# Informal review on MOTO Immortal PRO



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

So, I originally posted here a little while back with the question of what size Immortal PRO would work best for me. I ended up getting the 53cm and now that I've had it for a few weeks I figured I'd post back some of my initial impressions and experiences with it. 

The shipping was fast and I got the bike without any damage to the box or anything like that, which was a relief. I had intended all along to take the bike to my local shop for fine tuning and whatnot, but I figured I would try to get it together myself to verify the claim about the ease of assembly. 

The bike was relatively easy to get put together and go for a quick spin, but the brakes were pretty far out of a adjustment for any sort of long term ride. The shifting was set up reasonably well, though. I can tell you from having done a little side work at my LBS, this is how the shops get the bikes from just about any manufacturer. Just because they're 90% assembled doesn't mean you still dont have to do the usual fit and finish stuff that a good LBS would do to any bike that comes onto their floor. 

Anyway, the bike felt good, the size was right, but I wanted to reserve judgement until I got it dialed in. I took it to my LBS, where we got the brakes dialed in. I also flipped the stem so I could get a slightly less aggressive rake with the bars (I have a fairly substantial midriff). The seat is/was nothing to write home about, and the seatpost was junk too, so I replaced those right away. We got a scale out, and without pedals the bike weighed in at 18.5lbs, even with the lighter seat and CF post that I swapped over, so Im not sure where this 17.5 quoted weight comes from. Theres an extra pound in there somewhere. Another thing that was weird was that the front shifter is a 3 position, and of course there are only 2 chainrings, so it makes going between the two positions kind of an inefficient process. There was also an issue with the crank choice, IMO - I dont think its really designed for a 10 speed cassette, because if you're in the 10th gear out back and in the small ring in the front, you get chain slap against the big chainring in front. Its not hitting the derailleur, it's hitting the ring. Of course, you shouldn't really ever be in this gear combo, but still, its nice to be able to get through all gear combos without any rubbing or noise. I threw a set of Shimano double-sided pedals on it that I had on my MTB, because I already had shoes that worked well with them and I'm used to them. They aren't the lightest pedals/shoes in the world, but they work well, and this is Florida anyway, so its not like theres a ton of hills to contend with (the main reason to desire low weight). 

The next day I got it out for a ride, just a short 10 mile jaunt. The bike is very capable, its light, seems to handle well. I dont have a lot to compare it to as I haven't ridden a road bike in years, but I was comfortable with it and able to maintain what I guessed was about a 17-18mph pace without much effort. I confirmed this a couple days later when I rode again with a friend on his cervelo (he had a speedometer). 

The second ride I started to figure out more about what needed to be changed. The crank was causing problems again for me. Whenever I would stand up on the cranks, they would basically 'wash out' on me, if thats the right way to say it. Basically I couldnt get any downforce on them. It was then that I realized that they were just too short. They're 170mm's, which is a weird choice..Im not sure who this would work well for. I ended up putting a set of 172.5mm's on it, which I know isnt a big difference, but makes the bike work SO much better for me, its unreal. I can actually get power to the ground if I need to climb or accelerate. 

The only other thing thats on my list to change is the handlebars. Im not sure what size they are, but they're far too narrow for me, so thats on my list to change as well. I took it on a 20 mile ride yesterday with my local bike club, and I ran in the 24mph group, with no issues. Im hoping to move up into the 26 group eventually and go from there. Of course I added a bottle cage, a pump, a speedo/cadence computer, and a seat bag to keep a patch kit/tube/levers and a multi tool in. 

So, the I-PRO is definitely a good value for the money, though I think the size choice of crank is odd. I don't know if they put a longer crank on for taller frames or what, but the 170's were just too short for me. It could also use wider handlebars, I think, but the bottom line is that its a capable bike thats a good deal for the money, even after you change out the few little things that are so-so about it. I plan to ride the hell out of it.


