http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/bik/3306572248.html With the amount of add-ons, this is a no brainer for a first good road bike right?? thanks for advice
Too good to be true??
- Thread starter miltowndown
- Start date
FWIW. The particular bike is much TOO SMALL for YOU ...
Regardless, it is not worth it, IMO.
- unless you weigh 350 +/- & can't bend over to tie your shoe laces ...
and/or, you are planning on using FLAT, CRUISER, OR BMX handlebars on the bike ...
Regardless, it is not worth it, IMO.
For a first bike, I'd buy one from a shop so that if anything goes wrong, you have someone to take it to. If it's your first bike, you probably don't know enough to check the bike out and make sure everything on it is in good working order.
Good luck finding this guy if the bike falls apart a week after you buy it.
Good luck finding this guy if the bike falls apart a week after you buy it.
FWIW. YOU (i.e., any taller rider) can cobble a Road bike together for a fraction of what a "custom" bike would cost ...
As with bikes for those of us who are shorter, the effective TOP TUBE LENGTH + STEM should be high on the list of things to consider ...
IMO, a reasonably fit rider who is your height should opt for a frame whose top tube is minimally 62cm ... and possibly, 64cm ...
If you can think out-of-the-box for a moment, you will realize that there are scores of off-the-peg frames whose top tubes are 62cm, and longer ...
Well, that's all well-and-good, but that still doesn't-get-you-to-point-B ... but, it gets you closer!
Here (below) is a 26er MTB Hardtail frame which I cobbled together with ROAD components -- 700c wheels, Road crank, Road handlebars & shifters, and a Road fork ...
The front derailleur is a top pull XT because the cable routing is from the top ... the rear hub is a 135mm MTB rear hub because the alloy frame could not be respaced to 130mm ... the BB spindle is the length for a "Triple" crankset to allow the 52t chainring to clear the chainstay.
The Road fork's shorter shoulder-to-dropout length lowers the head tube & steepens its angle to roughly what a typical Road frame would have (72º-to-73º) AND makes the effective top tube length slightly longer (a good thing for the taller rider) than it would be if the frame were set up with a suspension fork.
The bottom bracket height is a little higher than is the norm for a Road bike for a shorter rider, but not so much higher that it is a out of the norm.
The weight is sub-20 ...
If you are a wise shopper then YOU can probably cobble something like the above bike for $700(US), or less, if you opt for an alloy frame.
Here is a steel 26er Hardtail with a steel Road fork which I modified to accept 700x32 tires ...
I removed the cantilever brake boss from the rear stays & respaced the rear triangle to 130mm ...
FYI. A CX or Touring fork will result in a head tube height with a slightly slacker head tube angle + a slightly shorter effective top tube.
As with bikes for those of us who are shorter, the effective TOP TUBE LENGTH + STEM should be high on the list of things to consider ...
IMO, a reasonably fit rider who is your height should opt for a frame whose top tube is minimally 62cm ... and possibly, 64cm ...
If you can think out-of-the-box for a moment, you will realize that there are scores of off-the-peg frames whose top tubes are 62cm, and longer ...
- that is, because MOST MTBs are set up with FLAT BARs which are typically set up with zero forward reach, the frames are available with longer top tubes
Well, that's all well-and-good, but that still doesn't-get-you-to-point-B ... but, it gets you closer!
Here (below) is a 26er MTB Hardtail frame which I cobbled together with ROAD components -- 700c wheels, Road crank, Road handlebars & shifters, and a Road fork ...
The front derailleur is a top pull XT because the cable routing is from the top ... the rear hub is a 135mm MTB rear hub because the alloy frame could not be respaced to 130mm ... the BB spindle is the length for a "Triple" crankset to allow the 52t chainring to clear the chainstay.
The Road fork's shorter shoulder-to-dropout length lowers the head tube & steepens its angle to roughly what a typical Road frame would have (72º-to-73º) AND makes the effective top tube length slightly longer (a good thing for the taller rider) than it would be if the frame were set up with a suspension fork.
The bottom bracket height is a little higher than is the norm for a Road bike for a shorter rider, but not so much higher that it is a out of the norm.
The weight is sub-20 ...
- that's porky to some by today's standards ...
- the same "bike" with a Carbon Fiber 26er Hardtail frame + a little more weight with some more exotic components would shave a pound-or-two off the total weight ...
If you are a wise shopper then YOU can probably cobble something like the above bike for $700(US), or less, if you opt for an alloy frame.
Here is a steel 26er Hardtail with a steel Road fork which I modified to accept 700x32 tires ...
I removed the cantilever brake boss from the rear stays & respaced the rear triangle to 130mm ...
- without taking into account the components, the steel frame & fork add 3-to-4 lbs.
FYI. A CX or Touring fork will result in a head tube height with a slightly slacker head tube angle + a slightly shorter effective top tube.
