# Wobbly Madone Geometry?



## kneejerk

I just got back from the Sea Otter and test rode 5 different road bikes. One striking thing I noticed with one of the two Madones that I test rode was that it was very nervous in the front end. I actually almost crashed when I reached for a bottle of water in my back pack pocket while I tried to ride with no hands (on the bars). This struck me hard as I recalled my 2008 5.2 OCLV Madone that was nervous in the front end aswell and ultimately made me praise my Cannondale when I got one (although, realistically only a marginal improvement it was noticeable). Also, I've heard from other riders complain of the same wobbly front end character. I did a search and came up with nothing here, resulting in my posting. The bikes that I rode before and after the Treks did not exhibit the same nervous front end character. Looking at the geometry charts between bikes I do not see any difference that could result in my perceived lack of stability in the Trek Madone front.

When I had my Madone I always struggled to remove or put on my wind breaker while I rode with "no hands". Not sure what gives but I know what I am concluding. I also know this can come down to personal preferences. Anybody else have a Madone that lacks front end stability?

I had a Specialized years back that had similar skittish behavior that I eventually fixed by putting a fork on with more rake.


----------



## tellico climber

Yes, I have noticed my 2011 6.5 being quite twitchy on the front end. You have to be careful, several times I have by accident bumped my hand up against the handlebars while fiddling with either a water bottle or eating and almost lost control. For some reason it is much more pronounced with this bike as compared to my previous Madone. I am by no means an expert on frames but I have always just attributed it to having a very stiff head tube but I could be wrong. The front end of this bike is much stiffer than my previous bike which most of the time is a good thing. I still love the overall ride of the bike.


----------



## okiefo

It should be pointed out that the Madone is intended to be a racing bicycle, its going to handle quickly. Like a sports car, or a sport bike. I'm sorry if that sounds condescending, but its true intent is for skilled riders. I'm not trying to question anyone's skills, but that's just how it is.


----------



## kbwh

A Colnago is also a racing bicycle...


----------



## Road Hazard

My 2010 Madone 6 definately feels twichier than my Arc Pro (I know its also a Trek).

I wouldn't say the Madone feels unstable though. I can ride with no hands, no problem. 

Part of it may be that my Madone has a lighter stem and lighter shifters than my rain bike Arc Pro, so there is less weight to give the front end a more stable feeling.

Also, the Madone seems to have less rake than even other high end bikes, not that I've measured, but just eyeballing it.

I did read a review somwhere of the Madone pro fit versus the performance fit (taller head tube) and the reviewer said he noticed a big difference, with the pro fit feeling much more stable at the front end.


----------



## tellico climber

okiefo said:


> It should be pointed out that the Madone is intended to be a racing bicycle, its going to handle quickly. Like a sports car, or a sport bike. I'm sorry if that sounds condescending, but its true intent is for skilled riders. I'm not trying to question anyone's skills, but that's just how it is.



I agree. It is an acceptable trade off for me, you just can't get careless with it.


----------



## early one

removed.


----------



## zac

early one said:


> Try 700x28 tires at 85 pounds. That may un-twich it. Anyway I heard that is a faster combination.


not sure 28's will fit a Madone frame/fork.


----------



## zac

kneejerk said:


> I just got back from the Sea Otter and test rode 5 different road bikes. One striking thing I noticed with one of the two Madones that I test rode was that it was very nervous in the front end. I actually almost crashed when I reached for a bottle of water in my back pack pocket while I tried to ride with no hands (on the bars). This struck me hard as I recalled my 2008 5.2 OCLV Madone that was nervous in the front end aswell and ultimately made me praise my Cannondale when I got one (although, realistically only a marginal improvement it was noticeable). Also, I've heard from other riders complain of the same wobbly front end character. I did a search and came up with nothing here, resulting in my posting. The bikes that I rode before and after the Treks did not exhibit the same nervous front end character. Looking at the geometry charts between bikes I do not see any difference that could result in my perceived lack of stability in the Trek Madone front.
> 
> When I had my Madone I always struggled to remove or put on my wind breaker while I rode with "no hands". Not sure what gives but I know what I am concluding. I also know this can come down to personal preferences. *Anybody else have a Madone that lacks front end stability?*
> 
> I had a Specialized years back that had similar skittish behavior that I eventually fixed by putting a fork on with more rake.


No, I haven't noticed that at all. I have found the opposite in fact. That the Madones tend toward being rather stable (for a race bike, and as compared with other race bikes). But then again I have only experience with the Pro fit or H1 fit frames. An interesting comment about whether it is the Performance fit (H2/H3) frames that are exhibiting this behavior....could very well be.


----------



## tellico climber

zac said:


> No, I haven't noticed that at all. I have found the opposite in fact. That the Madones tend toward being rather stable (for a race bike, and as compared with other race bikes). But then again I have only experience with the Pro fit or H1 fit frames. An interesting comment about whether it is the Performance fit (H2/H3) frames that are exhibiting this behavior....could very well be.



