Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 11 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Topic Options
#16512 - 10/11/05 11:47 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
Triple would be nice? Only if you are D-Elvis or an old lady (pretty much one in the same )

If ya don't have the oomph to push a 53x39, then at least do the trendy thing and get a compact crankset instead. (That and the right doping and you too can climb like Tyler Hamilton. )

50x36 or 50x34 are the standard sizes. Then you can run an 11-23 or 12-25 on the back and be all stylie with the best of 'em. Gives you more useable gears, closer ratios in back, and lighter too.

Honestly, I don't think frame material matters a whit. Seriously.
Get the bike that fits you, and your budget.
CF is nice, and certainly all the rage these days, but it's not like Al is all of a sudden not worthy of being made into a bike.
(all that being said, the Felt F2C gives me a chubbie )

Go for at LEAST 105 for the grouppo, and obviously Ultegra is better. D/A is for posers and lawyers (aka, D-Elvis ), and sponsored pros.

Oh, and consider the Cervelo Soloist. You can flip the seatpost around and make it "steeper" for Tris, or normal for reg'lar road riding.

PS - I'd pretty much spank EdK like a naughty schoolgirl too.
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
#16513 - 10/12/05 11:23 AM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
hartmann Offline
member

Registered: 11/20/99
Posts: 161
Loc: Northfield, VT
I had a Specialized Allez Comp for a long time. I put some Aero bars on it for triathlon. It was a great bike for the price and served me well. It had the Shimono 105 components. Unfortunatly I broke the frame in a bad crash. I replaced it with a Trek 5200 carbon frame bike that came with Ultegra components. Great bike for riding in the mountains. The only down side to the bike is I constantly have problems with the Ultegra crank set. I may take my old 105 bottom bracket from the specialized to see if that fixes the problem. I don't know what the geometry of the Trek 2200 is, but the Trek 5200 (2003 frame) has lower seat post angle than the Specialized Allez Comp (1995 frame). Overall, I would give the specialized a very good recomendation.

Edited to add: A triple on a racing bike really isn't needed.


Edited by hartmann (10/12/05 11:30 AM)

Top
#16514 - 10/12/05 02:10 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
crackers Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 03/21/01
Posts: 3424
Loc: pdx
First off, the bikes are probably all made by Giant in taiwan, so don't spend money on the branding. One tell tail is a mono seatstay, but Giant makes both the mono and traditional dual seatstays from carbon now.

Second, the "issues" of durability are total crap. If you race an aluminum frame, wreck, get run over, and bend the seatstay, you can't bend it back effectively. Same deal with carbon. After 30,000 hard (racing) miles many carbon or aluminum frames will be getting soft, but are you going to be doing that? A lot of the carbon bikes seem to be carbon over a very thin aluminum tube. Besides which, they come with warranties.

At your height, i think it'll be a bit of a moot point which material is better. You are the size they design bikes around, so, you'll get the optimum feel from aluminum. I'd stay away from super rigid aluminum frames like cannondale crit frames because they are among the only frames designed around tall folks. You could ride a vitus and never notice the flex...whereas i broke one at the bottom bracket sprinting.

Finally, its all about the angles. Find out what fits you and what works for you, and go buy the best frameset you can find with that geometry. For example, I liked 63cm from the tip of my saddle to the midpoint of the stem, and that is a huge constraint.

You don't need a triple, and many to most of the real race frames won't fit it. You could get it on, but you'll break lots of chains because of the length of the chainstays. (unless chains are way, way, way better than they were in 1996.)

Its much much cheaper to buy parts with a frameset than without it. Get the frameset you want and hope it comes with the good money parts. I have no idea what parts are good these days, but if you don't get it for free, there is no point to dura-ace, or whatever its called.

Top
#16515 - 10/12/05 02:20 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: hartmann]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan

okay, so I'm a sissy with the whole triple thing. The truth of it is this: I used my triple on barley road in highmount, new york in the catskills because I met hill that for the first time in the 8 years of owning my GT Rave I couldn't get up without using the granny gear. Then this summer in Colorado after nailing Long's Peak (on foot) Monday, Mount Evans (by bike) on Wednesday, I again used a granny gear on Fremont Pass that Friday morning because--and I know this is shocking--I am not a Tour rider who can hammer out massive efforts each day at elevation. So I want a Granny on my racing bike!!!

But let me step back a bit further: I am coming from a ten year old, single-butted chomoly frame/form on 7-speed gearing no one ever has heard of except for treasure hunters. ANYTHING I get now is going to be mind-blowingly amazing to me. Hell, I rented a Trek 1000 and and a Trek 1200 for the Mount Evans and Quadruple bypass rides I did and I thought they were amazing...I went mid-50s mph, carved turns with confidence and a stability I've never seen on my bike. And those bikes had Sora on the 1000 and Tiagra on the 1200. 105 will blow my mind and Ulterga will send me running to change my bike shorts. Not to mention that anything I pick up will be lighter! So I don't know if I need a triple because my bike is a mack truck now or if compact cranks will get me up my most dreaded climbs. As is most often said, I need to get fitted and test these out, but I won't know what it will be like to hit a crazy hill 90 miles into a ride until I'm there (with dana and murph? and...) with the bike I bought.

