There are many factors to consider when purchasing a bike. Manufacturer, material, type, size, color, components, wheels, etc. The first thing I decided was that I wanted to build my new bike up myself instead of purchasing one ready to ride. I won't be able to ride for at least another month, so I have the time to do it and I greatly enjoy figuring out how things go together. Plus, I'm looking forward to the satisfaction of riding something that I had a hand in creating.
The Frameset
Some decisions were made almost immediately. I knew I wanted to try a new manufacturer (previous bike was Specialized). I knew I wanted a carbon fiber frame (previous bike was aluminum). I knew that I wanted a dark-colored bike (previous bike was white and a constant hassle to keep clean). And I knew I wanted a slightly smaller frame (previous bike was a 58cm). I enjoy climbing Mt. Lemmon, riding the Saturday Shootout, and sprinting for the finish in crits and road races, so a lightweight, aerodynamic, stiff frame would seem to be ideal.
With all the free time I had lying in bed for 2 months, I read dozens of articles looking at the different options available for the latest trend of road bikes: aero. I've heard (and read) a lot of praise for aero road bikes, and I like the idea of having a bike that I can use for (and hopefully obtain good results in) time trials -- without the need of a second, TT-specific bike. The aero road bikes I looked at were the BMC Timemachine, Cervelo S5, Felt AR, Fuji SST, Giant Propel, Ridley Noah, and Scott Foil (I ruled out the Specialized Venge on account of wanting to try a new manufacturer).
Some articles comparing different aero road bikes if you're interested:
Below are some of the options I looked at (with links to reviews of each bike):
I've always liked the look of the Ridley bikes and out of the aero lineup I definitely preferred the look of the Ridley over the others. The curved top tube, integrated seatmast, and overall "stance" are significantly more appealing to me. Of course this is subjective but there were other, more objective factors that came in to play like the split fork & seat stays, drag-reduction strips on leading edges, and integrated brakes. As an engineer, I think these features -- though admittedly borderline gimmicky -- are pretty cool and set the bike apart from the others. Ridley claims a 20 watt savings at 40kph (25mph) due to their aerodynamic features over a standard road bike. Doesn't seem like much at first but looking at the Shootout segment from
Valencia to the bridge, I tend to average 24mph and 240 watts, which means riding the Noah would require just about 10% less energy.
 |
| Drag-reduction strip |
The Noah comes in three versions: the RS, Pro, and FB (aka "Fast"). The RS is the least expensive, using a heavier carbon layup, and doesn't have the integrated seatmast. The Pro uses a better carbon layup and has the integrated seatmast, but doesn't have the integrated brakes. The FB is the most expensive and includes all the features. The price of the FB was high enough that it was thrown out as a possibility. The integrated seatmast results in better aerodynamics and a cleaner look but could potentially be a resale problem and you want to make sure you get it right when you cut it. The better carbon used in the Pro version, however, was enough to convince me to overlook the drawbacks of the integrated seatmast. Besides, I don't plan on selling this bike any time soon, and I've learned to measure 16 times and cut once. Ridley's sizing is small, medium, large, etc. and the size I was looking for was equivalent to a 56cm, which for Ridley is a medium.
 |
| Split fork |
With my decision almost finalized I did some more online research specifically geared towards finding the flaws of the Noah. The main issues that I dug up were pretty minor. One was the cost and the other was the frame stiffness. For my build, cost isn't much of an issue because I am looking to buy a 2-year old (but still new) frameset, not a 2014 complete bike fresh off the assembly line. The stiffness issue for me also isn't a bad thing since I desire a stiff frame. In fact, one reviewer rode the Noah Pro on his first set of back-to-back centuries and "didn't feel beaten up afterwards."
 |
| Integreated Brakes |
I felt very confident that the Ridley Noah Pro was the one to get, but during my final searches I came across a deal on a Noah FB that I couldn't ignore. It turned out that Ridley had just one medium-sized 2-year old Noah FB left in their stock and I had a chance to snag it at a smoking price. I jumped on it. A little over a week later and I'm now the proud owner of a Ridley Noah FB frameset in the team colors (black with red accents).
 |
| The latest addition to our family |
If you are feeling lucky and wouldn't be opposed to acquiring a brand new, fully-customized 2014 Noah FB, you can enter a free contest at Ridley's website (contest ends February 3).
Click here to enter. Good luck!
I'm looking forward to the build -- and very much looking forward to the first ride. If you have any questions or suggestions on the build please feel free to comment below.
Awesome read! Looking forward to this build. I actually have been thinking the Cervelo S5 maybe this next year. That Ridley is really nice!
ReplyDeleteThanks Ryan, the S5 was the reason I starting thinking about going with an aero road bike in the first place. With any luck I'll join you for a ride soon.
DeleteOh man that is a sexy bike and that is awesome you were able to get a great deal on the pro version with the integrated brakes. The split fork is interesting, what was their reasoning behind it?
ReplyDeleteThanks Kyle, I can't wait to ride it! They claim the split fork deals with the turbulence created when air passing the fork meets the air from the spinning wheels. The split lets the air from the spinning wheel (which is moving in the same direction as the bike) to turn around and channel into the same path as the air passing the fork, reducing turbulence and therefore reducing drag. Their testing showed around a 7% reduction in drag. Of course the testing is done in a wind tunnel with no rider, so real-world results may be less significant. The design came from John Cobb and I believe Oval Concepts was the first to have it back in 2008. To my knowledge, Ridley is the only one utilizing it today. It's a heavier fork, but I'm hoping it (like the rest of the bike's features) turns out to be the ideal balance between aerodynamic and lightweight.
Deletehmmm, that's an interesting idea. Also I would think that the rider would have little effect on its efficiency since it is in front of the rider. My understanding is that things get screwy due to the disturbance of the air from the rider's body.
DeleteYeah I think you're right. I would think that crosswinds could affect the results a little. They also have splits in the seat stays, which are supposed to offer the same benefit for the rear wheel turbulence -- but those splits are behind the rider and likely affected more by him/her.
DeleteI should also mention that the weight of the fork, while heavier, does include the integrated brake -- which actaully makes the entire system (fork + brake) lighter than the standard option.
A slight correction to something I said earlier: I found out the testing they did was with a rider on a track (not just the bike in a wind tunnel). At 25 mph the required power was 20 watts lower and the rider's heart rate was 4% lower.
Deletethat integrated brake is sweet
ReplyDeleteHey Buzz,
ReplyDeleteEnjoyed the blog. You are making want a new bike
Thanks Jimmy, you should follow Jason's advice and spend as much money as the miles you ride! Miss you bro, I saw your ride the other day to Pistol Hill with the stop at the top!
Delete