Bike Hunting (or Induction, Applied)

Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race. 

- H. G. Wells

The contenders (in the order they were ridden) (Left) Pinarello Razha (Middle) Specialized Roubaix Elite 105 (Right) Cannondale Synapse 5 105

There comes a time in the lives of all Men when we outgrow our shoes, blunt our tools, out-store the data on our phones and stare at the vast emptiness that is our garage/home theater and ponder on what life-saving gadget/tool/bike we should buy next. It is a gut-wrenching time, and all our partners can do is stand by and shake their heads with the calm resignation of Voltaire heading to the guillotine as they see the impending doom approach with its steady Godzilla-like rhythm. Yes, I had a wonderful bike (Fuji Newest 2.0, all aluminium with carbon fork) that had served me well for three years. We had gone through our time together with all its ups-and-..well mostly more ups in the elevation - with nary a squeak or a crash, but as with all good things, it was time for the curtain to come down on this roadshow. After three seasons of faithful partnership, sadly, it was time for me to move on.

Some author once said - If it is time, then it is. As it also happened, our team was able to secure a deal from our LBS at just the right time for me to stop staring the the unknowable void and start staring at bike catalogs in earnest. After a few hours of online research, I narrowed my choices down to three potential candidates (see above), and now it was a matter of test riding them and selecting one that met my price-point and performance requirements.

Now, before we move ahead, a disclaimer: I am a regular guy who loves biking. I am not a professional bike tester or a pro-mateur rider who understands a bike like the back of his hand. What follows are my impressions of the test ride I took with some freeform speculation included for free. This is not an attempt to malign any bike manufacturer over another. Kindly ask your legal department to spend its time more fruitfully elsewhere.

As I sifted through tons of bike reviews during my online research, I came across many terms that were just plain alienspeak for me. Although I could tell my down tube apart from the seat tube, and regularly serviced my bottom bracket, "lateral stiffness" and "torsional rigidity" were terms that the engineer in me could appreciate, but the rider in me would ride all over. So, I set out with a commonsense approach of combining my engineering background with my passion for riding, to evaluate the test bikes. I designed a test area around the LBS that had a hill, a few quite neighborhood streets, a park with large trees (significance divulged later, and NO - it's not what you think it is), and at least one or two stop signs/traffic lights. For an as objective comparison as possible, I mentally recorded the following points on each ride:

Feel: Perhaps the most subjective point of comparison of all. In my case, the 'feel' did not only account for how comfortable I felt on the bike then, but also if I would still feel comfortable after a century ride? Not having ridden 100 miles on each of the contenders, this was a mental extrapolation from the riding experience of a couple of miles.

Response: The amount of effort or acceleration required to bring the bike to a particular speed from a standstill. Fortunately, there was a 4-way stop on my test route, so testing this part was particularly easy.

Hill-climbing: The most important parameter for me! How well did the bike react if I rev'ed up on a decent gradient (6-8%)? I had no delusions that a new bike by itself would allow me to break the record on Col de Madone, but the least I expected was lesser effort to scale similar heights.

Handling: I tested handling by making U-turns in a quite neighborhood street and checking how well the bike held its line with minimal input from the rider.

Braking and balancing: A good bike setup never brakes too soft, or too hard. The former carries the danger of not stopping in time, the latter the risk of skidding (in the best case) or landing on your face with the bike and optionally other road furniture set around you. The residential neighborhood around the LBS had a couple of traffic lights that I could use to test the braking. For balancing, I was simply counting the seconds when braking at the light until I had to keep a foot down on the road. While not so much a track stand, this was the first step in ascertaining how much the bike could hold itself up - a gauge of how balanced its construction was.

Bumpy: A carbon bike worth 2 grand better provide a smoother ride on not so smooth roads than my existing aluminium masterpiece. I tested bumpy-ness of the ride by riding on uneven pavements, rumble strips (where applicable), and a few patches of road where the tarmac weaved a Lilliputian knoll around the roots of some large trees.

