# Starting the Hunt. Need some advice to narrow the test ride list. (long post)



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

I've been riding a Trek Hybrid for the last 7 years and have been itching for a road bike for the last year or two as I have gotten more serious and am starting to really increase the mileage. I felt that I really compromised when I bought my Trek and went with the hybrid when I should have gone straight to a road bike. That decision has haunted me for a while and I do not want to make the same mistake when I move to a road bike. My primary concern is the ever present aluminum vs carbon decision.

I am a large rider at 6' 5'' and around 220-225lbs (dropped a lot with cycling and aim to lose another 10-15lbs). My size and power raises several concerns regarding frame durability and stiffness. This past winter I broke the frame of my Trek hybrid (sheared the joint where the seat post connects to the bottom bracket); thankfully it was replaced via lifetime warranty, how awesome is that?! I have also had numerous issues with rear wheels (hubs and spokes) and I recently chewed up a cassette and chain with only about 800 or so miles (took care to clean and lube regularly). I really hammer this hybrid with city communiting, crappy roads, and strong legs. 

I am concerned about the long term durability of my bikes and want to get something that will last. I have been informed by a great mechanic at my favorite LBS that some of the entry level carbon frames tend to be low on the carbon, high on the resin, and sort of sloppy in terms of stiffness and power transfer. He also made the point that metal fatigues over time and aluminum bikes will get less stiff as you ride them for years and years.

I am starting to put together a short list of bikes that I want to take on test rides and am hoping to get some input on some of the bicycle characteristics. I dont put all that much stock into company advertising and would rather hear from people who have real world experience. I am aiming for Tiagra or 105 for groupset (or SRAM equivalent) and probably topping out around $2100.

*My riding style:*
-medium distance (40-50mi) on the weekends, hoping to build up to centuries
-city commuting every day (will probably keep my hybrid to use for this)
-no designs on racing (sort of passing that age in my life)
-pretty much push 90%+ effort all the time (My philosophy is that if you are not sweating and breathing hard, then you arent doing it right)
-chug along at 18-20mph in my stock hybrid (no cycling shoes)

*Riding Goals:
*-like to go fast and push myself
-want a bike that will fulfill my needs for years to come, that wont leave me wanting an upgrade after 2 years (like my hybrid did). I dont mind upgrading components over time, but want a really solid frame.
-don't feel I need a super easy ride but dont want to be licking my front tire either
-want to keep aluminum in the mix as a possible all around replacement that will end up being used for commuting

*Some basic questions:
*1) How fragile is a carbon fiber frame? There are a lot of horror stories (like frames being cracked by the handlebars spinning around). 
2) Does a rigid frame for good power transfer preclude a smooth ride?
3) Any recommendations on specific models or brands to look at or avoid with regard to being a large rider?
4) I am trying to figure out which bikes go in which categories: aggressive racers(like a CAAD10 or Tarmac), softer/smoother rides (Roubaix? Synapse?), and bikes good for long distance (centuries, gran fondo-whatever that is, long weekend rides, etc)

*Bicycles on my List:*
These are the bikes that are on my initial, long list and represent options available in my LBS's. My list really runs the gamut and I dont quite know where to start crossing things off. :frown2:

Cannondale: CAAD10, SuperSix Evo, Synapse
Specialized: Allez, Roubaix, Specteur, Tarmac
Trek: Madone, Emonda
Felt: F75, F5, Z5, Z4
Cervelo: S2, R2
Scott: Speedster

*My thoughts on the above list*
That comes to 16 bikes, which is way too many to test ride. I need to narrow it down and am hoping to get some help from this wise community. I am tempted to write off The Tarmac, SuperSix, and Emonda since I dont need a really aggressive racing bike. I find the Specteur interesting as it has nearly the same geometry as the Roubaix. The bikes that initially interest me the most are the Cervelos (is the R2 the more "relaxed" of the two?), Felt F75 and Caad10. The Allez is interesting if only to compare to the CAAD10. I know nothing about Scott bikes. I am not all that excited about another Trek.


Props to anyone who slogged through all of that and thank you in advance for any nuggets of wisdom to be shared.


----------



## go do it (Sep 12, 2007)

Get this bike and be the envy of all who live.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

you had good experience with a Trek. Start there. Bikes are all pretty much the same. Over thinking the point makes it a tough choice.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

Try a relaxed and a race geo bike at the same price point from the same maker. Then do it with another 1 or 2 companies. You should then be able to figue out if you want relaxed or race. From what you are saying my guess is race. Carbon is fine, but aluminum is not bad either. Wheels would be my biggest concrn. At least 28 in the rear and probably 32. Also tires, use at least a 25 but preferably 28mm. 

You also do not mention whether your terrain is hilly or flat. If flat maybe an aero bike like a Specialized Venge or Giant Propel is worth considering.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

Biercycle said:


> 1) How fragile is a carbon fiber frame? There are a lot of horror stories (like frames being cracked by the handlebars spinning around).
> 2) Does a rigid frame for good power transfer preclude a smooth ride?
> 3) Any recommendations on specific models or brands to look at or avoid with regard to being a large rider?
> 4) I am trying to figure out which bikes go in which categories: aggressive racers(like a CAAD10 or Tarmac), softer/smoother rides (Roubaix? Synapse?), and bikes good for long distance (centuries, gran fondo-whatever that is, long weekend rides, etc)


1) Forget that BS. Any halfway decent carbon frame (meaning certainly one that you would get at your budget) will have no issues or concerns in this area.
2) Frame rigidity has nothing to do with "good power transfer". That's just another piece of marketing BS. That said, it's easier to find a carbon frame with good (=comfortable and stable) ride qualities than an aluminum frame. As an aside, the idea of your mechanic that aluminum frames "soften up" over time is complete nonsense. Stiffness doesn't change over time, at all.
3) No, any brand has bikes that are perfectly appropriate for you. Your weight is no particular concern, unless you are looking at the extreme lightweight end of the spectrum, but that's not in your budget anyway. Bottom line: It doesn't matter. Buy a bike you like.
4) What you should rather figure out is what bike you like to ride. Try some out at some bike stores.

