Canyon Aeroad – first rides

Canyon Aeroad – first rides

Firstly brief introduction.  This is written as a review by an owner, trying to be informative as there do not seem to be many substantive Canyon Aeroad reviews around on the internet (and its hard to take seriously the ‘first ride review’ on Bike Radar when you see the picture of the reviewer riding the bike…).  And a disclaimer.  I am an experienced 1^st cat road racer who has been cycling for many years and have reasonable idea of what I like and think is good, but I am not a cycling equipment expert and also not ridden lots of different bikes.  And also while I can try to be objective, there’s not many people who could admit the new bike they’ve just spend a lot of money on is not good.

Firstly some practical details.  As will be aware if done any research on an Aeroad it comes with an Acros headset which has a significant (~18mm) stack height and should allow for this when considering the geometry (although I assume relatively straightforward to fit standard headset if you wanted).  Aeroad’s have shorter headtubes than Canyon Ultimates so should not be problem for most riders.  Also the frame comes with relatively short fork steerer giving max ~15mm spacers between headset and stem, so unlikely to be suitable for riders who /need a relatively upright position (unless angled stem – ugh!). 

Building the bike was all straightforward, and nothing unusual.  Running Campag meant needed to get LBS to fit the press-fit BB cups otherwise no need for LBS.  I was quite careful and methodical with cutting the internal cable liners as first bike for me with internal cables but all seemed pretty easy (as mentioned in previous post, frame came with all the internal liners inserted and ends neatly taped to ensure ends accessible). 

Fairly plain vanilla build – 2011 Chorus, plus Deda stem/bars (not using the Ritchey stem than comes with bike – Canyon did not have 130mm stem available) and Specialized saddle.  And using Mavic Cosmic SLRs with Conti GP4000s tyres. 

Okay, enough procrastination first rides… 

First impression was that bike immediately felt right.  But fair part of that probably due to careful setup to make sure saddle and bars position exactly as per my old race bike, and frame geometry of Aeroad quite similar to my old race bike anyway (a 2004 Giant TCR – note current Giant geometry is bit different (mainly slacker seat angle, so shorter reach)).  Next impression is it is a lot stiffer than my current 2004 Giant that I’ve raced on at start of this season, and way more comfortable.  This of course is hardly surprising given 2004 Giant had relatively modest bottom bracket area and chain stays but still chunky (by current standards) seat stays.  I get onto the more relevant comparison is the team bike 2010 Giant TCR (with Ultegra and same bars/stem/saddle/wheels) that I rode for most of last year shortly.

The handling of the Aeroad feels very good to me.  Probably best way to describe to describe it was very straightforward.  Zipping round a few bumpy corners on the roads near my house there were no surprises, I looked where I wanted to go and the bike went there.  The bike did not give me immediate feeling ‘on this bike I’ll be able to take x corner y km/h faster’ but so far only ridden to/from/around Richmond Park which does not involve any tricky corners.  That said one lady with pushchair did jump out in front of me when swung round corner on Wandsworth one-way system while doing ~50km/h and all felt pretty stable when braked then swerved and then had to swerve other way when she finally saw me and jumped back. 

It is a little tricky to honestly compare a bike now to a bike that I last rode in Oct 2010, but compared to 2010 Giant I think the rear end stiffness is fairly similar, maybe little better but without doubt the Giant was a far harsher ride.  My recollection is the handling of the Giant was bit more planted/solid feeling, that you could really bash through bumps on corners no problem.  The first time I rode Crystal Palace on the 2010 Giant last year I really remember thinking this is so much better than my old Giant, and definitely taking the hairpin few k faster.  I think now my expectations may have been raised, whereas last year I was really blown away by how much same make/model of frame had improved in only 5-6 years.  Of course it would be surprising if front end of Canyon Aeroad was not less stiff that Giant, given super chunky head/top/down tubes on the Giant.  But as say, to me the handling of the Canyon Aeroad feels really good and definitely not left with feeling that have made significant compromise here. 

The Aeroad has the adjustable rake featured and frame was supplied in the ‘agile’ setting.  I did try swapping to the ‘stable’ setting for one ride but to be honest I am not sure I could really tell the difference.  Maybe would have been more noticeable if I’d changed during a ride rather than comparing an ‘agile’ and a ‘stable’ ride on different days.  Expect I will leave on ‘agile’, maybe changing if take bike to the alps or ever ride something like the Rutland. 