But thanks for the Allez Comp nod and thanks to Murphy for the great detail. Murhpy- my triple now is a lame 26/36/46....whenever I wanted to scream past folks on flats, I never could because I didn't have the gears. So I'm shy about going with a 50/36 instead of 53/39...and then I'd really want that 30 for the big hills...and I agree on the 105 as the bare minimum. But I don't feel like I need Ultegra (and certainly not D/A). While I could go overboard, I think of this bike as my entry into a new level of cycling for me where I want to test my competitiveness on something build to go nimbly fast.

I have a sinking feeling we'll be eyeing each other at a starting line somewhere this year....

Keep it coming...thanks!

Top
#16516 - 10/12/05 02:27 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: crackers]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan
Second, the "issues" of durability are total crap. If you race an aluminum frame, wreck, get run over, and bend the seatstay, you can't bend it back effectively. Same deal with carbon. After 30,000 hard (racing) miles many carbon or aluminum frames will be getting soft, but are you going to be doing that? A lot of the carbon bikes seem to be carbon over a very thin aluminum tube. Besides which, they come with warranties.

At your height, i think it'll be a bit of a moot point which material is better. You are the size they design bikes around, so, you'll get the optimum feel from aluminum. I'd stay away from super rigid aluminum frames like cannondale crit frames because they are among the only frames designed around tall folks. .

graham- great advice I was looking for. Thanks. And no, not 30,000 miles, but I'm not getting this to sit in the closet either. I think I've been doing about 1800 miles/year and that's with me marathon training too. Taking the spring running season off (sorta) will see me biking a hell of a lot more (probably double that in 2/3s the time)....but I appreciate your perspective very much.

Top
#16517 - 10/12/05 02:42 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
crackers Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 03/21/01
Posts: 3424
Loc: pdx
Do you have a pitch ten gruppo? if so, i want it.

Murhpy- my triple now is a lame 26/36/46....whenever I wanted to scream past folks on flats, I never could because I didn't have the gears. So I'm shy about going with a 50/36 instead of 53/39...and then I'd really want that 30 for the big hills...and I agree on the 105 as the bare minimum.

Learn to spin rather than push big wood. Whats your max cadence? Also think of getting an ultegra drivetrain and everything else 105. It used to be that all the shifters worked with all the derailleurs, which would save money etcetera etcetera...

Out of curiosity, *can* you spin when you're running a lot?

Top
#16518 - 10/12/05 05:34 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: crackers]
JoeKayak Offline
old hand

Registered: 06/21/02
Posts: 970
Loc: Manhattan

no, I think I have an old Suntour something or a Shimano so-old-and-low-end-you've-never-heard-of-it.

But to the spinning/cadence question. Interestingly, when my chain broke in the spring, I got a new cassette and chain and for the first time in owning this bike, increased my cadence substantially. The result was a much faster Montaul Century for me and a better cruising gear that saved the big ring for more useful applications.

But the short answer is that when I'm running it's tough to really be able to spin. It's the high cadence that the muscles are not used to firing on (or it seems so to me). But the problem with big rings/powering while running is that the knees are much more stressed by the more forceful rotation. Either way it's a bit tougher. But net-net, I'm stronger, have better breating and go overall faster. I'm sure when I scale back on running and increase cycling, I'll see a dramatic increase in my endurance, stamina and strength on the bike. And I'm sure that, in turn, will strengthen my running as I return to both in the spring to train for the half ironman.

right now though, I am staving off injury after injury from running just to get through Richmond (VA, nov 12).

Top
#16519 - 10/12/05 06:04 PM Re: All Carbon or Alum/Carbon? [Re: JoeKayak]
MurphysLaw Offline
gumby

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 2308
Loc: Hudson Valley, NY
Murhpy- my triple now is a lame 26/36/46....whenever I wanted to scream past folks on flats, I never could because I didn't have the gears. So I'm shy about going with a 50/36 instead of 53/39...and then I'd really want that 30 for the big hills...and I agree on the 105 as the bare minimum. But I don't feel like I need Ultegra (and certainly not D/A).

Of course you were getting spun out on a 46 big ring. That's MTB gearing, not road bike.

FWIW, a 50x11 is pretty much the same top-end as 53x12.
See here to play around w/ the top-end speeds, or whatever of any gear combo you could imagine.

And, 50x12 is almost identical to 53x13, meaning, you only give up the absolute top-end gear, which frankly you probably don't even need, as once you are going over 30 mph, it's better to coast. Pedaling at 30mph+ is wasting watts in the wind.

If you wanted a ridiculously wide gearbox, you could run 50x34 and a 12-27 in back. I can't imagine needing that gearing for anything short of Mt. Washington, but whatever works for ya.

If it were me, I'd get a compact 50x36, and 11-23.
For you, I'd suggest 50x34 and 12-25. That'll get ya up and down almost anything w/in reason.

Based on what you are telling us here, I would strongly advise you to NOT get a 53x39. You don't have the legs for it. Probably only 5-10% of the bike riding public does. It is WAY overgeared for anybody who is not either a Pro, or a very avid and strong amateur.

Please please please don't get a nice new bike and then debase it w/ a triple.
_________________________
"Flailing?" "Flail on!"

Top
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored