# Clyde looking for cross/commuter/fitness/road type bike



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

yeah, I really narrowed it down, eh?

I'm 250 lbs, fairly newbish, and yesterday did another 'long' ride, 51.01 miles on a Trek 820. I had fun, but I really found myself wanting something a little more....aero, for the road miles. Out of the 51, about 1/3 was 'off-road', i.e. fire roads, gravel, mostly hard packed (Although it started to get a bit mucky as it rained). It held up well off road as a 'gravel grinder' I suppose, but on the road, it obviously lacked especially once it started raining sideways and I couldn't get down into a low position without having my hands next to my ears

No single track requirements, but I don't want a pure road bike. I'd like it to have the capability to at least mount fenders or possibly even a rear rack. I'm not looking to set any land speed records or win any races. I want to be able to ride my 15 miles to work with some good speed, and then on the weekends, drop a half century on fire roads, gravel, maybe some hard-pack dirt, and standard hardball/asphalt, and not feel like my body is beat to hell. 

From what I've read, steel is a lot more compliant and gives a much less punishing ride than aluminum which is 'faster' (lighter?) but tends to beat a fella up. I don't want a pure road bike as I'd like to be able to go on some dirt and gravel, but I'd like a little more aero and 'distance' capability than my entry-level MTB. 

so steel all around, or is aluminum frame/carbon fork ok? What about a composite/carbon bike?

for example:

steel:
Specialized AWOL - Cr-Mo
Surly Straggler 4130 CroMoly
Salsa Vaya 3 Cro-Moly

combo Alloy frame + composite/carbon fork:
Giant Anyroad
Trek Crossrip
Kona Jake the Snake
Specialized Crux E5


vs. straight Carbon:
Anyroad CoMax
Trek 7.7 FX



I guess my questions:

1. Is carbon a good buy for a clyde at this low of a price?
2. Does the "compliant" carbon fork make up for the "stiff" aluminum or does it still end up being a rough ride?
3. If 1 above is true, does that mean the Anyroad CoMax and Trek 7.7 are crazy deals, since Carbon sure seems to be a lot more expensive than steel or aluminum?
4. If, for whatever reason, carbon frame is a bad idea, then does the aluminum frame/carbon fork provide for a good bike or do I just need to stop all this silly nonsense and go for steel?


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

You can do that type of ride on a road bike with 25 or 28 tires. I prefer the 28s for gravel and ride a Specialized Secteur for that. But am not hesitant to take my Tarmac with 25s out either.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

Get the Surly. It's a hell of a bike.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

NJBiker72 said:


> You can do that type of ride on a road bike with 25 or 28 tires. .


these are kinda gnarly HUMVEE trails on the back 40 training areas on the military installation. Perhaps I undersold the trails by stating 'no singletrack'? I already knocked my Trek 820 wheels out of true once, although I'm something of an oaf.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

sgtrobo said:


> these are kinda gnarly HUMVEE trails on the back 40 training areas on the military installation. Perhaps I undersold the trails by stating 'no singletrack'? I already knocked my Trek 820 wheels out of true once, although I'm something of an oaf.


Tough wheels can make a difference. I would not have taken the Tarmac on factory wheels. But on custom built Pacenti's. No problem. Tire width is a key though. And it is always a trade off. What will do better on dirt and gravel will be worse on the road and vice versa. 

If 2/3 of your riding is roads, make that the key.


----------



## pdh777 (Oct 7, 2005)

sInce you do a bit of road and a lot of gravel / dirt roads. Why not a cyclocross bike or a gravel bike. Either would suit your needs well - have drop bars giving you a more aero ride. 

Most LBS's have both on hand for you to test drive. 

With your weight a well built 32 or 36 spoke wheel will keep you rolling. Warnig if yuo continue to do 50 mile rides regularly you qare going to lose that weight.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Given your intended uses, I'd suggest a CX bike. Many accept fenders/ racks, wider tires and have slightly lower gearing, all making for a more versatile bike (versus a road bike).

Don't fret over frame materials... nothing wrong with steel, but alu (with or without a CF fork) would suite the purpose; the wider tires run at relatively lower pressures will provide an acceptable ride. As was mentioned, look for stout wheelsets, with (at minimum) 32h spoke counts. 

As always, fit matters most, so visit - and buy from - a reputable LBS that'll work with you on fit. And test ride any and all makes/ models available before committing to the purchase.

