Trek Domane 2023

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

Post Reply
Maddie
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:44 am

by Maddie

An alien-esque mean looking machine, Tobin. Looks great

hannawald
Posts: 1706
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:28 pm
Location: Czech Republic

by hannawald

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 8:07 am
hannawald wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 7:51 am
@TobinHatesYou Stunning bike, beautiful proportions, I like the massive bb and headtube compared to SLR version. Number 4 is decal or under the clear coat? It seems like a build with no budget constraint. Do you thing Light Bicycle wheels equals Bontrager Aeolus RSL wheels? They seem to have really great reviews.

Unlike the team bikes, the #4 is under the clearcoat. I was hoping Trek would sell the miscellaneous decal sets, but no go. While I could have gone for the Aeolus RSL 51s, the WR50s are 50-60g lighter and better proportioned for 28mm tires. The WR50s were also 40% the price of the Aeolus RSL 51s....
thanks, I was hoping for the same thing that the decals would be changeable as I saw an assembly video of a team bike and it was not under the clear coat...would be a nice feature.
I always wonder if there is some magic with top branded wheels. In some comparison videos between 1st class branded wheels and chinese brands (I mean Light Bicycle, Farsports) they always say branded ones are better so you get something more for your money (although the benefit is small and you pay a lot more). It usually is that chinese wheelsets are similar in many areas but lacking something. Weight is usually good, aerodynamics is similar, but sometimes they are simply harscher, sometimes they are much more sensitive to the wind... I have always had wheels from Light Bicycle, my branded ones were from FFWD (but I couldn´t make a comparison on the same bike), I haven´t tried 1st league like Enve or Bontrager. From what I have gathered it seems that this generation Aeolus is really great - they claim RSL37 aerodynamics is better than deeper Zipp 303 NSW and with deeper wheels they are miracle in cross winds... just wondered if there was something about it or it is just PR speech and you don´t feel any difference 99 percent of your ride.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
Mr.Gib
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:18 am
Build done.
That looks outstanding. You've gone to some lengths to get your fit. The bar is a nice touch. That video you posted of the extreme custom frame was an eye opener about the extent to which pelvic rotation can effect reach.

Gotta say something about the seat angle. I assume that is to accomodate your substantial pelvic rotation. And if you don't slide forward then I guess it works - but that angle is an indication that there may still be some gains in efficiency to be had. I'm sure you've obsessed about the best saddle for you, but I would think there is a saddle out there that can be set level or close to it, and still accomodate you when you get aero. Like you I "suffer" from significant freedom of pelvic rotation. That's how I ended up on SQ Lab - allowed me to roll forward without too much pressure up front.

Re the WR50's, I have them on my Ostro and have been very happy with them. Also 5000TR 28mm (30mm on the rear). Wouldn't mind if they were a touch stiffer. More of an overall wheel build issue than a rim issue, and at your mass, probably a non issue. My 77kg are about the limit for 24 Sapim CX rays.

Enjoy the ride and give us a handling report when you get some miles on her. I am curious if the reduced trail results in a bike that wants to run a little straighter in high speed corners/curves.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12455
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:10 pm
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:18 am
Build done.
That looks outstanding. You've gone to some lengths to get your fit. The bar is a nice touch. That video you posted of the extreme custom frame was an eye opener about the extent to which pelvic rotation can effect reach.

Gotta say something about the seat angle. I assume that is to accomodate your substantial pelvic rotation. And if you don't slide forward then I guess it works - but that angle is an indication that there may still be some gains in efficiency to be had. I'm sure you've obsessed about the best saddle for you, but I would think there is a saddle out there that can be set level or close to it, and still accomodate you when you get aero. Like you I "suffer" from significant freedom of pelvic rotation. That's how I ended up on SQ Lab - allowed me to roll forward without too much pressure up front.

Re the WR50's, I have them on my Ostro and have been very happy with them. Also 5000TR 28mm (30mm on the rear). Wouldn't mind if they were a touch stiffer. More of an overall wheel build issue than a rim issue, and at your mass, probably a non issue. My 77kg are about the limit for 24 Sapim CX rays.

Enjoy the ride and give us a handling report when you get some miles on her. I am curious if the reduced trail results in a bike that wants to run a little straighter in high speed corners/curves.