By the way, for $2,100 you should get at least full Shimano 105 or equivalent, with a good deal you may even get an Ultegra-equipped bike.

P.S.: NJ's advice on wheels is good, although a 25 tire in the rear should be perfectly adequate. It's not that you couldn't safely ride on a 23, but overall the 25 is probably a better choice. Not all frames will accommodate a 28 without very high demands on wheel trueness, at least.


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

Get the Cervelo R2 or R3 if $ allows. It is a great mix of race and endurance (it could and should be on both lists). I do lots of centuries and would not think of doing them on anything other than my race geometry bike so don't put too much focus on that. I kept my comfort geometry bike but my fit points are applied to that bike and it is now no more comfy than the racy one. Cervelo also has a lifetime warranty so if you end up with a frame problem , which is doubtful with the new ones, you get a new bike. 

If you have been second guessing your hybrid vs road bike decision for some years it would not make sense to do the same thing all over again with an aluminum bike. I also have a CAAD10 and they are very thin and very brittle so they can be light. Of all the bikes I own this would be the one I would figure for a frame problem. 

I would also suggest going with 105 11 speed as the minimum group set . this will be upgrade proof for a long time and its easy to get a power meter and or upgrade wheel set etc which you may want for any bike you get unless it is very pricey. 

Are you over 50 and not very flexible or over 35 ands not very fit/athletic? If so ride the R2, Synapse and Roubaix. If you are in decent shape try the tarmac, evo and R2. You cannot go wrong with any of these bikes but you need to go with the one you love to ride.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

Try an aggressive racy bike, then try a bike with endurance geometry. IF, after you do this, you prefer the endurance geometry... scratch the aggressive bikes off the list. You shouldn't be eliminating anything without having taken a single test ride. 

Don't write off Trek just because of your experience on a hybrid, it's apples to oranges. 

There are really only two categories for the bikes you are looking at, race/performance or endurance/distance. The advantage of bikes marketed as endurance is a taller headtube (more upright posture) and usually room for slightly wider tires (allowing for lower pressures). Maybe longer chainstays, not sure?

If you are going to baby the bike and if you have the budget, I'd get a carbon frame. Nothing wrong with aluminum, but the carbon bikes are generally higher end while the aluminum are more or less intro-level.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

I am most definitely over thinking this. However, this is just how I make significant decisions. All variable must be evaluated. Thanks again for all the good advice so far.



NJBiker72 said:


> Try a relaxed and a race geo bike at the same price point from the same maker.


That is more or less what I was planning on doing. I was just hoping to trim my list down to single digits before embarking on test rides. I can only imagine how annoyed the LBS's will be when I come in to test my 12th bike with them. I live in the ultra flat mid-atlantic, but have plans to move back to the hilly west coast in a few years. Whatever I get needs to be able to do both flats and climbs.



NJBiker72 said:


> Wheels would be my biggest concern.


Thank you! I had not even thought about what size wheels I may need. Whatever bike I do get I will be having the rear wheel rebuilt with good spokes. That is one important thing I have learned so far from being a big cyclist. Depending on how the price of the bike I end up choosing compares to my overall budget, I will consider a new set of rims with the wheel build.



Pirx said:


> 2) Frame rigidity has nothing to do with "good power transfer". That's just another piece of marketing BS. That said, it's easier to find a carbon frame with good (=comfortable and stable) ride qualities than an aluminum frame. As an aside, the idea of your mechanic that aluminum frames "soften up" over time is complete nonsense. Stiffness doesn't change over time, at all


Doesn't a stiffer frame flex less on the down stroke thus putting more energy into the pedals as opposed to flexing the frame? I totally get that just about any carbon will ride better than aluminum and look forward to judging the difference for myself. But metal does fatigue over time, that is part of how I broke my first trek hybrid frame. It may not be a significant issue, but being a heavy rider and having broken a frame already, I worry about it.




Donn12 said:


> Get the Cervelo R2 or R3 if $ allows


I was chatting with my mechanic the other day about a Cervelo that was next to mine in the shop area. I didnt know that you could get them at prices in the $2000-$2500 range. He mentioned that they have a 61cm sitting around that they havent been able to sell that would probably be $2000 or maybe even a little under. I look forward to testing one of these bad boys out. Interesting to know you would put it on both race and endurance categories.



Donn12 said:


> I also have a CAAD10 and they are very thin and very brittle so they can be light. Of all the bikes I own this would be the one I would figure for a frame problem.


Interesting point. All I ever hear about CAAD10's is fanboy love. Your comment lines up somewhat with some comments a couple guys at one of my LBS's said as well. Although, I thought that might have been just because they didnt carry Cannondales.



Donn12 said:


> I would also suggest going with 105 11 speed as the minimum group set . this will be upgrade proof for a long time


This is my preference, but I am willing to go with Tiagra if it turns out to be a really good deal on a bike I like. For example, the Spectuer tops out with a Tiagra groupset, but it is the lowest price of all the bikes I am looking at. I am only really interested in the Specteur because it is an aluminum Roubaix.



go do it said:


> Get this bike and be the envy of all who live.


Care to elaborate?


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Biercycle said:


> All variable must be evaluated.


In general, that's not a bad way to make decisions. But the problem here is that many of the variables you're evaluating are shameless marketing BS, longstanding bicycling myths, self-serving bike shop lore and internet misinformation.

Just get a bike you like, meaning a bike that does what you want it to do reasonably well and that you enjoy looking at. If you get to love the sport, you'll be wanting the next bike within short order, guaranteed.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

Biercycle said:


> Doesn't a stiffer frame flex less on the down stroke thus putting more energy into the pedals as opposed to flexing the frame?


