Difference between Bacchetta Ti Aero and CA2

July 31, 2012:

Saturday will see me riding from Prescott to Congress and back on the CA2. This will be the first real use of the bike through the mountain to desert and back terrain. The Ti Aero has been my steady-eddy for so long I'm wondering if there will be much sense of `difference.'

I know that there are many reading this who worship at the holy grail of the CA2 and anything Bacchetta, so I hope not to offend the true believers. It's a bike. A good one.

Aug 5, 2012:

I didn't quite get the CA2 dialed in in time for the Prescott-Congress-Prescott event yesterday. Since I swapped out the stock riser with a straight pipe riser and road stem I had some issues with securing the BFT. I contacted Bacchetta and they are sending me a certain fix. Assuming I get it (1 1/8 two bolt clamp) by the end of this week I should be able to ride the CA2 next Saturday.

So, I did the Prescott-Congress-Prescott training ride on the Ti Aero.

http://connect.garmin.com/activity/206596853

Aug 11, 2012:

I did the Prescott-Congress-Prescott circuit on the CA2 today. 

The bike (CA2) is about 90% of where it should be. Had a few adjustment issues with the FD and RD at the outset but they were fixed in a few minutes. Given that the wheels are 700s the center of gravity is about 1.5" higher than on the Ti. That was interesting but I adjusted to it by the time I got to Peeples Valley.

Gearing inches. A 39/30 on a 700 wheel gets me about 13% more gear inches than on a 650. All through the course I found myself `learning' that `x' grade required not a 39/30 on the 700 but a 39/32. This was a hard lesson. On rapid ascents (after a rapid descent) I found myself over gearing, i.e., pushing too high a gear than on the 650. I think this will take some time.

Actually, with these exceptions, there isn't much difference between the ti and the carbon fiber. The `ride' is no less harsh. It goes as fast as the engine can make it. They weigh about the same.

I'm going to get a set of long reach handlebars for the new bike; just like on the ti. With a longer reach there is even better steering control; though there is no `effort' difference so far as I can tell.

I'll probably put a different set of wheels on the CA2. Lighter and more `true' than the ones I've got on it now.

So ... what is the ultimate and fundamental reason for having both the Ti Aero and the CA2?  So that I can still train if one of the bikes is not operable.

Here's the Garmin for todays Prescott-Congress-Prescott on the CA2:

Saturday, Aug 11th: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/209320805

Aug 12, 2012:

Further thoughts about the difference between the Ti Aero and the CA2.

First, I'm glad I have both of them. Probably the only `bling thing' I've done in my entire life.

Then, because of my experience in both the midwest flatlands and the mountainous / desertic west I'm lucky to have something against which to compare each platform.

Next week I'm to do a 200K brevet (AZ Randonneurs - Show Low, AZ) with about 5,200 feet of climbing. Relative to my home training terrain I consider that course to be relatively sedate, though not flat. For the 200K Show Low brevet I'll use the CA2.

For terrain that includes lots of climbing I'll use the Ti Aero.

Why?

The larger 700 wheels on the CA2 give a small amount (5 - 10%) advantage on relatively even, flat terrain. Another way of putting it is that I don't need that gear inch advantage when lots of climbing is involved. The 650 Ti wheels and gearing match the demand of lower gearing, higher cadence, on the climbs. (The key, however, is to have the right climbing gearing in the first place; currently on the Ti I have a 55/39 up front and an 11/34 ten speed in back).

In mid-September I'll be doing the Skull Valley Loop Challenge (http://connect.garmin.com/activity/113716919) again. I've done this circuit many, many times since last September. I'll use the Ti Aero because of the climbing.

On November 2-3 I'll be doing a 24 hour race in Coachella, CA (http://24hrworlds.com/24/index.php?N_webcat_id=360). This is a dead-flat course where the 13% greater gear inch of the CA2 (and bike modifications to enhance aerodynamics) will be an advantage.

None of these events would amount to any fair use of either the Ti or the CA2 had it not been for the fact that I've lost 47+ lbs since July of 2011. I'm slowly losing weight (182 right now) as a consequence of not having a job and a fairly disciplined training regimen (4,400 miles and more than 350,000 feet of climbing since Jan 1 2012). Power to weight ratio rules.