RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Is $300 worth the upgrade?(3 posts)

Is $300 worth the upgrade?fsu_surfer
Mar 21, 2002 2:20 PM
I'm looking at the Felt line of road bikes and need help deciding between the F50 for $1299 and the F65 for $950. Both bikes seem like a very good deal considering the comps. on them, but I am unsure if it would be worth the extra $300?

The F50 is double crank, 105's with Ultegra front and rear der's. The F65 is a triple, w/full 105. (Is there that much of a difference?)

The F50 has a carbon fork, the F65 has aluminum.

F50's frame is Felt's custom Kinesium DB tubing, F65 is alloy.

The F50's stem is Cane Creek, 65's is just "threadless"

F50 has an Alex ALX 320m wheelset, hubless I think? (Can't find that much on the Alex wheelset, what is it's reputation?) and the 65 has 105 hubs, Mavic rims.

The 50 has Continental GP 3000's and the 65 has Conti Sport 1000 tires.

Both have Selle Italia racing sadles

Can anyone give me some info about Felt in general and more specifically if it's worth the extra $300 for the better bike.
Where did you get the specs on these, b/c I'm a little bit . . .morrison
Mar 21, 2002 2:38 PM
confused by your reference to the stems. My guess is that what you mean to say is that the headset on the F50 is Cane Creek, and the 65 is just listed as threadless w/out a brand name reference. FYI, while I'm not too familiar with Felt, I'd bet a lot of money that both are threadless.

There is a big difference between the bikes, and I think (based on the info you've provided) it would be worth the money. The carbon fork, if it's any good (who makes it?), and the ultegra front and rears almost make it worth it right there in terms of the difference in the costs of the components. However, whether you will notice a difference is another thing. It depends on your skill level, how frequently you ride, what you are going to be using the bike for, etc. If you just plan to ride for the sake of riding, and do not plan on racing, 105 is more than adequate.

In terms of the 105 double v. triple, there is no difference in quality . . . it's just a different setup. You probably know this, but the double has two rings up front, and the triple has three, giving you more of a granny gear feel for steep climbs. If you are in decent shape, and have ridden before, you probably don't need the triple, unless you live in extremely hilly terrain.

I'd get the 50.
re: Is $300 worth the upgrade?Ian
Mar 21, 2002 3:54 PM
Can I assume by you handle, fsu-surfer, that you live in Tallahassee?

if so, then you don't need a triple. But even if you lived in a hilly area, the F50 does have some nice upgrades on it.

The most important thing I noticed was the frame. You said the F50 is custom DB, while the F65 is alloy. If that means the F65 is straight gauge tubing, then that alone is worth $300. Not only will the F50 be lighter, but it should have a much more pleasant ride.

The carbon fork would be the next most important thing. Again, weight savings with a more pleasant ride.

The wheels, well, on this board we can get into the boutique vs. traditional debate, but I think the Alex wheels would retail for more money.

The GP3000's are a $50 a piece tire, I'm pretty sure the 1000's are $20-$25.

The derailleurs, those are more show than function. The derailleurs are the most visible parts, so that is what the product manager upgrades. Ultegra is better than 105, but I think the STI levers are more important. If I can have any Shimano group and upgrade only one item, it would always be the STI levers.

Anyway, my vote is for the F50.

Ian