Short answer: Yes, it flexes less, and no, no energy goes into flexing the frame. There's usually huge and heated discussions around this topic, so I 'll just leave it at this: Physical reality says that all of those tales about the advantages of frame stiffness are, within the parameter range we are discussing here, complete and utter BS, and nothing but marketing devices.



Biercycle said:


> But metal does fatigue over time, that is part of how I broke my first trek hybrid frame. It may not be a significant issue, but being a heavy rider and having broken a frame already, I worry about it.


Yes, metal, and aluminum in particular can fatigue over time. While this has no effect on frame stiffness, it can eventually lead to cracking. Carbon frames are much less susceptible to that kind of damage. If you are a heavy rider, put a lot of power out, and plan on riding this bike for a very long time, then carbon may be a good choice, but a higher-end aluminum frame should serve you well, too. Like I said, however, the carbon frame will tend to be more comfortable. Of course, you could be looking into titanium, or even high-end steel, but that would probably bust your budget.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

Pirx said:


> Short answer: Yes, it flexes less, and no, no energy goes into flexing the frame. There's usually huge and heated discussions around this topic, so I 'll just leave it at this: Physical reality says that all of those tales about the advantages of frame stiffness are, within the parameter range we are discussing here, complete and utter BS, and nothing but marketing devices.
> 
> Yes, metal, and aluminum in particular can fatigue over time. While this has no effect on frame stiffness, it can eventually lead to cracking. Carbon frames are much less susceptible to that kind of damage. If you are a heavy rider, put a lot of power out, and plan on riding this bike for a very long time, then carbon may be a good choice, but a higher-end aluminum frame should serve you well, too. Like I said, however, the carbon frame will tend to be more comfortable. Of course, you could be looking into titanium, or even high-end steel, but that would probably bust your budget.


Nice clarifications. I was wondering how much of the whole stiffness/fatigue issue was really relevant to the types of riding and wear that normal people put on a bicycle. However, I have to think that any decent road bike is going to be more efficient than my rather cheap hybrid. Is that due more to geometry than materials or simply a matter of weight?


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

Biercycle said:


> I am most definitely over thinking this. However, this is just how I make significant decisions. All variable must be evaluated. Thanks again for all the good advice so far.
> 
> 
> That is more or less what I was planning on doing. I was just hoping to trim my list down to single digits before embarking on test rides. I can only imagine how annoyed the LBS's will be when I come in to test my 12th bike with them. I live in the ultra flat mid-atlantic, but have plans to move back to the hilly west coast in a few years. Whatever I get needs to be able to do both flats and climbs.
> ...


The Secteur is an excellent bike and takes wider tires. I have 28s on mine and use it as a beater bike/gravel grinder once I got my Tarmac. 

FWIW. Don't be impressed with someone touting one bike. I tested a Cervelo RS or R3 when I was looking to upgrade from the Secteur. It is a very relaxed bike. Not as much as a Roubaix but very relaxed. Nothing like a Tarmac or Super 6. IMHO.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

Biercycle said:


> Is that due more to geometry than materials or simply a matter of weight?


It's typically a combination of many things. Weight, aerodynamics, geometry and position on the bike, etc. all make a difference. On the most fundamental level the story is simply that he road bike is optimized to give you maximum efficiency for road riding, whereas the hybrid is not (in that case, comfort, stability, ruggedness for some off-road riding, ability to add fenders and various additional loads were all part of the picture).


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Pirx said:


> ...the road bike is optimized to give you maximum efficiency for road riding, whereas the hybrid is not.


And from the first few pedal strokes, it's that immediate recognition of maximum efficiency that will make you want to ride faster and longer than you ever wanted on your hybrid. So in a strange sort of way, you tend to work harder on the road bike. But you do so for rewards that can't be gotten with hybrids.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

CAAD 10 has a shorter head tube btw. I think (at a 56 which is common comparison size) it's a 15.5? Same as the Super 6, again, I think... The Cervalo S series is 17.5 I think. That's a common head tube length. Of course that's only one small part of the geometry equation... There is a ton of love for the CAAD 10, it's a great racing bike, light, aggressive and affordable is what you will find. The Washoe "go do it" posted is steel. Like titanium, another option.


----------



## AlanE (Jan 22, 2002)

My advice is that you should select an LBS first. One that you are comfortable dealing with for sales as well as service. Find a shop that is willing to take time with you so that you can check several bikes that suit your riding style and your size, as well as your budget. Most shops carry multiple brands, and most brands have a range of road bikes from lower end "sport" bikes to high end race bikes. Don't worry about the brand too much, there's really not that much of a difference between them.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

AlanE said:


> My advice is that you should select an LBS first. One that you are comfortable dealing with for sales as well as service. Find a shop that is willing to take time with you so that you can check several bikes that suit your riding style and your size, as well as your budget. Most shops carry multiple brands, and most brands have a range of road bikes from lower end "sport" bikes to high end race bikes. Don't worry about the brand too much, there's really not that much of a difference between them.


This is a common refrain I have seen and something that is playing a large role in my decision making. I have been to every LBS in my city through the 6 years I have been here and there are only two that I like going to.

My favorite shop carries Felt, Trek, and Cervelo and will be my first stop. The second shop carries Specialized, Jamis and Orbea. I dont know much about Jamis or Orbea.

I have to say that the Felt's really intrigue me as I have heard nothing but good things about them and they tend to have a pretty good component set for the amount you spend.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

Biercycle said:


> I am most definitely over thinking this. However, this is just how I make significant decisions. All variable must be evaluated. Thanks again for all the good advice so far.
> 
> 
> That is more or less what I was planning on doing. I was just hoping to trim my list down to single digits before embarking on test rides. I can only imagine how annoyed the LBS's will be when I come in to test my 12th bike with them. I live in the ultra flat mid-atlantic, but have plans to move back to the hilly west coast in a few years. Whatever I get needs to be able to do both flats and climbs.
> ...


are you married? Your selection process would drive a partner nuts, if you could ever select a partner. 