I suppose it is possible, mine is a H2. Is it possible the longer head tube could produce this. I also ride a 62cm frame. Maybe someone here who knows frames well would know.


----------



## Road Hazard

Also one more note for posterity. 

The subject of the thread doesn't really match with what the actual topic of the thread is, which is "twitchy" not "wobbly."

When I first got my Madone h2 performance fit (my first carbon bike) I was very gentle with it because I couldn't believe something so light could be strong. I wouldn't mash on the cranks or torque on the handlebars. 

Over time I realized that it was strong and very stiff or rigid if people are sick of the term stiff for bikes. The front end does not flex at all as far as I can tell. Nothing flexes. This is probably true of all good quality carbon bikes, but modern carbon fiber is a darn impressive material.


----------



## davidka

tellico climber said:


> I suppose it is possible, mine is a H2. Is it possible the longer head tube could produce this. I also ride a 62cm frame. Maybe someone here who knows frames well would know.


I ride an H2-62cm and have not noticed the front end to be twitchy. It seems pretty stable to me. The H1 vs. H2 conversation is tough to consider without knowledge of the rest of the setup. For instance, I ride a -17 deg. stem (I should be on an H1) so my hand position is a little lower than most other H2 users. That weights the front more. With the stem "upside down" on an H1 a higher position than I use could be easily achieved. Outside of where the hand position lands, the frame's have the same geometry, only the head tube length is different.


----------



## kneejerk

Whether it's wobbly or twitchy what I am talking about is a lack of stability. Especially noticed when riding with no hands and amplified with cross winds. I don't think it has anything to do with the length of the steerer tube or the stiffness of the frame or fork. It's a geometry thing. When a bike tracks straight for me when I am fiddling with my wind breaker riding with no hands, that is what I am talking about but it also comes into play in how it handles corners at speed. I suspect that it is either the head tube angles are steeper than spec. or the fork rake is less than spec.


----------



## MarvinK

I've got a 6-series H2 and am very happy with the balance of stability and quick handling. I don't have any problems riding no hands with mine. It's a 52cm.

I remember my first real road bike was a Cannondale 3.0 with very aggressive geometry but the fork rake was huge... so it was stable and a pleasure to ride no hands.


----------



## Richard

My new (to me) 2008 6.9 58cm "Pro Fit" (now H1) is "feed zone" stable from a crawl to 40mph+ descents. The front end of that sucker just feels planted but it still handles like the race bike that it is.


----------



## davidka

kneejerk said:


> Whether it's wobbly or twitchy what I am talking about is a lack of stability. Especially noticed when riding with no hands and amplified with cross winds. I don't think it has anything to do with the length of the steerer tube or the stiffness of the frame or fork. It's a geometry thing. When a bike tracks straight for me when I am fiddling with my wind breaker riding with no hands, that is what I am talking about but it also comes into play in how it handles corners at speed. I suspect that it is either the head tube angles are steeper than spec. or the fork rake is less than spec.


How about saddle setback? Where your weight is has a big effect, this attribute has an even bigger effect if you let go of the bars. 

The H/T angle "can't" be steeper than spec on a molded frame but it's possible that it was shipped with an incorrect fork rake. The rake should be marked somewhere on the steerer tube. If it's a 56cm or larger then it should have a 40mm rake. 

How about your headset, are the bearings smooth? Any tight spots? Tires and wheels? Also have the dropouts checked for alignment. All these things can cause a bike to not track well.


----------



## zac

davidka said:


> How about saddle setback? Where your weight is has a big effect, this attribute has an even bigger effect if you let go of the bars.
> 
> The H/T angle "can't" be steeper than spec on a molded frame but it's possible that it was shipped with an incorrect fork rake. The rake should be marked somewhere on the steerer tube. If it's a 56cm or larger then it should have a 40mm rake.
> 
> How about your headset, are the bearings smooth? Any tight spots? Tires and wheels? Also have the dropouts checked for alignment. All these things can cause a bike to not track well.


Yes, good points, I didn't even think of these initially other than being hung up on the Madone geometery, 

My troubleshoot would go as follows:
-check headset, make sure it is properly set and tightened with cap and bolt, with steerer cut to appropriate length for the spacers you are using. You can check this by straddling your bike, lock the front brake and gently rock the bike back and forth, any tick felt or movement of the steerer in the headset indicates a poor adjustment. Also lift the wheel and turn the bars from side to side. it should turn freely and smoothly. Any tick or grainy feel indicates some troubleshooting, see below.

