|2002 Fuji Team Frameset OR CAAD4 Frameset||joeblack|
Apr 18, 2003 6:13 AM
|Which is better the 2002 Fuji Team or CAAD4. I'm only looking at the frameset.
Stiffness? (I am a light rider @130lbs)
Apr 18, 2003 7:43 AM
|I ride a caad 4 and have been extremely pleased with it. It's been my lightest bike so far, equipped with Ultegra drivetraing except for sram PC 89 chain and DA cassette, and DA hubs on mavic open pro's. As any aluminum frame it is a little harsh on bumpy roads, but a carbon fork and seatpost should soften it a bit. Bike climbs like a goat and sprints like a bat out of hell. I weigh ~165 and can power climb really well. Can hardly feel any flex in the frame.
Cool thing about a C-dale is that if you break the hanger, almost any shop can replace it as opposed to a Fuji.
Not sure about the Fuji, but I've read reviews that they tend to be flexy.
|The Fuji Team||jesse1|
Apr 18, 2003 7:59 AM
|I bought a 2002 FT from bikesdirect.com and I'm pretty happy with it.
I'm a pretty strong hill climber at just under 150 lbs and I haven't noticed any flex.
You may have to gain about 30 lbs if you want to put a strain on it. :)
My one complaint of this bike was that those nice light wheels came nearly taco'd right out of the box!
The spokes seemed so tight already, that to true them, I only loosened spokes. So far (after abt 200 miles - and some pretty good bumps),the wheels have stayed true.
I added a pair of Performance Ti-Mag pedals, and the whole thing is 17 lb even. I think the bike is pretty responsive to whatever imput I give it.
|Folks may flame me for answering this post...||Swat Dawg|
Apr 18, 2003 8:00 AM
|because I have never ridden either bike. I have done a lot of research on both bikes (reviews, searching archives, talking with shops, etc.), however, in consideration of purchasing either for the past two months or so. The sense that I got was that they are both high quality bikes that offer stunning deals if you get them off the net, but that they both have their detracting factors. The Fuji was characterized as being very compliant and comfortable with predictable handling, but, many commented that the bike felt like a wet noodle when they stood up to sprint or when charging uphill. In your case, this may not be a problem as you don't weigh much, and may even be a benefit because you will get a compliant aluminum frame that won't beat you up. The CAAD4, on the other hand, was explained to be an extremely deft handling bike that was very light and quick. It, however, offers an abundantly stiff ride that many felt fatigued them over the course of a ride. They felt that the frame was so stiff that their was no give to relieve the stress of road shock on their butts and lower backs. Many have countered this assertation by stating that most road shock is taken up in the wheels and fork, and the problems people were having could be attributed to stiff wheels or mental halucinations. This may be a primary concern for you because you are not very big, and the frames stiffness might jar you too much. If I hadn't gotten a 5200 (shop summer employment work for new bike deal), I would have probably gone with the Fuji. A big factor was price and availability (Ebay has tons of them from reputable people). I was going to purchase the frame, build it up, ride it, and then decide for myself if it was too flexy. If I decided it was too flexy, I was going to have one of my engineering friends spray some of the structural foam he had left over from a project into the bb, seat tube, and chain stay area to see if that helped. I figure that if Bianchi does it, I should give it a try. It would have been a fun project in any case. But I got a 5200 and must say I am overjoyed. I haven't taken it out on a long ride yet, but just cruising around, I recognize the ride being so different from the '01 2300 I was on. It is really hard to describe. It's like the road is there, but it isn't. I feel the bumps, but I don't. It's kinda weird but the kinda weird I know I'll like. Anyway, I hope this is helpful in synthesizing some of my research efforts so you don't have to go through the same process. Hopefully, folks won't jump all over me for speaking without actually having ridden either frame.
Swat Dawg '04
Apr 18, 2003 8:28 AM
|As a 135-140 pounder, I wouldn't buy an aluminum frame, period. Not a one out there that won't have lot more stiffness than you need. I've owned several C'dales and a Litespeed Ultimate. All quite abusive.
I'd look at low end Ti or a good steel frame. At your weight, a pound difference in the frame weight is negligible.
|then can you recommend a good frame at around $400?||joeblack|
Apr 18, 2003 8:42 AM
|I like to do a lot of climbing. Correct me if I am wrong but won't I feel that pound difference after some high grade climbing?|
|pretty low budget....||C-40|
Apr 18, 2003 9:39 AM
|gvhbikes.com has a wide range of frames that are as low priced as any. GVH wants $500 for a CAAD 4 with fork. The cheapest steel frame is $550 with fork.
