# What would you get if you were me? Emonda vs Domane vs ??? for my riding style...



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Hey Everyone! I haven't been around for a while. I used to post in these forums a fair bit years ago. 

*Short Question*: I'm seeking opinions and advice about whether to get an Emonda SLR or Domane SLR to replace the trusty bike that I've been using for the past 14 years. I was 35 when I purchased that bike; I'm pushing 50 now. This next one will be my ride for the next decade or more. 

What do you think?

***

*Longer Background (skip if you'd like):*

Even though my posting traffic may have slowed, my riding hasn't! I do around 1-2k per year, largely recreational with a good amount of hill climbing here on the Wasatch front. A typical ride will be 25-50 miles. Rarely do I exceed 70 miles in one ride, but I have done a century here and there. 

Last summer I decided that maybe it's time for a new ride, and I've spent while considering options. I've been on a USPS Trek 5200 that I purchased new in 2003, which has seen some upgrades over the years, but remains a really great ride. As you can see from the pic, its been upgraded to DA 7800, and I have some nice-ish carbon wheels too (not shown), but I must say the stopping power is not the best which is why I find myself putting the aluminum rim back on from time to time. lol. I want my new bike to have disc brakes. (I'm not really seeking opinions on this, I've seen the debates, but if you must, go ahead and try to talk me out of it, lol.) 

Over the past 14 years, my gearing has moved from 53/39, to 50/39, and then to the current 50/34, which works pretty well for me with an 11-28, although I am looking forward to trying the new-ish DA 11/30 or even the Ultegra 11-34 (gasp!). 

Honestly my bike has been great. No real complaints at all. I like the quick steering. But the drop is a bit much. As you can see the stem has slowly moved up to where it is now, with maximum spacer count and flipped, as I've aged and become less flexible. 

I would like to stay with Trek. Call me sentimental. Their carbon has come a long long way since the days of US Postal OCLV! Originally I was thinking I would get the new Emonda SLR with H2 geometry once it was available in the disc version. The geometry of the Emonda is nearly identical to my OCLV 5200, except that the H2 gives that more upright position. How much more comfortable would the new Emonda be compared to the 5200, which is rather harsh? 

The Domane is attractive, obviously, because of the iso speed decouplers. At first I thought I'd never do that because--> Gimmick! But it has withstood the test of time and I have warmed up to it. So how does it handle the hills? Is climbing okay? I like that with the Domane I could have wider tires, which will certainly be put to use as I age over a decade. 

Unfortunately, I have not been able to find a 62 size locally that I can test ride, so your opinions mean a lot. 

What would you do if you were me?


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

Get the Emonda disc if you don't want to worry about possible issues with the moving parts of the Iso Speed Decouplers. Alternatively, you don't need the lightest/stiffest bike possible and that's what the Emonda is about so I'd pass on it.

Get the Domane disc if you don't mind the gimmick of the Iso Speed Decouplers and possible service issues down the road. Disc brakes will allow you run wider tires by default and run carbon wheels without loss of braking performance. You can easily choose the H-series fit to please your aging body. If you're going to stick with aluminum wheels, stick to rim brakes and save some weight and some money.

My buddy has a Domane early edition with only the rear decoupler. He likes the bike and has no complaints about it's climbing. He also has no complaints about it being too stiff or too soft. He has the rim brake version and runs aluminum rims.


----------



## biscut (Dec 15, 2016)

Domane SLR 6 disc here. 44 and call me 1500-2k a year mileage. No racing just riding. Not sure if the ride is the same on a frame that would fit you. Mine is a 56. The ride is excellent. The only flex I get is from the IsoSpeed handlebars when really grabbing them on an ascent. Very comfortable bike. I've found 28's to be great for me. Plenty of room for 32 as well.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

Get the Domane, no doubt to me - there's no real advantage to the Edmonda over the Domane other than a little weight. The Domane climbs great. I have over 20,000 miles on the Domane and no issues wiht the coupler, although the current model is different - I'm sure that's not going to be an issue. I'm 60 BTW and started riding about 5 years ago now average about 9000 miles / year.


----------



## jwalther (Jul 4, 2013)

Domane=Lexus, Emonda=BMW, broadly speaking. Your choice depends on what you're looking for exactly. I put thousands of miles/year on my Emonda, including century rides and have never found it uncomfortable.

Sent you an email.


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Thanks everyone! One thing that I fund myself thinking about is: how does the Emonda compare to my current ride? It should have the same handling characteristics bc the geo is nearly identical. What I am currious about is the ride quality. I'm going to try to find a test ride somewhere. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Drone 5200 said:


> I like that with the Domane I could have wider tires, which will certainly be put to use as I age over a decade.


I'd definitely error on the side of more tire room. That doesn't necessarily have anything to do with your aging either. It's just gives you a lot more versatility with no downside.

You may not care now but you never know when you might end up going to Vermont (where the pavement sucks and the best rides are gravel) or whatever.


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Drone 5200 said:


> Thanks everyone! One thing that I fund myself thinking about is: how does the Emonda compare to my current ride? It should have the same handling characteristics bc the geo is nearly identical. What I am currious about is the ride quality. I'm going to try to find a test ride somewhere.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah. I think this is good advice. My current bike cannot fit larger than 25mm and even then that is pushing it to squeeze 25s in there. I had to tweak the dish of the rear ever so slightly when I put the 25s on to get them in there. Lol. 

What is a considered "enough" as far as width is concerned? I realize that depends on what you are doing and some people are going to want clearance for 2 inch rubber. What I mean is, what is the consensus for what is "wide enough" or a decent width for a person who rides regular roads and no gravel? Per trek specs, the new emonda disc can handle 28. Is that sufficient? (I wonder if in real life a wider tiere could be squeezed in there too. The Domane disc is spec'ed at 32 but people report being able to go wider.) 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Drone 5200 said:


> What is a considered "enough" as far as width is concerned? I realize that depends on what you are doing and some people are going to want clearance for 2 inch rubber. What I mean is, what is the consensus for what is "wide enough" or a decent width for a person who rides regular roads and no gravel?


Good question. It still "depends' on body weight. But I can say as someone who's 145 pounds that 28 is plenty for me on anything I'd describe as regular roads and no gravel.

But like I was saying, there's really no down side to having the ability to use bigger (unless you want ultra sharp handling then the longer chain stays might be considered a down side) so why not keep open the possibility even if you never use it.

I few years ago I would have said I only ride on regular roads too. But now I can't get enough of riding gravel roads and trails.


----------



## jetdog9 (Jul 12, 2007)

I posted similar info in the other current Domane thread, but I just spent a week on a 2017 Domane SL 6 and it was fine. But I usually ride a Scott Addict that I think is comparable to the Emonda and the Domane was no more comfortable in terms of shock absorption. The geometry was a little upright for me but I guess that's sort of the point of it. This is coming from a rider that weighs ~180 pounds.

I did four rides on the Domane:
67 miles / 2000 ft
46.5 miles / 3300 ft
34 miles / 3100 ft
23 miles / 2000 ft

The one I rode was rim brake, not disc, though. It had Bontrager direct mount "Speed Stop" brakes that I thought worked great.

All that said, I'm happy to be getting back on the Addict soon and if I had to choose between an Emonda and Domane I'd probably go with the former even never having ridden one.


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Jay Strongbow said:


> ....there's really no down side to having the ability to use bigger....
> 
> ....now I can't get enough of riding gravel roads and trails....


I agree with that first part. All other things being equal, the ability to go bigger has little to no downside. Thats a +1 for the Domane. 

I am curious about your other point. I guess I don't get it. I don't doubt you though. I have a hardtail 29er with 2.4 tires and it is perfect for me for the trails where I ride on the Wasatch front. I use the 28x46 low all of the time for steep long technical climbs where I use every bit of the traction available from the relatively wide tires. And when going down the dropper let's me get supper low and way back on the bike so I don't risk doing an endo. I couldn't imagine riding a gravel bike on trails like these. Around here I think having both a dedicated road bike and a dedicated mtn bike is the right combo. It's like having a Porsche and a Jeep. You want both if you can because neither one is all that good in the other's domain. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

jetdog9 said:


> ... I just spent a week on a 2017 Domane SL 6 and it was fine. But I usually ride a Scott Addict that I think is comparable to the Emonda and the Domane was no more comfortable in terms of shock absorption....


Thank you, jetdog9. This is exactly the feedback I seek. Someone who has ridden both (or similar) back to back. This one of the main variables I'm trying to solve for on this decision. 

If anyone else out there has experiences like this, or opinons, let me know what you think....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Dude I know this is completely out of what you said you want and for that I apologize in advance. 
Have you considered a nice titanium bike? 
Something like this









Or this?









Again my apologies for stirring you this way but it appears to me you like bikes that last and give you a smile every time you ride them. Something that will last you a long time. I really don't know why people don't go Ti? 
Oh well again my
Apologies. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Drone 5200 said:


> I am curious about your other point. I guess I don't get it. I don't doubt you though. I have a hardtail 29er with 2.4 tires and it is perfect for me for the trails where I ride on the Wasatch front. I use the 28x46 low all of the time for steep long technical climbs where I use every bit of the traction available from the relatively wide tires. And when going down the dropper let's me get supper low and way back on the bike so I don't risk doing an endo. I couldn't imagine riding a gravel bike on trails like these. Around here I think having both a dedicated road bike and a dedicated mtn bike is the right combo. It's like having a Porsche and a Jeep. You want both if you can because neither one is all that good in the other's domain.