Pouring over specs is a fine and serves to educate, but we actually_ ride _bikes, so IME those test rides help narrow the field quickly.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

NJBiker72 said:


> Tough wheels can make a difference. I would not have taken the Tarmac on factory wheels. But on custom built Pacenti's. No problem. Tire width is a key though. And it is always a trade off. What will do better on dirt and gravel will be worse on the road and vice versa.
> 
> If 2/3 of your riding is roads, make that the key.


ok, so a road bike can probably handle some gravel and moderate off-road with a solid set of wheels. 

regarding the 'key', here's the question I have...any off-road bike can handle on-road. It may not roll as well, as you said the tire width and such, but it'll be able to handle it, it'll just be slower and a tougher ride. At what level do road bikes handle off-road? I suppose that's where you say "well it depends upon what type of off-road you ride" and that's when I get kinda stupid and say "well...there's gravel and hard packed bumps and such". 

kinda why I am thinking that perhaps some combination of touring or cyclocross bike is probably in my future. I don't want to be bogged down in my 50-milers, and I'd like a bit more of an aero position, but I still want to be able to ride through some woods and on fire roads and gravel and stuff. So yeah, that kinda reduces my ability on 2/3 of the ride, but doesn't eliminate my ability on the other 1/3 of the ride...if that makes even a lick of sense I dunno.

I guess it's kinda a sliding medium.

At one end, you have what amounts to rigid mountain bikes (Surly Ogre, Salsa Fargo). Then a step down in...eh..."beefiness"(?) would be the Specialized AWOL and probably the Salsa Vaya. Then keep moving in that direction, and bikes like the Crossrip, Jake, Diverge, etc.

I guess I gotta figure out where in that medium I want to be.



pdh777 said:


> sInce you do a bit of road and a lot of gravel / dirt roads. Why not a cyclocross bike or a gravel bike. Either would suit your needs well - have drop bars giving you a more aero ride.
> 
> Most LBS's have both on hand for you to test drive.
> 
> With your weight a well built 32 or 36 spoke wheel will keep you rolling. Warnig if yuo continue to do 50 mile rides regularly you qare going to lose that weight.


yessir, that last point is the idea!


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

PJ352 said:


> Given your intended uses, I'd suggest a CX bike. Many accept fenders/ racks, wider tires and have slightly lower gearing, all making for a more versatile bike (versus a road bike).
> 
> Don't fret over frame materials... nothing wrong with steel, but alu (with or without a CF fork) would suite the purpose; the wider tires run at relatively lower pressures will provide an acceptable ride. As was mentioned, look for stout wheelsets, with (at minimum) 32h spoke counts.
> 
> ...


thank you sir, some solid wisdom there. Regarding frame materials, I just want to make sure there isn't an obviously 'superior' (or notably inferior) choice based on my size and my intended use. I'd like to drop a 50-miler 'comfortably' (ha!) and still be able to move along pretty well on the road without having to avoid some dirt and such, so it seems like a semi-beefy type of touring/cyclocross bike would suit my needs. There are 9 gajillion bikes out there, so I'm just trying to narrow down my choices.

the LBS I'll go to prides themselves on fit. As an example, prior to a 30-minute test ride on a Salsa Fargo, the guy spent a good 20-30 minutes fitting the biek to me. Moved some spacers on the stem, adjusted the seat upward and backward, hung a weighted line from my kneecap in the forward position, checked my knee angle, etc. It was a pretty drawn-out process, just so I could take a bike for a spin, even after I said "I'm not buying today, I'm just test riding". So I'm quite confident they'll fit the bike to me perfectly. 

That's also when I discovered that I had a helluva tough time shifting the front gears while in the drops (left finger barely reached the shifter) as well as having a tough time braking while in the drops.

thanks a ton for the help from everyone so far, I really appreciate it!


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

sgtrobo said:


> thank you sir, some solid wisdom there. Regarding frame materials, *I just want to make sure there isn't an obviously 'superior' (or notably inferior) choice based on my size and my intended use. * I'd like to drop a 50-miler 'comfortably' (ha!) and still be able to move along pretty well on the road without having to avoid some dirt and such, so it seems like a semi-beefy type of touring/cyclocross bike would suit my needs. There are 9 gajillion bikes out there, so I'm just trying to narrow down my choices.


My only advice re: frame materials is to 1) not overthink it and 2) stay away from high end CF (many have rider weight limits). 

Other than that, your weight and intended uses don't limit you... most any frame material will do. So it really comes down to personal choice. As far as overthinking, truth be told, a lot of the comfort/ ride quality comes from tire size, construction and pressures, not frame materials. So choose based on intended uses and budget.

As far as choices, yes, there are many, thus the importance of test rides. What will help narrow the field is to work with a reputable LBS (like the one you mentioned). In many ways the value added services they offer trump a spec, price or certain make/ model. 



sgtrobo said:


> the LBS I'll go to prides themselves on fit.


