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 )


Picking a road ride for the hills(4 posts)

Picking a road ride for the hillsmhendo
Jan 26, 2004 7:41 AM
New to the board but there seems to be some knowledge out there so help me pick out of these for a new road rig for use in the mountains of Colorado. I've ridden and liked them all, some better than others. Want to race it some, do lots of centuries, and an after-work ride almost every day.

Litespeed Sienna- relatively light, quick, fairly comfortable, ti lasts forever, a bit on the high end of the budget, good climber, heard reports of squeking?

Litespeed Tuscany- same as Sienna, doesn't feel like as good a climber but don't know.

5200- lightest, very comfortable, right in the budget range, too damn many of them out there though- would have to do a Project 1 for that reason, how does the OCLV hold up over time.

Klein Aura XV- smooth ride, cheapest, seems to climb goood, same warranty as Trek

Specialized Pro DA- black is the paint job i like most, best components, not as smooth or comfortable as any of the rest though, seems best value though.

HELP!
what goes up must come downgtx
Jan 26, 2004 8:55 AM
If you're riding in the mountains, make sure you get a bike that inspires confidence on high speed descenets. Did you consider steel--like maybe the IF Crown Jewel? Weighs maybe an ounce or two more than the LS frames. For LS I like the Classic.
Any of 'em have a motor?dzrider
Jan 26, 2004 9:39 AM
Otherwise, the difference in actual climbing speed can be pretty slight. Often it's more a matter of perception than reality. If climbing's a huge issue, you could try timing a few of them on the same hill and see how much it matters.

Like many on this forum I own several bikes. I'd urge that the first one be comfortable and versatile so you can enjoy it in as many situations as possible. Look for more specific characteristics later.
Mixed bag....DINOSAUR
Jan 26, 2004 9:42 AM
I have two bike, a Klein Quantum Race and a Colnago Master X-Light. The Klein is about one pound lighter than the Colnago, it's stiffer, lighter, gives the impression that you are going faster than you are. I can climb faster with the Klein. But part of it might be in my head.

On the other hand, like GTX stated, what goes up must come down. The steel Colnago has rock solid handling. I've watched my speed on both bikes going through a certain curve on one of my ride routes and I can take it 7MPH faster on the Colnago, but part of that is just confidence and geometry of the bike itself. The Colnago handles better at high speeds, part of what makes these bikes tick (I'm finding out anyway)...

I ride a lot of hills, I've been passed and have passed just about every type of bike that is out there, it's not about the bike, it's the engine. I do have an advantage with body weight as I weigh 200lbs and I can descend like a rock, but when it gets technical, I've been passed by skinny little gals who have a lot of downhill mnt bike experience.

Just find something that is fairly light (+/-20lbs) and stiff in the bottom bracket and set it up right and it will work. I find the al bikes climb better but the steel bikes handle better on the descents. You have to have both worlds. I'd lean toward the handling end.