Fit can be reasonably close, but the Lauf is a bit lower which would require more spacers under the stem for me.
The biggest killer is that long front center and slack front end. I guess I may be an outlier, but never find my Emonda to be sketchy on roads, even with 60mm deep wheels on both ends. I just don’t get the need to put the front tire out like a top fuel dragster to make it hold a straight line
I would need to ride it I guess, but considering what I learned from my Warbird, that long front center may require some extra attention with forward weighting if and when someone decides to rip a corner at speed.
Longer front center still with a shorter rear. Perhaps this will still corner fine with that short rear end? I never expected the “Long, Low & Slack” trend to hit real drop bar roadies, but I guess it is going everywhere.
But the stack is well below and into the race bike area by comparison.
This seems to be a bike aiming at Endurance bike stability and then some, with a fit closer to a race bike. I sure wouldn’t aim to use this for crit courses but perhaps it would still be a fine bike for daily use. Just very different and not sure I’d like it at the very least.
Not yet mentioned: Cervelo Caledonia (5). My partner has the 5 as her roadie to supplement her tri bike. It’s fast and comfortable. I bought her a set of gravel wheels for light gravel in New England because the frame can clear 35 mm.
Recommend you check out Fezzari. US brand, based in Utah. Great value. The Empire is their endurance road bike, the Veyo their aero road bike. I have an Empire and really enjoy it.
The Lauf Uthald looks interesting. It’s brand new so no first hand experience with it but the Seigla is great.
I ran into a UAE rider last week riding his Colnago V4RS so naturally I felt it worthy of a mention here.
Just by chance while buying new shoes yesterday a V4RS was displayed at a LBS I frequent. I went from lust to seriously considering. I’ve been around long enough to know this won’t transform my riding in any appreciable way over the 2022 Trek Emonda SLR I currently ride. But, I could say the same thing about most bikes.
The geo syncs well for me; the T47 is a bonus; front end checks all the boxes, takes 32’s; reported to be slightly more comfortable than the V3; looks appeal to me, etc…But, the only reason I’m seriously considering it is because the LBS is a dealer. I’ve come to realize I value good service as much as anything else. Something to consider IMO/E.
I wouldn’t use the word horrible, I’d say opinionated. IMHO small brands should err on the side of opinionated bikes, for well-rounded (“boring”) bikes you can always get a Specialized, Trek or Cannondale.
Not sure if Lauf sets expectations correctly, though, which is key if you cannot count on people being able to test ride your stuff.
So “boring” is another word for “time tested, tried and true” geometry for road bikes that dates back decades?
The “opinionated” aspect jives correctly with me and parallels the fact that Lauf is stepping away from well established road geo, at least in the scope of one that is also “Race fit”.
Considering that Lauf is chose a “stable” geometry and is pushing that angle hard in their marketing, the LAUF would seem to be the “boring” option to me.
Stable handling - on a fast-fit road bike!
We firmly believe that a fast fit and stable handling should not be mutually exclusive. Because, why should they?
We believed that in order to go fast, a bike should be stable. This way the rider can put down more power efficiently, and go faster confidently. Sure, there were (and are) bikes out there that emphasize stable handling. But… stable handling is generally paired with slower endurance bikes with a taller/relaxed fit of the rider. While faster-fit road bikes are being differentiated from endurance bikes by less stable steering, in an effort to make them feel faster.
Great to have people trying new things here, but I don’t think you hit all the right notes with the "labeling above, at least for the way I ride and consider geo.
I’m not certain I understand the word choice here, but I would reinforce that I did say it was horrible “for me”…I’m sure for others, it would work well.
Are you talking about road bikes, you know, the bike category that evolves most slowly and tends to resist all good ideas until the end?
(@mcneese.chad knows this is written in jest and with love.)
The description of this bike doesn’t make it sound it is for me either, quite the opposite. I really hated the slow handling of my endurance road bike — which was a good bike, just not for me. But some people seem to prefer slow-handling bikes If you are used to and like your gravel bike and you want a road bike that handles similarly, perhaps. Or you live in Kansas where roads are often straight. Dunno.
Sometimes crazy combos work even though on paper they shouldn’t work. Let’s check back in in two, three years before declaring failure. And sometimes failures give birth to beautiful new ideas in the future.