I live to ride gravel roads and trails. There's really nothing I have to add to that and I really don't know what your question is......but if you're trying to suggest I should get a mountain bike to ride gravel roads and trails my only comment is I don't want a mountain bike to ride gravel roads and trails because it would be overkill for most of them and I never do any ride that doesn't involve at least some regular roads getting to and from gravel ones.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Test ride both bikes. Buy the one that you like the fit and feel the best.

Personally, I would lean toward the Domane. As Jay said, room for wider tires is something you may want in the future. And if you decide at some point that the position it too upright, you can always flip the stem. But concentrate on what I said in the first line.


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

charlitin said:


> Dude I know this is completely out of what you said you want and for that I apologize in advance.
> Have you considered a nice titanium bike?
> Something like this
> 
> ...


No problem. I'm glad to hear your suggestion. I gave some serious consideration to a moots but I concluded it's just not for me. Maybe one would say that my decision is uninformed because I've never even ridden a titanium bike and don't know what I'm missing. Well, that's true. I have no practical experience with it. Nevertheless, I'm going to stay in the mainstream with carbon. It's served me well for the past decade plus. And I consider a carbon frame to be something that I expect will last for 10, 20 or 30 years or more and should only need to be abandoned because one wants something else, not because of failure in the material. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Jay Strongbow said:


> I live to ride gravel roads and trails. There's really nothing I have to add to that and I really don't know what your question is......but if you're trying to suggest I should get a mountain bike to ride gravel roads and trails my only comment is I don't want a mountain bike to ride gravel roads and trails because it would be overkill for most of them and I never do any ride that doesn't involve at least some regular roads getting to and from gravel ones.


Sorry. I didn't want to be argumentative. I'm glad you are enjoying what you are doing. And your experience resonates with many which is great. The more two wheeled pedal powered machines out there the better! I'll stick with my pairing of road and mtn bikes. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

I am not concerned about the "mechanicals" of the isospeed decouplers. For the seat tube it is merely a short axle being run through a pair of sealed bearings. The bearings are available from any bearing supplier - the axle should not develop problems. The cover might break and fifteen years from now Trek won't have a replacement, but that's just a cover. I haven't looked at the front Isospeed yet, so I can't really comment on that. 

One area where my Domane has really stood out - something I bet that you run into in the Wasatch - is dealing with cattle grates. Unlike every other bike I have learned to stay in the saddle when riding over them on my Domane. It is really much smoother than the old trick of standing on the pedals, using my knees as springs.


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Drone 5200 said:


> No problem. I'm glad to hear your suggestion. I gave some serious consideration to a moots but I concluded it's just not for me. Maybe one would say that my decision is uninformed because I've never even ridden a titanium bike and don't know what I'm missing. Well, that's true. I have no practical experience with it. Nevertheless, I'm going to stay in the mainstream with carbon. It's served me well for the past decade plus. And I consider a carbon frame to be something that I expect will last for 10, 20 or 30 years or more and should only need to be abandoned because one wants something else, not because of failure in the material.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Well the truth is the modern carbon bikes are made light. They use less material making them weak for long term use. I cracked 3 frames already and had enough. It also depends on the type of riding you do. I am 5-11 200lbs and sprint hard and ride 200+ miles a week. 
I went Ti and I'm never getting anything that is not Ti. With the. New butting and welding techniques Ti frames are as stiff as carbon and far more comfortable. Against all my cycling buddies advice Me against Ti. I builded a litespeed T1 2015 model. This is the pic.









I am so happy with it that after 2 years that I might build another T1 in the disc brake version. It just came out and te price is steep. 
Another things to consider. It is hand made by a handful of people. It has a real lifetime warranty. It doesn't corrode and it's very light. 
My bike seats at 15.8lbs. Could be less close to 15 but as it is it is what I wanted. 

Brother Ti is like that místic thing that you only hear in whispers and only a few dare to go for it. Like that Dr. that has the cure for cancer. no one knows about it until you are desperate enough to go see him. And then even after you are cured , no one still believes you. 
Once you convert to it you will never go back to only carbon. It is that good. I haven't met anyone that is displeased with its performance. Problem is there is no marketing done. No Tour de France riders on it, but most importantly, it last a very very long time. That is not good for profits!!! You need something that breaks and can be replaced in a pinch. 
If you have the cash do it. You won't regret it. 
Good luck! 
Btw I saw a Mosaic and damn they are pretty. They are a high end Ti frame. Expensive but pretty. 
If I would go custom I would do Firefly. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## exracer (Jun 6, 2005)

Drone 5200 said:


> What would you do if you were me?


Me personally would look to something other than Trek (do they make good bikes? Needed to be asked). Been riding for over 35 years and never been into brand loyalty. A lot of people I've seen that have brand loyalty have kind of a tunnel vision thing going on. That is probably why I don't subscribe to it. 