Will not say too much on components because there are lots of groupset reviews around, and most people have their own fairly set views anyway.  The latest Campag brakes are very good (I was plenty happy with older Campag brakes) – not sure how much skeleton brakes and how much the new brake compound, but whatever definitely very nice.  It looks like Campag have beefed up the chainrings compared to a few years ago, and chainset does seem a bit more rigid.  But even a Campag fan like me will happily admit that Shimano hollowtech chainsets are simply significantly stiffer laterally (and probably torsionally as well but that’s much harder to judge).  Whether it is the stiffer front mech and/or new XPSS chainrings, front changes are definitely significantly snappier that used to be a few years ago. 

Overall so far very happy with my Canyon, and looking forward to first race on it in coming days.  Lots of other cyclists have said nice things about it – and think most of them genuinely like rather than just being nice to my feelings.  The matt black finish to the frame combined with black 2011 Chorus, gives the bike a fairly distinctive stealth look. 

What negatives can I think of?  Honestly not many (lets quickly forget about the rubbish name).  Obviously there is a modest weight penalty (+180g compared to Canyon Ultimate SLX – and more compared to some of the super light (and super expensive) bikes around at moment).  And there is little information – aside from the much quoted ‘20% less frontal area’ – apart what the aerodynamic advantage might be.  Canyon got fair bit of criticism on various forums for saying not conducted any wind tunnel testing.  But then every manufacturer claims their testing shows their bike is the stiffest/most aero and no-one believes them anyway.  Dealing direct with Canyon – rather than through a bike shop – some people might find as a negative but I found it fine. 

Will post some further thoughts in a few weeks once I’ve done a few longer rides and races on it. 

Canyon Aeroad - first impressions

I am probably one of the first people in UK to have a Canyon Aeroad frame, which arrived this afternoon.  I ordered it back in November last year and was originally due calendar week 12 (i.e. March) but issues with start of mass production meant 6-7 weeks delay.

The delivery process quite straightforward - got two emails (in German!) first advising order ready and will be transferred to UPS within 48 hours and then later that day another email with tracking number, and the UPS tracking is quite detailed which is good for knowing which day to stay at home.

Opening the box and you immediately get real impression of attention to details.  All the internal cable liners were inserted in the frame and neatly taped up keep then in the right place.  The Aeroad has a deep fork crown and neatly taped in place was a extra long allen key bolt.  In the box is a basic but functional allen key with torque indicator, to use on the stem and seat clamp bolts.  Rubber protectors to go on cables to prevent head tube wear are included.  The chain stay has a normal clear frame protector neatly stuck on, but also on the chainstay when the small chainrings pass is small possibly metal plate stuck on, providing more substantial protection in area that would get damaged if dropped chain.

The frame looks like on the Canyon website, except that the website does not really convey how matt the finish is.  Its stealth bomber matt.  Also the Canyon logos are more subtle that shown on the website.  I like understated generally, but from more than ~2 metres away you can barely see them.  I have not weighed the frame but being German I would be very surprised if the quoted weight is not spot on.  The seat post seemed heavier than expecting so weighed that and 260g is above average (Deda blackstick - i.e. nothing fancy - on my 2004 Giant is much less) - think is the very solid looking and highly adjustable seat clamp.

The seat post (and seat tube) is a gentle oval, which although assumed this was not totally clear from any of the pictures I saw or reviews I read.  Obviously the key feature of this frame is supposed aerodynamic advantages.  There are plenty of people (on various cycling forums) who seem to think they can judge the aerodynamics of a frame simply by looking at the pictures, but I am not one of them and there's a lot more to aerodynamics that simply what 'looks' aero.  But there is no doubt that this is a very neat and tidy frame and there is a lot of attention to detail to try to improve the aerodynamics.  The Acros headset is super easy to adjust and to me seems a great idea, with the only drawback being its relatively high stack height, but headtubes on Aeroad shorter than on Ultimates and for me one small spacer and standard 82 deg stem puts bars at exactly the height I need.  (The geometry of the Aeroad - quite long and low - suiting my average legs and super long torso perfectly, was a major selling point for me).

