RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Racing
New frame (old 1 got swiped, grrr)(8 posts)
|New frame (old 1 got swiped, grrr)||evant|
Jun 25, 2002 10:05 PM
|My old road frame (lotto Team edition) was swiped a few weeks ago and now I'm in the market for a new frame. I'm looking to spend about a grand. I was thinking 'bout 900-1100 usd. The intended use is mostly training and crit racing. I prefer the feel of steel but was considering the Santa Cruz Roadster frameset/fork/seatpost combo, it fits my budget nicely and I gan get it in pay-attention-to-me-polished-alum.
Just testing the waters for what else you might reccomend, just a few things,
a.) no mail order, I support my LBS
b.) unless the frame has a considerable aero advantage, I dont want to ride aluminum any more.
c.) I prefer established brands e.g. colnago-Orbea-De Rosa-Strong Frames etc. vs. unproven frames e.g. BP Stealth Scattantte etc.
thanks in advance
|at the risk of sounding like a broken record,||weiwentg|
Jun 26, 2002 2:18 AM
|I can recommend the Giant TCR, which is one heck of a lot lighter, and is also a great crit/race bike. and it's cheaper. but you say no aluminium; oddly enough the Roadster is Al, and is apparently stiff enough that Santa Cruz had to spec CF seatposts and bars. but, option 2 would be the Airborne Zepp.|
Jun 26, 2002 2:05 PM
|The reason that I would get the roadster is that it's so aero that I would put up w/ the rough ride. The TCR isn't any more aero that a compact steel frame. How much are TCR's for frame/fork anyways? I wanna use campy centaur so I dont wanna buy a complete bike.
Jun 27, 2002 9:35 AM
|Aerodynamic frame tubes do very little other than stiffen a frame vertically. The fork on the Giant is serverly aero, and cost will probably be <$600 for frame and fork.|
|forks 'n' frames||evant|
Jun 27, 2002 8:42 PM
|It's not just the fork I'm talking about. The Santa Cruz Roadster frame has an aero wing seatpost, which is very beneficial for a compact frame, and a deep cut-away around the bottom bracket. the Giant does have a nice fork. However, the tubing is no more aero than a more comfterbale to ride steel tubed bike.
|if you're in a pack, aero doesn't matter so much||weiwentg|
Jun 28, 2002 2:04 AM
|that said, the Giant isn't much more aero than usual. but it is a heck of a lot lighter than usual, plus it's cheaper. it's your call depending on what type of riding you do. if you're doing TTs, the Roadster won't be a bad choice.|
|forks 'n' frames||str8dum1|
Jun 28, 2002 9:04 AM
|are you pulling "very beneficial" out of your ass? sounds like it. I have never seen any data supporting that. aero seat tube have the very slightest effect (which equates to zero in the real world) b/c the air is already turbulant from the fork, legs, etc. Aero seatposts have been proved numerous times by John Cobb that they are purely for looks and have no aero benefits at all.
Not saying that the roadster is not a good bike (kent bostic still has his) but the false generalizations you make are what ruins this forum.
|oh, relax, will you?||weiwentg|
Jun 28, 2002 11:27 PM
|now, if I'm not mistaken, the article on slowtwitch said aero posts were of no benefit on COMPACT frames. an aero downtube does have an effect. and if an aero seat tube is worthless, why have disc wheels? it's got to be of some help. probably not much. but 28 spoke OPs are only a few % less effective than Ksyriums, and that doesn't stop a lot of people from getting Ksyriums.|| |