-failing that, check headset bearings (necessitates a teardown) make sure they are (a) good; and (b) properly seated in their respective sockets. Note that the headset bearings have an up and down orientation, (determined by the diagonal cut on the outer race of the bearings - I think - doing this from memory*) They will not seat properly unless they are installed correctly. On the lower bearing the diagonal is down on the fork crown, you'll see it mates over the steerer onto a diagonal shoulder on the fork crown. The upper, smaller, bearing I think can be installed either way, but otherwise, the diagonal is upward. and finally (c) when you do the teardown, clean the precision sockets very carefully and apply a light coat of grease.
*EDIT, now that I think about this more, I think the diagonal shoulder may be in the lower Headtube socket, in which case the diagonal cut on the lower bearing is upward into the headtube. Best is to visually inspect and set the bearing according to mate with whatever diagonal shoulder is present.

-make sure your front wheel axle is seated completely in the dropouts and the quick release is properly tightened.

-visually inspect the fork dropouts and make sure there is no paint buildup preventing the wheel from seating properly over the axle.

-make sure your front wheel axle is properly set and the locknuts are properly tightened on the bearings, this can cause wobble. (You can check for this by grasping the rim and trying to deflect it back and forth perpendicular to its plane. If you feel even the slightest tick, it needs adjustment.

-make sure the front wheel is centered between the inner locknuts. (you can check this by installing the wheel and marking the rims precise distance from the inner fork surfaces. They should be within 1mm). If not reverse the wheel and do the same. If things are out of alignment, try with another wheel, if the exact same thing happens with a second wheel, reinspect the dropouts. Barring that have the fork checked for alignment by your LBS. Else it is just your front wheel that is out of true and can/should be easy enough to true by your LBS.

HTH


----------



## kneejerk

Since I feel a bit like I have maybe opened a "can of worms" here. I've done some research and from my own experience what I maybe find to be a stable geometry setup is not for others and maybe a little different than what a manufacturer advertises as stable. In the dynamic motion of the bicycle there seems to be two types of stability. The one that I seem to pay more attention to when I look for that feedback is the natural stability. Information I see from manufacturers on reducing "trail" and getting a more stable ride seems to stray from my own impression of stability. Maybe someone is not riding the actual product here, or doesn't have the where with all to know the difference when ridden (that would be a shame). 

I guess I would have to experiment with different fork rakes to put this to rest. At the moment I'm a little at odds with the belief that reduced rake in a fork offers more stability due to more trail (as I see posted by manufacturers). As there seems to be two different ways to interpret stability.... and it seems the data on what makes it right is a little fuzzy. 

Without a doubt I do notice differences in "stability" on my so called stable bikes at different speeds. I believe this is where the split lives in the two interpretations of stability.


----------



## MarvinK

I don't think anyone believes reduced rake improves stability.


----------



## kneejerk

MarvinK said:


> I don't think anyone believes reduced rake improves stability.


I exchanged a couple of emails with a representative of a fork manufacturer and that is exactly what I said and he said. I too, believe that more rake ends up giving you a more stable solid feeling steering up front. This results in less trail (distance form imaginary line extention of steering axis and point of weight contact to the road). I believe this difference in belief is due to stability sensed when riding a bike is maybe different than the stability of maybe ghost riding your bike, the more rake the more likely the bike will not correct itself and ride straight....... this is where I believe the engineering minds have it wrong. This is just a theory right now, not sure if Trek is only "ghost riding" there bikes in testing (LOL!).


----------



## zac

MarvinK said:


> I don't think anyone believes reduced rake improves stability.


Don't know one way or another, but don't "stayer" bikes use reverse forks? Eg. Negative rake, to increase stability at high speeds?

And FWIW, my modern road bikes are much more stable than my old road bikes. No doubt there, i dont think anyone can seriously argue that. While I havent measured, they - the newer bikes/forks - also seem to have much less rake too than the older "j" bend steel forks. I suppose that could be an optical illusion too, not taking into account the offset on the newer straight forks.


----------



## kneejerk

zac said:


> Don't know one way or another, but don't "stayer" bikes use reverse forks? Eg. Negative rake, to increase stability at high speeds?
> 
> .


Good point. I thought they were doing that to get the wheel base as short as possible (actually to get the front of the bike short as possible for drafting). Not sure how a bike would handle like that out on the road, I may try it some time. Only other reference I can think of is a shopping cart caster wheel that runs like that and they tend to be quite wobbly but will go straight on it's own even when wobbling. I have ridden a few bikes that someone accidentally smashed into a wall that reduced the rake and recall they become rather nervous if not unrideable without hands on the handlebar. My other reference is that I owned one of the first Specialized Epic carbon tubed bikes that was a wobbly mess on the road and fixed it by adding a fork with more rake.


----------



## djbsteele

Hi,

interesting thread here. I bought a Madone 5.2 performance fit 56cm in Aug 2009. It lasted less than 1 hour! Horrific Shimmy developed at 29mph under braking descending into a 33% hairpin bend with nowhere to go. I had never experienced this in over thirty years of riding. I was terrified. Did not want to ride the bike again. The bike was swapped for 54cm frame and has behaved impeccably ever since - until it just cracked its rear chainstay :-( that is. I agree that the front end does not give confidence in riding hands free and it can feel light. It is ultra responsive however and great for changing direction.