----------



## robpar (Jan 26, 2008)

*informal moto review*

So how much $$ did you spend getting it to work right? (crank, seat post, handle bars, etc)
Did the specs call for a 10 speed cassette? were you able to solve the problem?
I'm looking at the Immortal Force


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, I had some store credit at my LBS, but actual cost was probably around $195 or so, thats not including the various accessories like the pump, bag, etc. 

I got an 'actual' CF seatpost and a Serfas seat that probably came out to about $120 or so, and then the 105 crank was like, $75 - it was an 07, I think. My LBS is a good guy that I've known for years, so I usually get the 'buddy deal' from him if I dont expect it to be done real fast and do some work myself. 

I haven't gotten bars for it yet so I cant tell you how much thats going to be. The bars I WANT go for like $250 or so, but I'm looking on eBay for those, so I might be able to get them for less. 

I really don't know if the specs called for a 10 speed cassette or not. I think that crank was probably designed for 9-speed, but I'm not an expert on it or anything. It just didnt work that well. Its worth mentioning that its advertised as a 'carbon crank', but it's carbon 'look', not real CF, unless they've figured out a way to mold raised serial numbers into CF (what Im saying is it looks like a cast piece with carbon fiber decal over it). At any rate the 105 crank weighed less, even with the bottom bracket (the FSA is an integrated 'axle' in lieu of a bb). 

Im sorry if some of my terminology isnt right or whatever, I havent been in this for awhile. 

Anyway, your mileage may vary - this is just my experience. I have wide shoulders so I need a wider bar, and from what I've read most people end up getting a new stem and/or seat with these bikes anyway. Seat comfort is wildly subjective, I've found. Overall its a good bike, but like any bike it takes a litle tweaking to make it fit and perform the way you want it to. Its important because if its not comfortable you're not going to want to ride it, and thats the whole point. 



robpar said:


> So how much $$ did you spend getting it to work right? (crank, seat post, handle bars, etc)
> Did the specs call for a 10 speed cassette? were you able to solve the problem?
> I'm looking at the Immortal Force


----------



## midlife_xs's (Jun 18, 2004)

pir8matt said:


> Well, I had some store credit at my LBS, but actual cost was probably around $195 or so, thats not including the various accessories like the pump, bag, etc.
> 
> I got an 'actual' CF seatpost and a Serfas seat that probably came out to about $120 or so, and then the 105 crank was like, $75 - it was an 07, I think. My LBS is a good guy that I've known for years, so I usually get the 'buddy deal' from him if I dont expect it to be done real fast and do some work myself.
> 
> ...


The seatpost and cranks may actually be carbon fiber, but it just shows that because it is carbon fiber, does not necessarily translate - lightweight . A lot of the manufacturers even the name brands substitute the crankset for an aftermarket. I think this is more to save money than lightweight or efficiency.

I agree that crank lengths, stem sizes and handlebar widths for a given size must be in the spec sheets as well.

Good to know you like the bike.


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, the seatpost wasnt CF - you could see that it was a metal post with some kind of 'decal' covering on the outside (maybe the decal is made of CF - lol). I dont know about the crank since I'm not an expert on CF, but the crank arm had a serial number cast into it, which I wouldnt think you could do with CF from what little I do know about it. Again, it looked like a metal piece with a CF 'look' material over it. Its a little spurious to advertise this as 'carbon fiber'. If I'm wrong about this, please chime in if you know better. 

It would have been nice to know the crank length and bar width in the specs on the site, but I guess they cant get that granular. They may not even know what size will be shipped from bike to bike - who knows? I just know on MTB's I always run 175's, so on a road bike I wouldn't have expected to run such short crank arms. It was resolved easily enough, though. 



midlife_xs's said:


> The seatpost and cranks may actually be carbon fiber, but it just shows that because it is carbon fiber, does not necessarily translate - lightweight . A lot of the manufacturers even the name brands substitute the crankset for an aftermarket. I think this is more to save money than lightweight or efficiency.
> 
> I agree that crank lengths, stem sizes and handlebar widths for a given size must be in the spec sheets as well.
> 
> Good to know you like the bike.