Miltowndown, if you're 6 feet tall, give or take and inch, and of fairly average proportions (especially not built like a gorilla), and you are aware of the drawbacks of buying a used bike, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this bike looks like a good deal. A good deal if everything on it works as well as the seller says.
Well, the asking price is a bit steep. Street price for a new 2.1 has been typically around $1200-1300. Offer $650 and see where that gets you.
Alf, I don't know where you get your fit information from. Eddy Merckx, Fabian Cancellara, and I are all around 6' and we're riding 58s.
And what's this about XT derailleurs and cobbling a MTB into something that resembles a road bike if you squint real hard? He's a noob and he wants a bike he can ride, not spend 8 months looking for a frame and parts that he'll probably have to pay a mechanic to assemble, and then maybe have something he can ride by next July. Get off your hobby horse and read the question.
Yes. Such a project is ok for someone looking for a project and who doesn't mind fiddling with something that might not work just right. For the vast majority of riders, especially new riders, a project bike as such, of questionable value and function, is absolutely the wrong idea. Given that most stock bikes today are sussed out pretty damn well, there's little reason to believe that a backyard shed project is a better idea.oldbobcat said:
FYI. In a prior (contemporaneous) thread, miltondown stated that he is 6'4" tall ...
BTW. If YOU understood as much about bicycle frames as a person selling-or-servicing bikes should, then you would know that other than the head tube angle & fork, it's all pretty much the same on a Road frame from that point rearward except for the frame material & subsequent stiffness-or-not ...
- regardless, the skill level to assemble a bike with contemporary components is probably about as difficult as assembling an IKEA-or-other-in-a-box piece of furniture ...
- if it is difficult for YOU, then maybe the shop owner is over-paying you for what you are doing ...
- if YOU are someone who thinks that MTB derailleurs are verboten on Road bikes OR Road cranks on MTB frames, then you really don't understand how arbitrary labels are
FYI2. Anyone can buy an XL ([COLOR= rgb(128, 128, 128)]that's e[/COLOR]X[COLOR= rgb(128, 128, 128)]tra [/COLOR]L[COLOR= rgb(128, 128, 128)]arge for you people in Boulder[/COLOR]) Hardtail frame 24/7/364-([COLOR= rgb(255, 140, 0)]closed on [/COLOR][COLOR= rgb(255, 0, 0)]Christmas[/COLOR]) for under $100 ([COLOR= rgb(128, 128, 128)]$500 +/- for a Carbon Fiber frame[/COLOR]) without breaking a sweat. Of course, a person can pay more & if he's not a [COLOR= rgb(0, 100, 0)]wise shopper[/COLOR], then he can assemble the bike with an appropriately long top tube for $1200.
Of course, the option is to scrounge around for "8 months" on Craig's List for a too small USED bike-or-frame OR to pay a huge premium for a ZINN-or-other-custom frame (i.e., $2000 + components).
Well, don't take this as a sign of the apocalypse, but I agree with YOU (!?!) that most stock bikes are good-to-go with the components that they are equipped with ...
- heck, presuming the sales people at a bike shop aren't snobbish or otherwise unfriendly, the only reason that a person probably shouldn't buy a bike from a bike shop is because they can get a comparable bike from an online retailer like BIKESDIRECT, or some eBay sellers for significantly less ...
- OR, they can pay the same amount and have a bike equipped with better components
- of course, there are pitfalls to buying online, but they are minimal (IMO) & probably no more frequently encountered than buying a used bike on Craig's List
It's just that for the significantly TALLer riders than the rest of us, the options are (IMO) limited unless they have deep pockets.
Presuming that an individual has the components s/he wants, then, IMO, the most difficult thing about a DIY project bike is having the tools ...
- most of the generic tools are can fit in your rear pocket ... an adjustable wrench is probably the largest tool a person needs, now
- and, the requisite bicycle specific tools are few, now -- Cassette Lockring tool + BB tool
- so, you just need a headset press which can be cobbled together with a threaded rod + nuts + washers OR have a shop install the headset
Let's see (remember, ALL information is now readily available on YouTube, Parktools.com, etc.) ...
- install the BB ... knowing that the driveside has a left hand thread is the most significant thing an individual probably needs to know ...
- install the headset
- install the fork, spacers, stem
- install the handlebars
- insert the seat post
- attach the saddle to the seat post
- install the crankset
- install the tires & tubes (inflate the tires)
- install the Cassette
- install the derailleurs
- install the chain
- install the shifters + housing & cables
- wrap the handlebars
- adjust the derailleurs (again, see PARKTOOLS.COM, YouTube, etc.)
- install the pedals
- check the air pressure in the tires
Mounting the tires on the wheels & putting tires air in the tires will probably the most strenuous part of the assembly ...