----------



## kneejerk

djbsteele said:


> Hi,
> 
> interesting thread here. I bought a Madone 5.2 performance fit 56cm in Aug 2009. It lasted less than 1 hour! Horrific Shimmy developed at 29mph under braking descending into a 33% hairpin bend with nowhere to go. I had never experienced this in over thirty years of riding. I was terrified. Did not want to ride the bike again. The bike was swapped for 54cm frame and has behaved impeccably ever since - until it just cracked its rear chainstay :-( that is. I agree that the front end does not give confidence in riding hands free and it can feel light. It is ultra responsive however and great for changing direction.


I believe Trek specs. the 54cm bikes with a 45mm rake fork and the 56cm and above with 43mm rake forks. This change in my opinion would make the 54cm have more stability given the same steering angle. 

Yes, the twitchy character makes for a very responsive bike out of the saddle at slow speeds. Maybe even helping to bring that next pedal stroke around. But, I prefer a more solid feel even in those slow speed circumstances.


----------



## ljonesjo

I found your posting after a lengthy internet search. I am glad I am not alone. I think I have the same issue. I recently got a 2010 Madone 5.9 as a warranty frame for my Lemond Zurich that broke. From the first ride I did not feel right on this bike especially in a crosswind.

From some research i've done online, the problem may be too much stability or wheel flop. When riding without hands you unconsciously make slight weight shifts to steer the bike, If those inputs do not move the CG back under you you feel out of control. An example would be trying to ride a straight line with the headset way too tight. The same thing occurs during a crosswind, the bike is pushed to an angle and normal weight or steering corrections do not overcome it an move the CG back under you so you feel like the bike is going to be pushed out from under you.

I too am at a loss for why, but instead of feeling excited about having a new frame I have lost enthusiasm for riding it. I did a long ride this past weekend and I had an overwhelming sense of dread on downhills and in crosswinds.

Hopefully this better explains the issue and maybe someone has a fix to offer.


----------



## kneejerk

ljonesjo said:


> I found your posting after a lengthy internet search. I am glad I am not alone. I think I have the same issue. I recently got a 2010 Madone 5.9 as a warranty frame for my Lemond Zurich that broke. From the first ride I did not feel right on this bike especially in a crosswind.
> 
> From some research i've done online, the problem may be too much stability or wheel flop. When riding without hands you unconsciously make slight weight shifts to steer the bike, If those inputs do not move the CG back under you you feel out of control. An example would be trying to ride a straight line with the headset way too tight. The same thing occurs during a crosswind, the bike is pushed to an angle and normal weight or steering corrections do not overcome it an move the CG back under you so you feel like the bike is going to be pushed out from under you.
> 
> I too am at a loss for why, but instead of feeling excited about having a new frame I have lost enthusiasm for riding it. I did a long ride this past weekend and I had an overwhelming sense of dread on downhills and in crosswinds.
> 
> Hopefully this better explains the issue and maybe someone has a fix to offer.


I tend to disagree with your thinking that the Trek may have too much stability but, like I said the engineers seem to think of stability in two different ways. I imagine putting a fork with more rake on it would likely give you more confidence and ability to ride in cross winds. But, you will likely not find one that will work. The other thing is getting a more slack steerer angle.

On an aside note: I am playing with a Raleigh Grand Prix steel framed road bike lately. It is absolutely a "truck" in stability. I just changed the front fork to a carbon legged Winwood to drop some weight and see if I gained some comfort (which it has done both). But, like I said this Raleigh has geometry that is so stable at speed it's almost too stable. It is totally the other end of the spectrum compared to a "wobbly Trek Madone". I rode in a cross wind yesterday and let go of the handlebars on purpose and it just goes so straight. I think it is ready for some aero wheels (lol, if I could push them!). The downside to this overly stable geometry on the Raleigh is that when I am out of the saddle the bike sways slower with each power stroke, something that can make the bike feel a little sluggish. This may be why Trek and others choose a geometry that is more sensitive (wobbly). Either way, I have never owned such a stable high speed road bike as my Raleigh Grand Prix, I'm thinking it's ready for a 70mph downhill (yikes!). The basics to the geometry here is a rather slack head tube angle (although I have not measured it, I'll try) and a fork with generous rake (45mm).

The other thing about this "rock stable" Raleigh I picked up is that it's so stable that the front wheel likes to go straight when you let go of the handlebars, so much so that if you are leaning off to one side the bike may not come with you as easily and maybe give you the impression it is more difficult. Don't worry though, this factor cancels out once the speeds rise above 10mph or so.

For the road bikes that I have recently owned I would classify them like this: 2007 Trek 5.2 Madone stands at the wobbly end but was my quickest climbing bike. My Raleigh Grand Prix is the other end of the spectrum a rock stable almost sluggish climbing, ready for a high speed down hill or cross wind bike. My Cannondale Caad9 sits in between the two somewhere. So, to each his own!