----------



## robpar (Jan 26, 2008)

FROM SPECS:
CRANKSET: FSA CarbonPro Carbon Fiber Compact 50/34T integrated with MEGAEXO External Bearing Bottom Bracket
SEATPOST: FSA Carbon Fiber FR270, 27.2mm

Could not find them anywhere I looked.... even though the picture shows what looks like a carbon crank arm and seatpost... maybe they shipped the wrong parts?... I would definitely contact BD and inquire...
This is the same spec as the Immortal Force (all i have are web pictures) so I'm very curious...


----------



## david462 (Jan 3, 2008)

after this review, and waiting a few months to purchase my own immortal pro, i may backout. i am 5' 10" and was going to get the 53cm frame, but if the cranks seem too short and may not even be carbon fiber (same with teh post) i just dont know anymore. i dont really know what to do...gahhhhhh!


----------



## rogerstg (Aug 1, 2007)

FWIW, 170 cranks are pretty normal on a 53cm frame. Also, chain rub is normal when you crosschain with a compact crank.


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

I think that its just a little poetic license from the manufacturers. I'm not sure what % of a part has to be carbon fiber to call it 'carbon fiber' and not just be outright lying. Its possible that there is some CF in it. FWIW, the frame *is* carbon fiber, but the seatpost is definitely some kind of decal affair - you can see the metal that its actually constructed from when you look at the cut end. Its also pretty heavy when compared to a 'real' CF seatpost, which I did at my LBS. And by 'real' I mean, you see CF on the outside and the inside. 

The crank, again - I really don't know how you can tell one way or the other - like I mentioned, I saw stampings on the inside of the crank arm that would appear to me to be the sort of thing that you could only do with metal. But it may just be that there is some percentage of CF in the process and that allows them to call it a 'carbon fiber' part. It looks like creative marketing to me. However, lets see what the internet has to say. 

A quick look at the FSA site shows no current product called the 'Carbon Pro' that I can see: 

http://road.fullspeedahead.com/fly.aspx?layout=product&taxid=53&pid=147

I googled 'Carbon Pro 170' and got this product result: 

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=23007

This looks like the crank that was on the I-PRO when I got it, and it has this as its description: 

Road use, Shimano 10 speed compatible. *Compression moulded composite crank arms*, crankarm and spider with precision 100% CNC machined 7075/T6 chainrings, ramped and pinned for perfect shifting, MegaExo oversize cartridge bearings, oversize splined integrated chromoly BB axle. 110BCD

Features:
• 48-34T chainrings
• 110BCD
•* Carbon crankarm *

So I dont really know what to make of this. At first glance it would appear that one crankarm is CF and the rest is composite? I'm not b1tching about it, honestly, I'm just curious what the deal is. I'm happy with the bike - I don't ever expect to get a specialty item (no matter what it is - a car, a guitar, an amplifier, etc) and not have to 'season to taste' - I just think that the term 'carbon fiber' is being tossed around a little loosely here. 




robpar said:


> FROM SPECS:
> CRANKSET: FSA CarbonPro Carbon Fiber Compact 50/34T integrated with MEGAEXO External Bearing Bottom Bracket
> SEATPOST: FSA Carbon Fiber FR270, 27.2mm
> 
> ...


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, the frame is a good fit, I just didn't like the cranks. Your mileage may vary. I'm 5'10" but have short legs (30" inseam for pants). 

You'd think that would make shorter crankarms desirable for me, but I dunno - they just didnt work for me. I'm not a big 'spinner' though, I prefer to dial up more resistance and just keep an even pace going. I know thats contrary to the way a lot of roadies ride (at least from my own observations) 

And I wouldnt worry so much about whether the cranks are 'real' carbon fiber or whatever. I mean, they worked fine in the context of the bike overall, they just didnt work that well for me. I'd still recommend this bike to anyone, I just figured I'd point out my own observations. 




david462 said:


> after this review, and waiting a few months to purchase my own immortal pro, i may backout. i am 5' 10" and was going to get the 53cm frame, but if the cranks seem too short and may not even be carbon fiber (same with teh post) i just dont know anymore. i dont really know what to do...gahhhhhh!