Perfect. 'Nuff said. :thumbsup:



sgtrobo said:


> That's also when I discovered that I had a helluva tough time shifting the front gears while in the drops (left finger barely reached the shifter) as well as having a tough time braking while in the drops.


Yup, points up the importance of test rides.


----------



## harryman (Nov 14, 2014)

I'd agree with the majority, frame material choice is secondary to function. I would instead encourage you to look for a frame with piles of tire clearance since like you, I'm a fan of do-it-all bikes. I ride 28mm tires on my road bike, but 42's with fenders & racks on my POS commuter and I love it. Lots of clearance future proofs the bike and there's little downside if you're a clyde. 

I also ride flat bars on all my bikes since I have a weakness for nasty surface adventure rides and when I had drop bars, I just didn't spend enough time in the drops to make them worth it. So, if you prefer a flat bar, go for it.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

sgtrobo said:


> ok, so a road bike can probably handle some gravel and moderate off-road with a solid set of wheels.
> 
> regarding the 'key', here's the question I have...any off-road bike can handle on-road. It may not roll as well, as you said the tire width and such, but it'll be able to handle it, it'll just be slower and a tougher ride. At what level do road bikes handle off-road? I suppose that's where you say "well it depends upon what type of off-road you ride" and that's when I get kinda stupid and say "well...there's gravel and hard packed bumps and such".
> 
> ...


I think you got it right. It is a sliding medium. A cyclo cross bike might work best but again depends on what you want to do most.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

well, managed to get asome test rides in on 3 different bikes, a Salsa Fargo, a Kona Jake, and a Redline of some sort.

The Fargo fit like a glove. I really liked the upright riding position. I don't know if the Jake or the Redline were set up properly, as I felt like I was almost flipping forward over the handlebars, just sitting on the bike. I know the Fargo is supposed to have a fairly upright riding position, and it makes sense that it would be more comfortable since I'm used to MTBs, but I was really surprised at how..."weird" the more forward position of the Jake and the Redline was really uncomfortable.

any other bikes out there with a similar upright riding position? I was quite pleased with it


----------



## Midlifecyclist (Nov 29, 2014)

Might look into some touring bikes, and see if that's the way to go. They often have more upright geometry, but a longer wheelbase, so they won't be as responsive. But something like that may work out for your needs.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

I needed a bike to ride on a wide variety of conditions when I visit England. It can be wet or dry, gravel, sand, mud, and road. There is no way a 28mm tire is going to do the job.

What really surprised me was that the tires I picked (Clement 40mm), rolled really well on the road. I can honestly say that I don't feel that I'm being slowed by them.

So, I ended up with an alloy Cinelli frame, all carbon tapered fork. Very happy.


----------



## cs1 (Sep 16, 2003)

bikerjulio said:


> I needed a bike to ride on a wide variety of conditions when I visit England. It can be wet or dry, gravel, sand, mud, and road. There is no way a 28mm tire is going to do the job.
> 
> What really surprised me was that the tires I picked (Clement 40mm), rolled really well on the road. I can honestly say that I don't feel that I'm being slowed by them.
> 
> So, I ended up with an alloy Cinelli frame, all carbon tapered fork. Very happy.


That sure would look nice with a set of flat bar shifters.


----------



## obed (Jan 12, 2014)

I think the carbon would be more comfortable on the road as it cuts down in the "vibration" feel but would not be much of an advantage on the jarring and bumps off road, so I think the materials is not as important as the fit and the tires.
My Domane and my secteur are both fine on normal dirt roads with a bit of gravel, both have 25's on them... but if I am going to be riding rough roads like what you describe I have a ridely x-fire with 35's on it.. any of them are fine on the paved roads and will do the 50+ ride for you no problem...at your weight focus on the wheels for reliability... I was 240 just a year and a half ago... 165 now and liking the riding a lot more.


----------



## GOTA (Aug 27, 2012)

sgtrobo said:


> well, managed to get asome test rides in on 3 different bikes, a Salsa Fargo, a Kona Jake, and a Redline of some sort.
> 
> The Fargo fit like a glove. I really liked the upright riding position. I don't know if the Jake or the Redline were set up properly, as I felt like I was almost flipping forward over the handlebars, just sitting on the bike. I know the Fargo is supposed to have a fairly upright riding position, and it makes sense that it would be more comfortable since I'm used to MTBs, but I was really surprised at how..."weird" the more forward position of the Jake and the Redline was really uncomfortable.
> 
> any other bikes out there with a similar upright riding position? I was quite pleased with it


The Salsa Fargo is almost a drop bar mountain bike. I don't think anything short of a hybrid is going to be that upright. 