----------



## Munk69

I am schocked at the amount of people that feel the Madone is twitchy up front. I just bought a 6.5 56cm H3 (I have back and neck issues) and that bike is probably the most stable bike I have ever owned. Before my Trek I had a Cervelo RS and that bike felt twitchy to me. I could never get it to track straight when looking around or hands off the bars to get a drink or something to eat. With my 6.5 I have total confidence the bike is going to track right where I want it too. 

This is a very interesting thread. Thanks to all that have posted.


----------



## kneejerk

Munk69 said:


> I am schocked at the amount of people that feel the Madone is twitchy up front. I just bought a 6.5 56cm H3 (I have back and neck issues) and that bike is probably the most stable bike I have ever owned. Before my Trek I had a Cervelo RS and that bike felt twitchy to me. I could never get it to track straight when looking around or hands off the bars to get a drink or something to eat. With my 6.5 I have total confidence the bike is going to track right where I want it too.
> 
> This is a very interesting thread. Thanks to all that have posted.


Maybe yours is an exception. I don't know. I did test ride a 6 series recently at the Sea Otter. I didn't notice it being "wobbly" or "twitchy" but then I didn't really check for it until I noticed the 5 series doing it which I rode right after the 6 series bike. The feedback I remember receiving from the 6 series was very similar steering wise to the 5 series I rode afterward (speaking of my memory of the comparison of them).


----------



## djbsteele

Hi, indeed the Madone in crosswinds is quite exciting! I am 70kg so I just put it down to being pushed around due to my weight and the modern bikes having a greater side profile than my old Flying Scot. One thing I can say for sure is that the Bonti Aero spokes whilst great at going forward in no wind are the source of the nervousness in crosswinds. Especially the front. It is very hard to feel comfortable. I also never ride hands free. Not only the Madone has this problem. I have a pair of dura Ace 50mm Carbon wheels too with much narrower spokes. They are less nervous than the Bonti spoked wheels. What wheels are you riding? Cheers JB


----------



## vs779

A longer trail measurement means greater caster effect, heavier and slower steering, and a more stable feel in a straight line. Reducing trail causes the bike to steer lighter and quicker and the front end to feel more nervous in a straight line. 




For me bikes with longer trail are more planted in the front end yet have a heavy nosey feeling. Bikes with less trail for me feel lighter but are little pushy in the front thru a corner.


----------



## alias33

I've got a 58cm 6.9 pro fit madone and it rides perfectly and never ever have gotten the shimmy or wobbles at high speed decents, I love the way it handles and performs. Its like throwing a leg over a rocketship everytime I ride it.


----------



## vs779

I took a demo 6.9 out for a spin last week and riding no handed at 10mph was a bit wobbly but nothing that would stop me from buying one. The bike felt light and I was impressed on how easily the bike moved along.


----------



## ljonesjo

Well I took my 5.9 in to be Retuel fitted. Based on my settings from my previous bike (Lemond Zurich) i was too far forward. Nearly 4 cm more forward than the lemond with the saddle shoved all the way back. With the Retuel they were able to measure the effective seattube angle; 77 degrees. Looking at the spec it should be about 74. But the seatmast actually leans farther forward causing the greater effective angle. 
I tried a larger (54 cm) Madone 4.5 and the bike fits and feels stable now. I am gun shy from the previous frame so it will take awhile for me to trust the 4.5 on downhills and in crosswinds but it is already such a relief. Riding is a pleasure again. It is stress relieving instead of stress causing.


----------



## nor_cal_rider

I love my 2010 6 Series P1, but honestly when descending long steep grades, I brace one knee against the top tube to give the bike a bit more stability. The same grades on my Moots RSL (same wheels) has me square in the saddle with no bracing needed. I also have an easier time riding no handed on my Moots over the Madone. Then again, I've spent months of riding and quite a bit of money to get the RSL ready/confortable for the same type of distance events that I was able to do on the Madone "right out of the box" 

YMMV


----------



## RedNose44

The 6.9 demo bike I rode felt like a different bike completely from my 6.9 that was fitted to me. I think not having a proper fit might be the source of the problems people are having. The demo bike was a 56 with H1 geometry with narrow bars. My bike is a 54 with H2 geometry and wide bars. The demo bike while fast, did not feel comfortable like my custom fitted bike. My 6.9 has no Wierd handling issues.


----------



## cycle7man

*Madone Issues*

Very interesting thread. I had a 2010 6 series Madone (H2) with RXL wheels. I experienced the dreaded "bike shimmy" within a month on a steep descent. Luckily, I wrestled the bike under control (May, 2010). I thought maybe I hadn't tightened the front release well enough as I was in a hurry to get started in a group ride. Nearly a year later, I've been uncomfortable on downhills and riding the brakes..... I did a ride in the NC Mtns (blood, sweat, and gears) with 9000 feet of climbing and then descending. The Madone was great climbing but I went downhill like a grandmother. The next day we went for a short recovery ride and in the first downhill the whole front end of the bike started shaking left to right tremendously. Not sure why it happened but now I've lost confidence in the bike (or me).

