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

[Owlie]

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.

[zoom-zoom]

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.

[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.

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.

[zoom-zoom]

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.

[Eden]

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.

[indysteel]

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....