Hills vs flats, relaxed versus race, carbon versus alloy, brand x vs brand y, it really doesn't matter a hell of lot.95% marketing BS.
Fast people are fast on just about anything and slow people are always gonna be slower than fast people. You aren't interested in racing so just buy the bike that emotionally appeals the best, fits your 30,000 foot brief and ride the hell out of it. Chances are if you ride the hell out of it it won't be your last bike so you can update refine your selection criteria again.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

Biercycle said:


> This is a common refrain I have seen and something that is playing a large role in my decision making. I have been to every LBS in my city through the 6 years I have been here and there are only two that I like going to.
> 
> My favorite shop carries Felt, Trek, and Cervelo and will be my first stop. The second shop carries Specialized, Jamis and Orbea. I dont know much about Jamis or Orbea.
> 
> I have to say that the Felt's really intrigue me as I have heard nothing but good things about them and they tend to have a pretty good component set for the amount you spend.


I think you have the right idea. I wish I had a local Felt dealer. They make nice bikes. But my favorite LBS is Giant, Canondale, Specialized and Focus. Think my next will be a Focus.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

kiwisimon said:


> are you married? Your selection process would drive a partner nuts, if you could ever select a partner.


guilty, your honor...


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

Just thought I would throw a brief update here.

I had the chance to test ride a couple bikes the last few weekends. I took out a 64cm Sectuer and a 61cm Allez. I dont know if I am just not used to race geometry or if the bike was too small, but the Allez felt really cramped (for reference, I am 6' 5" and about 220lbs with a 34" inseam). It was like my chin was on my knees. The Sectuer felt great, maybe even a little long in the reach.

After riding the Allez, I am a little concerned about sizing what with most manufacturers only going up to 61 or 62cm. I know the Cannondales go to 63cm and the new Trek Emonda comes in a 64cm. I had been looking forward to taking a Cervelo R2 out for a test in the near future but it is very close in stack and reach to the Allez and now I wonder if I will have the same cramped feeling on it. Only one way to find out.

What should the fit feel like on a properly sized race geometry bike? Should one feel a little compact? I have a strong feeling that it is just a matter of altering my expectations as I have never owned a road bike before.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

IMO you need -

A bike that will take 28mm tires (inflated to sub 100psi) and 32's would be even better.
Custom wheels tailored to your weight and riding terrain (32 spoke wheels? suitable weight rims)
To be fitted by a *good* bike fitter. They can suggest bikes that will fit *you*.
The frame material is immaterial.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Just my $0.02, but I would definitely put the ability to run wider rims and tires near the top of the list in deciding on a frame.

My SuperSix is the worst in this regard because of the short chainstays, even a 25mm tire on a regular rim is brushing the seat tube.

I say this because I'm thinking that custom wheels are the way to go for you to get the strength, rigidity and comfort that you need.

I've got no experience with the Specs but I'd be looking carefully at clearances around the tires on all the frames you look at, and possibly negotiating a substitute wheel set.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

bikerjulio said:


> Just my $0.02, but I would definitely put the ability to run wider rims and tires near the top of the list in deciding on a frame.
> 
> My SuperSix is the worst in this regard because of the short chainstays, even a 25mm tire on a regular rim is brushing the seat tube.
> 
> ...


Yes. Most factory bikes tend to be "road racing" bikes and (IMO) this is far from what he should be getting. And machine-built wheels with few spokes are not what he needs.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

I fully intend to, at the VERY least, have the rear wheel rebuilt with good spokes. Depending on the bike I get, I probably wont have much money left over for an immediate wheel set upgrade. Someone else mentioned size 25 tires as a minimum size and I plan to follow that rule of thumb.

I was a little surprised that some brand's endurance geometries are similar to other brand's race geometries (in terms of stack and reach). For example, the Allez is within a couple millimeters in both dimensions as the Cervelo R2.

Maybe I am getting a little too hung up on stack and reach as defining characteristics for how I may feel on a bike. Mostly I just have too much time to think about it and not enough time to get out there and test a lot of different bikes for the direct comparison.


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

Based on everything so far in this thread stick to the endurance geometry frames. If you really get into riding you will not be done with bike purchasing! Test ride a roubaix, synapse and r2. Get whichever you like the best and be done with it. Then ride a lot!


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

Biercycle said:


> I fully intend to, at the VERY least, have the rear wheel rebuilt with good spokes. Depending on the bike I get, I probably wont have much money left over for an immediate wheel set upgrade. Someone else mentioned size 25 tires as a minimum size and I plan to follow that rule of thumb.
> 
> I was a little surprised that some brand's endurance geometries are similar to other brand's race geometries (in terms of stack and reach). For example, the Allez is within a couple millimeters in both dimensions as the Cervelo R2.
> 
> Maybe I am getting a little too hung up on stack and reach as defining characteristics for how I may feel on a bike. Mostly I just have too much time to think about it and not enough time to get out there and test a lot of different bikes for the direct comparison.


Maximize your testing time. Go to a shop and test two of their brands race and endurance geos. To the extent you can on terrain similiar to what you want to ride. For instance, test ride an Allez and Secteur back to back. Same with a TCR and a Defy. 

After that you should know which geo to focus on. Then worry about brand.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

> I fully intend to, at the VERY least, have the rear wheel rebuilt with good spokes. Depending on the bike I get, I probably wont have much money left over for an immediate wheel set upgrade. Someone else mentioned size 25 tires as a minimum size and I plan to follow that rule of thumb.


If someone tries to sell you a bike with a 24 spoke rear wheel, then you still have a potential problem, that changing spokes won't cure.

I'd think that most bike shops would be willing to swap out a factory wheelset, if strength and durability look to be an issue.

And both Mike and I are suggesting either 28mm tires, or 25mm on wider rims, which work out to have the width of a 28mm.

