Help choosing intermediate road bike

[Joe]

Hey everyone,

I've been a browser of these groups for quite sometime now, but this is my first time posting a
question. I have been road biking for a little over a year and am really beginning to get into
it. I am currently riding a converted mountain bike with slicks on it and I'm getting ready to
make the plunge into buying a road bike. I've decided that the bike I buy needs to be within the
$1000 price range and I must have at least 105 components and a carbon fork. I have test ridden
several bikes and have narrowed it down to a. If and when you decide to help me out, keep in
mind that I'm pretty much a newbie and may not be taking all things into consideration while
looking at these bikes, for one thing I know nothing about wheels aside from which ones I think
look cool.

Here are the bikes in consideration: 2001 Lemond Buenos Aires $999 (steel frame)
http://www.capitolcyclery.com/2001/lemond/buenos.htm

2002 Giant TCR2 $1000 (aluminum frame) http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.asp?-
lYear=2002&bikesection=8792&range=48&model=10467

2003 Felt F65 $1080 (aluminum frame) http://www.feltracing.com/f65.html

All of them rode really nicely and I could feel a bit of a difference in the Lemond due to the steel
frame, but not so much smoother that the other two seemed too bumpy, keep in mind I'm riding an old
mountain bike here. I also noticed that the aluminum ones did seem to feel a bit quicker I guess
since the steel seems to flex a bit more. So, they all have 105, and all have carbon forks. The
Lemond does not have a threadless headset, which from what I understand means that if I ever wanted
to upgrade my fork I'd need to buy more than just a new fork. Anyway, like I said I'm leaning
towards the Felt right now. I hope to hear from some of you, I'd really like some help.

Take care, Joe

 

[Ken]

[email protected] (Joe) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> All of them rode really nicely and I could feel a bit of a difference in the Lemond due to the
> steel frame, but not so much smoother that the other two seemed too bumpy, keep in mind I'm riding
> an old mountain bike here.

Unless you mounted the same tires (with the same air pressure) on all the bikes and rode them down a
steep mountain at full speed, I doubt you could judge "smoother". The main things to look for in a
test ride are fit and balance, i.e., how well the bike matches your body and riding style. All the
bikes you list are good bikes, but the best one for you depends on how well it fits you.

Ken

 

[Zoot Katz]

1 Dec 2002 22:49:54 -0800, <c1beb61[email protected]>, [email protected]
(Joe) wrote: Trimmed X-Post to rec.bicycles.racing

> I have test ridden several bikes and have narrowed it down to a.

The one that lights your fire and begs to be ridden, they're all good bikes. If the shop you like
best sells your favourite bike it's a double win.

>If and when you decide to help me out, keep in mind that I'm pretty much a newbie and may not be
>taking all things into consideration while looking at these bikes, for one thing I know nothing
>about wheels aside from which ones I think look cool.

I think boutique wheels look cool on anybody's bike but mine.
--
zk

 

[Lindsay Rowland]

In rec.bicycles.tech Joe <[email protected]> wrote:
: Hey everyone,

: Here are the bikes in consideration: 2001 Lemond Buenos Aires $999 (steel frame)
: http://www.capitolcyclery.com/2001/lemond/buenos.htm

: 2002 Giant TCR2 $1000 (aluminum frame) http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.as-
: p?lYear=2002&bikesection=8792&range=48&model=10467

: 2003 Felt F65 $1080 (aluminum frame) http://www.feltracing.com/f65.html

These are all great bikes = hard decision! When it comes down to it, buy the bike that feels right
and speaks to you, you won't regret it. If you still can't decide, choose the one you like the look
of - you still won't regret it!

Cheerz, Lynzz

 

[Pbwalther]

Well, I think all of the bikes you listed would do fine.

So I would offer several considerations.

Take the bike that YOU think has the nicest ride. You will be the one that rides it afterall.

Take the bike, which in your opinion, has the coolest color.

Take the bike from the best local bike shop. The differences between bike shops are greater then the
differences between bikes.

 

[Art Harris]

"Joe" wrote:
> I've decided that the bike I buy needs to be within the $1000 price range and I must have at least
> 105 components and a carbon fork.

I would be more concerned with fit, frame geometry, gearing (double/triple?), wheels, overall build
quality, and warranty. Be sure the shop is giving you an appropriate bike and not just reducing its
inventory on a particular model or size. Don't be swayed by a sale price if the bike doesn't fit
perfectly.