I have a Salsa Colossal. It's a great steel endurance bike. It doesn't allow for the tire width of the Fargo but I've been fine with the 28 mm that I use on some pretty poor roads. The Salsa Warbird is another option. It's alloy and allows for wider tires. 

If you were looking at a scale the Colossal would sit at the road side, the Warbird in the middle, and the Fargo at the offroad end.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

so what kind of groupset and brake levels should I be looking to get to on this bike? I'm not worried about initially, as I'm going to get the bike I like riding, but I would like to eventually upgrade the groupset to a solid level of performance that will allow me to do my "hybrid on-road/off-road" thing and perhaps the Seattle-to-Portland ride (well, it's a race I think, but i'm not going to be racing anybody but myself)


obviously any bike I get at a lower price point will need to have a groupset upgraded, but what is the 'minimum level of pretty darn good'? Sora? 105? SRAM Rival?

what about brakes? BB7, or is BB5 ok? What about Tektro?

i know, me and my darn questions.


----------



## robt57 (Jul 23, 2011)

BB7 over BB5s, Get Sora 9 speed, the 2014 Sora that came on my Roubaox Disc worked well. When you wear it our, get your higher end groupo. Save the coin in the beginning. Unless you get a deal on 105 for near the same cost or something....


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

excellent, thanks, that's exactly what I'm looking for. What if the bike comes with SRAM stuff, is there a comparable SRAM groupset to the Sora? or does it matter which groupset it comes with now, as it is a simple matter to change a groupset later on?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

sgtrobo said:


> excellent, thanks, that's exactly what I'm looking for. What if the bike comes with SRAM stuff, is there a comparable SRAM groupset to the Sora? or does it matter which groupset it comes with now, as it is a simple matter to change a groupset later on?


The key to most any groupset performing well is how well it's installed/ set up and tuned. The rest is up to the user (maintenance).

IMO the biggest difference between SRAM and Shimano is in the shifting method. Preference is personal, so try both and see which you prefer. 

Just remember that you can't interchange some SRAM/ Shimano components (namely, shifters), so when the time comes to upgrade staying with the same brand will likely be cheaper. 

Lastly, discuss your fitness and (anticipated) terrain with your LBS. They'll be able to guide you as to gearing. It should be matched to both rider fitness and terrain. I think you'll find most CX bikes to be geared 'adequately' for most uses.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

STP's not a race. Also check out http://www.nwepicseries.com.

I have a 'cross bike with Tiagra 4500 and a fair number of miles. The 2009 Kona Jake, actually. The Tiagra stuff has done really well over the last few years, and I'd feel confident in the new version. 4600? Or is there another out?

I put some new Sora 9-speed shifters on another bike several months ago. I don't ride it that much. I have better opportunities to ride my mountain bike lately. They work great, but I don't know how well they'll age. The rest of the group already seemed pretty solid, though I haven't owned other Sora components myself. People seemed to get plenty of service out of the old Sora shifters too, for that matter. The thumb levers just felt odd.

I'm not sure why you think you'll need a whole group for a bike you buy now. I mean, lately it doesn't seem like I'm likely to get the whole Tiagra group if I buy a bike that comes with the shifters. But if it comes up, I've just replaced individual offending parts. My old road bike still has its original hubs and one of its original derailleurs despite my eventually wearing out the other derailleur, the shifters, and a couple chain rings. And, that kind of wear took me many years.

Shimano and SRAM have limited cross-compatibility. Try both, Campagnolo too if you also like Apple, and go with whichever has better ergonomics for you. SRAM's lowest-positioned group is Apex. I haven't heard anything bad about it, but haven't owned it. I think it's supposed to compete with Tiagra?

Do you want to commute on this bike, or is it dedicated to riding just for you?


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I'm not sure why you think you'll need a whole group for a bike you buy now.


I don't necessarily think I'll need one, just trying to get an idea as far as groupsets. for example, as a simple and very obvious example, the Giant Revolt 1 and the Giant Revolt 3 are $400 difference and probably the biggest difference in the spec sheet is the Revolt 3 has the Shimano Claris and the Revolt 1 has Shimano R460/4600/350 (shifters/F/R). 

For the sake of argument, is the Claris groupset "too low" for me to consider for a bike I'm going to ride darn near everyday, rain or shine, come hell or high water? Is it a decent idea to go with (Again, for example), the lower grade bike for now with the knowledge that I'm probably going to need to upgrade the groupset since I started too low

hopefully that made sense. an easier example for me is MTB, since I know a little bit about that. If we're talking SRAM MTB groupsets, a Shimano Deore groupset is perfectly fine, a Shimano TX is really bottom of the barrel as far as performance and reliability. Is that what a Claris groupset would be like?

as for brakes, Shimano SLX MTB brakes give fantastic 'bang for the buck' as do XT (before you get into serious expense with XTR) Is there a similar 'line of demarcation' where you go for ***type of brakes*** as great bang for the buck, but the next level up is REALLY expensive.