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

I guessed that maybe on smaller frames they go with shorter crankarms, but it doesn't specify on the site, so if you order a 56cm or larger, you have to wonder if they use longer ones or not? One would assume they would, but you never know. 

The 105 crank actually performs a lot better than the FSA did though, we didn't even have to change the chain. Shifts were a lot crisper and take less effort, so I was glad of that. 

I suppose the way around all of this is just to order the Immortal Ice and get full Ultegra Sl - but thats a good bit more $. 



rogerstg said:


> FWIW, 170 cranks are pretty normal on a 53cm frame. Also, chain rub is normal when you crosschain with a compact crank.


----------



## mikeyp.1 (May 24, 2006)

I am a couple inches taller than you and have a one inch shorter inseam-even more long torso than you,I would not buy this series because the 53 is too small and the 56 too big.The top tubes are what really matter to me and the 2 inches between the sizes is too much.The answer to this goldilocks dilema is the century series,come in a 55 with a 55 top tube.I agree that 170 cranks come on small bikes like this-I,m afraid you bought too small a bike-next you will realize that it is too short and change the stem and you will be all set.I think the weight thing is one of cyclings dirty secrets they all lie-but the weight given is prolly the 48 or something so they don't lie too much.


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

mikeyp.1 said:


> I'm afraid you bought too small a bike-next you will realize that it is too short and change the stem and you will be all set



I don't think its too small. The standover is just about right. I don't have a full 1" of clearance but its close. It's difficult for hypertorso guys to find right-sized bikes though, if you need a smaller bike you end up getting stuff thats designed for women, which is also wrong. Fortunately for me, my LBS owner is almost the exact same size as me dimensionally, so all he has to do is set up the bike the way he would ride it, and that usually works great for me, too. 

I do plan to change the stem though - like I said I already flipped it, but I want better bars anyway so I'll probably do a new stem at the same time. I don't have a problem with the stem length though, its about right for my my torso length.


----------



## sonex305 (Jun 17, 2007)

As for the carbon fiber seatpost, there are 2 different kinds. One is full carbon fiber which it sounds like you purchased aftermarket and the other is carbon wrapped. The one that comes with the Immortals is the carbon wrapped kind. By definition, most manufaturers from what I have seen call the carbon wrapped kind carbon fiber. Often times you have to dig deep to find out the truth about the individual part.


----------



## robpar (Jan 26, 2008)

*Informal review*

"pir8matt: Well, I had some store credit at my LBS, but actual cost was probably around $195 or so, thats not including the various accessories like the pump, bag, etc."

Well, this adds about $200 to the Immortal Force plus maybe $100 for my LBS to assemble, set up and adjust. I also know I'll have to change the stem (another $50 to $100) so now I'm looking at $1,900 to $2,000... and I don't get the free lifetime adjustments and tune ups...

So maybe the Giant OCr C2 (SRAM group) at my LBS does not look too bad at $2,000 plus tax (2007) :idea: 

Thanks for the info...


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Thanks for the honest, eyes-wide-open review. Your experience is pretty typical of my friends and acquaintances who have purchased Internet bikes that are impossible to test ride, whether they be from BD, Randall Scott or even an exotic brand like Orbea that just isn't available at an LBS. Often they end up buying new stem, bars and saddle to begin with, and may even buy a new cassette and cranks. 

After buying new parts and paying for labor, they've spent more than they would on a comparable LBS bike.


