How much of a difference does a bike upgrade actually make?

[MarieV]

I'm also 5'2" with a 28" inseam (barefoot), so I have a short reach. For me (and probably for you) the smallest stock bikes are usually just too big. I wonder if part of what's holding you back may be due to bike fit. Have you ever gotten a bike fit, where the fitter spends an hour or more watching you riding the bike on a trainer and adjusts the seat position, stem, handlebars, etc.? For women our size it's definitely worth it since most stock bikes are just too big. Also, some PTs who specialize in bike fits take insurance, so it may only cost you $25-50 rather than $100-150+.

I bought and rode three different road bikes (aluminum, steel, and carbon) that all turned out to be too big for me. The first was a Kona Lisa RD aluminum bike (510 mm effective top tube), which has a similar geometry as the Specialized Dolce, but I was never very comfortable and always anxious on that bike. I thought it was because road bikes just aren't as comfortable and easy to ride as hybrid and mountain bikes, but then I test rode a Bianchi steel bike (also 510 mm ETT), which was a revelation. It was so much fun to ride, more comfortable since the steel frame absorbed road noise better than aluminum, and once the LBS swapped the stem for a 70 mm stem and the right width handlebars, I bought it and really enjoyed riding it. I finally felt like I was in control of the bike rather than at its mercy. I realized the Kona was just way too big for me, so I put it on craigslist the next day.

With the steel bike I started riding more and doing longer rides, eventually doing a 100 km ride with DH. I would get frustrated, though, because he rode 10x more and was much stronger, and although he was incredibly patient and would usually let me set the pace. Still, he was on a light carbon bike while I was on my heavy steel bike, so I couldn't go as fast, had to work harder, and would get tired faster. All of this became evident when we did a particularly hilly 100 km ride when I'd only been riding about 6 months. I just wasn't very strong or very good at climbing, and that ride was so hard for me, I ended up sobbing.

I spent the next few months researching carbon bikes and test rode 5-6 of them (e.g., Specialized Ruby 44, Ridley, Giant, etc.). I did hilly test rides, and while I could tell it was easier to climb the hills on the carbon bikes than my steel bike, they just didn't feel quite right. One day I test rode an XS Wilier Izoard XP (515 ETT), and it was amazing! I could climb more easily and ride faster on the flats, and the bike was so stable, I could descend confidently. I was grinning during that entire test ride. Needless to say, I bought the Wilier. (For some reason I really like the ride on Italian bikes.) BTW I never test rode a Cannondale when I was bike shopping, but I've since ridden the Cannondale Synapse 44 (491 ETT) carbon bike when I took a friend bike shopping. It's really nice and responsive, and if they'd had one in my size when I was shopping for carbon bikes, I might have gotten it.

So to answer your original question, "How much of a difference does a bike upgrade actually make?" It makes a HUGE difference if you upgrade frame material and components and the bike fits. And you should be able to feel the difference, but only if you do a long enough test ride to feel the difference on climbs and descents and long flats. There's no way you'd be able to really know how well a bike fits and handles just by riding around a parking lot. You might be able to tell a bike is way too big or way too small just by doing a parking lot test ride, but there's no way to tell its responsiveness (i.e., has a stiff BB, so you accelerate faster and climb more easily) unless you do at least a 15-30 minute test ride where there are hills and some straightaways where you can punch it. If you're looking at carbon bikes, I can't imagine the LBS not letting you take the bikes out for longer test rides.

Fast forward almost three years, and I've since traded in the Wilier for a Colnago CLD 40s (500 ETT), the smallest available WSD carbon bike in 2013. I rode the Wilier more than my steel bike and could definitely finally feel myself getting stronger and faster, but once I started consistently riding over 50+ miles, I started getting knee pain that turned out to be IT Band Syndrome. My PT gave me exercises to address the ITBS, but she was convinced my bike was just too big for me. The wear marks on my saddle showed I was clearly dropping a hip to compensate for the reach, putting strain on my knee. I didn't want to believe it since it meant I'd have to get yet another bike. I just kept riding, but the harder I rode the worse the pain got. Once the pain got to the point I couldn't even ride, I finally realized she was right. I did more research on carbon bikes and found the smallest non-custom bike with the shortest top tube and reach was the Colnago CLD 40s. I had my LBS order one and sold the Wilier on craigslist. Within a month of me getting the Colnago, I did a century ride and the 180+ mile RSVP (Seattle to Vancouver) ride, and I knew it was perfect! I continually get stronger and faster riding this bike, and I've been riding pain-free and injury-free ever since.

[fallstoclimb]

I'm glad you found an answer to your shortie problems!!

I think my proportions must be a bit different from yours, as my 48 Dolce does fit me well. I got a professional fitting and he didn't even change all that much. I'm just finding that most bike shops stock 'comfort' women's bikes, whereas I'm looking for elite road bikes, but I did track down one I'm going to test ride on Sunday.

I wish I were upgrading from a steel bike as that would make a significant difference in terms of speed!!! Dolce to carbon/high level aluminum will be much more subtle, but I'm now firmly convinced it is time for an upgrade, not least of all so that I don't stick out like a sore thumb when I do the fast group ride and am the only one on an entry level bike....of course I stick out when they drop me about halfway through, but that's a separate issue

[fallstoclimb]

Thanks Sheila!! I'll keep my eyes open for someone stocking small men's sizes!