For other reasons (bottom bracket noise), Trek is replacing my frame with a new 2011 frame. I'll see how it turns out but I'm nearly ready to get rid of the RXL wheels and go with something else. I kind of suspect there is a connection with the wheels and the shimmy. I've been riding my old litespeed with campy neutron wheels and bombing downhill with lots of confidence.

Anyone else feel the wheels could be contributing to the "shimmy issues"?


----------



## grashoverride

Just got my 2011 Madone 5.2 H2(size 58) last week. I did some fast descents and don't have any problems. It feels very stable and I don't feel any of the mentioned problems here. I also ride with no hands even easier than on my old Trek 2.3... Maybe this is something individual... I weigh 93kg, so maybe that's something that gives me additional stability over lighter people?!


----------



## jaggrin

I have a 2011 Madone 5.2 and also have a 2006 Madone 5.2 both of which handle much better than other bikes I have owned. The new Madone cuts through corners very well and I have not had any problems with shaky geometry when I ride with no hands. 

I would suggest double checking your setup on the bike. IMHO the Madone is a great race frame whether its the 5.2, 6.2 or 6.9


----------



## bakdaman

madone can be wobbly


----------



## Marvin8

Amazing thread!!!
I very recently bought a 52cm 2007 Madone 5.2 SL (new condition) and took it out for its first spin last week. Yikes!!! As opposed to every other bike I've ever owned (none of them carbon fiber), my out of the saddle riding on the Madone was bizarre. It felt as if I was trying to turn the wheels against a gyroscope....resistance to turning. Never felt that before on a bike, and it made me feel very wary. I bought a carbon Klein Q Elite (craigslist) at the same time as the Madone (ebay), and it does NOT do the same thing as the Madone. The Klein's front end feels free and easy, just like every other bike I've ever ridden. I wonder if I should try the no-hands test on the Madone? The original poster has me a little nervous about it now. And btw, on my short first ride, I never got it above 20 mph or thereabouts. Now, I'm a little nervous. Oh, and I arrived at this thread by typing "madone 5.2 front wheel turning issue" into Google.


----------



## grashoverride

I wonder how it's possible some madones to have that wobbly problem, while others don't... Or maybe the wobbly problem is in the people experiencing it...


----------



## Marvin8

Although I haven't taken my Madone to high speeds yet, I wouldn't characterize the problem I'm having as a wobble so much, but more like a high resistance to turning. When riding no-hands (op), you want LOW resistance to turning in order for your body to be able to make tiny course corrections by shifting one's weight. Once again, I only notice it when I'm riding out of the saddle.


----------



## MarvinK

Marvin8 said:


> Amazing thread!!!
> I very recently bought a 52cm 2007 Madone ....


You bought a completely different bike than the other people in this thread. Trek has completely redone the 5-series (twice) since 2007. Take your bike to a shop--could be a poorly adjusted headset or something.


----------



## kneejerk

I've purchased another wobbler http://forums.roadbikereview.com/scott/cr1-wobbly-geometry-speed-266168.html.... although, I really like it and am dealing with it..... it's nowhere near as stable at speed compared to the steel Raleigh I picked up, now that thing feels good for 70mph w/o wobbles....... I'm seeing more and more bikes now with 50mm of rake being listed for fork rake specs., maybe somebody is catching on!.... but, again the "racer" types are going to be okay with a twitchier ride and quicker steering (transitioning) design that maybe allows more steep hill climbing performance.... there are always trade offs!


----------



## Trek2.3

My 2011 Trek 2.1 is twitchy too. But none of my 4 other Treks do that.


----------



## icsloppl

Front end wobble is the creation of a standing wave between the ground and the rider, similar to what happens to a guitar or violin string when plucked. Vibrations at particular frequencies may either dissapate (good) or compound (bad).
In order for a standing wave to occur, several things must be true. Both "ends" of the system must be "pinned". That's why holding the bars tightly, as when nervous, is the worst thing you can do, and overinflating narrow, light tires is the second worst. That's also why lightly clamping the top tube between your knees can be effective in damping vibrations before they build.
Standing waves have no understanding of rake, trail, or frame angles other than as a secondary function relating to how much of the rider's weight is over the wheel. So, steering behavior isn't directly related to wobble. It would seem logical that a "slow" steering bike would be more stable than one that turns more easily, but that is not the case. In most cases, the opposite tends to occur.
Lastly (at least in this post), large frames are almost always more succeptable to wobble than smaller ones. The "sting length" of smaller frames is normally too short to allow the creation of standing waves at frequencies that lead to wobble. That's often why one person with frame X has wobble and another with the same model does not.


