Kent Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Yep..the problem with custom bikes is that they lose value when sold. IMO, I'd cross over the US and talk to the folks at Seven Cycles. Bob Jenny might know a few things about how they make bikes.... Ti isn't for everyone, but sounds like it just what you need for your riding characteristics (and pocketbook). K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 I just got my Vélo Mag (cycling magazine from Québec) and they review this month a Merlin Extralight and a Litespeed Siena. I did not read the article yet, but the Merlin is 6000$CDN with Ultegra or 8500$CDN with Dura-Ace (3500$CDN for the frame) and the Litespeed is 5400$CDN with Ultegra or 6800$CDN with Dura-Ace (3000$CDN for the frame). So 3000$US won't get you any of the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted November 18, 2006 Report Share Posted November 18, 2006 Three out of four from the quiver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted November 18, 2006 Report Share Posted November 18, 2006 while I'm a fan of all the hitech fabrication materials if you are gonna ride for a long time Steel has always had the smoothest ride out of the box for me. My recommendation, since money isn't much of a problem, is to find a local framebuilder and have a custom bike made. Custom in steel is affordable (relatively) anything else is like buying a Tinkler and again riding on rock days. As far as parts, again if parts aren't an issue Campy is very nice though for the most part Shimano parts work better, I'd still rather have Campy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted November 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2006 This one looks like it may fit the bill. Like the Farrari link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronG Posted November 22, 2006 Report Share Posted November 22, 2006 C5, great choice I have that same bike, it only cost me 7,000.00, JK!! Notice the flat bars on that bike, it is more of a hybrid than a true road bike. Beautiful bike though, does Michael Schumi come with a purchase?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted November 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2006 C5, great choice I have that same bike, it only cost me 7,000.00, JK!!Notice the flat bars on that bike, it is more of a hybrid than a true road bike. Beautiful bike though, does Michael Schumi come with a purchase?? Are you saying that only cost $7000? if so where can I buy one, I may consider it. I'd need to do a test drive for that price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin A. Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I finally snapped a picture of my old road bike (actually my fathers, but I commandeered it ). It's a '67 Raleigh Sprite 10 Speed, super lightweight at about 40lbs. <a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/allenjustinm/UntitledAlbum/photo#5044405285202570770"><img src="http://lh5.google.com/image/allenjustinm/RgFT4WeaLhI/AAAAAAAAAAk/JSMZRCiwjmg/s144/Old%20Bike.jpg" /></a> Click link for a decent size. I'll grab a picture of my current bike tomorrow once I get it back from the shop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bamboo_Girl Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 Hi... So cool thread, bicycles! Something I actually know. Check it out, I've been road racing bikes for 2 years as well as dabbling in the velodrome (up in CO Springs). If what you are after is a bike to ride a century, cruise with your buds, etc - then $3000 seems like a huge and excessive amount to spend. A $1000-1200 (new) road bike, with a triple (crank that is), would be more than enough for century riding, club riding, and even some racing. I raced a trek 1600 wsd my first season and it was no problem. What I'd look for would be the following: a) a decent frame. Aluminum is affordable, light, readily available but not the best ride over gnarly roads. Steel rides way better and is cheaper, but obviously a bit heavier - which you may care about if you ride in the mountains. Carbon is nice, super light, and rides better than aluminum but is very pricey. b) good components - a triple crank with an 8-10 speed cassette in the back. Everything from Ultegra on up is good. Tiagra and Acera can be OK, but you'll need to become an expert on adjusting it. c) a decent riding position. there are road bikes with more laid back geometry, like the trek pilot, which can be easier on some people's backs. Don't be afraid to buy used either, as there are lots of bargains to be had, maybe craigslist or a local bike club can be a good resource. People obsess about technology, every gram of weight, etc - but remember, no matter how fancy the bike or how expensive it was, whether you have dura-ace components all-around with an oclv frame or a 3rd hand 70's puegot - you still have to pedal the thing and keep it moving. Get something reasonably priced, save money, and work on improving your motor (fitness) as much as you can. I love blowing away squids in their $5000 Madones that are sucking wind up the mountains. The best investment I made in my cycling career was getting a power meter and some coaching. Happy riding :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfell Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 Spend a grand on a road bike, then take the remaining 2 grand and get a mtn. bike. Way more fun, better cross over skill wise to snowboard carving. The biking in Utah right now is great......But I'm in Banff so I can't ride my bike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin A. Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 Hi...So cool thread, bicycles! Something I actually know. Check it out, I've been road racing bikes for 2 years as well as dabbling in the velodrome (up in CO Springs). If what you are after is a bike to ride a century, cruise with your buds, etc - then $3000 seems like a huge and excessive amount to spend. A $1000-1200 (new) road bike, with a triple (crank that is), would be more than enough for century riding, club riding, and even some racing. I raced a trek 1600 wsd my first season and it was no problem. What I'd look for would be the following: a) a decent frame. Aluminum is affordable, light, readily available but not the best ride over gnarly roads. Steel rides way better and is cheaper, but obviously a bit heavier - which you may care about if you ride in the mountains. Carbon is nice, super light, and rides better than aluminum but is very pricey. b) good components - a triple crank with an 8-10 speed cassette in the back. Everything from Ultegra on up is good. Tiagra and Acera can be OK, but you'll need to become an expert on adjusting it. c) a decent riding position. there are road bikes with more laid back geometry, like the trek pilot, which can be easier on some people's backs. Don't be afraid to buy used either, as there are lots of bargains to be had, maybe craigslist or a local bike club can be a good resource. People obsess about technology, every gram of weight, etc - but remember, no matter how fancy the bike or how expensive it was, whether you have dura-ace components all-around with an oclv frame or a 3rd hand 70's puegot - you still have to pedal the thing and keep it moving. Get something reasonably priced, save money, and work on improving your motor (fitness) as much as you can. I love blowing away squids in their $5000 Madones that are sucking wind up the mountains. The best investment I made in my cycling career was getting a power meter and some coaching. Happy riding :) Great response and answers, but Al actually bought his bike awhile ago and recieved it 2 weeks or so ago...I ressurrected the thread because I had promised to post pics of my ancient bike...good answer, but a few months late ;) . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bamboo_Girl Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 Great response and answers, but Al actually bought his bike awhile ago and recieved it 2 weeks or so ago...I ressurrected the thread because I had promised to post pics of my ancient bike...good answer, but a few months late ;) . The laugh's on me, ha! I read through the thread but must have missed it. Now I read it again and see that he got a nice looking steel-framed bike with what looks like a double. Very cool! I converted an old bike like that into a fixie, it rocks! Big fun and even more so leaving the techno weanies wheezing on their gazillion dollar bikes For the original poster, Al - if you want to find out the effect of weight on speed, up hills, etc, check out the premier site for that very topic right here Look at the 'less weight on hill' and/or power given speed, speed given power. I can tell you this much already....power-to-weight ratio is the bottom line when it comes to hill climbing, period. Doesn't matter if you are riding a unicycle or if Nicole Cooke is pedaling. Forget the hype or hoopla about someone just being a better climber as if it were some sort of magic, it is all p-w. In the flats, aerodynamics & overall power, (not p-w ratio) are king. Witness that for time-trialing, you'll often get in a position where you can't make quite as much power but have superior aerodynamics in order to get the best speed/time. The faster you go, the more aerodynamics matter, CdA, etc. P.S. - great choice on the bike! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted March 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 The laugh's on me, ha! I read through the thread but must have missed it. Now I read it again and see that he got a nice looking steel-framed bike with what looks like a double. Very cool! In the flats, aerodynamics & overall power, (not p-w ratio) are king. Witness that for time-trialing, you'll often get in a position where you can't make quite as much power but have superior aerodynamics in order to get the best speed/time. The faster you go, the more aerodynamics matter, CdA, etc. P.S. - great choice on the bike! Thanks for info BambooGirl. What’s a nice Bamboo Girl like you doing in New Mexico? I have had a few Arbors over the years myself – only one stayed at home – the 170 Arbor Munoz. It has been a very wet rainy month since I picked up the Serotta - there is a picture of it in another post on bicycles - so haven't logged a bunch of miles yet, good part is I put more miles on my Prior 178 4WD and Hot Blast 178. and I have Whistler next week to ride em again. I live in a very hilly area and have my test ride pretty well sorted out. I am amazed how much difference there is in climbing this long a** hill in the Serotta compared to my Sekai 10 speed. Granted the Sekai is heavier ( damn that Sekai loves speed ), inefficient tires, needs a lower gear and it is not the best fit for me. The fit of a bike is/was more important that I thought going into this 5 or so months ago. The old bike felt great albeit a bit road vibration that was tiring after 30 miles or so but no sore joints or back. Biggest change in the new one is in body position so the foot is more forward at the 3 or 9 o’clock position and the change to a longer crank. I guess that is power efficiency related huh! For me one of the difficult choices/information/data what ever you call it is the fact most articles and private discussions as on this board relate to racing or speed and an age group of about 30 or so. Well my good friend double the age to 60 for me and change the bike requirements to a comfortable bike to ride with friends and a century ride someday. All the mechanics change at that point. I prefer the bar height to be closer to my saddle height than the 6 or so inches lower you young gals and bucks can ride. I prefer not to have 12 inches of seat post exposed specially with a carbon seat post. Don’t get me wrong I love speed – without really pushing it I hit 41 mph the other day on the Serotta - just not a steady diet of it on a bike, plus I love my riding partner and would like it to stay that way. My Serotta has a compact double – which so far seems to work for me on the hill climbs, very rarely am I in the last low gear, still getting used to the brake lever shifters instead of the down tube shifters which I kinda miss in that I could just look at the levers and know what gear I was in – miss that! So far it looks like my Brooks B-17 saddle was a good choice since my butt keeps wanting to ride more and longer. My only complaint so far is I think my handlebars a bit too wide but I think that is because my Sekai was so friggen narrow as most 10 speeds of the 1970 -1980 era were, plus it seems the bars including others I have felt are made so thin and light weight that I can feel them flex on a hill climb, the Sekai bars you could use for an engine hoist. I also miss the beauty of the lugged steel fabrication the Sekai has – it is a work of art. I may have buy a modern day bike someday with lugs just for the hell of it – One of the few advantages of being an old fart- you can do certain things just for the hell of it! Happy trails you Bamboo girl and someday you should try a narrow square tail snowboard ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.