworld.com/product/specs/...mpact-6075.htm

Any suggestions/advice is greatly appreciated! TIA!

[Cataboo]

It might be something to do with the geometry and your position on the bike. At certain seat tube angles/crank arm length combinations, I know I'm slower than with what I'm used to.

Does your position feel any different?

How hilly are the rides you do? Are you hanging out in different gears?

[nscrbug]

I don't really have any useful advice for you, but if it makes you feel any better...I went through the same exact thing when I upgraded from my aluminum/carbon mix Trek 2100 WSD (triple) to a full-carbon Cervelo aero roadbike (compact). Talk about feeling discouraged! The first few rides on the Cervelo felt like I was dragging a grand piano behind me! I was extremely frustrated that I had spent so much money on a full carbon aero bike, only to ride WAY slower than I ever had on my Trek. I'm not sure if it was the switch to the compact crank or what...but, it did take me a good while to get used to the new bike. The biggest difference I noticed was on hills. In my area, we don't really have "hills" they way most folks know hills. Ours are more like "bumps" rather than mountains. On my Trek, I was able to power up the hills with no problems (and that was NOT using my granny gear!). So it was a big surprise to me, when I rode up my first hill on the Cervelo...only to find that even in the lowest gear possible...I could barely make it up the whole way! Maybe you just need more saddle time on the Ruby to get more comfy. Now that I've ridden my Cervelo for a season (4,700 miles), I don't feel as slow as I initially did...but some of the hills are still an issue for me. Obviously, hills are my weakness...so I'll be devoting a lot of time this year to improving in that area.

Linda

[rubywagon]

Talk about feeling discouraged! The first few rides on the Cervelo felt like I was dragging a grand piano behind me! I was extremely frustrated that I had spent so much money on a full carbon aero bike, only to ride WAY slower than I ever had on my Trek.

Yes, yes, YES! I wanted to cry today while out on my ride.

I live in Salt Lake City, which is very hilly. I find that I am slower on the climbs, but even more frustrating is on the flats, when I am really pushing it hard and see that I am hardly moving.

The geometry of the bike does feel different than my Trek. Not uncomfortable, or cramped or anything, just different. I know I need to raise my saddle up a bit. What difference would crank arm size have? I am headed out to the garage with my measuring tape right now to see if there is a big difference between the two.

ETA: The crank arms are the same length.

[nscrbug]

Yes, yes, YES! I wanted to cry today while out on my ride.

I live in Salt Lake City, which is very hilly. I find that I am slower on the climbs, but even more frustrating is on the flats, when I am really pushing it hard and see that I am hardly moving.

The geometry of the bike does feel different than my Trek. Not uncomfortable, or cramped or anything, just different. I know I need to raise my saddle up a bit. What difference would crank arm size have? I am headed out to the garage with my measuring tape right now to see if there is a big difference between the two.

Good question...but I honestly don't know. The cranks on both of my bikes were the same size - 170. The geometries on my bikes are quite different. Going from the Trek, which had a taller headtube (thus putting me more upright)...to the Cervelo, which essentially has ZERO headtube...placing me in a much more aggressive, racing position. This has impacted my overall "comfort" on the bike...so perhaps that is why I'm riding slower on the Cervelo. I have recently "flipped" my stem to put me in a more upright position, so hopefully this will help somewhat with my comfort issues.

[VeloVT]

Please don't get mad at me for saying this, but if you haven't done so, take a minute and make absolutely sure your brakes aren't dragging. There is nothing that can sap your energy (and speed) like dragging brakes. They're worse than a headwind.

Having your saddle height/setback dramatically wrong could also affect your power, but you'd probably notice if your saddle was way off since you are used to how your old bike felt and the new one would feel immediately wrong.

When I went from a 52/42/32 triple with 11/23 cassette to a standard double with a 12/25 cassette, I did have an uncomfortable gearing spot that was somewhere around 42/11-13. 39/12 was a little easy (and rubbed on my bike) but 53/middle gears were a bit hard. Basically I had to get a little bit stronger so I could cruise in the big chainring.

[tulip]

take a minute and make absolutely sure your brakes aren't dragging.

That was my first thought, too.