'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 )

Litespeed Natchez?(5 posts)

Litespeed Natchez?coifmo
Jul 29, 2003 9:49 AM
Any thoughts? Other than a few reviews here, not much info out there. It was the low-end Ti Litespeed in '99.

Tubes are apparently not butted. Does that make much difference - especially for a large (225lb) rider?
re: Litespeed Natchez?03Vortex
Jul 29, 2003 10:27 AM
I own a Vortex and while I cannot offer you anything about the Natchez, suffice it to say that I really do not think you will have any bad experience with either a "Low" or "high" end LS. I think their workmanship and quality is first rate.
I had one. It's a good bike. I think that it's on the stiffbill
Jul 29, 2003 10:47 AM
side for ti bikes -- should be fine for a big dude. The tubes are "tapered," but not "butted," which means that there is some shaping but the tubes are not thinned near the middle. So it's a little heavy by ti standards, although mine, with Record and Ksyriums, weighed about 19 lbs, I think.
I liked it better when I was over 170 lbs. When I lost 10-15 lbs, I found that it beat me up a little, and the ride and handling were not as refined as my steel Pegerotti or my CF Fondriest. It's a good race bike, though.
re: Litespeed Natchez?The Walrus
Jul 29, 2003 4:42 PM
I got one when Colorado Cyclist was closing 'em out, figuring I'd build it as a "play" bike--Heliums/Ultegra/DuraAce/XTR/Cook Bros/Kestrel. Turned out to be much more fun than my Catalyst; a little bit stiffer, a bit lighter and better handling. The "real" roadies would gag when they saw it ("budget" Litespeed with all that MTB stuff on it), but it was definitely a great ride. I was somewhat larger than you, and it was fine for me.
re: Litespeed Natchez?coifmo
Jul 30, 2003 6:15 AM
Thanks guys.