The saddle issue is being monitored. I normally use a 3DBikeFit Throne RS with a little bit less of a tilt, but the Selle Italia was being cleared out and I figured I’d give it a try. SQLab has definitely been on my radar. My ass gets along with Selle SMP too as long as I set the middle portion level.

elmtree
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2022 7:45 pm

by elmtree

Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:10 pm

Enjoy the ride and give us a handling report when you get some miles on her. I am curious if the reduced trail results in a bike that wants to run a little straighter in high speed corners/curves.
I'm also curious! But shouldn't reduced trail make it more twitchy/turny? My impression was that for the domane they did a sorta fast front end with a longer wheel base to make it more stable. Could be wrong, which is why I'm asking!

apr46
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:46 pm

by apr46

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:18 am
Build done.
Wow. Love this build. Looks amazing and I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts on its ride.

Its very similar to how I would build it and I also own LBWR50 wheels and run the Croder Spider with (smaller) Praxis rings on both my gravel and road bike!

Ive also been pining over the Domane RSL, but its hard for me justify a bike that slots in between my gravel bike and the road bike i self-designed with a similar geometry. For those of you wondering about how the 51mm or 52mm trail will affect the handling, between narrower hand positions on the bars and the high volume/ lower pressure tires adding some pnuematic trail back in, i feel like my bike handles a lot like race bikes of 5-7 years ago when high to mid 50s trail numbers were coupled with 23mm tires pumped up to high pressures.

User avatar
Mr.Gib
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:32 pm
Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:10 pm
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:18 am
Build done.
That looks outstanding. You've gone to some lengths to get your fit. The bar is a nice touch. That video you posted of the extreme custom frame was an eye opener about the extent to which pelvic rotation can effect reach.

Gotta say something about the seat angle. I assume that is to accomodate your substantial pelvic rotation. And if you don't slide forward then I guess it works - but that angle is an indication that there may still be some gains in efficiency to be had. I'm sure you've obsessed about the best saddle for you, but I would think there is a saddle out there that can be set level or close to it, and still accomodate you when you get aero. Like you I "suffer" from significant freedom of pelvic rotation. That's how I ended up on SQ Lab - allowed me to roll forward without too much pressure up front.

Re the WR50's, I have them on my Ostro and have been very happy with them. Also 5000TR 28mm (30mm on the rear). Wouldn't mind if they were a touch stiffer. More of an overall wheel build issue than a rim issue, and at your mass, probably a non issue. My 77kg are about the limit for 24 Sapim CX rays.

Enjoy the ride and give us a handling report when you get some miles on her. I am curious if the reduced trail results in a bike that wants to run a little straighter in high speed corners/curves.

The saddle issue is being monitored. I normally use a 3DBikeFit Throne RS with a little bit less of a tilt, but the Selle Italia was being cleared out and I figured I’d give it a try. SQLab has definitely been on my radar. My ass gets along with Selle SMP too as long as I set the middle portion level.
The theory would be that that amount of tilt requires more energy to maintain body position than a level saddle, perhaps by pushing back against the pedals more, or using more chest, arm, hand effort. You may not feel the extra energy use, and/or it may not bother you, but theoretically at least, the energy is being used. You're in CA so you should have no trouble finding an SQ Lab to try. If you get along with the squarish edges and the wide nose they can work.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

User avatar
Mr.Gib
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

elmtree wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:50 pm
Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:10 pm

Enjoy the ride and give us a handling report when you get some miles on her. I am curious if the reduced trail results in a bike that wants to run a little straighter in high speed corners/curves.
I'm also curious! But shouldn't reduced trail make it more twitchy/turny? My impression was that for the domane they did a sorta fast front end with a longer wheel base to make it more stable. Could be wrong, which is why I'm asking!
It's a tricky thing because it depends on the situation. Bikes with less trail feel very tossable and agile when they are being maneuvered while upright and at lower speed. So in situations like moving around in a peloton, or climbing, the bike feels quick and easy to position. But as speed picks up on descents, the reduced trail shows itself by the reduction in the response to bike lean. It can be a really nice design because the bike, if well made, will track very straight, less upset by body movement and incidental input to the bars. But lean the bike for a high speed corner or curve and it will naturally carve a greater radius. If you are switching from a bike that had more trail, the first ride can surprise you in a bad way. It takes a bit of adjustment to figure out how to get a bit more lean so you don't go off the road.