The frame came with a Ritchey WCS stem (noticeable lighter than a Deda Newton, so I weighed and 35g lighter) but they could only supply with default 110mm now or two weeks wait for 120mm, whereas I need 130mm so will be putting Deda Newton on for now and the Ritchey on eBay.  The Aeroad has standard 1 1/8" steerer (at top) so Canyon's general inflexibility regarding stem lengths less of issue than for Ultimate with 1 1/4" with limited manufacturers making.

Little more to say now until I build the thing (2011 Chorus, Mavic Cosmic SLRs, probably Deda stem/bars and Specialized Toupe or Romin saddle...and maybe white bar tape).  But currently waiting the arrival of Campag press fit BB86 bottom bracket cups, and getting them fitted.  And off fishing with my dad tomorrow anyway

Pro cyclists' mistakes...

Very exciting Tour of Flanders yesterday, and lots of good write-ups in the cycling press.  But found it interesting how worlds best professional cyclists all made seemingly very basic mistakes.  Not judgement call like whether Chavanel should have ridden with Cancellara, but more basic stuff. 

Boonen’s attack (0:31 in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buaUpLCr5Dc).  Why did Boonen launch with Cancellara virtually on his wheel at the time (just before Boonen is 5^th wheel with Cancellara right behind, Boonen then moves up pretty unsubtly on the right and briefly Ballan is between them).  There was fair way to go, and surely plenty of time to choose much better opportunity.  With radios then do not even need to look round to check who’s on your wheel, and surely Wilfred Peters should have been screaming ‘not now, Fabian on you wheel, wait Tommeke wait…’ 

Cancellara catching Chavanel too quickly.  Pretty obvious that Chavanel was going to sit on Cancellara, so little benefit in Cancellara getting to Chavenel sooner that he needed to.  Catching Chavenel 6-7k later just before next climb would have been far more logical.  Although to be fair I think Chavanel rode to manage when Cancellara caught him, and make sure he got to ride Valkenburg at tempo. 

Gilbert’s attack up Bosberg.  I am massive fan of Gilbert and it made great tv but surely nailing it from the very bottom was not the best way to try and get race winning gap.  The result was others rode up the Bosberg at their limit, and quickly recovered to chase and catch Gilbert.  Race winning gaps are rarely about simply outpowering others up a fairly short climb – its when other riders overextend themselves that gaps really grow.

Large pro teams in UK cycle races...

Reading reports and results from UK cycle races over the weekend.  Team Raleigh full 8 riders in Evesham Vale and finish 1-2-3-4 http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/road/article/20110321-Report--Evesham-Vale-RR-0 and Motorpoint finish 1-2-3-4-5 in the Peter Young memorial http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/events/details/38022/Hounslow-Peter-Young-Memorial-Road-Race.  While both of these are decent National B events, they are still essentially grass roots races albeit for the slightly better or more ambitious rider.  While such complete domination by the pros is impressive I can't be the only one who thinks this is little sad.  If there's no big races on over a weekend then of course pros should be doing Nat B races - and its one of attractions of cycling that anyone can race against much better riders and that a guy like me has 'raced' against Cavendish, Backstedt, Elliot and Olympic gold medallists etc etc over the years - but do they really need to put whole team in just one race?  Four Raleighs and four Motorpoint in each race would have surely been much better.  A smaller team like Twenty3c-Orbea was happy enough to sensibly split their riders between the Peter Young and the Wally Gimber road races.

Tenerife cycling

Tenerife
This year the unofficial London Dynamo training camp went to Tenerife and I thought I would do a short write-up that maybe helpful for anyone who’s thinking of heading there for cycling training.

We flew out on a Monarch scheduled flight from Gatwick. Not particularly cheap once pay the sports equipment charges, but was all fine with 13 bikes so can’t complain. We stayed in Médano a small town only a few km from the airport so only short journey which was nice after 4 hour flight (Tenerife is fair bit further flight than south of Spain).

Médano had various advantage and disadvantages as a cycling base in Tenerife. It is a nice relaxed town which has everything need for a cycling trip (and also happens to have decent bike rental shop just in case – and came in handy for one of our group). It was nice to come back from rides and look out from terraces to the beach and watch all the windsurfers, and couple of days also went for a swim in the sea.