I hope that rambling made sense



AndrwSwitch said:


> Do you want to commute on this bike, or is it dedicated to riding just for you?


I have 3 primary uses for this bike:

1. Daily commuter (least important requirements - i.e. "does it go when I pedal it and can it have a mudflap or a fender so I'm not wearing the road grime?") and this is rain or shine or freezing weather. However, I'll probably use my Trek 820 for a lot of this as well, especially on cruddy days where I know I will just be going straight to work (i.e. purely for transportation reasons, rather than fun reasons)

2. Serious workout/fun rides on the weekends - i.e. It's Saturday and I'm going thataway for the next 2 hours, and then I'll make my way home through the path that has the most flowy dirt trails and maybe I'll get lost for an hour and hopefully I'll get filthy from the dirt and gravel and trails I ride through (non-singletrack, it's not a MTB, I know)

3. Training for and hopeful completion of the Seattle-to-Portland ride

I guess what is inspiring this is my first half-century ride recently on my Trek 820. I had fun but I really got bogged down with how slow it went on the road (I felt like the resistance was palpable) and I was REALLY wanting a more aero position for those road miles. Plus, as i said, I'd like to really put a challenge out to myself for the STP and I'd like to have a bike that is going to help me get to that goal, and an entry-level MTB probably isn't the best bike for that goal.


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

bikerjulio said:


> I needed a bike to ride on a wide variety of conditions when I visit England. It can be wet or dry, gravel, sand, mud, and road. There is no way a 28mm tire is going to do the job.
> 
> What really surprised me was that the tires I picked (Clement 40mm), rolled really well on the road. I can honestly say that I don't feel that I'm being slowed by them.
> 
> So, I ended up with an alloy Cinelli frame, all carbon tapered fork. Very happy.


Gorgeous bike


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

I think a Specialized Diverge smartweld would be perfect. it has hydro brakes and a 105 group set. Beware of actual CX bikes as they usually have race geometry. not a good setup for endurance rides unless you are very flexible and that probably won't happen until you are smaller and rack up a lot of seat time. I have a aluminum CX bike and until I went to tubeless tires it was a pretty rough ride.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Shimano Claris is an evolution of Shimano's 2000 series. That stuff was pretty cheesy, but Claris is pretty well-reviewed. I considered some wheels with Claris hubs several months ago. Their construction looks like it's above the demarcation line. They get the same seal design as the higher-end stuff. My impression is that it's positioned somewhere between old Sora and Tiagra.

Beware a "Claris" bike. Actually read the spec sheet. I think people often unfairly malign Shimano's inexpensive groups when the problem is a crappy FSA crank or loose-ball Formula hubs. I'd feel good about a bike that actually had Claris, but a lot of the time, you're only getting a couple more recognizable items, maybe the shifters and rear derailleur.

Brakes depend a lot on type. There's nothing wrong with Tektro rim brakes that an $8 brake pad can't fix. But there are some awful cantilever and disc brakes out there. You need to be comfortable with the type of brake, at least, because you can't change it without a TIG torch and a kiln.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

My carpool buddy needs his car today but I thought it was my turn and didn't bring a book. So...

I looked up the Revolt. Not sure I could ride one, but you're a lot taller than me.

If you're planning to ride STP, or with other people on the road in general, small jumps between gears can be really nice. Moving up to the ten speed drivetrain is kind of cool because it fits two more cogs into the same range. So you're a lot less likely to find yourself between gears when you're riding someone else's pace. You could accomplish the same thing with a tighter 8-speed cassette, like a 12-25, but then you give up a couple low gears. You can get them back with a different crank, but that starts getting expensive.

I didn't like BB5s on my mountain bike. Road riding isn't likely to blow through pads so fast, so it may not make much difference. I have BB7s on one of my road bikes and like them, particularly when I was still able to commute on that bike. BB7s are the best brakes you can have on either of those bikes without also replacing your shifters. So you need to be content with them, or you should buy something that comes out of the box with what you really want.

I had a pretty bad experience with my FSA bottom bracket. I like that bike a lot better with a three-piece crank. But, I think the MegaExo is cross-compatible with Shimano. So when it gets rough, you have other choices. My bike had one with a different spindle diameter, so I was stuck with FSA's BB as long as I kept the crank. I was disappointed in their chain rings too. So the crank on the 1 would be appealing to me.

