Bicycle thread

[Bueller]

Originally Posted by ThomD

I think that if you just got back into riding and you enjoy your current bike, sit on your money for a year. Then you'll know if it is worth spending money on.

That's basically what I'm doing. Perhaps not for a full year, but I won't be doing anything before next spring.

[Cat0020]

Originally Posted by Bueller

What do you think?

check out: http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/road_bikes.htm



Full carbon DuraAce equippped bike for under $2000, the frame may not be reputable manufactuer, but components alone is worth the price.

[ThomD]

Originally Posted by Cat0020

check out: http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/road_bikes.htm



Full carbon DuraAce equippped bike for under $2000, the frame may not be reputable manufactuer, but components alone is worth the price.

Not to pick on Cat, but when I look at that bike I see:

Unbelievably uncomfortbale, with handlebars too low.
A double chain ring - doesn't work for the terrain I ride
Short cage derailler (I ain't even gonna try to spell that), so a reasonable gear range is out.
Not enough spokes for my piece of mind.
With the rear tire tucked like that, I'd expect some interesting handling characteristics.

My point being, a one-size-fits-all recommendation is a bad idea. One needs to know a lot about the rider (current abilities and future desires, kind of terrain they ride, etc, etc) before one can make a sound recommendation.

-t

[Askel]

Originally Posted by Bueller

What do you think?

It sounds like your going to geek out on the technical details of bike shopping, so enjoy it.

[knary]

Originally Posted by ThomD

Not to pick on Cat, but when I look at that bike I see:

Unbelievably uncomfortbale, with handlebars too low.
A double chain ring - doesn't work for the terrain I ride
Short cage derailler (I ain't even gonna try to spell that), so a reasonable gear range is out.
Not enough spokes for my piece of mind.
With the rear tire tucked like that, I'd expect some interesting handling characteristics.

My point being, a one-size-fits-all recommendation is a bad idea. One needs to know a lot about the rider (current abilities and future desires, kind of terrain they ride, etc, etc) before one can make a sound recommendation.

-t

My bike isn't too different in geometry. It's pretty comfy to me.

As to the double, that's a question of fitness and terrain. I ride the easier compact double on hills as big as any you've got down there.

Spoke count matches mine and while I'm not a clydesdale, I'm not a whippet either. I run a set of Ksyriums that have a similar count and so far they're handling the rough pavement and my pothole banging ways just fine.

Rear tire tucked in? A tiny bit, I suppose.

[Gummee!]

Originally Posted by Bueller

I got back into bicycling recently. I borrowed a bike from my brother so my girlfriend could tag along. She really liked it so we bought her a bike. I've already discovered Pearl izumi shorts, so getting away from the current clothing discussion for a minute I have a different question:

Assuming I'm still into bicycling next spring, should I just buy a bike or should I build a bike?

Now before you answer that please read about my intended useage. I'm not doing any crazy distances at this point (about 50 miles in a 24 hr period on the weekends) and may never get to due to a physical disability, but I really am enjoying the hell out of riding at this point. I'm riding my now 17 year old Trek 1100. I've put some SPD pedals on it, gotten some decent shoes, new rubber, retaped the handlebars, lubed, trued, tweaked, and adjusted as needed. It is performing flawlessly, but my trip to the bike store yesterday revealed the fact that even an entry level Trek is lighter and much nicer than my 1100. The result of nearly two decades of progress has me really intrigued. I'm all about fit, comfort, and shedding bike weight and friction within reason even though I'll never compete.

I'm thinking full carbon. I don't want to burn 5 grand on a bike, but I don't mind parting with some cash to get something really nice. However, as I was riding today I was wondering about the merits of things like selecting frames and cranks specific to my body geometry. I'm a very mechanical guy and wouldn't hesitate to build a bike if it yielded some obvious benefits, but if dropping a grand or two on a name brand will yield me approximately the same thing or if I can just buy something very close right off the shelf why go through the hassle?

What do you think?

Two werds: Pedal Force

I prefer building a bike, BUT 1. ya gotta have a source of cheep parts (CL, ebay, roadbikereview.com, etc.) 2. ya gotta know what works with what: SRAM only shifts SRAM, old D/A only works with old D/A etc. and 3. ya gotta know exactly what you want and what its worth so you don't get taken.

If you want it RIGHT NOW, don't build it. If you can wait and piece it together (like I'm doing) you CAN build a $1000 D/A bike. I know cause I've BTDT.

As for full bikes the above outlets for cheep parts are still yer best bet. Guys buy em, ride em for a bit, then dump em for the new hotness. I don't, but others do. Makes it easy to find great bikes for pennies on the dollar.

As an added benefit, if something squeeks, rattles, and/or creaks you know what it is. Some things require immediate attention, some don't. Build it and you can prolly tell the difference.

