Benefits of Carbon Frames

Jorg Lueke said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point,

Carbon is not an upgrade for a commuter, it's a liability. Forks are a
good place for plastic, tho.

Quoted message said:

though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations?

Spend $50 on some 25j-28mm tires, fattest you can squeeze in and
you'll notice more damping. Get some fresh bar tape. $75 worth of
tires and foam, and you'll be more comfy. Still not enough? Get your
bars up higher with a $20 stem raiser. We're still under a $100, and
these things will affect your comfort far more than getting a frame
you have to worry about scratching.

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Quoted message said:

Jorg Lueke said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point,

Carbon is not an upgrade for a commuter, it's a liability. Forks are a
good place for plastic, tho.

OK, I'll bite. Why is that? What is it about carbon fiber that makes it a
"liability" for a frame, but not a fork? If you're concerned about
durability, why would you use it for a fork where, if it were to fail, the
consequences would be far worse than if something were to happen to a frame?
There are few things more important to the cyclist than the fork, handlebar
& stem, as far as safety is concerned. A failure there can be seriously bad
news. Frame failures on the other hand, regardless of material, are rarely
catastrophic (such that when it does happen, a very big deal is deservedly
made of it).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations?

Spend $50 on some 25j-28mm tires, fattest you can squeeze in and
you'll notice more damping. Get some fresh bar tape. $75 worth of
tires and foam, and you'll be more comfy. Still not enough? Get your
bars up higher with a $20 stem raiser. We're still under a $100, and
these things will affect your comfort far more than getting a frame
you have to worry about scratching.

Agreed that those changes will make a bike more "comfortable" but at some
sacrifice in efficiency. The OP is putting in a significant number of miles
per month, and may be looking to take things to the next level (in terms of
riding faster & longer). What you & the OP are looking for in a bike might
be different things. People buy cars with far more power than they need for
the type of driving they normally do, but might enjoy the sporty handling
characteristics... it might simply be more "fun" to drive. Same thing is
true for bikes. You don't *need* to have a really nice (expensive) bike. You
could get by with something much less. But that's a value judgement.

People come into the shop all the time and ask how much money they have to
spend for a nice bike. I tell them that what's worth paying for isn't
something for *me* to determine, it's for them. I set them up on perhaps
three different bikes (good, better, & really really really good) and they
generally can figure it out for themselves.

Quoted message said:

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Are you sure the OP's not "racing?" A lot of people race. But it's usually
against themselves, trying to better their last time, trying to get a bit
further. "Racing" can be a state of mind; it isn't limited toa formal
contest with entry fees & officials.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Jorg Lueke said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point,

Quoted message said:

Carbon is not an upgrade for a commuter, it's a liability. Forks are a
good place for plastic, tho.

OK, I'll bite. Why is that? What is it about carbon fiber that makes it a
"liability" for a frame, but not a fork? If you're concerned about
durability, why would you use it for a fork where, if it were to fail, the
consequences would be far worse than if something were to happen to a frame?
There are few things more important to the cyclist than the fork, handlebar
& stem, as far as safety is concerned. A failure there can be seriously bad
news. Frame failures on the other hand, regardless of material, are rarely
catastrophic (such that when it does happen, a very big deal is deservedly
made of it).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations?

Quoted message said:

Spend $50 on some 25j-28mm tires, fattest you can squeeze in and
you'll notice more damping. Get some fresh bar tape. $75 worth of
tires and foam, and you'll be more comfy. Still not enough? Get your
bars up higher with a $20 stem raiser. We're still under a $100, and
these things will affect your comfort far more than getting a frame
you have to worry about scratching.

Agreed that those changes will make a bike more "comfortable" but at some
sacrifice in efficiency. The OP is putting in a significant number of miles
per month, and may be looking to take things to the next level (in terms of
riding faster & longer). What you & the OP are looking for in a bike might
be different things. People buy cars with far more power than they need for
the type of driving they normally do, but might enjoy the sporty handling
characteristics... it might simply be more "fun" to drive. Same thing is
true for bikes. You don't *need* to have a really nice (expensive) bike. You
could get by with something much less. But that's a value judgement.