Table 1. The results of my test ride, in plain English

Parameters Vs. Bikes	Pinarello Razha	Specialized Roubaix 105	Cannondale Synapse 5 105
Feel	Not very comfortable	Smooth as butter	Comfortable, and fast
Response	Twitchy	Less pronounced, but predictable	Woo-hoo!
Hill Climbing	Needed more control	Good for a hard long grind	Hills? What hills?
Handling	Precise! Could ride it on a penny	Solid, predictable lines along the curves	Combination of precision and stability
B&B	Never put	a foot	down
Bumpy	Ride feel was the worst of the three!	Bumps, what bumps?	Did well on speed-bumps, but not so well on rumble strips

Let us look at the three rides individually (Spoiler alert - some bike jargon ahead. Side effects may include an irresistible urge to look up terms on the interweb in a separate tab while reading through):

Frankly, I was very surprised (and a tad disappointed too) by the results. I had expected the Razha to be the top performer of the three, but in reality, it was the worst (personal experience). Apart from the razor precise handling that Pinarello is famous for, the overall bike felt like an "incomplete, unfinished" bike. I could probably position a penny around a 90-degree corner and ride precisely on top of it while cornering at 16+ mph (I tried, without an actual penny), but it required me paying attention to every damn millimeter of the road. Surprisingly, I could not trust the bike to hold its line once it entered the corners. I am speculating that Pinarello made a few "optimizations" to bring the cost of the bike to the level of other entry-level carbon bikes, but in doing so, adversely affected a few crucial parameters of ride quality. The Razha was the lightest of the three, but it certainly was not my best bet going uphill. It did not noticeably damp any high frequency vibrations (hence, rumble strips), but I was surprised that low frequency ones (potholes, speed bumps) also came through. If this was a ploy to cash on the Tour success by introducing an entry-level model, it was certainly not working on me. Plus, no internal cable routing for 2K+ bike, c'mon Pinarello!

The Roubaix is widely credited with the popularization of the sub-category of "endurance" bikes, and all the good things you may have heard about it are true. Every. Last. One. This bike made the tarmac invisible for all practical purposes. Although, in fairness, all three bikes were much smoother than my existing Al frame, it was not until I rode the Roubaix that I truly understood the difference between the ride quality in aluminium and carbon frames. This was an entirely next level of comfort. But then, this is the frame/geometry that is supposed to crush the famed cobbles! There was never a moment on the rumble strips, speed bumps or root-infested side street that I had to stop pedaling due to an up-shock (a term I may have coined to describe the sharp jolt of vibration that travels from the wheels to the frame to the rider). The larger wheelbase (distance between the two wheels, duh?) also made this a very comfortable ride into corners. I simply pointed the bike towards the apex and leaned in to trace wonderful arcs that would have made M. M. Bezier and de Casteljau proud. What it lacked in uphill acceleration, it more than made up for in comfort and solid handling. I could definitely ride a century on this bike and be ready for another one the next day.

Which brings us to the belle of the ball, so as to speak. The Synapse was a wolf in sheep's clothing - a race bike masquerading as an endurance bike. It flew up the hills when I rode out of the saddle - the stiff bottom bracket and downtube were cleary race pedigree. It had a mix of precise handling of Razha with some stability a la Roubaix. I could do a complete U-turn while standing up on the pedals (Kids - DO NOT try this at home, in the park, or anywhere else) without swerving an inch from the intended line on the road (could not do this on the Razha and Roubaix without making some last-second adjustments). It suitably subdued the low and high frequency road chatter, but certainly not to the extent that Roubaix cleaned up the road furniture. I could ride this bike, hard and fast, but unfortunately, not over longer distances.

As you may have guessed by now, while the Synapse impressed me the most as a race/endurance bike, after some hard fought mental hand-wrangling, I opted for the Roubaix. After a few hundred miles, and as importantly, a few thousand feet of elevation gain, I can confidently say that for my price-point and performance considerations, I did make the best choice. I love my Roubaix, and am hoping to ride it on as many long-distance rides as possible - maybe some day - the Paris-Roubaix Challenge Ride, that the bike takes its name after! Any takers?