----------



## tenrec

*Madone 4.7 with the same issues*

My 2009 Madone 4.7 has a 60cm frame and I notice the same lack of stability when trying to ride no-handed. With my old Raleigh 3-speed, I could ride for hours without hands, and even turn corners that way -- but with this bike, I constantly feel like I'm going to fall. I have no problems with "twitchiness" when riding normally, and I feel the bike handles very well.

As for descending, this bike develops a wobble or shimmy in the front end when descending at high speed. It starts at about 33 mph. I've learned to control it better, but when it first happened I thought I was going to crash.


----------



## grashoverride

You guys have serious lack of bike-handling skills... Sorry, but I can't find any problems, neither with no-handed riding, nor with fast descending... Even today I was riding no-handed in some decent cross-wind, and had no problems at all, cornering while no-handed is also easy and stable...


----------



## drodrigueznyc

i just picked up a 2012 madone 4.7 and it is just as stable at high speeds and with no hands as my specialized tricross sport... both are very stable and excellent bikes..

the madone is obviously lighter and turns in quicker... but it doesn't seem as excited as excited or as twitchy as some have mentioned... 

i think it's a great bike and i'm glad i got it... but i'll keep this in mind now that you guys mentioned it..


----------



## wetPNWbiker

I have a 2010 Madone 5.1. Stability is a thing the Trek engineers compromised for manuverability and shorter geometery when they moved away from a curved fork and less trail. Curiously, the new models are incorporating more curvature in the forks for stability. I agree with those who have expressed fear and trembling on fast decents on the Madone. Every time my speedo hits 40 I question whether I want to spend the rest of my life as a quadrapelegic.


----------



## gormleyflyer2002

what length stems on the bikes with "wobbles".........long top tubes = short stems = twitchy


----------



## mpcbike

gormleyflyer2002 said:


> what length stems on the bikes with "wobbles".........long top tubes = short stems = twitchy


Ahhhh, WRONG! Sorry, no debate here. Short stems do not cause twitchy steering.


----------



## gormleyflyer2002

mpcbike said:


> Ahhhh, WRONG! Sorry, no debate here. Short stems do not cause twitchy steering.


so my 64cm Madone would react to steering inputs in the same manor wether is it had an 80mm or 140mm stem ? 

yah......sure, you win and i really hope you dont work in any building or engineering trades.


----------



## mpcbike

gormleyflyer2002 said:


> so my 64cm Madone would react to steering inputs in the same manor wether is it had an 80mm or 140mm stem ?
> 
> yah......sure, you win and i really hope you dont work in any building or engineering trades.


Didn't say that...
But, this one has been actually tried and discussed in every way possible. Short stem will not cause twitchy steering! If anything it will usually make it more stable or have no perceptable effect. Everyday example, look at DH bikes. Different I agree, but 20-40mm stems very common and twitchy would be an immediate deal breaker.

Seriously, this has been looked at a thousand times by VERY qualified and certified people. No steering downside(specifically twitchyness) from short stems!

Go long enough to bring bar clamp into line with, over or even close to the wheel center and you'll experience negative handling results.


----------



## marathon marke

The most informative of all the replies here yet.

I ride larger frames, so I can relate to this. I've had high speed wobbles occur on my old steel frames before, and was able to stop the wobble with either a bracing of the toptube between my knees, or a slight shift of weight. The only bike I've ever had where I couldn;t stop the wobble was a 2005 Felt F65. It wobbles at anything over 30mph, and no amount of bracing or weight shift could stop it. I don't have a Madone, but I could get one at a great discount since I work at one of the largest Trek stores in the USA. However, I test rode a few different brands before I made my last choice and really didn;t care how the Madone took the corners at speed. My choice? A BMC Team Machine. 

I've had this bike at 45 mph while turning a few times now since buying it a couple months ago, and I can't explain the confidence I have in the handling. Not saying that the Madone can't offer the same quality of handling at high speed, but maybe what I experience is something more of an issue with the larger frames. I ride a 60cm BMC, which is closer to a 61-62cm when compared to many other brands. YMMV



icsloppl said:


> Front end wobble is the creation of a standing wave between the ground and the rider, similar to what happens to a guitar or violin string when plucked. Vibrations at particular frequencies may either dissapate (good) or compound (bad).
> In order for a standing wave to occur, several things must be true. Both "ends" of the system must be "pinned". That's why holding the bars tightly, as when nervous, is the worst thing you can do, and overinflating narrow, light tires is the second worst. That's also why lightly clamping the top tube between your knees can be effective in damping vibrations before they build.
> Standing waves have no understanding of rake, trail, or frame angles other than as a secondary function relating to how much of the rider's weight is over the wheel. So, steering behavior isn't directly related to wobble. It would seem logical that a "slow" steering bike would be more stable than one that turns more easily, but that is not the case. In most cases, the opposite tends to occur.
> Lastly (at least in this post), large frames are almost always more succeptable to wobble than smaller ones. The "sting length" of smaller frames is normally too short to allow the creation of standing waves at frequencies that lead to wobble. That's often why one person with frame X has wobble and another with the same model does not.