People come into the shop all the time and ask how much money they have to
spend for a nice bike. I tell them that what's worth paying for isn't
something for *me* to determine, it's for them. I set them up on perhaps
three different bikes (good, better, & really really really good) and they
generally can figure it out for themselves.

Quoted message said:

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Are you sure the OP's not "racing?" A lot of people race. But it's usually
against themselves, trying to better their last time, trying to get a bit
further. "Racing" can be a state of mind; it isn't limited toa formal
contest with entry fees & officials.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Wider tires do not necessarily sacrifice efficiency. Bicycle Quarterly
did a test of rolling resistance on tires several issues ago and
actually found some wider tires that rolled easier than the 23c ones.
They also found that very high pressure makes very little difference
in rolling efficiency. I wish more frames had the clearance and
chainstay length for wider tires (28c and up).

Smokey

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Jorg Lueke said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point,

Quoted message said:

Carbon is not an upgrade for a commuter, it's a liability. Forks are a
good place for plastic, tho.

OK, I'll bite. Why is that? What is it about carbon fiber that makes it a
"liability" for a frame, but not a fork?

How much is a fork? How much is a frame? Duh. If you fall on some oily
intersection and hose your fork, it's $150 for a basic replacement, if
you crack your frame, it's considerably more.

Quoted message said:

If you're concerned about
durability, why would you use it for a fork where, if it were to fail, the
consequences would be far worse than if something were to happen to a frame?
There are few things more important to the cyclist than the fork, handlebar
& stem, as far as safety is concerned.

Duh. This is about ultimately a liability to the wallet.

Quoted message said:

A failure there can be seriously bad
news. Frame failures on the other hand, regardless of material, are rarely
catastrophic (such that when it does happen, a very big deal is deservedly
made of it).

Ugh.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations?

Quoted message said:

Spend $50 on some 25j-28mm tires, fattest you can squeeze in and
you'll notice more damping. Get some fresh bar tape. $75 worth of
tires and foam, and you'll be more comfy. Still not enough? Get your
bars up higher with a $20 stem raiser. We're still under a $100, and
these things will affect your comfort far more than getting a frame
you have to worry about scratching.

Agreed that those changes will make a bike more "comfortable" but at some
sacrifice in efficiency. The OP is putting in a significant number of miles
per month, and may be looking to take things to the next level (in terms of
riding faster & longer). What you & the OP are looking for in a bike might
be different things.

Puhlease. The efficiency between a couple pounds and a 23mm and 25mm
tire are negligible. You're off the sales floor, quit the hype. I ride
6-800 miles per month on 30mm tires, and I'm no slower than when I
rode 23s. Do you understand what the word "commuting" means? It means
reliability and a modicum of comfort.

Quoted message said:

People buy cars with far more power than they need for
the type of driving they normally do, but might enjoy the sporty handling
characteristics... it might simply be more "fun" to drive. Same thing is
true for bikes. You don't *need* to have a really nice (expensive) bike. You
could get by with something much less. But that's a value judgement.

Sounds like the OP wants comfort. There is no complaint about his
current bike's handling or performance. Again, you're off the sales
floor, stop with the hype. I understand sporty handling--just sold a
bike with 70s type criterium handling, and ride a bike with bog
standard road bike geometry--they mostly handle similarly as angles
have gotten to be pretty standardized.

Quoted message said:

People come into the shop all the time and ask how much money they have to
spend for a nice bike. I tell them that what's worth paying for isn't
something for *me* to determine, it's for them. I set them up on perhaps
three different bikes (good, better, & really really really good) and they
generally can figure it out for themselves.

Quoted message said:

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Are you sure the OP's not "racing?" A lot of people race. But it's usually
against themselves, trying to better their last time, trying to get a bit
further. "Racing" can be a state of mind; it isn't limited toa formal
contest with entry fees & officials.

Yak yak yak yak yak. You're off the sales floor, chill.