By contrast longer trail give a sensation of steering flop and awkwardness a slower speeds. In particular climbing out of the saddle with longer trail requires more effort to control the precise direction of the front wheel as every shift of weight will have a bigger impact on steering. But at high speed more trail, can produce both incredible stability and great response to lean. Carving tighter turns can be quite effortless requiring less "body english" to get the bike leaned more. Colnago had this longer trail geometry nailed.

Further compicating the issue, I suspect that the actual experience will also depend on bike size. Every different model in every different size probably behaves differently. Maybe smaller sizes always turn plenty quick and huge bikes want to go straighter. All my experience is with 56ish size bikes. I did once switch a Giant TCR fork from 45mm offset to 43mm and the effect of the reduction in trail
was consistent with my description above.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

Karvalo
Posts: 3444
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:40 pm

by Karvalo

Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 9:37 pm
It's a tricky thing because it depends on the situation. Bikes with less trail feel....
While any of the above may or may not be true, it should be noted that Mr Gib has some... unique views on descending that are shared by almost exactly no one else on this forum or anywhere in the cycling world.

apr46
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:46 pm

by apr46

Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 9:37 pm
elmtree wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:50 pm
Mr.Gib wrote:
Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:10 pm

Enjoy the ride and give us a handling report when you get some miles on her. I am curious if the reduced trail results in a bike that wants to run a little straighter in high speed corners/curves.
I'm also curious! But shouldn't reduced trail make it more twitchy/turny? My impression was that for the domane they did a sorta fast front end with a longer wheel base to make it more stable. Could be wrong, which is why I'm asking!
It's a tricky thing because it depends on the situation. Bikes with less trail feel very tossable and agile when they are being maneuvered while upright and at lower speed. So in situations like moving around in a peloton, or climbing, the bike feels quick and easy to position. But as speed picks up on descents, the reduced trail shows itself by the reduction in the response to bike lean. It can be a really nice design because the bike, if well made, will track very straight, less upset by body movement and incidental input to the bars. But lean the bike for a high speed corner or curve and it will naturally carve a greater radius. If you are switching from a bike that had more trail, the first ride can surprise you in a bad way. It takes a bit of adjustment to figure out how to get a bit more lean so you don't go off the road.

By contrast longer trail give a sensation of steering flop and awkwardness a slower speeds. In particular climbing out of the saddle with longer trail requires more effort to control the precise direction of the front wheel as every shift of weight will have a bigger impact on steering. But at high speed more trail, can produce both incredible stability and great response to lean. Carving tighter turns can be quite effortless requiring less "body english" to get the bike leaned more. Colnago had this longer trail geometry nailed.

Further compicating the issue, I suspect that the actual experience will also depend on bike size. Every different model in every different size probably behaves differently. Maybe smaller sizes always turn plenty quick and huge bikes want to go straighter. All my experience is with 56ish size bikes. I did once switch a Giant TCR fork from 45mm offset to 43mm and the effect of the reduction in trail
was consistent with my description above.
I think you have it backwards. Moving from the 45mm offset to 43mm increases your trail. Your obversations are consistent with also being reversed. Longer trail feels more stable at speed, shorter trail when acheived via a high offset fork leads to more flop.

Its worth noting that the lower BB and corresponding faster fall angle of the rider, is an important element to making this kind of low trail design work. As is the notion that this frame is probably designed to a min tire of 28mm and likely optimized for a 32mm WAM.

User avatar
Mr.Gib
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

apr46 wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:41 am
I think you have it backwards. Moving from the 45mm offset to 43mm increases your trail.
I am not super up on this issue, so I'd be happy to be educated further, but I thought it worked like this (not to scale of course):
Image
Seems like more offset in a fixed steering axis equals more trail. Remember offset in mm is the distance between the line created by the angle of the fork steerer, and the location of the dropouts. IOW, how far the dropouts are kicked out forward from the steering angle.

I assume as earlier noted that the impact of this can vary for many reasons. And both amounts of trail can be stable, but for different reasons.