The main disadvantage with Medano was the relatively limited choice of routes from Medano. The first day we headed out west along the coast and it is quite messy navigating way through Playa de las Américas and getting to the TF-47 coast road. However several of us also came out this way on the penultimate day and plodding through the suburban sprawl not too bad once know way and not stopping at junctions needing to check directions. The other two main options from Medano are north towards Vilaflor and Teide, or along the inland road up the east coast through Arico/Fasnia.

Before arriving in Tenerife we were expecting we head up Teide at least once and possible twice. In the end ending up doing Teide four times, and another two days going to Vilaflor (1400m), and only one day that completely avoided Teide/Vilaflor. We were pretty lucky with the weather. The first day was around 27 deg C and sunny, and it was probably still around 18-19 deg C up at 2,300m altitude. This lulled us into a little complacency. On fifth day leaving Medano it was about 19 deg C sun/cloud and took thin arm warmers and a gilet. At Vilaflor cold misty cloud rolled in and temperature plunged to an estimated 5 deg C. It was relatively okay whilst climbing up from Vilaflor, but the descent was grim. Spent most of it braking and pedalling hard at same time trying to keep slightly warmer. Towards Vilaflor saw an Astana pro coming up in full legwarmers and balaclava and he must been surprised to see these frozen muppets descending in shorts. But this day aside we had good weather, but if weather less favourable then certainly would not want to go up Teide four times in a week and that would limit the riding somewhat.

In Tenerife generally the vast majority of the roads are either up or down, and that means options for easy rides are quite limited. And that also means more difficult to accommodate group riding with differing abilities or aims for the week, and meant fair bit of week was riding in sub-groups rather than everyone together.

Tenerife is very windy, however it only seemed to be windy at low altitude and as soon as headed into the hills the wind was rarely very noticeable. The only times wind was significant was the 5km coast road from Medano to El Abrigo, which meant a lazy 50+ km/h start to the day and/or 25 km/h grovel finish to the day. And the descents home from San Miguel or Grandilla (especially Grandilla) when it would be horrible blustery strong cross wind, while descending exposed bumpy roads with lots of traffic zooming past – I would definitely preferred not to have my deep section wheels on (currently only have Cosmic SLR race wheels or heavy Aksium training wheels).

On subject of traffic Tenerife drivers are impatient and quite aggressive (read somewhere that they are polite and considerate to cyclists – nope). They will overtake a group of cyclists immediately pretty much no matter what. Most of time its relatively okay as roads wide enough for cars to squeeze by cyclists two-a-breast but one guy nearly got taken out as he moved left a little approaching a sharp right hand bend only almost into path of guy overtaking just 10-20 metres before the bend.

Will not describe every ride we did but just to mention few comments/highlights:

- climbing Teide from the east is the least interesting direction, long stretches of bland straight road, and the section of road 1km before the TF-38/TF-21 junction is a total mess and unpleasant to ride over. The descent down to Vilaflor is quite nice though, with sweeping bends and gets little steeper and faster as approach Vilaflor (in general none of descents in Tenerife are super fast compare to Alps – lots of 60-70km/h rather than 70-80+km/h)

- the climb direct from San Miguel to Vilaflor on an unclassified road is nice, no traffic and much steeper (especially last 300m) than all other climbs to Vilaflor

- the climb up Teido from Arafo is really nice but continues climbing much more from the TF-523/TF-24 junction that you expect, and its quite a long way, rolling up and down, across the Teide plateau (scenary is stunning)

- the climb from Masca (northwest of Santiago del Teide) is brutal (4km at 11% with lots of 15-16% on very poor road surface) but is great scenary (both spectacular and quite different to rest of the island)

Staying so close the airport meant we did not bother with hire cars but would have been useful for a couple of days to be able to have a bit more variety of routes. That said depends how much bothered about doing some roads a few times in a week – sometimes doing the same road with nice scenery in warm sunshine in a week away from work is a high class problem really.

Overall I liked Tenerife a lot, although probably would not go back there again for a training camp mainly because just too climbing orientated, and somewhere like Callosa (near Calpe) was better training camp riding (although weather in south east Spain when we were in Tenerife was really bad).

Testing twitterfeed

Can't always express myself in 160 characters so trying linking my old blog with my twitter