----------



## S2k552m

Interesting thread. My 6 series handles differently vs my other bikes, but very well and predictably at all speeds. I actually find it a little better in wind than my C-dale - odd but true. BTW, the Trek is 2012 6series 56 H1 with a 110mm stem + I am 145lbs.
I have had 2 types of related head shake issues that are similar to what I have read…
First … My Ciocc resonates (that's what I call it) at 43mph, started after 7500 on the bike in yr 2 of ownership. First time scared the heck out of me since I thought it was a flat tire and I was going down with a train of guys behind me. I was getting up over 40 and ready to tuck down a straight decent and the shake happened and it was pretty violent. I took the bike over 40, 50, 60 mph before with no issue. The bike was out of warranty but they still replaced the fork multiple times with no effect. Didn't matter what wheels were on it. Should have looked at the headset too but didn’t, something changed up front and we never figured it out. So point being, there is something inherent in this bike that creates a vibration. I still ride it as my winter/rain bike, never over 40 and with no problem but since it was my racing bike at the time I had to get a new ride for racing after this problem developed.
The other type occurs in wind, I am a light weight and dread the wind. So this my fault. There are some roads where a moderate descent (low 40’s mph) will open up suddenly exposing me to crosswinds (15-25+ mph), I do tense up in anticipation of the first blast of wind, and the tenser I am in the hands, elbows and shoulders the worse the shake I get as I work to correct and then over-correct. The wind just gets the best of me, not the speed. BTW, this is with any bike.


----------



## thinkbike

I am the original owner of a 54 cm 2007 Trek Madone 5.2. I'm not heavy, about 140-145 lbs. I have plenty of experience with steel, aluminum and carbon bikes.

First time I let go of the handlebars on the Madone, I almost crashed. I thought, "Whoa, that was weird. Let me try this again". Almost crashed again. If I picked up speed (>10 mph) it became easier, but it was still unstable.

Learning how to ride my Madone no handed was like learning to ride a bike all over again. 

Fast forward 2 years. I'm searching the web for this problem I come upon a white paper on Fork Symmetry by Craig Calfee of Calfee Designs. Listed below are some of the major points he made in the paper:



> _Calfee Design has identified a cause of speed wobble... Speed wobble is a dangerous condition that can cause the rider to lose control of the bicycle and crash. While a skilled rider can prevent and stop speed wobble, it is better if it doesn’t start. Some experts state that speed wobble is caused by the rider, which is technically true because the rider responds to the steering dynamic, initiating a resonance that causes the frame to act as a spring. While loose headsets and out of true wheels and frames can contribute to starting a speed wobble, we have found that fork asymmetry can also get it going.
> 
> Fork symmetry is defined as the symmetrical position of the fork dropouts in relation to the steering axis.
> 
> Traditionally, steel forks were cold set after welding or brazing to realign them after possible distortion caused by the heating and cooling of the metal.
> 
> Carbon fiber forks cannot be cold set. They must be molded straight to begin with
> 
> A symptom of a fork that is off by 1.8 mm or more is a noticeable difficulty when riding no hands at a slow speed (less than 10 mph). One has to lean to the side slightly to keep going straight. A bike with asymmetrical forks seems to corner better in one direction but not so well in the other. At speeds of 30 mph or more, the bike can develop speed wobble._


I decided to purchase new Easton EC90 SLX forks with the same rake as my Madone. Since I was now paranoid about crashing, I sent these new Easton forks to Calfee Design to be tested for Symmetry. They came back as being only .025 mm off perfect, which is extremely good. Speed wobble can result from forks that are approximately 2 mm off center. The .025 mm is an A+++.

I installed the forks, set off down the street at a low speed and let go...didn't crash or almost crash. Way more stable at all speeds. The frame is small and has a tight geometry so it's still going to be more sensitive than some of my other bikes, but the Easton fork difference was like night and day.

Here's the fork symmetry white paper http://www.calfeedesign.com/tech-papers/fork-symmetry/


----------



## Marvin8

GREAT information. THANKS!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## wetPNWbiker

Thanks for the info. I wonder what TREK's spec tolerances are for Madone fork symmetry offsets. I'd guess that they are fairly tight, but how much would I have to spend to find out if they are in the Calfee crash zone? I'd also guess that the biggest source of high speed wobble on my bike is an interaction of road surface roughness and frame resonant harmonics, plus having flat spokes that catch cross winds more than round spokes, plus me tightening my grip out of fear when I really should be loosening my grip. Most of my fastest decents are straight downhill, but now I am will to have to pay attention to differential stability on turns.

Thanks for sharing that paper.


----------



## thinkbike

I spent about $100 all total, fees and 2nd day air shipping there and back. It was worth it for the peace of mind.


----------