On Sep 1, 11:09 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Agreed that those changes will make a bike more "comfortable" but at some
sacrifice in efficiency. The OP is putting in a significant number of miles
per month, and may be looking to take things to the next level (in terms of
riding faster & longer). What you & the OP are looking for in a bike might
be different things. People buy cars with far more power than they need for
the type of driving they normally do, but might enjoy the sporty handling
characteristics... it might simply be more "fun" to drive. Same thing is
true for bikes. You don't *need* to have a really nice (expensive) bike. You
could get by with something much less. But that's a value judgement.

People come into the shop all the time and ask how much money they have to
spend for a nice bike. I tell them that what's worth paying for isn't
something for *me* to determine, it's for them. I set them up on perhaps
three different bikes (good, better, & really really really good) and they
generally can figure it out for themselves.

Quoted message said:

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Are you sure the OP's not "racing?" A lot of people race. But it's usually
against themselves, trying to better their last time, trying to get a bit
further. "Racing" can be a state of mind; it isn't limited toa formal
contest with entry fees & officials.

These are good points. The problem with trying out bikes is that it
takes a while to know what one likes and dislikes so that first
purchase might be decent but not perfect. What I might be looking for
is a bike I can try to ride at an average of 20 mph to get to work and
back in an hour flat. I might keep the pilot for days when need to
carry 20 pounds of stuff with me but I think it would be nice to have
a speedier bike as well. But going that route I'd also like something
that can withstand the vibrations of poorly paved urban streets. Like
I said something like a Virata or Roubaix or the Trek equivalent.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Agreed that those changes will make a bike more "comfortable" but at some
sacrifice in efficiency. The OP is putting in a significant number of
miles
per month, and may be looking to take things to the next level (in terms
of
riding faster & longer). What you & the OP are looking for in a bike
might
be different things.

Puhlease. The efficiency between a couple pounds and a 23mm and 25mm
tire are negligible. You're off the sales floor, quit the hype. I ride
6-800 miles per month on 30mm tires, and I'm no slower than when I
rode 23s. Do you understand what the word "commuting" means? It means
reliability and a modicum of comfort.

I'm NEVER off the sales floor. The sales floor is the place to be, because I
get to match people up with bikes suitable for their own dreams. You're more
interested in people following *your* dreams & ideas.

For what it's worth, I love 25mm tires. And I think the Pilot series of
bikes I sell are great because they can fit wider tires yet (up to 32mm).

Regarding your incredible speed on 30mm tires, if this is on halfway-decent
roads, then dang, the reason Discovery folded up was because they hadn't
discovered you. You rock, man. If you can ride just as fast on 30mm tires as
you can on 23s, I can only conclude that you're approaching aerodynamic
limits that the rest of us can only dream of.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"landotter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

On Sep 1, 2:34 pm, Jorg Lueke <[email hidden]> wrote:
> Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
> Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
> am thinking about upgrading at some point,

Quoted message said:

Carbon is not an upgrade for a commuter, it's a liability. Forks are a
good place for plastic, tho.

OK, I'll bite. Why is that? What is it about carbon fiber that makes it a
"liability" for a frame, but not a fork?

How much is a fork? How much is a frame? Duh. If you fall on some oily
intersection and hose your fork, it's $150 for a basic replacement, if
you crack your frame, it's considerably more.

Quoted message said:

If you're concerned about
durability, why would you use it for a fork where, if it were to fail,
the
consequences would be far worse than if something were to happen to a
frame?
There are few things more important to the cyclist than the fork,
handlebar
& stem, as far as safety is concerned.

Duh. This is about ultimately a liability to the wallet.

Quoted message said:

A failure there can be seriously bad
news. Frame failures on the other hand, regardless of material, are
rarely
catastrophic (such that when it does happen, a very big deal is
deservedly
made of it).

Ugh.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>though maybe not though the
> winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
> carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
> vibrations?

Quoted message said:

Spend $50 on some 25j-28mm tires, fattest you can squeeze in and
you'll notice more damping. Get some fresh bar tape. $75 worth of
tires and foam, and you'll be more comfy. Still not enough? Get your
bars up higher with a $20 stem raiser. We're still under a $100, and
these things will affect your comfort far more than getting a frame
you have to worry about scratching.