Me, I'd look at Cyfac, Time, Look, Sarto, Crumpton, Kirk Lee and several others. I'm hoping to get a Cyfac Nerv DS2 frame to replace my aluminum bike with next years tax return. And it's not like there's a shop around here with a bunch of Cyfacs built up so you can test ride one. Everything I've read has been very positive, so I am going to have to take a leap of faith.

I'm more of an aggressive rider so I'd be looking at the one that has the more traditional road bike geometry. But hey, it's your money; get what you want. If want a sports car, get the Emonda. If you want a GT, get the Domane


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Check this lynskey r460. It looks nice. Not my favorite frame but nonetheless it is a very well built bike. 









http://hub.chainreactioncycles.com/latest-news/road/lynskey-r460-custom-road-bike-build/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Thanks for the shout out about titanium. It is something to consider for sure, so I'll think about it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

charlitin said:


> Check this lynskey r460. It looks nice. Not my favorite frame but nonetheless it is a very well built bike.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting. That Lynskey frame has an MSRP of 4025 which puts it up there with the litespeed T1sl disc. Of course the Lynskey is on sale for 40% off but not in my size. Honestly I don't really see the value proposition at that msrp when the msrp for a 2018 Domane SRL disc is 3000. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

charlitin said:


> Well the truth is the modern carbon bikes are made light. They use less material making them weak for long term use. I cracked 3 frames already and had enough.


Cracked 3 frames, really? Carbon is really very strong - stronger than aluminum. While carbon is strong, it is not tough. When I say it's not tough, I mean it cannot stand blunt impact. So if you are crashing in races, like throwing rocks at your bike frame, running into low underpasses with your bike on the roof or just like colliding with cars, carbon isn't for you, LOL!

Just curious, which carbon bikes were these that you cracked the frames on? 

This being said, Ti is a very nice material for bikes, but it's also very expensive. Another great and less expensive option is cromoly steel. Check out the Jamis Quest Elite or the Renegade Exploit. They both have Reynolds 631 frames and come with full Shimano 105:

questelite 

renegadeexploit


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Cracked 3 frames, really? Carbon is really very strong - stronger than aluminum. While carbon is strong, it is not tough. When I say it's not tough, I mean it cannot stand blunt impact. So if you are crashing in races, like throwing rocks at your bike frame, running into low underpasses with your bike on the roof or just like colliding with cars, carbon isn't for you, LOL!
> 
> Just curious, which carbon bikes were these that you cracked the frames on?
> 
> ...


Scott's CR1 comp. it cracked at the seat post; and pro matte 2 of them. Pro cracked twice. Non accident at the BB and accident at the top tube. 
That was my first carbon bike for 1500$ with my first paycheck after graduation. That was what I could afford at the time. Got the pro as a replacement. The CR1 is one of the stiffest frames at that price point. I was going to get the foil but decided against it. 


























There you can see them. I am 192-195 lbs at racing weight. Used to sprint 40+mph. Between falls and racing Carbon is not made for that kind of abuse. 
My pro friends tell me the same thing and they weight 25lbs less. They go thru 2-3 carbon frames per season. Including crashes and everything. 
If you are not planning on crashes or falls then you are delusional. 
Chromoly is the heaviest of materials and it rusts. Stainless steel is better in the rust department but heavy as well. 
He wants the last bike of his life. The best material for bike frame in my opinion is Ti. Lightest, rust resistant and strongest if the tubing is done properly with the new butting techniques. It is not the stiffest. That place is for aluminum. 
Carbon resin with sweat and sun cracks over time. Want a carbon bike? Get it custom made. The frame I guarantee you is going to weight as much as a Ti frame. Crumpton, Appleman and some Italians that I remember make them. 
Expensive is a relative term Lombard. A pinarello F10 is close to 12k. That is the price of a 2 yo corolla. A T1SL frame only with Di2 group and carbon wheels is around 10k. 
The question is if it is worth it for him!
When comparing frame materials all have its place. All have their uniqueness but over all Ti represents the best long term investment. 
Only downside back in the day was flexibility but that is now addressed with proper butting and tube shapes. 





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bootsie_cat (Jan 7, 2005)

*Domane*

Given your height and the spacer stack on your current bike I recommend the Domane.


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

And yet I know many racers who have had carbon bikes last them for years. Personally, I have a 1989 Specialized Allez Epic, a 1990 Kestrel MXZ mountain bike, and a 2013 Trek Domane - none of which has shown any such trouble over the years. That Kestrel MXZ was involved in a weird accident on the trail where I went into a hairpin way too fast, went off the trail and t-boned a large tree stump, going over the bars. I hit that stump so hard that the rear derailleur cable popped out of the cable guides... the frame had flexed and allowed it to pop out. If I had been on a steel, aluminium or titanium bike and hit it that hard the frame would have crumpled. With the carbon frame all I needed to do was loosen the cable anchor bolt, pop the cable housing back into place and re-adjust the derailleur. 