How will the bike be used? Fast club rides? Centuries? Short solo rides? Touring? What kind of road
surfaces will you be on? Do these bikes have clearance for 700 x 28 tires?

> for one thing I know nothing about wheels aside from which ones I think look cool.

Personally, I would avoid "cool" wheels. Conventional 32 or 36 spoke wheels will be more durable and
maintainable, and will not slow you down a bit.

> Here are the bikes in consideration: 2001 Lemond Buenos Aires $999 (steel frame)
>
> 2002 Giant TCR2 $1000 (aluminum frame)
>
> 2003 Felt F65 $1080 (aluminum frame)
>
> All of them rode really nicely and I could feel a bit of a difference in the Lemond due to the
> steel frame

I doubt that the difference is due to the frame material.

> I also noticed that the aluminum ones did seem to feel a bit quicker I guess since the steel seems
> to flex a bit more.

I doubt it. Flex is a function on tube diameter, wall thickness, frame geometry, and material used.

> So, they all have 105, and all have carbon forks. The Lemond does not have a threadless headset,
> which from what I understand means that if I ever wanted to upgrade my fork I'd need to buy more
> than just a new fork.

If you "upgraded" to another threaded fork, you wouldn't need to buy anything else. If you go to a
threadless fork, you would need a threadless headset.

BTW, since the steer tube on the threadless bikes have already been cut, you may have trouble
raising the bars (if needed). Check to see if there are spacers above and below the stem.

Art Harris

 

[Jkpoulos7]

> Anyway, like I said I'm leaning towards the Felt right now. I hope to hear from some of you, I'd
> really like some help.
>

Get a 2002 Lemond BA. They can be had for $1199 with Ultegra. What's a Felt? Don't buy a no name
aluminum bikr or any aluminum bike unless you like to loosen fillings. Try the Jamis Quest or a
steel Bianchi. You WILL regret an aluminum road bike.

 

[Mike Jacoubowsk]

You may be needlessly limiting yourself to closeout models; this year, some '03s came out at
considerably lower pricing than their '02 counterparts. For example, you might check out the 2003
TREK model 2000, which, at $1099, has the requisite '105 components, carbon fork, and a very nice,
domestically-produced aluminum frame.

But, as others have pointed out, fit and the quality of the shop you get the bike from are also very
important considerations. And as for test rides, keep in mind that even subtle differences in how
the bikes were set up can make *huge* differences in how they ride. You might check out this article
on our website-

http://www.ChainReaction.com/roadbiketestrides.htm

for an idea of what sort of things you should be looking for, how the bikes should be set up, and
even some clues as to how to evaluate the different shops. Unlike the rest of our website, that
particular article is brand & material neutral, so it will apply no matter what you're looking at.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReaction.com

"Joe" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Hey everyone,
>
> I've been a browser of these groups for quite sometime now, but this is my first time posting a
> question. I have been road biking for a little over a year and am really beginning to get into
> it. I am currently riding a converted mountain bike with slicks on it and I'm getting ready to
> make the plunge into buying a road bike. I've decided that the bike I buy needs to be within
> the $1000 price range and I must have at least 105 components and a carbon fork. I have test
> ridden several bikes and have narrowed it down to a. If and when you decide to help me out,
> keep in mind that I'm pretty much a newbie and may not be taking all things into consideration
> while looking at these bikes, for one thing I know nothing about wheels aside from which ones I
> think look cool.
>
> Here are the bikes in consideration: 2001 Lemond Buenos Aires $999 (steel frame)
> http://www.capitolcyclery.com/2001/lemond/buenos.htm
>
> 2002 Giant TCR2 $1000 (aluminum frame)
>
http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.asp?lYear=2002&bikes
ection=8792&range=48&model=10467
>
> 2003 Felt F65 $1080 (aluminum frame) http://www.feltracing.com/f65.html
>
> All of them rode really nicely and I could feel a bit of a difference in the Lemond due to the
> steel frame, but not so much smoother that the other two seemed too bumpy, keep in mind I'm riding
> an old mountain bike here. I also noticed that the aluminum ones did seem to feel a bit quicker I
> guess since the steel seems to flex a bit more. So, they all have 105, and all have carbon forks.
> The Lemond does not have a threadless headset, which from what I understand means that if I ever
> wanted to upgrade my fork I'd need to buy more than just a new fork. Anyway, like I said I'm
> leaning towards the Felt right now. I hope to hear from some of you, I'd really like some help.
>
> Take care, Joe