Agreed that those changes will make a bike more "comfortable" but at some
sacrifice in efficiency. The OP is putting in a significant number of
miles
per month, and may be looking to take things to the next level (in terms
of
riding faster & longer). What you & the OP are looking for in a bike
might
be different things.

Puhlease. The efficiency between a couple pounds and a 23mm and 25mm
tire are negligible. You're off the sales floor, quit the hype. I ride
6-800 miles per month on 30mm tires, and I'm no slower than when I
rode 23s. Do you understand what the word "commuting" means? It means
reliability and a modicum of comfort.

Quoted message said:

People buy cars with far more power than they need for
the type of driving they normally do, but might enjoy the sporty handling
characteristics... it might simply be more "fun" to drive. Same thing is
true for bikes. You don't *need* to have a really nice (expensive) bike.
You
could get by with something much less. But that's a value judgement.

Sounds like the OP wants comfort. There is no complaint about his
current bike's handling or performance. Again, you're off the sales
floor, stop with the hype. I understand sporty handling--just sold a
bike with 70s type criterium handling, and ride a bike with bog
standard road bike geometry--they mostly handle similarly as angles
have gotten to be pretty standardized.

Quoted message said:

People come into the shop all the time and ask how much money they have
to
spend for a nice bike. I tell them that what's worth paying for isn't
something for *me* to determine, it's for them. I set them up on perhaps
three different bikes (good, better, & really really really good) and
they
generally can figure it out for themselves.

Quoted message said:

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Are you sure the OP's not "racing?" A lot of people race. But it's
usually
against themselves, trying to better their last time, trying to get a bit
further. "Racing" can be a state of mind; it isn't limited toa formal
contest with entry fees & officials.

Yak yak yak yak yak. You're off the sales floor, chill.

In article <[email hidden]>, Jorg

Lueke said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point, though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations? I do notice some effects specially in my elbows from time
to time.

I put about 750K per month commuting and running errands; here's my
perspective. Don't buy carbon -- or scandium, Ti or CroMo for that
matter -- anticipating that a greater or lesser degree of comfort
inheres in the frame material. As landotter noted that's more a matter
of fit and components.

But, yes a lighter bike can make for a more enjoyable commute - not
because it dampens road vibrations though. Among the bikes I regularly
bike to work on is a an old Ti Sumitomo (A Muzi's shop), the commute
morphs into a fast recreational ride with this bike - the nature of the
bike influences how I ride and the route I choose. It's fun. :-)

But care should be taken when opting for a lighter ride that durability
not be sacrificed: IMO rolling to work on 20 or 24 spoke wheels is
asking for headaches.

Another steed in the stable is an old Reynolds 531 roadie converted to
a fixie. This bike makes for an equally enjoyable commute, albeit
slower. The Medici is ideal for exploring neighbourhoods and new
routes; or a minimalist, elemental ride -- all under the guise of a
commute.

There's also the Nova.....

But you get the idea. Your commute is what you make it: a race, a
tourist trip, strictly a utilitarian activity, or a melange of all
three. Get the bike that best suits how you define the proposition.

Luke said:

I put about 750K per month commuting and running errands; here's my
perspective. Don't buy carbon -- or scandium, Ti or CroMo for that
matter -- anticipating that a greater or lesser degree of comfort
inheres in the frame material. As landotter noted that's more a matter
of fit and components.

When I bought a carbon bike, I noticed that the ride was considerably
smoother than on my alloy one, given the same tyre width & pressure -
it felt as though I was rolling on a thin carpet.

On Sun, 2 Sep 2007 11:34:37 +0930, Michael Warner <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Luke said:

I put about 750K per month commuting and running errands; here's my
perspective. Don't buy carbon -- or scandium, Ti or CroMo for that
matter -- anticipating that a greater or lesser degree of comfort
inheres in the frame material. As landotter noted that's more a matter
of fit and components.

When I bought a carbon bike, I noticed that the ride was considerably
smoother than on my alloy one, given the same tyre width & pressure -
it felt as though I was rolling on a thin carpet.