Think of a car that has been designed for mass market appeal (VW Golf/Rabbit in Europe or the F150 in the US). Those aren’t great at anything but very good-to-very decent at a lot. Compare that to an Alfa Romeo or BMW: they are more opinionated in their design, made to appeal to a smaller audience, but amongst that audience the affection is greater.
In bike terms, think of the 3T Exploro, this is in my mind a positive example. It certainly isn’t for everyone, by design. Yet I wouldn’t call it a failure. Another one is the 3T Strada: an aero bike made for wide tires, disc brakes and (initially) 1x only. It was years ahead of its time when it came out. The kind of bike that gets me excited.
Even bikes that clearly aren’t for me get me excited, especially those that take a risk. I love Surlys, but never would I buy one in a million years.
The OP didn’t mention a price range, so I’ll offer that there are meaningful improvements up to $5-6K, and then beyond that there are serious diminishing returns.
IMO, the sweetspot is:
Carbon frame from a reputable mfg that invests in R&D
Ultegra 12s Di2
Quality carbon wheels ≤60mm
OP mentions the Canyon Ultimate and they have a model that ticks all these boxes for $5500
Reminds me of Jonathan’s reasoning in his post about his Melee vs SL7/SL8, he said the Tarmacs were ‘nervous’ compared to the Melee and said the Tarmacs are like a STI and the Melee is like an AMG… There’s a couple young idiots with STIs in my building and its an association I don’t care for, would much prefer the refined but powerful idea of the AMG than the snorty STI. I have heard others describe the Tarmacs as ‘lively’ in a comparison to the new Madone and SL8 I shared in the SL8 thread. The Madone was faster in every test and more comfortable but the testers didn’t like how the Madone felt and described it as climbing like a board. I’m guessing that is a feeling of ‘stable’ vs ‘nervous/lively’.
Yeah, car analogies are often flawed, and I think his is too.
WRT the bikes, it’s clear that the longer front center of the Melee (+13mm between 54cm which I think he rides) would clearly slow the handling down. That’s with the majority of the other values close enough to call them the same.
WRT to cars, his comparison is not even close to a “paired” set that is worth discussing IMO. The closest proxy would be to check wheelbase and steering ratio at the least to consider simplistic turn attributes. But cars get so much more tricky with suspension geometry, weight and other attributes that determine cornering feel. Setting a budget racer against a top tier luxury sports car is just a mismatch on a number of levels.
I’m in the same position as the OP, only more focused on climbing/descending performance, and would consider a Canyon Ultimate for the reasons you mention but their absolute rejection of any reasonable accommodation for cockpit fit adjustments kills that option. I get that it’s not their market strategy, so I guess it just isn’t a good fit for me. Pun intended…
Well, that is an excellent question I am still trying to figure out for myself. I would guess the leading candidates are:
Cervelo Soloist
Giant Propel
BMC Teammachine SLR three
Cannondale Supersix Evo new version
I have a set of Ultegra C50 wheels, so I can actually build up a bike myself with Ultegra Di2 less the wheels for about the same money as a full bike with 105Di2 build. I’m kind of looking to see if I will be able to snag a frameset on a deal in the near future. I would really like to test these bikes, but its just not reasonable without quite a bit of travel. The only bike shops near me, as one other poster mentioned, are Trek stores, Specialized, and Mikes Bikes. I really shouldn’t complain, first world problems and all that…
I’ve got a C68. Didn’t try a V3RS and the V4RS was announced after I’d pulled the trigger. High level seems to be that the V is a more out and out racer (so I’d assume stiffer) and the C is more for middle aged guys like me who want a beautiful all-rounder and aren’t fussed about racing. So, as the thread is titled “best all round road bike” I’d like to nominate the C68. It’s stiff, but not too stiff. Aero, but not massively so. Super comfortable for long rides. Lovely to ride. Makes me smile every time.
How do you test a bike in a way that represents what it will ultimately feel like? I think of things like bike fit, tires, tire pressure, possible stem changes and do not know if I could trust a quick ride.
I feel the same about test driving cars - I just go with what the consensus around the car rather than thinking I can uncover it in a short drive.
but perhaps it would still be a fine bike for daily use. Just very different and not sure I’d like it at the very least.
