As an obvious disclaimer, I receive products from each of these companies either at a reduced price or free. That said, my goal is to provide an unbiased opinion of these companies' products.
With that out of the way, the point of this post is to provide a highly detailed write up on my new ride, an Orbea Ordu. I will discuss my thought process in selecting each component as well as some pros and cons of different components.
Without further ado, here she (he?) is all dressed up to race:
(And, yes, I bought those flowers on the table in the background for Stacey just because I'm such a great guy.)
Orbea had me pick my component spec using their "Made to Order" system at orbea-usa.com. Basically, this system allows one to select which components the bike will include instead of choosing from 2 or at most 3 options offered by other comapanies. It's a cool feature, though if I were to improve it in any way it would be to offer even greater choice. For example, instead of selecting a group set, one would be able to select each component individual of the others, such as a Dura-Ace rear derailleur and an Ultegra front derailleur. At any rate, this system is the best I've seen and I was pleasantly surprised when my bike showed up just 5 days after I ordered it.
Since the bike was shipped directly to me and not to a dealer, I got to assemble it myself. I've learned to do most of my own wrenching over the past few years because I enjoy working on my bike and want to be self-sufficient. By being fully responsible for all my gear, I only have myself to blame if something goes wrong during a race. Anyhow, I spent a few hours each day during the past week building the bike and making minor alterations until I got everything setup just how I wanted. I was very meticulous, using my torque wrench when necessary and taking care of minor details like cable routing and even sanding the cut ends of zip-ties to avoid cutting myself (cut zip-ties can be sharp!).
When I started putting the bike together, I worried that the cable routing would be a pain -- internal cable routing often is. To my surprise, every cable went through on my first attempt. Nice! However, later I was changing out the rear derailleur cable and the cable guide inside the frame became dislodged. The rear derailleur cable no longer goes right when it should and it took a lot of effort to get it back in. In the future, I'm going to make sure to leave a cable through the frame whenever I change out the housing and leave the housing in place whenever I change a cable. That's good practice with any internally-routed frame.
I was able to position my saddle at about 78 degrees (relative to the bottom bracket) even though I'm using the 74/76 degree seatpost and not Orbea's optional 78/80 degree seatpost. Even with a 76 cm saddle height and without a long-nosed saddle like my old Profile Design saddle, I was still able to get plenty steep on this frame.
The Ordu is a fantastic looking frame and offers a much smoother ride than my old aluminum bike. Even chip-and-seal roads didn't bother me on my initial ride with the new bike. There's a lot more that I could discuss about the frame, specifically with reference to aerodynamics and whether or not they are relevant. I've touched on the issue before and won't go into detail now, but maybe I'll expound in a future post (this one is long enough as is). Anyhow, the biggest compliment I can give the frame is that I'm thrilled to own it and look forward to putting many, many miles on it.
The Ordu also happens to be the same bike that Craig Alexander -- who I believe trains in Boulder at least part of the year -- rode to victory in Kona the past two years. Here's Craig celebrating one of his many victories:
Since I do a fair amount of riding up in Boulder, I'm sure people will frequently confuse myself with Craig, with the two of us riding the same bike and all. As I imagine it, their conversations will go something like this:
First rider: "Hey, did you see that guy? I think that was two time world champion Craig Alexander."
Second rider: "Yeah, that guy was certainly fast. However, I don't think that was Craig because that guy was far more handsome than Mr. Alexander ."
As far as wheels go, I'll race Cali 70.3 with a 404 front and 808 rear. I selected this wheelset because I think it's ideal for Kona. From what I've read, an 808 front can be dicey on windy days in Kona. Plus, according to Zipp the 808 front only saves about 6 seconds per hour over a 404 front. That savings is hardly worth the risk of a crash, in my opinion. I'd love to have a slew of Zipp wheels for different occasions, like a 1080 front and 900 disc rear, but that isn't happening unless I win the lottery or cut 45 minutes off my IM time. I may, however, put a disc cover on the rear for future races, other than Kona of course.
Also regarding the wheels, I'm going with clinchers because (1) they're as fast or faster than tubulars (see www.biketechreview.com) and, more importantly, (2) they're less of a hassle for me. Changing brake pads, worry about flatting on my test ride the day before a big race, and learning to properly glue and change tubulars can all be avoided with clinchers.
Right now I'm running Michelin Pro 3 Race tires, both sized 23 mm. I used these exact same tires for most races last year, so I'm going to thoroughly inspect them before Cali 70.3. For my next set, I may select a slightly narrower front tire, likely a Bontrager Aero TT tire or a Zipp 21 mm Tangente. A narrower front may make for slightly better aerodynamics, as the 23 mm Michelin protrudes slightly relative to the wheel brake surface. When I change tires, I am willing to give away a bit of rolling resistance for extra puncture resistance. My rationale is that my cycling is strong enough to achieve my goal (a Kona qualification) and one thing that could derail that goal is a flat tire or two.
