Apr 20, 2001 11:16 PM
|ok, well i've been riding for about a year now, and am already checking out what kind of bike i want to get next. right now i'm on an Allez. what i want to do is build my next bike (so i can buy the components over a period of time and maybe save a little money), but i'd like to get a good good frame. some frames i'm looking at are like Colnago, Litespeed, Rourk, and such. what i can't decided is which frame material i want. i know that when it comes down to it, i'm gonna have to go out and test them, but what are y'all's opinions on frame material? i'm 6', 168 and i know that weight will play a factor in how the frame reacts/feels. anyone have opinions about which frame company, too? just curious.
another thing: Campy or Shimano? i've got Shimano now, but does the compatability of the Campy components make them "better"? i'm kinda thinking it does. thanks....
|Some answers||Kerry Irons|
Apr 21, 2001 9:15 AM
|1. You won't save money buying components over time. It will cost you about 30% more than buying a complete bike. The bike companies get the volume factory discount and pass some of it on to you. Your only hope to even equal the price of a complete bike is buying everything on sale, with the prospect that some of it won't work well together once you get it on the bike "over time."
2. Frame design is far more important than frame material. The geometry, tube diameters, tube shapes, butting, etc. will be what determine the ride and weight of your frame. If weight is critically important, Ti, CF, and Al will typically build the lightest frames, though material fatigue is likely an issue in superlight Al (and maybe CF) frames. Crash durability is probably an issue for superlight steel. Any test ride you do will be so strongly influenced by other factors, especially the wheels/tires, that you would not be able to discern differences in frame performance solely due to material.
3. C vs. S. Are you kidding?
Apr 21, 2001 1:40 PM
|yeah, so what are you saying? C's better?|
|Some answers to questions||Kerry Irons|
Apr 22, 2001 3:39 PM
|No, I'm not saying that C is better than S. What I am saying is that this is an eternal argument that will never be resolved. Ford v. Chevy? Ferarri v. Lamborghini? Etc. While you can argue either way, it will only be an argument, with no clear answer. Buy what you like.|
|re: some questions...||fuzzybunnies|
Apr 22, 2001 6:39 PM
|at the high end there are some differences between the materials but probably not much, I recently test rode a new litespeed ti that was similarly priced to my steel bike, the only major difference I noticed was in the wheels that were stock on the litespeed which definately rode smoother than mine. otherwise it felt equally stiff, climbed the same, and was just as stiff in all the right areas. As a result the next time I take on a new project I'll deffinately give ti more of a consideration and go with something different. Carbon and aluminum deffinately feel different though aluminum is developing and coming closer to riding pretty much the same where as carbon frames seem like more of a distance bike imo. They don't seem quite as responsive but definately soak up all the rough spots better than any of the other materials and rides real nice. As for shimano vs campy, go with what you like. I use campy on my road bikes, sram on my mountain bikes, and prefer shimano for cyclocross. TTFN|| |