Perhaps narrow the field down and report here as to what stock wheels are being offered to you.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Biercycle said:


> I fully intend to, at the VERY least, have the rear wheel rebuilt with good spokes. Depending on the bike I get, I probably wont have much money left over for an immediate wheel set upgrade. Someone else mentioned size 25 tires as a minimum size and I plan to follow that rule of thumb.


The problem is, as Julio notes, factory wheels always contain very few spokes. The only reason why, IMO, is that it's what the "Pros" ride. Unfortunately, they're all under 180lbs and 99% of them are under 150-160. And they don't have to worry about wheel deterioration.

As there is no free lunch with the amount of work that x amount of spokes have to do, a bigger x number means more spokes share the load and therefore they tend to last longer. And also (this is a big one!), the more spokes a wheel has, the less it goes out of true when one breaks. And the wheel's ability to rotate makes a difference in whether you ride the bike home, push it or carry it.

And the wider the tire, the less the clearance for all this. And on it goes. The big shame is that many Newbs only find all this out from personal experience. Choose wisely.


----------



## shiftinggears (Oct 12, 2014)

Personally, based upon the riding styles that you mentioned, I'd go aluminum frame and use the money saved from carbon to go to a higher end model with better components. Since you're not looking to race and it sounds like looking for a bike to use for commuting/citywide touring, carbon may not be necessary. However, at the end of the day, it's your bike and you're the one putting miles on it. Buy the one that you like most.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

A newbie poster, but a long-time road rider. I'm coming back to cycling after an 18 year hiatus, and have just recently gone through some similar considerations, although with much more modest goals than yours, and at a different point in life (retired) than you. I'll offer a few thoughts for you - by no means a recommendation of anything specific, just general thoughts.

With the caveat that it is very difficult to generalize, for the most part decent quality carbon-fiber composite frames are more durable in normal use than aluminum frames. They are also more tolerant of low and moderate energy damage scenarios, such a impact. Where carbon suffers is in reparability, and they don't endure localized compressive loads (i.e., clamping). What this brings up is changing some old habits that were typical with steel or Al frames, such as clamping on the top tube in a workstand or on a car mounted carrier, and being a bit more mindful until it becomes second nature. Much of the problem isn't carbon fiber composites per se, rather habits and practices that we adopted (sometimes carelessly) with more forgiving metal frames.

From everything you've posted I would agree with others that a good endurance road frame would seem to be best suited to your goals and concerns. For that reason I would suggest you add a Trek Damone to your list, certainly well ahead of an Emonda, which is designed entirely around low-weight. The weight difference issue is really only significant for climbing or high acceleration demands, such as crits. The Damone will give you essentially the same performance as the comparable level Madone, but with a more forgiving and easier ride. As for power transfer, you will probably find the low-spoke count rear wheel to be more a source of power loss than the move from metal to C-fiber composite in a well designed frame.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

shiftinggears said:


> Personally, based upon the riding styles that you mentioned, I'd go aluminum frame and use the money saved from carbon to go to a higher end model with better components. Since you're not looking to race and it sounds like looking for a bike to use for commuting/citywide touring, carbon may not be necessary. However, at the end of the day, it's your bike and you're the one putting miles on it. Buy the one that you like most.


My hybrid will be kept for the daily commuting and general errand running around town. I want a new road bike because I have been getting into longer rides these last couple seasons on the weekends (pushing 50mi) and would like to work towards doing centuries. I dont race, and dont really plan to, but would like to participate in group rides and longer events so am looking at the endurance geometry. Going aluminum and spending more on a nice set of wheels and groupset is certainly on my mind as an option.




ibericb said:


> With the caveat that it is very difficult to generalize, for the most part decent quality carbon-fiber composite frames are more durable in normal use than aluminum frames. They are also more tolerant of low and moderate energy damage scenarios, such a impact. Where carbon suffers is in reparability, and they don't endure localized compressive loads (i.e., clamping). What this brings up is changing some old habits that were typical with steel or Al frames, such as clamping on the top tube in a workstand or on a car mounted carrier, and being a bit more mindful until it becomes second nature. Much of the problem isn't carbon fiber composites per se, rather habits and practices that we adopted (sometimes carelessly) with more forgiving metal frames.
> 
> From everything you've posted I would agree with others that a good endurance road frame would seem to be best suited to your goals and concerns. For that reason I would suggest you add a Trek Damone to your list, certainly well ahead of an Emonda, which is designed entirely around low-weight. The weight difference issue is really only significant for climbing or high acceleration demands, such as crits. The Damone will give you essentially the same performance as the comparable level Madone, but with a more forgiving and easier ride. As for power transfer, you will probably find the low-spoke count rear wheel to be more a source of power loss than the move from metal to C-fiber composite in a well designed frame.


The Domane is on my list. I recently found out from my LBS that Trek has discontinued their Trek Care Plus program (which has been awesome for my daily beater hybrid as it easily pays for itself). The only reason I was interested in the Emonda was because they make it in a 64cm (I am 6' 5").


I have some test rides set up for this weekend for a Felt F75, Scott Speedster 40, and a Cervelo R3 left over from last year's stock and discounted to $2000. It will be fun to ride them all back to back to back for comparison. The price tag on the Cervelo sure is nice. I will be checking with the LBS about compatible tire sizes as well.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

Biercycle said:


> My hybrid will be kept for the daily commuting and general errand running around town. I want a new road bike because I have been getting into longer rides these last couple seasons on the weekends (pushing 50mi) and would like to work towards doing centuries. I dont race, and dont really plan to, but would like to participate in group rides and longer events so am looking at the endurance geometry. Going aluminum and spending more on a nice set of wheels and groupset is certainly on my mind as an option.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


DOn't rule out a race or aero geo. I have done plenty of centuries on my Tarmac. Never ridden my Secteur more than 80 miles. 

Maybe next week.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

You might find this July review and test ride of the Emonda insightful. The test rider placed in between the Madone and the Domane for feel / performance.