There is a Tommmaso Ti with a carbon fork for $700. Can't remember who sells it, but it's often advertised on this site.
Excel Sports sells the Gios Compact Pro steel frame for $550 without a fork, as I remember. This is a pretty nice frame for the money.
There would be a lot more possibilities at a higher price ceiling.
As for the climbing, do you climb mountains as is Colorado, or just hills? Weight is always a factor, but 1/150 = .0066 or .66%. If you start and end your rides at the same point like most folks, then the net gain in altitude is zero. One pound of additional weight might slow you down by .1 mph on a climb, but it will increase your speed on the downhill run, unless you have to brake a lot.
|yes it is a pretty low budget.||joeblack|
Apr 18, 2003 11:24 AM
|The caad4 from gvh is what I am considering at $495.
I've been reading that the Fuji team has a more comfortable ride and has been appearing on ebay for $400. The have been notes of flex, but I think my light weight might not notice it.
I do climb the mountains here in Colorado and I here that the lighter the bike, the better it climbs.
|If you ride a 54cm Cannondale, E-mail me for a deal.||SGbike|
Apr 19, 2003 4:31 PM
|If you ride a 54cm Cannondale, E-mail me for a deal.||SGbike|
Apr 19, 2003 4:32 PM
Apr 18, 2003 10:06 AM
|I'd take generalizations such as C-40's recommendation to avoid aluminum frames because of your weight with a big grain of salt. My 130 pound girlfriend never complains of being uncomfortable on her 50cm CAAD 4, and neither does my 150 pound retired-age father on his. In fact, they both owned well-fitting steel bikes before their Cannondales, and both prefer the rides of the Cannondales. You'll be filtering out a lot of good bikes if you automatically eliminate them based solely on the material they're made from.
If you can, go out and ride both bikes, and ride a few others, too. Make sure the tire pressures in all bikes you ride is the same. Both frames you're considering are fine frames. I like the CAAD 4 a lot and think that Cannondale is one of the most innovative frame-makers out there. I haven't ridden the Fuji. But the only way to know which frame you'll be happier with is to go out and ride some bikes.
Let us know how you make out.
|have test ridden a few||joeblack|
Apr 18, 2003 11:35 AM
|I have test ridden the Cannondales and Trek OCLV. My first choice is the Trek! Can't afford a Trek at the moment or probably for the rest of my life. Team Fuji's are non-existent in my size (or even close to my size) at the LBS around here. So, I might be taking the the risk at a good deal on frames. But, people on this site have been pretty accurate so far about the bikes I have test ridden.|
|3 teammates have fujis||BenR|
Apr 18, 2003 10:28 AM
|Based on my teammates experiences, I would strongly consider the fuji for you, since it has the best compromise between crit and road race geometry, is very compliant for aluminum frames, and is super light. I don't know how long they last and fatigue might be an issue.
The Cannondale is certainly stiffer, somewhat harsher (not nearly as bad as older C'dales), and better crit geometry. I would say that an "average" rider 160lbs and up should steer clear of the fuji since my 190 lb. teammate claims that it flexes with every pedal stroke. My 155 lb teammate is lukewarm about his fuji, but believes the fit and weight serve him better than the slight loss in stiffness compared to his aluminum Lemond.
I race at 170 and could feel some flex when sprinting and cornering hard on his fuji. It definitely was not as responsive as my 18.5 lb. Klein quantum (of course) but was much smoother and noticeably lighter. My lightweight mountain goat teammate 145 lbs. loves his fuji. He went from barely hanging with me on super steep climbs on his Univega to suddenly kicking my ass on the Fuji, and I don't generally buy into attributing performance to your equipment. I believe the bike is about 16 lbs. with Ultegra, depending on other components and wheels, but you should double check.
I would test ride a Cannondale since they are easy to find. I personally have a soft spot for them, especially for the money, and I know of a couple females that like theirs too. If you don't like the Cannondale ride characteristics, the fuji is a pretty sure bet.
Apr 18, 2003 12:04 PM
|What about one of the 853 steel Fuji frames often found on Ebay? Also, fortframes.com has some good deals. If you ride a 52 mm frame, they have a super nice Minimax frameset for low $$. Nice deal in my opinion.