M

[Gummee!]

Originally Posted by ThomD

Not to pick on Cat, but when I look at that bike I see:

Unbelievably uncomfortbale, with handlebars too low.
A double chain ring - doesn't work for the terrain I ride
Short cage derailler (I ain't even gonna try to spell that), so a reasonable gear range is out.
Not enough spokes for my piece of mind.
With the rear tire tucked like that, I'd expect some interesting handling characteristics.

My point being, a one-size-fits-all recommendation is a bad idea. One needs to know a lot about the rider (current abilities and future desires, kind of terrain they ride, etc, etc) before one can make a sound recommendation.

-t

Funny, all I see is a mass produced carbon bike with the seat too far forward. Otherwise, looks OK to me! (frame prolly made by the same Taiwanese guys that make Pedal Force, some Looks, etc.)

My personal theory sez yer only as strong as yer smallest gear. Try riding a fixie around and see if I ain't mistaken.

M

[pierce]

Originally Posted by Gummee!

Funny, all I see is a mass produced carbon bike with the seat too far forward. Otherwise, looks OK to me! (frame prolly made by the same Taiwanese guys that make Pedal Force, some Looks, etc.)

My personal theory sez yer only as strong as yer smallest gear. Try riding a fixie around and see if I ain't mistaken.

M

heh. In the distant past I rode 1000s of hilly miles a year on old campi 10 speed gearing, which only handled 52/42 rings and 13-23 5 speed cluster. I used to use a 13-19 cluster. ultra-light in the 70s was a 19 lb bike. mine was about 21 lb typically as it was a touring bike with a longer wheelbase.

[pierce]

Originally Posted by Gummee!

Two werds: Pedal Force

so I wonder who's designs they are ripping off. maybe its a synthesis of a bunch the speciality bike makers who've outsourced their manufacturing to this taiwanese framebuilder?

[Gummee!]

Originally Posted by pierce

so I wonder who's designs they are ripping off. maybe its a synthesis of a bunch the speciality bike makers who've outsourced their manufacturing to this taiwanese framebuilder?

They look familliar tho...

M

[ThomD]

Originally Posted by Gummee!

Funny, all I see is a mass produced carbon bike with the seat too far forward. Otherwise, looks OK to me! (frame prolly made by the same Taiwanese guys that make Pedal Force, some Looks, etc.)


M

That's my point exactly. There are so many variations on "bicyclist" and many people just assume that all would be riders want/need what they want. Advice givers rarely take the time to offer good advice. (Not me of course, my advice is solid.)

Oh, and I also see a generic ugly bike in that picture.

-thom

[knary]

Originally Posted by ThomD

That's my point exactly. There are so many variations on "bicyclist" and many people just assume that all would be riders want/need what they want. Advice givers rarely take the time to offer good advice. (Not me of course, my advice is solid.)

Oh, and I also see a generic ugly bike in that picture.

-thom

umm... Bueller said he was riding a Trek 1100 and was looking for something more up to date. That older 1100 isn't some ancient heavy Schwinn.

[Cat0020]

Originally Posted by ThomD

Not to pick on Cat, but when I look at that bike I see:

Unbelievably uncomfortbale, with handlebars too low.
A double chain ring - doesn't work for the terrain I ride
Short cage derailler (I ain't even gonna try to spell that), so a reasonable gear range is out.
Not enough spokes for my piece of mind.
With the rear tire tucked like that, I'd expect some interesting handling characteristics.

My point being, a one-size-fits-all recommendation is a bad idea. One needs to know a lot about the rider (current abilities and future desires, kind of terrain they ride, etc, etc) before one can make a sound recommendation.

-t

ThomD, it's all relative, what's uncomfortable for you to see isn't the same for others.
Bueller is looking for full carbon frame, doesn't want to spend $5000... I though something under $2000 with full carbon frame and DuraAce componentry would be a nice choice, no need to break the bank to get quality components.

[ThomD]

Originally Posted by Cat0020

ThomD, it's all relative, what's uncomfortable for you to see isn't the same for others.
Bueller is looking for full carbon frame, doesn't want to spend $5000... I though something under $2000 with full carbon frame and DuraAce componentry would be a nice choice, no need to break the bank to get quality components.

No argument that for that criteria that is an interesting bike, I just think there is a lot more to bike selection than frame material. A Trek Pilot is also carbon, but a very different bike.

[Cat0020]

Originally Posted by ThomD

No argument that for that criteria that is an interesting bike, I just think there is a lot more to bike selection than frame material. A Trek Pilot is also carbon, but a very different bike.

I didn't limit the choice of frame material to be carbon fiber only.

Besides, top of the line TREK Pilot cost $2300+ and it is 105 equipped.