Since you're getting ready to drop a sizable sum on a new bike, and you're a bit out of the norm for size, I'll suggest getting the sizing right from the outset should be a point of major concern (yep, the Domane and Madone only go up to 62 cm). Since it sounds like you have a good Trek dealer, you might check to see if they have Trek's Precision Fit Bike Pro system. If so, that would let you find the optimal size and fit position for you.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Pirx said:


> Short answer: Yes, it flexes less, and no, no energy goes into flexing the frame. There's usually huge and heated discussions around this topic, so I 'll just leave it at this: Physical reality says that all of those tales about the advantages of frame stiffness are, within the parameter range we are discussing here, complete and utter BS, and nothing but marketing devices.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, metal, and aluminum in particular can fatigue over time. While this has no effect on frame stiffness, it can eventually lead to cracking. Carbon frames are much less susceptible to that kind of damage. If you are a heavy rider, put a lot of power out, and plan on riding this bike for a very long time, then carbon may be a good choice, but a higher-end aluminum frame should serve you well, too. Like I said, however, the carbon frame will tend to be more comfortable. Of course, you could be looking into titanium, or even high-end steel, but that would probably bust your budget.


A lot of incorrect information here, just more BS from the CF crowd who thinks all old school stuff is schit. I know a guy who weighs 240 pounds plus adds another 70 pounds of touring gear on a steel bike, and he's been touring on the same steel bike for the last 13 years with no damage to the bike. Steel is still the strongest longest lasting frame material made, not the lightest though. Aluminum is probably the weakest frame material especially for the long haul, my same friend I mentioned tried various aluminum frame bikes and broke all of them in less than 5 years of use. There is a reason why you don't find CF frames being used in fully loaded touring bikes. I hve a 84 Trek 660 with over 160,000 miles on the frame which includes racing and training in the mountains of California and it still rides great, good luck getting even half that many miles on a CF frame.

Also steel tends to be more comfortable than CF.

And no, Titanium doesn't have to bust your budget, in fact Lynskey makes a fully equipped 105 TI bike for under $3,000; Or you can save another $100 and get SRAM Apex; Or you can equip it anyway you want simply go to this page and chose what you want: Adrenaline Bikes If not sure ask for Matthew at Adrenalin, this guy is very practical and honest and won't sell you expensive stuff just because it's expensive, he'll sell you based on what fits your needs and the kind of cycling you want to do, he's very knowledgeable. Adrenalin also allows you to swap components and just pay for the difference, example on my Lynskey I upgraded the rear 105 derailleur to Ultegra and paid $34 more, this was just one of several upgrades I did. You could order the bike directly from Lynskey but they can't make changes on anything. And this TI bike is a made in American frame not some Asian generic sourced frame.


----------



## Bridgestone (Sep 6, 2007)

froze said:


> -
> 
> Also steel tends to be more comfortable than CF.


I think it relate to design more than material.


----------



## Hiro11 (Dec 18, 2010)

Lots of great advice here already. I'm really surprised that the OP broke his frame. Breaking a frame is a rare occurrence these days, he must absolutely trash his bike.

My opinions:
- most importantly, get 32 spoke wheels. They will be much, much better for you in the long run. 36 spoke wheels are even better. Unless you're climbing mountains, don't worry about a few hundred grams of wheel weight. Durability should be paramount.
- many of the frames being discussed here are very racy. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but it may not be what the OP is looking for.
- Carbon can be very robust these days and breaking a carbon frame is as rare as breaking any other type of frame. In general, carbon can be more "tunable" than other materials: it can be extremely stiff and unforgiving and it can be very soft and comfortable. This is all dependent on frame design. All of that being said, I personally feel steel and Ti are still the most bulletproof materials. Either one will last a lifetime. I'm personally not a fan of Al frames just because I don't think they're as tough as other options but I have no real basis for my belief.
- Frame stiffness is about personal preference, not about "efficiency". There is absolutely zero evidence that a stiffer bottom bracket is faster, they just feel different. Personally, very stiff frames rattle the crap out of me on long rides, a feeling that gets very old in about hour three. I prefer a more forgiving frame, YMMV. One note: I think front end torsional stiffness is a good thing and something to seek out. I find a stiff fork and head tube to be more confidence inspiring and results in a better handling bike.
- The single biggest factor in riding comfort and "feel" of a bike is tire width. I personally wouldn't buy a road frame that can't fit at least 28MM tires. The "fatter tire" trend in road bikes these days is my personal favorite trend in newer bikes. This is especially true at the OP's size. In fact, I would ideally shoot for 32MM tires. The difference in comfort and ride between a 23MM tire and a 32MM tire on the same bike is simply night and day. Even a few pro racers have started to ride 32MM tires, they're not any slower (in fact, they may be faster).
- if you're going to be maintaining the bike yourself, home mechanic friendly details like threaded BBs, external cables, traditional round seat posts, standard headset sizing etc all should be important features. If you plan on having a shop take care of the bike, this is less of a concern.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

I had a chance to go on a few more test rides yesterday. Rode a Felt F75 ($1350), Scott Speedster 40($1000), and a Cervelo R3 with 10spd 105 (closeout price marked down from $2600 to 2000). The Cervelo was the best bike, but certainly not 50% better than the F75 to justify the increased cost (IMHO). 

I am strongly leaning towards Felt and still need to try to get my hands on a Felt Z75 or Z85 for a test ride to see how I like Felt's "endurance" geometry. The F75 felt good other than having a slightly too long stem.

My next questions are for the wheel wizards out there:
1) does anyone know what the max tire size is for a F75 or Z75? The F comes stock with 23c and the Z comes with 25c. Does the Z have more frame clearance because of the different geometry?

2) what are some good wheel upgrades to look at? I have heard of Mavic, Zipp, Fulcrum, and Easton. Any guidance on good brands, brands to stay away from, or other suggestions are welcome. Keeping in mind that I am shooting for 32 spoke count as recommended by Hiro11.