I've heard the same said of Al over Steel, Ti over Al, CF over Ti,
and Steel over CF. Round and round it goes....

Luke said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Jorg

Lueke said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point, though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations? I do notice some effects specially in my elbows from time
to time.

I put about 750K per month commuting and running errands; here's my
perspective. Don't buy carbon -- or scandium, Ti or CroMo for that
matter -- anticipating that a greater or lesser degree of comfort
inheres in the frame material. As landotter noted that's more a matter
of fit and components.

But, yes a lighter bike can make for a more enjoyable commute - not
because it dampens road vibrations though. Among the bikes I regularly
bike to work on is a an old Ti Sumitomo (A Muzi's shop), the commute
morphs into a fast recreational ride with this bike - the nature of the
bike influences how I ride and the route I choose. It's fun. :-)

But care should be taken when opting for a lighter ride that durability
not be sacrificed: IMO rolling to work on 20 or 24 spoke wheels is
asking for headaches.

Another steed in the stable is an old Reynolds 531 roadie converted to
a fixie. This bike makes for an equally enjoyable commute, albeit
slower. The Medici is ideal for exploring neighbourhoods and new
routes; or a minimalist, elemental ride -- all under the guise of a
commute.

There's also the Nova.....

But you get the idea. Your commute is what you make it: a race, a
tourist trip, strictly a utilitarian activity, or a melange of all
three. Get the bike that best suits how you define the proposition.

I think I'm stuck between the first two 🙂. My current bike is fine
for the latter, rolling along the Mississippi and taking in the sights
instead of trying to stay awake on the freeway is a definite plus on
any bike. I guess I;m really looking for a speedier trip on some days
but hopefully with some comfort.

What would the difference be beween an Allez and a Roubaix or whatever
the comporable Trek models are this year. Is there any difference in
comfort? Is it only mainly weight and speed?

(P.S. it looks like all the mide range Trek road bikes only have 20
spokes).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you were racing, a pound *might* matter. But ya ain't.

Are you sure the OP's not "racing?" A lot of people race. But it's
usually
against themselves, trying to better their last time, trying to get a bit
further. "Racing" can be a state of mind; it isn't limited toa formal
contest with entry fees & officials.

These are good points. The problem with trying out bikes is that it
takes a while to know what one likes and dislikes so that first
purchase might be decent but not perfect. What I might be looking for
is a bike I can try to ride at an average of 20 mph to get to work and
back in an hour flat. I might keep the pilot for days when need to
carry 20 pounds of stuff with me but I think it would be nice to have
a speedier bike as well. But going that route I'd also like something
that can withstand the vibrations of poorly paved urban streets. Like
I said something like a Virata or Roubaix or the Trek equivalent.

Make sure you get a chance to ride the relevant bikes on some hills, if
available. And you might find this article useful on our website-
www.ChainReaction.com/roadbiketestrides.htm. It's one of the few on our
website that is completely brand & material neutral, meaning that it should
help you evaluate just about any bike... as well as the shop setting it up.

And above all, have fun and keep riding. I'm jealous of the miles you're
getting in by commuting alone!

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Jorg Lueke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point, though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations? I do notice some effects specially in my elbows from time
to time.

If you're feeling some "effects" from the road, your problem isn't frame
material, IMHO. You're having fit and/or tire problems. If I were you, I
would try to get weight off my hands(raise the bar) and put the widest
possible tire on the Trek, first.

In article <[email hidden]>, Jorg

Lueke said:

What would the difference be beween an Allez and a Roubaix or whatever
the comporable Trek models are this year. Is there any difference in
comfort? Is it only mainly weight and speed?

Can't comment on the two specific models. Perhaps the
roadbikereview.com forums will be helpful.

Specialized Bicycle Allez Comp Double:
http://tinyurl.com/25h8jr
Specialized Bicycle Roubaix Comp Double
http://tinyurl.com/ye79f6

Be selective when reading these reviews; they are often erroneous. Eg.
the first review of the Allez Comp Double begins "Had been riding a
1976 Peugot PR-10 w/ Reynolds 531 aluminum frame..."