An aerobar close-up:
Profile Design bars were my choice because of their stack height. I wanted something with a fairly high height so that I wouldn't need many spacers beneath my stem. I run about 13 cm of drop, which isn't a ton for someone of my height. With the T2+ clip-ons, I can run a 100mm negative 6 degree stem without any spacers. Actually, some modification was required to lower the bars a bit.
As you may be able to see in the pictures above, I installed the armrest mounts upside-down and then used a few washers to raise the armrests to the proper height. I opted for washers instead of the risers included with the bars because the risers raised the armrests a bit too high and using washers allows me to incrementally adjust the armrests by adding or subtracting washers.
Overall, I'm very happy with the Profile Design bars. Their biggest advantage is adjustability. The extensions can be rotated about two axes, can be slid fore and aft, etc. One disadvantage is that the base bar does not have the most aero profile, especially compared to my Hed bars. However, I'm happy that the base bar has upturned ends. Since I do a fair amount of climbing and descending, the additional stability provided by upturned ends is welcome. Oh, and I also setup the extensions as narrow as possible. The extension mounting brackets are right up against the lateral sides of my stem. This provides an armrest width of 17.5 cm, if I recall correctly. My old bars were set up 1 cm or so narrower, and while that may be more aerodynamic, it's slightly less comfortable.
I also paid careful attention to the cable routing and tried to keep the derailleur cables out of the wind. I accomplished this by running the cables along the extensions and then over the base bar. Looking at the bike from the front as shown above the derailleur cables are not even visible. And that's with external cable routing.
The Profile Bars came with carbon S-bend extensions. I tried these for one ride and realized I'd get carpal tunnel syndrome in my wrists if I continued using them. Double-bend extensions work for me because they're located right where my hands are when my hands are completely relaxed. While S-bends look much better than the double-bends I'm now using, comfort is more important than aesthetics (sometimes it seems like many people go for the cool factor over practicality). After installing the double-bend extensions, I hack-sawed off a few inches of their tips so that the shifters sit right at the ends of my hands. I also considered drilling these extensions for internal cable routing, but decided I'm happy enough with the routing as is.
At IMLP and IMLou last year I had some difficulty filling my front mounted aero bottle, and as a result I occasionally had to discard empty Gatorade bottles after the trash line. While this is a minor infraction unlikely to result in a penalty, I want to do my best to abide by the rules. To this end I am experimenting with a cage mounted along my stem:
A few zip-ties hold the cage in place. On my first two rides this setup has worked well. It's easy to pull the bottle from the cage and I don't need to worry about quickly filling an aero bottle. Plus, some claim the front mounted cage is more aerodynamic. While a bottle positioned in the cage is enclosed nicely by my arms, aerodynamics did not play much of a factor in my decision to use a cage in this fashion.
If the front-mounted cage comes loose, I have confidence that the other bottle holder on the bike's down tube will be sufficient to allow me to get through an IM. Carrying two bottles is more of a backup measure than a necessity for me (I carry Gatorade or another sports drink in both bottles).
A power meter is a nice addition to the bike:
I got this SRM for a great deal, otherwise I may have purchased a Quarq. My experience with Powertap is positive, but a crank-based system is a bit nicer for racing and training since one needn't own two power meters or use the same wheel for both racing and training. My favorite use of a power meter is to make trainer rides more interested. Having a goal in mind and structuring trainer rides like swim workouts makes time go by much faster.
One thing I had to do for the SRM was to attach a magnet to my frame's bottom bracket.
Normally this magnet would be attached to the cable guide on the bottom bracket, but the Ordu doesn't have an external cable guide. Instead, I cut off the mount portion of the magnet and taped the magnet to the frame with some double sided tape. Hopefully the magnet stays put for the long haul!
A Garmin Edge 500 reads the SRM's signal. This computer is a good choice to keep the price down, plus it's extremely user friendly and offers a huge number of display options. It displays temperature, altitude (based on pressure, not inaccurate GPS info), gradient, and a host of other fields...if you want it to. Even if I were still using my Powertap, I'd consider buying this computer to replace the cumbersome yellow Powertap computer. The Edge 500 is by far the best cycling computer I've used.
I'll be surprised if anyone made it this far! My write-up is perhaps too extensive. Anyhow, with my bike fully assembly, I guess I'm out of excuses for the squalid condition of my den/bike room:
I think the bike should be a 'she', because I don't think you would like to ride a he. "I rode the hell out of him" just sounds weird. Stacey wouldn't approve either.
ReplyDeleteIt is a very nice bike tho. Congrats on the sponsorship deal!