3) Both the Z and F75 come with Felt Road RSL3 rims stock. Is anything I buy after market going to be an upgrade over those?

4) What price ranges am I going to be looking at for a good middle of the road wheelset? $300? $500? $1000? (say, Shimano 105 compared to Sora, if that analogy to groupsets isnt too much of a stretch)


Thanks again. This community has been an incredibly helpful resource.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Suggestion - post your questions about wheels in the Wheels & Tires forum. There are some very knowledgeable folks who frequent those pages. Be sure to include your pertinent background info.


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

The R3 at 2000 is a hell of a deal.,ride that for a while them get some dura ace c24 wheels from$800-$1000'and you will be set for a long time


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Okay, from the Wheels forum it appears your narrowing to the Felt. Cool! Now a thought - based upon your size, experience and goals I would strongly encourage you to look a the their endurance line (Z-series) instead of the race (F-series). I personally believe it will better suit you, and you will find road riding much more enjoyable as a result. If in the future you shed some pounds and desire to get more competitive, you'll want a better racing bike anyway. For now, go with what will bring you the most enjoyment as you make the transition to road riding. I am firmly of the belief that it would be an endurance model, that will readily accept 28 mm tires on a suitable wheel. If you like the F75, look at the Z85 - price is about the same, and similar construction. I believe the Z85 comes with 32/28 spoked wheels (r/f) that will readily accommodate 28 mm tires, so you would save on wheels immediately. Overall, I think you would come out ahead, ride better and faster (comfort = speed), and be more pleased.


----------



## Sundog (Sep 25, 2013)

If you go the route of the R3 105 - note this:

That $2,000 closeout price on those is everywhere, since the R2 hit the streets. One of my friends just picked up one for $1,800 - so I would suggest that is the floor for that one, right now. If I were you - I would negotiate an upgrade in wheels at the $2,000 asking price. You may have to throw down a little cash - but chances are you will be better off. The Shimano RS501 wheels that come with it are generally considered to be the weak point of that complete bike.

FTR - my friend is 6' 1"235 lbs and he went with the 56cm R3. The 61cm that your LBS has would probably be harder for them to move - and it should increase your bargaining position.

One more thing. You mentioned Orbea many posts ago. If that store happens to have a '14 Orca B left over in your size - it would be worth your while to check it out. I have seen them listed at terrific value points. I am guessing that you could get Ultegra at the pp you are talking about.

Best of luck to you.


----------



## robt57 (Jul 23, 2011)

The Secteur is Roubaix Geometry. Will assume you rode the 61. The 61 Tarmac and Allez to me will be more like the 58 Roubaix/Secteur.

Is a Roubaix out of your price range?

Note: I know a 6'5" 270lb guy that has broke two Secteurs, I await him breaking the newest warrantied one. Nice they are under warranty, but for the cost of a few 'move everything over' labor charges over a few years, why not spend that up front on the Roubaix. Begs the question, at least until the Carbon one breaks. 

I have two of them so clearly bias, but for good reason. A 2005 and a 2014 disc SL4. The older one is not even close as far as being stout [flex] as the new one, not even a little close. 

While not your size, I am 210 and pretty strong as well. Ride the 58 in a Roubiax, and a 60-61 in about everything else. The SL4 version of the Roubaix is a stout [VERY] design at least in function, time will tell regarding big folks ability to break them of course.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

robt57 said:


> The Secteur is Roubaix Geometry. Will assume you rode the 61. The 61 Tarmac and Allez to me will be more like the 58 Roubaix/Secteur.
> 
> Is a Roubaix out of your price range?
> 
> ...


Granted your friend is a lot larger than me but I have found my Secteur to be very durable. Even after a couple of nasty crashes. My Tarmac is much less so. And I think that is a fairly consensus opinion between carbon and aluminum. Lots of things favor carbon but not usually durability.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

> Lots of things favor carbon but not usually durability.


That depends on what challenges are presented to the frame, and what you mean by durability. 

Basically, carbon fiber composites aren't very tolerant of negligent abuses that were never a problem with steel, and are often not an issue with Al. C-fiber composites weakness is impact and high compressive loads. However, a well designed and fabricated C-fiber composite will have superior impact resistance to an Al tube. A second downside of C-fiber composites is reparability. It can be done, but it takes a level of knowledge and expertise that is very limited. 

Al's weakness is its susceptibility to fatigue. Al frames can be easily repaired by a number of experienced frame folks, and minor damage can often be ignored. 

So long as you don't crash them, or torture them by clamping or otherwise excessively compressing frame elements, well fabricated C-fiber composites are well more durable than Al tubes.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

ibericb said:


> Okay, from the Wheels forum it appears your narrowing to the Felt. Cool! Now a thought - based upon your size, experience and goals I would strongly encourage you to look a the their endurance line (Z-series) instead of the race (F-series). I personally believe it will better suit you, and you will find road riding much more enjoyable as a result. If in the future you shed some pounds and desire to get more competitive, you'll want a better racing bike anyway. For now, go with what will bring you the most enjoyment as you make the transition to road riding. I am firmly of the belief that it would be an endurance model, that will readily accept 28 mm tires on a suitable wheel. If you like the F75, look at the Z85 - price is about the same, and similar construction. I believe the Z85 comes with 32/28 spoked wheels (r/f) that will readily accommodate 28 mm tires, so you would save on wheels immediately. Overall, I think you would come out ahead, ride better and faster (comfort = speed), and be more pleased.



I have been weighing the differences between the Z and F bikes since I went to my LBS to talk about test rides. They do not have any Zs in stock in my size so I cannot test a Z. However, I just realized that the Scott Speedster that I test rode has very close to the same stack and reach as the Z85. I liked the overall position I was in on the Scott, but didnt care for the bike as a whole, so I know I will like my position on the Z85. I will be getting a professional fit session with the purchase as well so I know I can tweak little things here and there.