----------



## mikeyp.1 (May 24, 2006)

Yes sizing can be a problem.I have bought 7 bikes from BD over the last ten years and know how they are sized but they also give clues sometimes like "sized like Treck or fuji" and if you try a 54 treck you will know how it is sized.Also they often have diagrams that show the actual size& if you know what length top tube or whatever that you want you will know if it will fit.You can even find a few shops that sell these bikes&can go look at one.I may even buy my next bike at Performance if there is like a year old model that I want thats on sale and I get a discount for joining their club and then there is a special sale on top of that-they can approach Bd prices.I have come close to buying a Schwinn Peleton there-It would be nice to have a shop to ***** about your bike to.


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, the cheapest CF road bike my LBS had was $1900, and that was the good-buddy price, so I still feel like I came out ahead. Bottom line, I think just about any bike is going to require additional/customized parts to really make it 'work' for the individual rider. Its just that some people are fussier about it than others (like me). 

Someone else might have bought the I-PRO, assembled it, and felt no need to change a thing. I just felt the seat was uncomfortable, didnt care for the length of the cranks, and feel like it could use wider HB's. There was an option to add a higher quality bar from BD but I opted not to, and probably should have. The seatpost swap wasn't really a 'must-do'. I could have been fine with the one it came with, but compared to a full CF seatpost, it really was pretty heavy. 

Anyway - I still feel good about the bike. I've been riding it whenever possible and like it more every time I do.  



team_sheepshead said:


> Thanks for the honest, eyes-wide-open review. Your experience is pretty typical of my friends and acquaintances who have purchased Internet bikes that are impossible to test ride, whether they be from BD, Randall Scott or even an exotic brand like Orbea that just isn't available at an LBS. Often they end up buying new stem, bars and saddle to begin with, and may even buy a new cassette and cranks.
> 
> After buying new parts and paying for labor, they've spent more than they would on a comparable LBS bike.


----------



## pir8matt (Jan 8, 2008)

You gotta go with the deal that works best for you - lifetime adjustment and tune is a good motivator to buy from a LBS. 

But yeah if the I-Force had an ultegra crank on it, that might make it a better deal than the Giant with the SRAM group. I'm not sure how SRAM holds up to Ultegra stuff. But with that FSA crank it would be suspect to me, if you weren't able to know what the crank arm length was, and you knew you didn't want 170's. 

Its probably always better to be able to ride the bike you want to buy before buying it, I suppose. I still feel like the Immortal PRO was a good deal, though. 



robpar said:


> "pir8matt: Well, I had some store credit at my LBS, but actual cost was probably around $195 or so, thats not including the various accessories like the pump, bag, etc."
> 
> Well, this adds about $200 to the Immortal Force plus maybe $100 for my LBS to assemble, set up and adjust. I also know I'll have to change the stem (another $50 to $100) so now I'm looking at $1,900 to $2,000... and I don't get the free lifetime adjustments and tune ups...
> 
> ...


----------



## Lifelover (Jul 8, 2004)

pir8matt said:


> Well, the cheapest CF road bike my LBS had was $1900, and that was the good-buddy price, so I still feel like I came out ahead. Bottom line, I think just about any bike is going to require additional/customized parts to really make it 'work' for the individual rider. Its just that some people are fussier about it than others (like me).
> 
> Someone else might have bought the I-PRO, assembled it, and felt no need to change a thing. I just felt the seat was uncomfortable, didnt care for the length of the cranks, and feel like it could use wider HB's. There was an option to add a higher quality bar from BD but I opted not to, and probably should have. The seatpost swap wasn't really a 'must-do'. I could have been fine with the one it came with, but compared to a full CF seatpost, it really was pretty heavy.
> 
> Anyway - I still feel good about the bike. I've been riding it whenever possible and like it more every time I do.


I don't think Sheepshead meant to question your choice. It is just that in the past the Moto reviews have read more like advertisments than realistic reviews.

You are correct that almost any pre-assembled bike may very well need parts changed out to make the rider happy.

No question you bike will serve you for many, many happy miles.


----------