The point of this post is that not everybody is going to crack a carbon frame within a few years. They can last indefinitely, just like any other quality frame.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

charlitin said:


> Scott's CR1 comp. it cracked at the seat post; and pro matte 2 of them. Pro cracked twice. Non accident at the BB and accident at the top tube.
> That was my first carbon bike for 1500$ with my first paycheck after graduation. That was what I could afford at the time. Got the pro as a replacement. The CR1 is one of the stiffest frames at that price point. I was going to get the foil but decided against it.
> 
> 
> ...


Well OK, it's true that if you are a racer where crashes are not a matter of "if" but "when", carbon probably isn't the best material - unless you are pro and your bikes are given to you. I know a racer who races a Cannondale CAAD8, which is aluminum.

Your seatpost crack sounds like someone torqued the post too tight. The BB crack sounds like the only one that could be QC related. Downtubes on some Trek OCLV bikes were a sore spot for awhile. Never heard of QC problems with Scott.

Yes, steel is heavy for racing. For the rest of us, it works just fine. Rust isn't a problem unless you regularly ride in the rain. I store my bikes inside the house, not the garage where swings in temperature and moisture can be a problem. If you take care of your steel frame, it can last a very long time.

I can't say I've ridden Ti. Maybe if I tried them, I'd be a convert. Who knows? I do know a woman who has an older Ti bike and recently bought a carbon bike. She likes the carbon bike better. That could be because the Ti frame was old tech.

I'm brought back to the quote from the immortal Sheldon Brown:

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-materials.html 

"Did you know that:

Aluminum frames have a harsh ride?
Titanium frames are soft and whippy?
Steel frames go soft with age, but they have a nicer ride quality?
England's Queen Elizabeth is a kingpin of the international drug trade?
All of the above statements are equally false.There is an amazing amount of folkloric "conventional wisdom" about bicycle frames and materials that is widely disseminated, but has no basis in fact.The reality is that you can make a good bike frame out of any of these metals, with any desired riding qualities, by selecting appropriate tubing diameters, wall thicknesses and frame geometry."​​


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Lombard you don't know where the seat post cracked happened. You assume much!
It was far away from the tightening bolt. About 2 inches away from it. 
When you ride hard you have to understand that you are going to be meeting the unexpected. Someone not calling a pot hole at 22+ mph while sitting in the saddle can cause this. The impact is absorbed over time by the tube and it cracks. Simple. Regular riders don't understand the stresses of racing in a frame. When you put 300+ miles per week, about 15-20 hrs of saddle time and some of that time is 2x week is hard riding. Those frames don't stand more than 2 years of abuse for a 200 lbs rider + gear. 
These frames are made for skinny TDFrance Pro riders.
People are made to think they can ride them for a long time as well. 
I have a friend in his 50s, heavy set prob about 230lbs, has cracked 3 super six evos within 3years. The Same BIke that Sagan used to ride. That frame I think is one of the lightest in the market at about 800s grams?
I could keep going on the list. 
The only reason I went Ti was bc of my heavy set or Clydesdale category. 
Drone5200 you can get any bike you want as long as you are aware of what you are getting into. 
To make an informed decision is to make a better decision and to understand the consequences and potential ramifications of your decision. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Well, OK Charlitin, I guess that's what happens when I @$$_u_me. Though if I ran over a pothole at 22+ mph, I think a cracked frame would be the least of my concerns at the moment.

And no, a 230lb. rider should not be riding carbon unless he has lots of money or gets his bikes for free.


----------



## biscut (Dec 15, 2016)

Lombard said:


> Well, OK Charlitin, I guess that's what happens when I @$$_u_me. Though if I ran over a pothole at 22+ mph, I think a cracked frame would be the least of my concerns at the moment.
> 
> And no, a 230lb. rider should not be riding carbon unless he has lots of money or gets his bikes for free.


Fatty better stick to steel?? 

I think a lot depends on the carbon (probably more the resin) used and the engineering behind it. As a fatty myself I feel comfortable on Trek and Santa Cruz (modern) carbon. I believe Trek specs a max rider weight of 250? For most of the 600 series carbon on their road bikes. 

From just my perspective, seems to be a good number of lower quality carbon out there just to say it's carbon.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

biscut said:


> Fatty better stick to steel??
> 
> I think a lot depends on the carbon (probably more the resin) used and the engineering behind it. As a fatty myself I feel comfortable on Trek and Santa Cruz (modern) carbon. I believe Trek specs a max rider weight of 250? For most of the 600 series carbon on their road bikes.
> 
> From just my perspective, seems to be a good number of lower quality carbon out there just to say it's carbon.