I find the whole concept strange because as I understand it, you can get more steering effect by turning the bars with low trail, but when it comes to just leaning the bike, greater trail gives me better turning response and carving feel. At least that has been my experience.

And good point about tires. As a bike designer you can't really target a particular steering performance without knowing what size tires will be used.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

apr46
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:46 pm

by apr46

Mr.Gib wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2023 4:20 am
apr46 wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:41 am
I think you have it backwards. Moving from the 45mm offset to 43mm increases your trail.
I am not super up on this issue, so I'd be happy to be educated further, but I thought it worked like this (not to scale of course):
Image
Seems like more offset in a fixed steering axis equals more trail. Remember offset in mm is the distance between the line created by the angle of the fork steerer, and the location of the dropouts. IOW, how far the dropouts are kicked out forward from the steering angle.

I assume as earlier noted that the impact of this can vary for many reasons. And both amounts of trail can be stable, but for different reasons.

I find the whole concept strange because as I understand it, you can get more steering effect by turning the bars with low trail, but when it comes to just leaning the bike, greater trail gives me better turning response and carving feel. At least that has been my experience.

And good point about tires. As a bike designer you can't really target a particular steering performance without knowing what size tires will be used.
This is one of those places where scale of the drawing matters. In practice for every bicycle I can think of the trail is forward of the contact patch not behind it due to the relative angle and offset so your picture ends up looking more like this (from wikipedia):

Image

Therefore increasing the offset of the fork actually closes the gap instead of making it larger. The other thing is that the capsize speed of the system (and therefore its stability) is related to the HTA not the trail. Trail doesnt actually affect the handling limits of the system, its affects how the handling feels in terms of effort. Steep HTA means the system is less stable. Lower trail means that you have reduced the lever acting agains the rider when they steer, therefore narrower bars also means you may want a corresponding lower trail.

Lower BB / position on the bike will also increase its lean rate, so these things all need to be balanced.
Last edited by apr46 on Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:24 am, edited 2 times in total.

Lell87
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2021 6:25 pm

by Lell87

Deleted - apr46 beat me to it

apr46
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:46 pm

by apr46

I think the Domane RSL is one of the most interesting race bikes to come out in the last few years because its geometry is so different.

I see it as clearly designed to help smaller riders win Paris Roubaix (which it already did with last year with the women's race) and think its the first race bike designed for wider tires and really narrow bars. I think its ground breaking and a better go fast bike for a lot of us.

Of course, I designed my own bike and had it built before this bike was released--but wouldnt have bothered if I knew what Trek was up to.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
Mr.Gib
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

apr46 wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:15 am
Mr.Gib wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2023 4:20 am
apr46 wrote:
Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:41 am
I think you have it backwards. Moving from the 45mm offset to 43mm increases your trail.
I am not super up on this issue, so I'd be happy to be educated further, but I thought it worked like this (not to scale of course):
Image
Seems like more offset in a fixed steering axis equals more trail. Remember offset in mm is the distance between the line created by the angle of the fork steerer, and the location of the dropouts. IOW, how far the dropouts are kicked out forward from the steering angle.

I assume as earlier noted that the impact of this can vary for many reasons. And both amounts of trail can be stable, but for different reasons.

I find the whole concept strange because as I understand it, you can get more steering effect by turning the bars with low trail, but when it comes to just leaning the bike, greater trail gives me better turning response and carving feel. At least that has been my experience.

And good point about tires. As a bike designer you can't really target a particular steering performance without knowing what size tires will be used.
This is one of those places where scale of the drawing matters. In practice for every bicycle I can think of the trail is forward of the contact patch not behind it due to the relative angle and offset so your picture ends up looking more like this (from wikipedia):

Image

Therefore increasing the offset of the fork actually closes the gap instead of making it larger. The other thing is that the capsize speed of the system (and therefore its stability) is related to the HTA not the trail. Trail doesnt actually affect the handling limits of the system, its affects how the handling feels in terms of effort. Steep HTA means the system is less stable. Lower trail means that you have reduced the lever acting agains the rider when they steer, therefore narrower bars also means you may want a corresponding lower trail.

Lower BB / position on the bike will also increase its lean rate, so these things all need to be balanced.
Thanks for the clarification. Explains what I have been experiencing.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

Post Reply