|'03 Giant OCR2 vs. OCR3||Zscottie|
Mar 16, 2003 7:10 AM
|After many years (and using road tires on my MTB..a Giant Rincon), I'm planning to buy a road bike. I'm deciding between the above bikes. I put a deposit down on an OCR2 yesterday, but am starting to have buyer's remorse...thinking a little more about the OCR3, since the cost is less.
Can someone puh-leese give me input on the good/bad of both bikes? I'm heavily into running (marathons, 1/2 marathons...nothing over 26.2 yet), and want a road bike for cross training...and perhaps do a charity ride or a sprint triathlon in the future.
Thanks a bunch!
|re: '03 Giant OCR2 vs. OCR3||cyclopathic|
Mar 16, 2003 4:38 PM
|the friend of mine had OCR2 and he dropped it in a few month and got steel instead. Giant was a bone shaker.
If you're running marathons there's a good chance you'd get sucked in riding centuries/doubles and ultra marathon guys ride mostly steel.
|re: '03 Giant OCR2 vs. OCR3||astrobiker|
Mar 16, 2003 6:37 PM
|I have an OCR 1, and have done many centuries on it. No problem with the Al frame vs steel. My wife has an OCR2 or 3 (I forget which)...the difference is the components and wheels. I would recommend going to the 2 or even the 1 - if you get into any distances, you'll want the better components and wheels.|
|re: '03 Giant OCR2 vs. OCR3||Toffster|
Mar 16, 2003 7:20 PM
I was in a very similar situation that you find yourself in at the moment. I was running 5 times a week and wanted a bike to start doing triathlons and Duathlons.
I only had a limited amount of cash and after doing my research bought the Giant OCR2. (I would have liked to have been able to spend more, but such is life) The only difference between them are the components. The OCR2 will more than likely be running Tiagra and the OCR3 Sora, The OCR frames are all the same.
With Sora you can't change while in the drops....where the Tiagra you can. I ride about 200km a week without to many problems (Done the odd 100km ride as well).
If your really concerned about comfort etc then maybe buy a OCR1 yes it's more $$$ but you'll get 105 running gear and a carbon fork which will help with comfort etc. Or you can upgrade later. It all depends how hooked you get. I'd say it's cheaper to spend alittle more now than later.
The OCR2 is a pretty good bike for the price..I live in the Adelaide hills and it copes very well with them. ..I've found it quick and responsive....basically I think it's only my limits as a cyclist that don't make this bike do better. :o) There are better bikes out there for sure.....but IMHO not for the $$$ your spending so rest easy! :o)
I have to say that cycling has taken over my life....I still run but cycling is my love now. Buy the best you can afford....and enjoy the ride. :o)
|Stock, go with the OCR2||bobwill|
Mar 16, 2003 7:39 PM
|I personally had to deal with this same problem. I ended up going with the OCR3, but this was under very special cirumstances. I'm 6'3" and ride an X-Large, he just happened to have an OCR3 in stock and offered it to me for $545, with an Ultegra/Open Pro front wheel. I just couldn't pass it up.
Not only does the OCR2 have 27 speeds versus 24, thus not requiring you to replace the entire drivetrain if you do upgrade anything, but you can shift in the drops.
Do you use spd pedals on your mountainbike, if so that's just one more reason to go with the OCR2, it comes with SPD's.
|Stock, go with the OCR2||Toffster|
Mar 16, 2003 9:22 PM
|Oh! On the pedals....SPD's are fine if your not riding around town etc.....but they're a pain if your constantly clicking in and out at lights, intersections etc. (Unless your one of these people that can balance :o) ). |
I'm going to upgrade to Looks as soon as I can......but at least the OCR2 does come with pedals. Alot of bikes don't and you have to fork out more cash.