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 )


now I know why 'everyone' owns a trek OCLV(14 posts)

now I know why 'everyone' owns a trek OCLVcbutte
Apr 8, 2003 10:22 PM
Test rode a CAAD5 and a 5200 today. I weigh in at 130lbs. So, I guess it's true the smaller Al frames give a harsh ride. The 5200 absorbed all of the vibrations and yes it did have a dead feel. But, wouldn't a bike go faster if it kept its line and didn't 'bounce' all over the place? Anyways, when I save up the money I'm going to buy a OCLV frame. Was planning on the CAAD5 because of the great deal at GVH, but I feel the TREK rides so much better! Any of you smaller riders feel the same way?
no.thatsmybush
Apr 9, 2003 7:10 AM
I own a Caad 6, I sleep with itwheelsucker
Apr 9, 2003 7:27 AM
I ride a caad 6, I feel the ride is the best(though I wouldn't mind trying out a new giant composite). I weigh 140 and don't feel that the ride is all that harsh. I think the cannondale bb/crank are the best, much more resposive than my da equipped specialized. But go with what works for you, your the one paying and racing/riding it.
I own a Caad 6, I sleep with itcbutte
Apr 9, 2003 7:37 AM
Have you ridden an OCLV frame? What size frame is your CAAD6. I test rode a 50cm CAAD5. If you have a bigger frame it might dispersing the vibration better.
nosefiltersweep
Apr 9, 2003 8:06 AM
Not to stick my nose in here, but if you consider a CAAD7 and a 5200 are in the same ballpark for price- AND they still sell CAAD7s (no jokes about the Canny bankruptcy please, their bike division has been doing fine), it must be for a reason. Ride quality has always been an inexact science, and preferences are based on a variety of factors (else we'd all be riding the same material).

To say all small Al frames are harsh is an over-generalization. To say the Trek feels dead seems like reciting a mantra that has been repeated so many times that it must be true...if it is "dead" there are a lot of people riding dead frames...

Bottom line- it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks, as long as you like your frame.
re: now I know why 'everyone' owns a trek OCLVdtufts
Apr 9, 2003 7:59 AM
I feel the same way. Just picked up a 5200. Compared it to the R2000 CAAD7. Went with the OCLV. You are right about the reason why there are so many on the road. I don't think its so much a "wanna be like Lance" thing. It's a superb ride.
wait 'til you try steel!Spunout
Apr 9, 2003 8:27 AM
If yer shopping at GVH, go the Landshark route and ask Gary to fix you up with a lightweight special. Landshark will custom mix your tubes, save weight, and be supple. You will save $$$ over a Trek, even with a custom landshark.
This is getting old...alansutton
Apr 9, 2003 9:56 AM
"The 5200 absorbed all of the vibrations"
Is that so? Were the tyres the same on both and were they inflated to the same pressure?

"it did have a dead feel"
Like a dead dog? Was it cold? No pulse?

"wouldn't a bike go faster if it kept its line"
More of a ride problem don't you think?
This is getting old...cbutte
Apr 9, 2003 11:22 AM
"wouldn't a bike go faster if it kept its line"
More of a ride problem don't you think?
The frame acts like a suspension and keeps the tires in line. Who would go faster on a mountain downhill? One with shocks or one without?

The 5200 absorbed all of the vibrations"
Is that so? Were the tyres the same on both and were they inflated to the same pressure?
No, but it was night and day between the two. If you put the worst tires on the trek and the best on the CAAD5, the trek would still be a much smoother ride.
AgreedMatno
Apr 9, 2003 11:33 AM
Tires make more difference than the frame, assuming the frames are relatively similar.

Why does everyone use the term "dead"? Why not just say smooth? That's what your really mean when you say dead, right?

Keeping a line? Where are you riding, the stunts on the north shore of BC? If you think your frame is getting you offline, it's either got really poor geometry, you're riding pave on too small tires, or you're not a good rider. (I'm not bagging on anyone personally, since the discussion seems to be purely theoretical so far. Those are just the only options I could think of). I guess "bouncing around" due strictly to frame stiffness might make you crash in a tight corner if you lose traction, but I never really rely on traction to hold me upright in a curve. Too many bad experiences with very small amounts of gravel.

Oh, and I've never ridden an OCLV. I do, however, have a CAAD4 in the 56cm size. I weigh 140, and it's WAY smoother than my old steel bike (which was probably more comparable to the stiffest aluminum frames than anything else). I ride roads that are as rough as anyone does without damaging rims, and the CAAD design makes a huge difference. Maybe size DOES matter... On the same note, with my old super stiff frame, 28mm contis at 80 psi still felt rougher than 23mm contis at 110 psi on the C'dale. To me, that means there is obviously a lot to frame design/technology! The only thing I don't like about the OCLV is that the only one I ever see is ridden by a cool old guy I pass occasionally. (He looks like a serious rider, rides fast, and is well into his 60's). The problem? His bike has a beautiful paintjob (the kind of pearly look), but it is downright PINK! Ugh! I sure hope he got a good deal on it because of the color. Cannondale is not immune to this weakness either, as they have also made pink bikes in the past.

I'm going to start riding with a guy who has an OCLV next week. I think it's the same size as my C'dale, so I'll have to see if he'll let me try it out sometime...
I've ridden a CAAD4, 5200, Zurich, vintage italian steel,bigrider
Apr 9, 2003 12:32 PM
alpe de'huez, and a Bianchi Campione de Italia plus a couple of others.
All frames ride different because of design and materials.

My viewpoint is this:

The 5200 is the best (climbing and comfort)

The Zurich is the next most comfortable but not quite as good of a climber as the CAAD4

The CAAD4 rode nice, climbed great, but you felt it after 40 miles or on rough roads.
owned a dale, specialized, litespeed and a 5200GregR
Apr 9, 2003 2:47 PM
Dale (CAD4)- Had great lateral stiffness, but the ride beat you to death. The handling was not that great. Also had an alignment problem with the rear wheel. My observations have been if you get one that is aligned, its a fluke.

Specialized (A1) - Ride was ok, handling was mediocre, rear triangle was flexy causing wheel rub on hard climbs.

Litespeed (classic) - Handling was perfect, confidence inspiring. Ride was good, made the long rides easy. Flexy as hell though, almost like having two wheel steering. Climbed like a bananna slug.

5200 - Handling is quick (maybe slightly just a bit too quick for my tastes). Ride is superp, I wouldnt say dead, but quiet. Stiff laterally (not as stiff as the dale, but is "stiff enough"). Climbs great.

Note, all these bikes I used the same wheels on (older set of ultegra 32x open pros) still going strong.

If my 5200 broke today, I would go out and buy another one tomorrow....nuff said

G
how much do you weigh?nmthe bull
Apr 9, 2003 3:57 PM
owned a dale, specialized, litespeed and a 5200BaadDawg
Apr 10, 2003 6:11 AM
whats a bannana slug? Is climbing like one a good thing or a baad thing?