Both the Z85 and F75 have all the same 105 components, handlebars, seat post, etc. The only accessory that is different is the saddle (felt stock vs prologo kappa 2) which I was planning to replace anyway. They both have beefy wheels with 32 spokes in the rear. I will have my LBS rebuild the stock rear wheel with better spokes to start with most likely and buy a new set after a few months (thanks to those in the Wheel sub-forum for all their help!).

Now all I need to do is save the money for a few months. We arent even through Fall yet and I can hardly wait for spring! Thanks to everyone in this thread. You have all been very helpful!


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

I think you will be much happier one you start grinding out the miles on the Z than the F. Not sure you will need to redo spokes - if they're good double butted you should be good to go. Proper tension is what you want to check. And do step up to 28 mm tires which I'm pretty sure you'll be able to do on the Z, but not the F.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

ibericb said:


> I think you will be much happier one you start grinding out the miles on the Z than the F. Not sure you will need to redo spokes - if they're good double butted you should be good to go. Proper tension is what you want to check. And do step up to 28 mm tires which I'm pretty sure you'll be able to do on the Z, but not the F.


The largest size I saw mentioned on the internet that will fit the Z is a 25, I suggest the buyer that he asks the dealer to make sure. Also keep in mind that not all tire manufactures state their sizes correct, for example my Hutchinson 25's measure 23.2 and my Vittoria 25's measure 25.1. So if a 25 is the largest that will fit it may behove the poster to make sure he gets the largest 25 instead of a 23 wearing a 25 label.

By the way, most modern road bikes won't accept anything larger than a 25.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

I found a post from 2010 by SuperDave in response to a question about 28c tires on Z6 and z85:



> I think you'll find that most brake calipers do not allow 28mm tires to consistently pass without rubbing. I would not advise using anything but the OEM width on these Z series models.


Link: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/felt/wider-tires-z6-z85-232314.html

I dont know if the Z85 frame has changed in the last 5 years or not. But it sort of sounds like hybrids, mountain, and cross bikes are the only ones that you can reliably put larger than 25mm tires on.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

The Domane will take 28 mm tires (a number of folks have made that change). A Trek rep told me they it's close but they work fine (they've done it in Waterloo), but the Trek line is "no" because they won't fit with fenders (for which the Domane is set-up to accept).

The easy test is take a suitable wheel/tire combo form another bike in the shop and try it out. The rear brake caliper is often the tight spot.

From what I've seen in the recent past, most bikes, except the most serious competitive racing frames, will accept a one-up increase in tire width from the OEM size supplied. But I suspect that isn't a good rule to live by. Try and decide.


----------



## Wetworks (Aug 10, 2012)

Surprised I haven't seen it suggested yet (or maybe I missed it), but given the OP's concern for sporting bigger tires coupled with a relaxed geometry, why not consider the Specialized Diverge? It comes in both Al and C flavors and I think can accommodate up to 32c tires, all on frames up to 64.


----------



## WheelNut2 (Jul 21, 2014)

A frame that will fit larger tires is going to be invaluable for the long rides you`re planning. I`m 190lbs and my 25mm tires will get pinch flats at anything below 100psi, which means my ride quality can be pretty buzzy and jarring on old rough/choppy asphalt. If you can get something will accommodate 28s or 32s you will be very happy on those long rides! This will probably mean going to a disk brake bike, which would be really quite nice.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

ibericb said:


> The Domane will take 28 mm tires (a number of folks have made that change). A Trek rep told me they it's close but they work fine (they've done it in Waterloo), but the Trek line is "no" because they won't fit with fenders (for which the Domane is set-up to accept).
> 
> The easy test is take a suitable wheel/tire combo form another bike in the shop and try it out. The rear brake caliper is often the tight spot.
> 
> From what I've seen in the recent past, most bikes, except the most serious competitive racing frames, will accept a one-up increase in tire width from the OEM size supplied. But I suspect that isn't a good rule to live by. Try and decide.


One up from stock is what Specialized told me when I asked. I now run 25s on my Tarmac and 28s on my Secteur.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

The Diverge series indeed looks very nice. The OP had 4 Spec's on his original list, but Diverge wasn't in there. It certainly has the tire size and the frame size to meet his needs.


----------



## Biercycle (Oct 4, 2014)

ibericb said:


> The Diverge series indeed looks very nice. The OP had 4 Spec's on his original list, but Diverge wasn't in there. It certainly has the tire size and the frame size to meet his needs.


Neither of the shops near me have any of the cross bikes available. They may be able to order one, but I would have to buy it in order for that to happen. I am going to stick with the Z85 and if my LBS has a demo day and I get an opportunity to try one of the V-series Felts, I may reconsider. I dont feel a need to go all the way to 32s for the tires. If I could get 27s, 28s, or large 25s on the Z, that would be a bonus. It is also hard to argue with the groupsets that Felt offers at their price points.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Biercycle said:


> I found a post from 2010 by SuperDave in response to a question about 28c tires on Z6 and z85:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Slowly, and I mean very slowly, a rare few bike manufacturers are beginning to make frames to accept a 28 tire. I think all Lynskey model road bikes except the Pro series will accept a 28 both rear and front. Looking at my Lynskey with 25 on it and 105 calipers it has plenty of room for 28's to fit between the calipers, of course you may have to flatten the tire to get them to pass through but that's not a big deal, heck on my 84 Trek 660 I had to flatten the rear tire just to clear the seat tube! But I was able to get 27 tire on it with no problem (Specialized use to make a 27 Armadillo tire) other than having to smash it flat against the seat tube to get it into position, but never had any caliper problems. It's possible that maybe the high end modern racing calipers like Dura Ace won't accept a 28 inflated. 

Anyway here is a way to tell if a tire will work; see: How Wide a Tire Can I Run? | Off The Beaten Path Also read the comments, one writer says that the highend calipers won't accept wider tires inflated but noted that they only had to do that with 30c tires.


----------