[MarieV]

To be clear, my "heavy steel bike" is a Bianchi Vigorelli with Reynolds 631 and Ultegra/105 mix, so it weighs in around 20-21 lbs. It's not a tank like a Surly Cross-Check or LHT or Bianchi Volpe with Tiagra or lower-end components. In contrast, my carbon bike weighs about 16 lbs. Granted my carbon bike has upgraded wheels and a Campy Chorus groupset, but any stock carbon bike in your size should weigh about 17-18 lbs if it has an Ultegra/105 groupset. Once you start doing longer test rides involving climbs, you should totally feel the difference between a carbon bike and your Dolce.

Before you completely rule out "comfort" bikes, you should take a few of them on longer test rides. By "comfort" I'm guessing you mean a relaxed geometry with a shorter top tube. Keep in mind that more bike companies are offering relaxed geometries for riders who don't ride very much and probably are not comfortable with an aggressive geometry, where you're totally stretched out over the top tube to get into the most aero position. But relaxed geometries are also better for sportive or endurance riding, where you're in the saddle for 5+ hours. If you want a bike only for shorter rides (up to 2-3 hours), then an aggressive geometry where you're stretched out may be fine, but if you want to start doing longer rides like century rides, where you'll be in the saddle 7-10+ hours, then the more upright position is more comfortable once you reach hours 4-5.

Keep in mind that you can always make a bike with a more relaxed geometry (i.e., with a shorter top tube and tall head tube) more aggressive by swapping for a longer stem and using a negative angle, but it's a lot harder to make a more aggressive bike (i.e., with a longer top tube) more relaxed since you'll compromise the handling with a really short stem (<70 mm) and a really steep angle.

[OakLeaf]

Just FTR, "comfort bike" is a specific configuration, pretty much the same as a hybrid - hardtail, sprung forks and seatpost without damping, buckhorn to flattish bars, hybrid frame geometry, rack bosses or integrated racks, wide wheels with street tires, low end MTB components. My Trek Navigator is an example. Basically a low-end UAV. It weighs upwards of 40#, and 20 miles on that bike is a very long ride. All day is out of the question AFAIC, even with the road saddle I slapped on it to replace the OEM saddle, one of those things that's bigger than my head. Not at all the same thing as road bikes set up for sport-touring or day rides.

[Crankin]

She means an endurance bike, not the kind of comfort bike you are talking about. But, you knew that.
All I know is that I don't feel slower on my Silque than I did on my Kuota. While, I am not "fast" by any means, nothing has changed, except the smoothness of my ride and no twitchiness.

[OakLeaf]

Right, but I think when the OP said the bike shops were all trying to sell her "comfort bikes," she meant the kind I was describing. That's all!

[Jolt]

To be clear, my "heavy steel bike" is a Bianchi Vigorelli with Reynolds 631 and Ultegra/105 mix, so it weighs in around 20-21 lbs. It's not a tank like a Surly Cross-Check or LHT or Bianchi Volpe with Tiagra or lower-end components. In contrast, my carbon bike weighs about 16 lbs. Granted my carbon bike has upgraded wheels and a Campy Chorus groupset, but any stock carbon bike in your size should weigh about 17-18 lbs if it has an Ultegra/105 groupset. Once you start doing longer test rides involving climbs, you should totally feel the difference between a carbon bike and your Dolce.

Wow, a 21-pound bike sounds really light to me (says the person who rides a fully racked and fendered Surly LHT, usually with a handlebar bag on to boot, for almost all of her riding)! Does 2-4 pounds (your steel bike vs. a carbon bike) really make THAT much of a difference in speed? I average 12-14 mph on my Surly...it'd be interesting to see what would happen if I got on a carbon bike.

[MarieV]

Jolt, I'm probably only 1-2 mph faster on my carbon bike than my steel bike. On a typical 100 km (~65 mile) ride I probably average 11-13 mph on my ~20 lb. steel bike (Bianchi Eros Donna) compared to an average of 12-14 mph on my carbon bike. So I'm only a little bit faster on the carbon bike, but because it's also much lighter and more responsive, I'm usually a lot less tired after riding the carbon bike compared to the steel bike. I probably wouldn't be able to do century rides on my steel bike, but I'm usually OK after one on my carbon bike.

Now I use my Bianchi Vigorelli as my commuter bike, so with a rack, bag, and fenders it's closer to 27-28 lbs. After a week of commuting on my steel bike, I always feel like a superhero when I ride my carbon bike on the weekends. I'm guessing you'd probably have an even more pronounced experience if you rode a carbon bike compared to your 30+ lb. LHT.

[zoom-zoom]

Jolt, I'm probably only 1-2 mph faster on my carbon bike than my steel bike. On a typical 100 km (~65 mile) ride I probably average 11-13 mph on my ~20 lb. steel bike (Bianchi Eros Donna) compared to an average of 12-14 mph on my carbon bike. So I'm only a little bit faster on the carbon bike, but because it's also much lighter and more responsive, I'm usually a lot less tired after riding the carbon bike compared to the steel bike. I probably wouldn't be able to do century rides on my steel bike, but I'm usually OK after one on my carbon bike.

This is precisely my experience on my Carbon road bike vs. my Ti CX bike with lightweight wheels and slick tires. There's still probably a 4# difference. It doesn't seem like much, but it's astounding how much easier it is to get the carbon bike up to speed and keep it there. And the geometry on my CX bike is just...weird on the road. I don't like it when I'm riding in a paceline, because the steering does not inspire confidence at speed when on someone's wheel. On gravel it's wonderful, though.