Really, it's a gut check, though. The 2 would work fine, it's just a little rougher around the edges. So you have to decide if the 1 is $400 better. Replacing the group on the 2 would eat your entire savings, probably. So you should be prepared to stick with 8-speed long-term if that's the way you go.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Beware a "Claris" bike. Actually read the spec sheet. I think people often unfairly malign Shimano's inexpensive groups when the problem is a crappy FSA crank or loose-ball Formula hubs.


bloody hell man...this is what kills me. How can I tell if something has a "crappy FSA crank" or "loose-ball Formula hubs"? I thought at least a crankset was something I didn't need to worry about. UGH!!!



AndrwSwitch said:


> You need to be comfortable with the type of brake, at least, because you can't change it without a TIG torch and a kiln.


well i am trying to move to disc brakes for everything



AndrwSwitch said:


> I looked up the Revolt. Not sure I could ride one, but you're a lot taller than me.


nah man, i'm only 5'9. I'm not a tall dude, just oafish



AndrwSwitch said:


> small jumps between gears can be really nice. Moving up to the ten speed drivetrain is kind of cool because it fits two more cogs into the same range. So you're a lot less likely to find yourself between gears when you're riding someone else's pace.


today is the first time i made a conscious effort to sit and spin. Usually I stand and hammer. I noticed what you talked about regarding the 'small jumps' because my bike does NOT have 'small jumps'. I went from the 3rd to the 4th gear in the back one, the right side shifter, and holy crap it felt like I just jumped up to a bigger ring up front (the left shifter). It was absolutely bizarre. It was either too tough to 'spin' or it left me spinning fast enough that I almost started bouncing



AndrwSwitch said:


> BB7s are the best brakes you can have on either of those bikes without also replacing your shifters. So you need to be content with them, or you should buy something that comes out of the box with what you really want.


so are BB5s 'upgradeable' to BB7s?



AndrwSwitch said:


> I had a pretty bad experience with my FSA bottom bracket. I like that bike a lot better with a three-piece crank. But, I think the MegaExo is cross-compatible with Shimano. So when it gets rough, you have other choices. My bike had one with a different spindle diameter, so I was stuck with FSA's BB as long as I kept the crank. I was disappointed in their chain rings too. So the crank on the 1 would be appealing to me.


dude, you just totaly lost me. The Revolts say "Shimano, Sealed" for their Bottom Brackets. 

EDIT - oh geez, ok, you're talking about the 2012 Fargo



AndrwSwitch said:


> Really, it's a gut check, though. The 2 would work fine, it's just a little rougher around the edges. So you have to decide if the 1 is $400 better. Replacing the group on the 2 would eat your entire savings, probably. So you should be prepared to stick with 8-speed long-term if that's the way you go.


crap! The Fargo is a 9-speed, the Revolt's a 10-speed....you lost me again!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I thought I was only looking at the Revolts. But I remember a 10-speed and an 8-speed. Maybe I looked at the wrong years?

I do my best not to let the gear interfere with the sport too much. It's actually kind of a tangent. But it's an expensive tangent, so blowing it can be very frustrating. Worse, I think a lot of us feel like we have blown it at some point during ownership of our first bikes, or first expensive bikes, or first bikes in a new discipline. In hindsight, I've realized that I learned a lot and got something important from almost every bike I've owned. So not so bad, though the feeling of, "this is how a bike should fit me but I can't afford a do-over right now" sucks.

The spec lists for bicycles list everything with varying degrees of specificity. The cheaper Revolt I read about said "crank: FSA something-or-other." Hubs are a little harder since wheels are often sold complete, and with unbranded hubs. You can sometimes find reviews or forum discussions, you can sometimes tell by looking closely, and I think every now and then, somebody opens a hub and is surprised by the contents. Formula also sells hubs under their own name and just to muddy things, they do some well-regarded sealed bearing hubs. At this point, I think only Shimano and maybe Campagnolo do cup and cone hubs seriously anymore.

If you feel stretched out on a road bike, own it and try something smaller. I rode too big a road bike for years because I thought it was supposed to be different from mountain bikes.

I'm not sure how to answer about BB5s and 7s. They're two different pieces of hardware. However, BB7 calipers aren't very expensive, are actuated the same way, and mount the same way. So while a BB5 will never be anything else, replacing it with a 7 would be very straightforward. They're not terribly expensive, either. Just one more annoying expense/excuse to buy bike stuff. Changing to hydraulic brakes would be very expensive.

I think Shimano's sealed cartridge bottom brackets are really nice. Even the cheap ones, though they're not as well regarded by The Internet.