 

[C.F. Reynolds]

My story is much the same as yours. I also recently converted from mountain to road. 95% of my miles
were on the road anyway, so the switch was a natural one. About a Month ago I purchased a Giant TCR
One. It's got the same basic set-up at the TCR 2, except that the TCR One comes with a little better
component group (Ultegra). I will say up front, that I am not an expert, but I know what works for
me. I did a lot of reading and shopping. I read many reviews, and wound up settling on the Giant (my
decision, partially based on the advice of a local trainer that I have been working with). I had the
TCR professionally fit (which, for me, was a must, as I would not have known where to begin). The
only thing that I have added (besides water bottle cages), were a set of SpeedPlay X2 pedals.

I rode my mountain bike in a metric century recently (the Solvang Prelude was about 63 miles), and
had no trouble at all. However, my first few rides on the TCR were a rush. What a difference! About
two weeks ago I completed an 82 mile ride. The TCR is so light and agile. It's been a real pleasure
getting accustomed to it. Also done some training with a local racing team; what a blast! Others in
this group can (and will) give you reams of information on aerodynamics, rolling resistance, weight,
etc. I can only say that my bike just wants to keep rolling and rolling. I have picked up two to
three MPH on the TCR. I'm sure one MPH is from the added enthusiasm alone.

I don't live near a large city, so test driving bikes was hard to do sometimes. Mainly because
larger stores seem to have demo bikes, or will let you ride a shop bike of some kind. Whereas the
dinky shops in town here don't keep demo bikes, and don't want you putting miles on their inventory
bikes. I wound up buying mine out of town. But... I digress.

One other thing. There is a school of thought that compact road frames are a good thing. And there
is an also equally vocal, and adamant, group who will have nothing to do with them. Just take your
time sorting it all out. If there's a trainer in your area, you might ask him/her. They should be
able to give good sound advice (Of course, if they own a bike shop they may want you to buy the
bikes they sell).

Good luck!

--

Cliff

"Ken" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (Joe) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> > All of them rode really nicely and I could feel a bit of a difference in the Lemond due to the
> > steel frame, but not so much smoother that the other two seemed too bumpy, keep in mind I'm
> > riding an old mountain bike here.
>
> Unless you mounted the same tires (with the same air pressure) on all the bikes and rode them down
> a steep mountain at full speed, I doubt you could judge "smoother". The main things to look for in
> a test ride are fit and balance, i.e., how well the bike matches your body and riding style. All
the
> bikes you list are good bikes, but the best one for you depends on how
well
> it fits you.
>
> Ken

 

[Guy Chapman]

On 2 Dec 2002 06:37:46 -0800, [email protected] (Art Harris) wrote:

>How will the bike be used? Fast club rides? Centuries? Short solo rides? Touring? What kind of road
>surfaces will you be on? Do these bikes have clearance for 700 x 28 tires?

These are good questions. For long rides a steel bike will probably be more comfortable, especially
if it has raked steel forks.

Guy
===
Now available in both wedgie and bent flavours!

** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[G.T.]

Lindsay Rowlands wrote:
> In rec.bicycles.tech Joe <[email protected]> wrote:
> : Hey everyone,
>
> : Here are the bikes in consideration: 2001 Lemond Buenos Aires $999 (steel frame)
> : http://www.capitolcyclery.com/2001/lemond/buenos.htm
>
> : 2002 Giant TCR2 $1000 (aluminum frame) http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.-
> : asp?lYear=2002&bikesection=8792&range=48&model=10467
>
> : 2003 Felt F65 $1080 (aluminum frame) http://www.feltracing.com/f65.html
>

Definitely not the Giant. I wouldn't go for any of them but if these were the only 3 to choose from
I would pick the Felt because it comes in a 63cm.

Greg "boycott compact designs" T.