A fatty or just horizontally enhanced? ;-)

Well, if you don't race or aim for potholes, a carbon frame could probably work for you. Though I doubt I would want to be the one to test the upper limits of a product. When a bunch of corporate execs meet with their company lawyers and actuaries, they decide on rating a products tolerances based on a balance between profits and potential lawsuits. Sure, there would be less chances of product failure if they lowered their rider weight limit to 200lbs., but they would also sell much fewer bikes.

More to the point is that a heavier rider has less to gain by riding a super lightweight bike. If you are 250lbs., riding a 17lb. bike saves you 2% of the weight riding a 22lb. bike does.

To your point, yes, there is a lot of cheaper quality carbon junk out there including a lot of these no-name Chinese carbon frames and rims. However, I would not expect a well known brand like Scott to have these problems.


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Drone 5200 said:


> Interesting. That Lynskey frame has an MSRP of 4025 which puts it up there with the litespeed T1sl disc. Of course the Lynskey is on sale for 40% off but not in my size. Honestly I don't really see the value proposition at that msrp when the msrp for a 2018 Domane SRL disc is 3000.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It is being sold the frame and fork in nashbar for 1500$. 










If you wait towards the end of the year you can get them cheap. Although this is insanely cheap. I think they also have like a 33% off every once in a while. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

You sound more like an emonda customer than a domaine but ride and try both and get the one that feels better. i disagree with the posters directing you towards disc. nothing you wrote tells me that's money well spent. and i'm also a trek 5200 owner although since getting my colnago c-59 i use it a great deal less, the colnago just works better for me but i'm sentimental about the old bike. oddly that doesn't translate into their new models.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Trek_5200 said:


> *You sound more like an emonda customer* than a domaine but ride and try both and get the one that feels better.


What is it about a 50 year old who describes his rides and recreational and wants a frame to last a decade or more sounds like a 690gram frame customer?


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

Jay Strongbow said:


> What is it about a 50 year old who describes his rides and recreational and wants a frame to last a decade or more sounds like a 690gram frame customer?


Shortish rides and he likes climbing. And i'm over 50. 
Emonda sounds more like a climbing bike while the Domaine more of a century touring bike to me at least. The 690 gram is just what it is. Don't see why that precludes him from getting the frame. If it was me, I'd be looking elsewhere and I did. I'm on a C-59 which weighs about 1000 grams.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

biscut said:


> Fatty better stick to steel??
> 
> I think a lot depends on the carbon (probably more the resin) used and the engineering behind it. As a fatty myself I feel comfortable on Trek and Santa Cruz (modern) carbon. I believe Trek specs a max rider weight of 250? For most of the 600 series carbon on their road bikes.
> 
> From just my perspective, seems to be a good number of lower quality carbon out there just to say it's carbon.


Trek actually specs it @ 275 I believe. Not all carbon work is created equal, nor are all Titanium builds. We generalize and oversimplify too much around here sometimes. My advice, test the bikes and get feedback from people that ride the models that interest you. There really is no other way to figure what YOU really want/need IMO.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Trek_5200 said:


> Shortish rides and he likes climbing. And i'm over 50.
> Emonda sounds more like a climbing bike while the Domaine more of a century touring bike to me at least. The 690 gram is just what it is. Don't see why that precludes him from getting the frame. If it was me, I'd be looking elsewhere and I did. I'm on a C-59 which weighs about 1000 grams.



The Domane will climb just fine as long as you have the low gearing to do it. A race geometry bike like the Emonda may hammer faster on long flat sections, but won't be noticeably any better on hill climbs.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

" A race geometry bike like the Emonda may hammer faster on long flat sections"

I think this whole idea might be being overstated. I haven't seen anything that suggests the OP is looking at the H1 fit Emonda. If that's the case, the H2 geometry for the Emonda and Domane really aren't that far apart. If you are talking about a race fit H1 Emonda, however, then the difference is substantial. It also looks like you can slam the stem and make the H2 Domane pretty racy as well. I read somewhere that one of these guys actually races on it. I'm sure it will be more than fine for what the OP plans to do with it. Moreover, I haven't heard anyone reporting that they are cracking or somehow destroying their Trek Domane or Emonda frames in significant numbers. I have seen folks of every shape and body type report riding and/or owning them. Everything else is just speculation and subjective opinion that may not even be relevant.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Lombard said:


> Cracked 3 frames, really? Carbon is really very strong - stronger than aluminum. While carbon is strong, it is not tough. When I say it's not tough, I mean it cannot stand blunt impact. So if you are crashing in races, like throwing rocks at your bike frame, running into low underpasses with your bike on the roof or just like colliding with cars, carbon isn't for you, LOL!