I guess the bottom line is that you've already identified a couple things you want from a road bike, and they're reasonable things, that you can have at your budget. So own that, ride a bunch of bikes, and buy your favorite. The big thing to avoid is buying something that needs a bunch of changes to be what you want. Since you want disc brakes, definitely buy a bike that has them. If you decide you want lots of speeds, buy a bike that already has them - it's a pretty expensive change to make later and the bike industry changes standards fast enough, lately, to make upgrading older bikes irritating, though it almost always supports them okay if you just want to maintain them.

And really - if you get to the end of the season and say, "I want better wheels" or "I want a better crank," it's not the end of the world. Disappointing, maybe, but as long as you're not spending the first six months of owning this bike replacing each and every part, well, nothing's perfect. You'll also have a warranty. I've gotten a little more motivated about pursuing those over time, and I'm at about three out of four. Sports equipment manufacturers tend to be fairly loose with replacement parts.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

AndrwSwitch said:


> I do my best not to let the gear interfere with the sport too much. It's actually kind of a tangent. But it's an expensive tangent, so blowing it can be very frustrating.


this is the thing basically. I don't want to drop the $$$ on something that is going to need constant maintenance or always be in the shop. I want to be able to buy the bike, ride the hell out of it, do what I can do to maintain it, and go in for standard regular maintenance. I don't want to take the thing in weekly because I ride when it's 15 degrees F out, or I ride in the mud, rain, cold, hot, come hell or high water, on the roads, off the roads, in the gravel, in the dirt, etc.

now, if, for example, that means that I can get that Giant Revolt 3 ($1025) and then just upgrade over time, then ok. But I don't want to get stuck with a bike that cannot be 'upgraded' to a necessary level of competence once i break something



AndrwSwitch said:


> I'm not sure how to answer about BB5s and 7s. They're two different pieces of hardware. However, BB7 calipers aren't very expensive, are actuated the same way, and mount the same way. So while a BB5 will never be anything else, replacing it with a 7 would be very straightforward. They're not terribly expensive, either.


ok that's what I mean. You mentioned something about 'BB7s being the highest grade to keep from changing shifters' or something. I just wanted to make sure that if I got a bike with BB5s that I could later upgrade to BB7. I'm still stuck with the fact that I didn't know better and bought a bike with a fork that didn't have the mounting points for disc brakes (it's this type of thing I'm really looking at)



AndrwSwitch said:


> the feeling of, "this is how a bike should fit me but I can't afford a do-over right now" sucks.


This is EXACTLY what I'm feeling and it's why I'm so paranoid. I never buy stuff without researching, but I didn't do too much research this time. What I'm going through now is that I have a Trek 820 that I have put nearly 700 miles on, including a 51-miler on Thanksgiving, and I'm finding that EVERYTHING is dying on it. From what my LBS has told me, i am "downright evil" to this bike. I lube the chain, I wipe the bike down after any dirty ride, I wipe the chain after i lube it. *shrugs* I know, I know, it's an entry-level bike that I didn't ride like an entry-level bike. I'm just paranoid that I'll end up going through the same thing because of componentry dying on me or something so now i'm looking at every piece on the spec sheet and thinking "am I going to break this thing too?"

I know the word is 'don't make purchases based on spec sheets' but a bike can feel great in the parking lot even if it is held together by nothing more than baling wire and 5-50 cord. I don't trust myself to buy something good based purely on how it rides for 10 minutes in the parking lot.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Not meaning to come off as critical, but I think you're focusing a bit too much on the durability issue. 

Bikes are durable. Some at lower price points (oddly) are more durable than at higher price points... especially wheelsets. Obviously, this is a general statement, because most anyone can break most anything if they put their mind to it.

Bottom line (and similar to what's been mentioned), get a bike that is within budget, meets your intended uses, fits well and is geared to meet those needs/ uses. 

And speaking of which, since there's only one additional cog going 8-9 and 9-10 speed (usually mid-cluster), I wouldn't agonize too much over it. Getting tighter gearing is (IMO/E) beneficial, but the added cog is relatively insignificant - at least to me. 

So go get a bike, ride it in all the conditions you mentioned and maintain it "at a reasonable level". Yeah, ambiguous, but that's a part of being in tune with your bike. If you are, I'd bet it'll serve you well for many years and thousands of miles.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

bikes are less durable for big boys. We snap things smaller riders could never imagine.
find a decent used steel cx bike with a decent group, or aluminum
hardly anybody wants them anymore so you can find good deals.
I ride 8 speed but wouldn't suggest it for a newb, the parts are harder to find so having a stockpile at this point is good and it's a little late to join that game.
32 spoke 3x wheel sets, again, nobody wants them so you can get them cheap. Under $200 typically. 36 is great but if you aren't too hard on your gear 32 will suffice. I beat the snot out of mine but do have to retrue them once in awhile ( a good skill to learn for Clydes)


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

So something that I think bears mentioning here is that while road and mountain hardware are more similar than different, road riding is much gentler to equipment. Even in crappy weather.

