Hi, i have not had a bike ina long time and am wanting to get back into cycling and getting fit... i have no interest in a mountain bike... and would prefer a road bike... what you boys recon to either of these 2 bikes???
i personaly like the look of the hand built one with the ribble frame.. both are gonna be at the top of my budget, might even have to travel to menchester from london :s
cheers simon
PS allso i am a average 5.11 heaight, and i think both of these bikes would be good size wise??
Hi, i have not had a bike ina long time and am wanting to get back into cycling and getting fit... i have no interest in a mountain bike... and would prefer a road bike... what you boys recon to either of these 2 bikes???
i personaly like the look of the hand built one with the ribble frame.. both are gonna be at the top of my budget, might even have to travel to menchester from london :s
cheers simon
PS allso i am a average 5.11 heaight, and i think both of these bikes would be good size wise??
If you're 5'11" a 52cm is too small, I'm 5'9" and I normally ride a 53-54 I would go with the Scott, I don't recognize the other brand, and believe me I know most if not all the major brands here in the US.
Both of the bikes seem rather different in size, I think the Scott lokks nice and if you get it at a good price it would probably be a good buy. But then again Ribble has a good reputation for some good training frames - you see a few over here in Australia that people have ordered from the UK.
5 11 is rather tall - the Scott might be a bit small Check out some threads on sizing in this forum.