--
"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late, the battles we fought were long and hard,
just not to be consumed by rock n' roll..." - The Mekons

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <asfe[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
>
>In rec.bicycles.tech Joe <[email protected]> wrote:
>: Hey everyone,
>
>: Here are the bikes in consideration: 2001 Lemond Buenos Aires $999 (steel frame)
>: http://www.capitolcyclery.com/2001/lemond/buenos.htm
>
>: 2002 Giant TCR2 $1000 (aluminum frame)
>:
http://www.giantbicycles.com/us/030.000.000/030.000.000.asp?lYear=2002&bikesect
ion=8792&range=48&model=10467
>
>: 2003 Felt F65 $1080 (aluminum frame) http://www.feltracing.com/f65.html
>
>These are all great bikes = hard decision! When it comes down to it, buy the bike that feels right
>and speaks to you, you won't regret it. If you still can't decide, choose the one you like the look
>of - you still won't regret it!

I would also add that for a newbie, the right bike shop is also important. So keep in mind the type
of service you get from the bike shop that sells the brands you are looking at.
-----------------
Alex __O _-\<,_ (_)/ (_)

 

[Kbh]

The Specialized Sequoia Expert model I believe is in this class and uses standard (long) reach
brakes, for more versatility.

"Buck" <j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c o r p . c o m> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Joe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Hey everyone,
>
> <snip>
>
> > All of them rode really nicely and I could feel a bit of a difference in the Lemond due to the
> > steel frame, but not so much smoother that the other two seemed too bumpy, keep in mind I'm
> > riding an old mountain bike here. I also noticed that the aluminum ones did seem to feel a bit
> > quicker I guess since the steel seems to flex a bit more. So, they all have 105, and all have
> > carbon forks. The Lemond does not have a threadless headset, which from what I understand means
> > that if I ever wanted to upgrade my fork I'd need to buy more than just a new fork. Anyway, like
> > I said I'm leaning towards the Felt right now. I hope to hear from some of you, I'd really like
> > some help.
> >
> > Take care, Joe
>
> Joe,
>
> You need to consider what your primary use for the bike will be. In my
area,
> the forecast for tomorrow calls for rain, rain, rain, so I'm getting out
the
> old bike with the full fenders. None of these bikes you have selected have room to mount fenders
> or panniers, or racks, etc., so if your idea is commuting, then the bikes you have listed will not
> serve you well in that capacity.
>
> However, if you are just looking for a fair-weather friend, then all of these would do fine. The
> difference between steel and aluminum is a moot point. It has been discussed to death around here
> and the smarter among us believe there is no appreciable difference in "smoothness". As was
> pointed out in another post, you will find a greater difference by switching tires and changing
> the inflation pressures.
>
> When considering threaded or threadless forks, keep in mind that it is
much
> easier to adjust the height of a threaded setup. Loosen one bolt, slide
the
> stem up or down, retighten. Once the steerer tube is cut on a threadless setup, the only way to
> increase the height is a new stem with a different angle. Alright, so you can flip a threadless
> stem over for a change in
heigh
> t, but will it be the right one?
>
> Boutique wheels look neat, but can be a pain to true and have fewer
"backup"
> spokes to ride on if one breaks. The disadvantages outweigh any speed
gains
> you or I will ever see. Maybe if Greg were doing the comparison.....
>
> The arguments for compact frames are just smoke to cover the real
advantage:
> a manufacturer gets to spend less money by making only three sizes of
frames
> instead of eight or nine. While I'm sure you can come close to your ideal position on one of these
> frames, I found that it doesn't work for
everyone.
> The idea is to move the seat back as it goes up to accommodate larger riders. When I tested an
> OCR, I found I preferred the seat to go up
without
> going back and the seat didn't have enough forward adjustment to be comfortable for me. It may
> work for you, but it didn't for me.
>
> You do also need to consider the service at the shop. A good shop can make
a
> big difference in your overall experience.
>
> So, if I were faced with this dilemma, I would first expand my search to include a couple of other
> brands and see what was available in the used market. If I came back to these three new bikes, I
> would pick the Lemond, but trade in the funky wheels for something a bit more traditional and
> easier to work on.
>
> Good luck! -Buck

 

[Tom Kunich]

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You may be needlessly limiting yourself to closeout models; this year,
some
> '03s came out at considerably lower pricing than their '02 counterparts. For example, you might
> check out the 2003 TREK model 2000, which, at
$1099,
> has the requisite '105 components, carbon fork, and a very nice, domestically-produced
> aluminum frame.