I bet if you weren't using your 820 as a mountain bike, it would be a lot more reliable.

I have a really nice mountain bike and it's a big improvement over my last one. But I get a lot of mountain miles lately, and I've gone through a ton of brake pads, a chain, had the suspension serviced a few times, blown a spoke, and right now that bike is waiting on a warranty freehub. Point being, riding trails chews equipment. I love mountain biking, so I do as much of it as I can. But I can't say I'm that surprised that those bikes spend a certain amount of time in the shop, or require more from me than wiping and relubing the chain and replacing wear parts.

Think about how much service you got out of your 820 before you discovered the trails near you. You can expect better from the Revolt 3. Probably even if you take it off-road.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> ... road riding is much gentler to equipment.


Depends on the road. There's a stretch of road I've been riding lately that's done in my headset. Granted, it was 1/2 way there anyway, but point is 'stuff' does happen traversing only paved roads. 

Still, given what they're subjected to, I think bikes are generally durable - and with a modicum of care can last a long time. 

And people oftentimes confuse higher end groups (Ultegra versus 105/ 105 versus Tiagra) with longevity, and I don't really think it makes all that much difference. A user can beat a DA groupset and another care for Tiagra, and most likely, Tiagra will outlast the former.

Lastly, given a certain price point, the choices (in specs) are pretty close, so it's not like (to any measureable degree) one brand is going to outdo another in durability, with the exception being shoddily designed cranksets/ BB's or similar. 

Parts may need to be replaced along the way no matter what, so I say go with your gut, with what fits and feels best, ride it the way you want and don't look back.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Lastly, given a certain price point, the choices (in specs) are pretty close, so it's not like (to any measureable degree) one brand is going to outdo another in durability, with the exception being shoddily designed cranksets/ BB's or similar.
> 
> Parts may need to be replaced along the way no matter what, so I say go with your gut, with what fits and feels best, ride it the way you want and don't look back.



yeah, i'm getting to this point. Ultimately, all the research I do here and the questions I ask aren't going to matter as much as the 30 minutes I take to ride the bike. Maybe I end up with a Giant Revolt, maybe it's a Spec AWOL, maybe it's a Fargo. Ultimately, whichever one seems to feel best to me is where I'm going to go, and then whatever parts and upgrades I need to do afterward is whatever I gotta do.


----------



## sgtrobo (Aug 26, 2014)

Ok, so during my question, I ended up riding a Surly Troll, Surly Ogre, a 2012 Salsa Fargo, a 2015 Salsa Fargo, a Kona Jake, and a Redline of some sort, as well as a Giant Anyroad, a Giant Revolt, and a Specialized AWOL.

The Troll and the Ogre were outstanding, but I was looking for a dropbar bike and although I could convert it, that would require additional work and cost and I wasn't up for that. 

Rode the Kona Jake and the Redline. Wasn't a fan of either. They felt too..."twitchy", and they had too much of a 'lean forward' position and I prefer the more upright riding position.

Rode the AWOL and absolutely loved it, then almost immediately after rode the Anyroad and Revolt. Didn't make it around the block before I just brought them back. They felt far too...eh....they just didn't feel as stable or as compliant as the AWOL. Too jittery.

Rode the 2015 Fargo on multiple occasions and absolutely loved it, although I wasn't a fan of the low-geared front double. I do want to do some road riding and some distance/endurance stuff, even unloaded. I rode the 2012 Salsa Fargo because...it's cheaper than the 2015 version and it has a front triple, which I liked, and my LBS had it for about $500 cheaper than the 2015 version. It had bar end shifters which I hated, and BB5s. However, it was incredibly cheap because the LBS wanted it out of the shop, for obvious reasons, so upgrading to a Shimano Sora groupset + BB7s and 180mm rotor + Jagwire cable kit ended up being $1255 + tax, and that's what I ended up going with. 

Thanks to everyone for their input and assistance! Pics will go up once I have it in my greedy little mitts.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Are you doing the crank too?


----------



## Whacked (Feb 14, 2011)

Charge Plug
Meets all your requirements.
Steel. VERY comfortable saddle. Comes with Sora or better depending version. Fender mounts. Rack mounts (except fork brazeons). Can put some meaty tires on.
Not a race bike. More relaxed geometry. Good for commuting or long distance rides.
I have the Plug 3 with 9spd Sora. Love it. Soaks up road chatter, with more CX type tires would handle gravel better but does good as is.
Worth checking out


----------