Other than trimming the housing to the right length & snipping the ends of the cables, almost everything else is about as difficult as removing-or-replacing the cap from-or-onto a jar of pickles.
N.B. Some literacy (text & computer) IS required to access the necessary information, of course ... And, as I've stated before, 'hand models' and surgeons/etc. (i.e., people whose work depends on their hands) OR people who have a physical limitation (e.g., arthritis) probably should not engage in most DIY projects, bicycle related, or otherwise. Quote: Originally Posted by alienator
Yes. Such a project is ok for someone looking for a project and who doesn't mind fiddling with something that might not work just right. For the vast majority of riders, especially new riders, a project bike as such, of questionable value and function, is absolutely the wrong idea.
As YOU know, Campagnolo shifters are just short of being universally compatible ...
Or, a person can buy a SHIMANO 105 "group" of the same vintage components if that is their inclination."Wrong idea"? Maybe for someone with deep pockets, but maybe not for others.
Just a couple small points of contention with Alfeng's otherwise very good list above:
I would install the pedals before I adjusted the derailleurs--it's easier to rotate the cranks to check derailleur operation that way.
Second, he left off cutting the steer tube to length--not a difficult task, but it definitely falls into the "I really don't want to screw this up" category.
I would install the pedals before I adjusted the derailleurs--it's easier to rotate the cranks to check derailleur operation that way.
Second, he left off cutting the steer tube to length--not a difficult task, but it definitely falls into the "I really don't want to screw this up" category.
Found the contemporaneous thread. Hey, I even contributed to it. I stand corrected. But the craigslist ad clearly suggested the bike for a rider of about 6', and it would be a straightforward inference that the OP had read this and associated himself to this group.
Regarding project bikes, Alf, I respect the work you do on your bikes. Your persistence at solving problems is evident in your posts and your workmanship and taste clearly shows in the photos of your bikes. But how many years have you you been working at this, were you always this good right from the start, how many mistakes have you made along the way, and how many rides did you miss because of mistakes you made on the only bike you owned?
Not that I haven't made mistakes, but I was fortunate enough to have accumulated a few miles on my first bike before I had to start making them.
I hear you!
I suspect that people who are taller than 6'1" are so used to making do with stuff for those of us who are shorter that the OP was simply wondering if a bike which would be good for someone who is 6'0" +/- would be 'okay' for him, too ...
FWIW. The only person whom I "know" (make that "know of") who apparently doesn't make mistakes (by his own declaration) is Barry Soetoro ....
So, yes, I have made mistakes ...
Other than trying to take a turn too quickly on a gravel road when I was young, the FIRST real bicycle-related mistake was buying a French bike (!!!) ...
- only the 27" tires & tubes could be called "standard" ...
- but, its lack of compatibility was probably more of a revelation & opportunity than not
And, thanks to what I learned in SHOP CLASS, the 'mechanical mistakes' which I have made were (by my possibly faulty recollection?!?) few ...
- check specs ...
- but, don't rely on them being accurate ...
- if it doesn't fit, then it probably doesn't fit!
- unless it is a tapered square peg being driven into a round hole, or vice versa
- if it doesn't fit, then it can often be made to fit ...
- after all, before mass produced standardization, parts were fit together on an ad hoc basis
Of course, a workstand + "test" rides go a long way toward sorting out potential problems ...
So, almost EVERYTHING bicycle-related that I have done which is non-standard is basically grade school level work, IMO, and does not begin to compare with efforts like the "unofficial TWELVE-SPEED" (?!?) Campagnolo drivetrain which CAMPYBOB pointed out in the "Do you count the gear when you ride?" thread.
REGARDLESS, if you were to pause for a moment and compare (in your mind, if not actually in front of you) a vintage bike from before the mid-80s (just to pick an arbitrary time frame) with a contemporary bike, then you would probably realize that unlike the box of tools which you would need to service (or, assemble) a vintage bike you really only need a handful of tools to work on most contemporary bikes.
So, presuming that the cables aren't binding & the tires are inflated & the drivetrain has the 'right' chain, the ever-improving ramping-and-pinning seems to make components for both mechanic-and-rider more user friendly with each passing iteration ...
- yes, yes, yes ... before you say it, adjusting indexed shifting DOES require some knowledge, but not that much when you think about it ...
- AND, though I haven't looked at it, the information which is now available on YouTube is presumably all a person needs to know for adjusting indexing + other instructional information & "stuff"
So, while bikes do require maintenance, the cartridge-this & cartridge-that really have changed things + the need for a minimal amount of bike-specific tools makes it all seem comparatively pretty easy, now ... at least, IMO ... and, assembly isn't that far removed from maintenance once one acquires the proper tools + the properly sized components ...
So, I still say that if a person can remove-and-replace the cap on a pickle jar then they can probably cobble a bike together from its individual parts.