I was very impressed with the latest Trek 2000. They're light, not too oversized to make them ride
like a brick and they look good. And there are Trek dealers all over the place so that you can find
them just about anywhere.

 

[lisated]

Guy Chapman <[email protected]> wrote:

> These are good questions. For long rides a steel bike will probably be more comfortable,
> especially if it has raked steel forks.

But not an especially good answer. The fork has offset to provide the appropriate amount of trail
and has nothing to do with comfort. Lots of forks have straight legs, the offset having been
provided by the legs not being in the same line as the steerer.

Ted Bennett

 

[Guy Chapman]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 09:16:31 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>But not an especially good answer. The fork has offset to provide the appropriate amount of trail
>and has nothing to do with comfort. Lots of forks have straight legs, the offset having been
>provided by the legs not being in the same line as the steerer.

A pair of raked 531 forks springs appreciably and absorbs bumps very well. Other types of fork which
create the offset without rake do not do this, and are less comfortable on long rides as a result.

Guy
===
Now available in both wedgie and bent flavours!

** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[lisated]

> >But not an especially good answer. The fork has offset to provide the appropriate amount of trail
> >and has nothing to do with comfort. Lots of forks have straight legs, the offset having been
> >provided by the legs not being in the same line as the steerer.
>
> A pair of raked 531 forks springs appreciably and absorbs bumps very well. Other types of fork
> which create the offset without rake do not do this, and are less comfortable on long rides as
> a result.
>
> Guy

That springing to which you refer is for-and-aft movement, which does little to reduce vertical
shock loads on the frame and handlebars.

It's not hard to test this. If you mount a fork vertically, you will find that it will take huge
loads to move the dropouts in a vertical line, much larger that occur when riding.

Ted Bennett

 

[Guy Chapman]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:44:19 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>That springing to which you refer is for-and-aft movement, which does little to reduce vertical
>shock loads on the frame and handlebars.

>It's not hard to test this. If you mount a fork vertically, you will find that it will take huge
>loads to move the dropouts in a vertical line, much larger that occur when riding.

The simple fact is, I've ridden bikes with raked steel forks and I've ridden bikes without, and the
bikes with raked steel forks are more comfortable. Not that I ride very long distances, rarely over
100 miles in a day, but that's been my experience. I find carbon forks in particular very harsh.
Responsive, but harsh.

Guy
===
Now available in both wedgie and bent flavours!

** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

 

[lisated]

> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:44:19 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >That springing to which you refer is for-and-aft movement, which does little to reduce vertical
> >shock loads on the frame and handlebars.
>
> >It's not hard to test this. If you mount a fork vertically, you will find that it will take huge
> >loads to move the dropouts in a vertical line, much larger that occur when riding.
>
> The simple fact is, I've ridden bikes with raked steel forks and I've ridden bikes without, and
> the bikes with raked steel forks are more comfortable. Not that I ride very long distances, rarely
> over 100 miles in a day, but that's been my experience. I find carbon forks in particular very
> harsh. Responsive, but harsh.
>
> Guy

You are probably one of the many who dislike this, but I would suggest that your perceptions are
based on something quite different than the fork. Unless you are comparing bikes with the exact same
frame, tires, seat, handlebar, bar wrap and fork geometry, you're not comparing just the fork. Also,
most folks' perceptions vary quite a bit depending on their expectations. That is, if you have
ridden bikes with straight forks and found them to be less comfy than bikes with curved forks, and
attribute the difference to the fork, then you would expect all straight forks to be less
comfortable.

Different forks certainly can make a bike ride different. But the path from the crown to the hub
makes no difference, whether straight or as curly as a Hetchins, because they don't compress
anywhere near as readily as the tires.

Ted Bennett

 

[Just Zis Guy]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:32:08 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>Different forks certainly can make a bike ride different. But the path from the crown to the hub
>makes no difference, whether straight or as curly as a Hetchins, because they don't compress
>anywhere near as readily as the tires.

I don't suppose it does make much odds - Argos n the UK make bladed Reynolds forks which I'm told
are also ggod, so maybe it's the steel which makes the difference. Either way I find steel-fork
bikes much more comfortable than others. Actually, even that's not quite the whole story - I find
the bent most comfortable

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.