That is just so wrong. Watch near the end of the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5eMMf11uhM


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

mfdemicco said:


> That is just so wrong. Watch near the end of the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5eMMf11uhM


Truly an amazing video-show off strength but its a little one sided. We had little pile up in a group ride and two carbon fiber frames broke, both chain stays and the impacts were minimal... Most likely the stays were side loaded in the crash and broke,, not an uncommon occurrence.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

n2deep said:


> Truly an amazing video-show off strength but its a little one sided. We had little pile up in a group ride and two carbon fiber frames broke, both chain stays and the impacts were minimal... Most likely the stays were side loaded in the crash and broke,, not an uncommon occurrence.


Carbon fiber frames can be made strong and tough. The design and construction and quality control is what matters, not necessarily the material.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Yep, it completely depends on the layup, resin, and type of carbon used on the particular model in question. Most manufacturers build their carbon MTB to be able to take more abuse than their road bikes. In essence a carbon frame can be strong and resilient to impact, but it can also be thin and susceptible to cracking. Depends on the bike.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Rashadabd said:


> Yep, it completely depends on the layup, resin, and type of carbon used on the particular model in question. Most manufacturers build their carbon MTB to be able to take more abuse than their road bikes. * In essence a carbon frame can be strong and resilient to impact, but it can also be thin and susceptible to cracking. Depends on the bike.*


And that's not at all unique to carbon. Steel and alloy bikes made with lowest weight being the goal will dent really easy.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Rashadabd said:


> Yep, it completely depends on the layup, resin, and type of carbon used on the particular model in question. Most manufacturers build their carbon MTB to be able to take more abuse than their road bikes. In essence a carbon frame can be strong and resilient to impact, but it can also be thin and susceptible to cracking. Depends on the bike.


Though I have to wonder. If you made a carbon MTB frame tough enough to resist impact like the guy in the video, that would probably negate a lot of weight savings over aluminum.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Jay Strongbow said:


> And that's not at all unique to carbon. Steel and alloy bikes made with lowest weight being the goal will dent really easy.


Absolutely...


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Lombard said:


> Though I have to wonder. If you made a carbon MTB frame tough enough to resist impact like the guy in the video, that would probably negate a lot of weight savings over aluminum.


Sometimes that's definitely the case, especially like 10 years ago, but it seems like a lot of 1000 grams-ish frames are pretty durable today. Carbon MTB frames are heavier, but the bigger brands seem to hold up fairly well from what I see and are still significantly lighter than most aluminum MTBs.


----------



## mfdemicco (Nov 8, 2002)

Rashadabd said:


> Sometimes that's definitely the case, especially like 10 years ago, but it seems like a lot of 1000 grams-ish frames are pretty durable today. Carbon MTB frames are heavier, but the bigger brands seem to hold up fairly well from what I see and are still significantly lighter than most aluminum MTBs.


Santa Cruz's carbon bikes are significantly lighter than their aluminum offerings.


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

Everyone, thanks for all the ideas. I appreciate it! As the OP, I'll respond generally to some ideas.

Carbon vs titanium - I don't doubt that titanium makes a nice bike. But I am skeptical that it is magical in some way. I mean, any material can fail and any material can be made into a comfortable ride. Among my riding friends I've never seen a carbon frame fail, road or mountain. 

Fit - my 5200 as shown in the pic is a size 62. The head tube is 20 cm (including headset cups) and I have 3.5 cm spacers. This puts the stem at the top of the steerer, and with the stem flipped down I have 8 cm of drop from top of seat to top of bars. This is a good fit for me. The H2 Emonda has 23.5 head tube and the H2 Domane is 24.5, so either of these should work, but with the Domane I would probably run the stem slammed and flipped down. 

Test ride (finally!) - I was able to find a shop that has a 2015 Domane 62 cm in H2 geo with 25mm tires. This is a 4.5 version from before the front had iso speed. All I was able to do for now was to roll around on it on some local streets in my jeans on flat pedala. Lol. These were my impressions:

First, it's light! Compared to my 14 y/o 5200 (with DA and carbon wheels no less) this 4.5 with its aluminum rims and tiagra shifting and cranks was noticeably lighter. That suprised me. 

Second, I immediately noticed the seatpost flex on pavement and sidewalk cracks and such. At first I thought it was due to a cushy seat, but as I rolled around the seat itself became rather uncomfortable but the flex was nice. All the while, it seemed rock solid. No bottom bracket flex that I could see but I didnt really get to hammer it uphill or at all really. Will need another test ride for sure. 

Third, geometry. I didn't like it at all. I'll have to go back and try it for an extended test ride with a better setup. They had it with the stem flipped up and the bars at the top of the steerer, so it was far too upright. So I don't know. 

I wish I could find one to try the front iso speed. I am worried that it will bob while peddling uphill, standing or just sitting. Any one with experience on a larger size? 

I'm still no closer to decide between Emonda and Domane. The former would be a good match for replacing what I currently have, the latter promises a little more comfort with that endurance style. That's really what it comes down to, I suppose. 

Finally, specs. I'm really disappointed with what I'm seeing available on the project one website. I mean, there really isn't much variation in what can be spec'ed and there is a step premium to go that route. And the shops weren't very helpful. When I do this I'm thinking I may just buy the frame/fork and then build it up the way I want it. I'll post about componentry separately when I get to that point. 

Thanks! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fishboy316 (Feb 10, 2014)

Hey Drone5200, I recently purchased a 2017Domane SLR6. Was comparing with an Emonda also. Both were Ultegra with the Bontrager speed stop brakes. I also work at a Trek dealer P/T so I am able to ride all the bikes pretty much anytime. I am also partial to Treks. That being said I ride a 58cm Cervelo S5 for the Quick need for speed ride. Went with a 56cm Domane as the Geometry of the Domane is more stretched so that is what felt good to me.

First I want to say I love the Domane. It is a great distance bike. It is super comfy. It climbs great and is fast. What I have found is it does not feel quick like the S5 but it is fast. It is a slight bit "sluggish" or maybe slower steering I guess you would call it.(compared to the S5) It is like when you are riding in a land yacht and look down and you are doing 80 and had no idea. It was never intended to be like the S5 though. It eats up the road buzz and softens the bumps out. Mine has rim brakes and they have done fine for me. I was considering the disc but felt I was good with rim brakes. The disc does allow for wider tires but the 28 has been great for me. What it boiled down to for me was when I test rode them both I was impressed with the way the Domane could climb and the quality of the ride. Waited 2 weeks and found that the quality of the ride on the Domane was unforgettable and to me the Emonda was. I also found that I had to get used to her handling aspects and now that I know how she acts it is a much better feel. The way I see it is you have a "Go Fast" bike so why not go for some comfort. I was going to sell the S5 (who knew you could sell a bike) but now I have both riding needs covered. I know for me at 60 with a bad back it is a Godsend!

As far as the customizing goes I would probably do it myself also. The program trek offers is great if you cant find a color you can live with or you cant (or don't want to) wrench on a bike. I would find a bike closest to what I wanted in a color I can like and tweak it later as I felt like it. 

The Domane was close enough to the Emonda that I really wanted to have the comfort it offered and thought about the ride it gave for 2 weeks so in my mind that was what sold me in the end. You may want to try the Domane in a 60 if you can find one. Trek is also having a sale now. Something to consider. 
Good Luck with your decision!


----------



## Drone 5200 (Mar 3, 2003)

fishboy316 said:


> Hey Drone5200, I recently purchased a 2017Domane SLR6. Was comparing with an Emonda also. Both were Ultegra with the Bontrager speed stop brakes. I also work at a Trek dealer P/T so I am able to ride all the bikes pretty much anytime. I am also partial to Treks. That being said I ride a 58cm Cervelo S5 for the Quick need for speed ride. Went with a 56cm Domane as the Geometry of the Domane is more stretched so that is what felt good to me.
> 
> First I want to say I love the Domane. It is a great distance bike. It is super comfy. It climbs great and is fast. What I have found is it does not feel quick like the S5 but it is fast. It is a slight bit "sluggish" or maybe slower steering I guess you would call it.(compared to the S5) It is like when you are riding in a land yacht and look down and you are doing 80 and had no idea. It was never intended to be like the S5 though. It eats up the road buzz and softens the bumps out. Mine has rim brakes and they have done fine for me. I was considering the disc but felt I was good with rim brakes. The disc does allow for wider tires but the 28 has been great for me. What it boiled down to for me was when I test rode them both I was impressed with the way the Domane could climb and the quality of the ride. Waited 2 weeks and found that the quality of the ride on the Domane was unforgettable and to me the Emonda was. I also found that I had to get used to her handling aspects and now that I know how she acts it is a much better feel. The way I see it is you have a "Go Fast" bike so why not go for some comfort. I was going to sell the S5 (who knew you could sell a bike) but now I have both riding needs covered. I know for me at 60 with a bad back it is a Godsend!
> 
> ...


Thanks, Fishboy, for this thoughtful and detailed feedback. Exactly the type of feedback I am looking for. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## biscut (Dec 15, 2016)

mfdemicco said:


> That is just so wrong. Watch near the end of the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5eMMf11uhM


I'm a Clyde and my down hill mtb is Santa Cruz. We aren't comparing Apple to Apple here. SC isn't seeking the lightest frame. They make the lightest toughest frame they can. Preparing carbon frame for a road bike is certainly not the same as preparing a carbon frame for down hill mtb racing. 

Just me but Trek and Santa Cruz are where my trust lies in the world of carbon. Especially Santa Cruz. They are no where near the giant Trek is and therefore more risk adverse. But their frames are damn stout and they do damn well with their lifetime warranty. 

Trek is big enough they will go to the edge and deal with issues as they come up. 

My take is all.


----------