If you ride predominantly on flat terrain, (along the Mississippi
River?) don't expect minor weight differences between bikes to
translate into significant decreases in commute times or energy
expenditures. Try hooking up with a local group of riders; perhaps
they'll be able to lend you the model you want or similar for some test
rides.

Quoted message said:

(P.S. it looks like all the mide range Trek road bikes only have 20
spokes).

When/if you buy don't hestitate to haggle AND insist that undesirable
components be swapped out, of course, revising the price accordingly as
you go. If you're confronted with an inflexible or unaccommodating
retailer take your money elsewhere.

Luke said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Jorg

Lueke said:

What would the difference be beween an Allez and a Roubaix or whatever
the comporable Trek models are this year. Is there any difference in
comfort? Is it only mainly weight and speed?

Can't comment on the two specific models. Perhaps the
roadbikereview.com forums will be helpful.

Specialized Bicycle Allez Comp Double:
http://tinyurl.com/25h8jr
Specialized Bicycle Roubaix Comp Double
http://tinyurl.com/ye79f6

Be selective when reading these reviews; they are often erroneous. Eg.
the first review of the Allez Comp Double begins "Had been riding a
1976 Peugot PR-10 w/ Reynolds 531 aluminum frame..."

If you ride predominantly on flat terrain, (along the Mississippi
River?) don't expect minor weight differences between bikes to
translate into significant decreases in commute times or energy
expenditures. Try hooking up with a local group of riders; perhaps
they'll be able to lend you the model you want or similar for some test
rides.

It's flat aling the river but hilly coming out. It's about 350 ft
difference in a 3 mile strech on the one end but most of that is
cofined to two specific hills. The other way is pretty flat with
maybe 250 ft rise but spread out over the whole 10 miles. There are
other commuters but they each have their own preferences. Plus it's
hard to find people who ride on 60cm+ frames.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(P.S. it looks like all the mide range Trek road bikes only have 20
spokes).

When/if you buy don't hestitate to haggle AND insist that undesirable
components be swapped out, of course, revising the price accordingly as
you go. If you're confronted with an inflexible or unaccommodating
retailer take your money elsewhere.

Yes! That the was biggest mistake on my last purchase. The place had
a good bike at a good price but the subsequent service was abysmal.
But since then I';ve found a nice Trek and a nice Specialized dealer
so all is well. So you recommend swapping out the low spoke models?
I take it they are more suceptible to being damaged? Is it any harder
to true those wheels?

Gooserider said:

"Jorg Lueke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point, though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations? I do notice some effects specially in my elbows from time
to time.

If you're feeling some "effects" from the road, your problem isn't frame
material, IMHO. You're having fit and/or tire problems. If I were you, I
would try to get weight off my hands(raise the bar) and put the widest
possible tire on the Trek, first.

It's a matter of degree too. I notice when I go over the rougher
streets but it's not horrible or long lasting. I like the overall fit
now on this bike. I do probably still have a little extra pressure on
my hands but the bars are up as far as I can go. I think it's partly
a size issue, I'm tall but moreso in my legs than in my arms.

"Jorg Lueke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Gooserider said:

"Jorg Lueke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
am thinking about upgrading at some point, though maybe not though the
winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
vibrations? I do notice some effects specially in my elbows from time
to time.

If you're feeling some "effects" from the road, your problem isn't frame
material, IMHO. You're having fit and/or tire problems. If I were you, I
would try to get weight off my hands(raise the bar) and put the widest
possible tire on the Trek, first.

It's a matter of degree too. I notice when I go over the rougher
streets but it's not horrible or long lasting. I like the overall fit
now on this bike. I do probably still have a little extra pressure on
my hands but the bars are up as far as I can go. I think it's partly
a size issue, I'm tall but moreso in my legs than in my arms.

Are your elbows locked out? I have a tendency to lock my elbows and death
grip the bar, and that will make elbows sore, for sure.

"Luke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Be selective when reading these reviews; they are often erroneous. Eg.
the first review of the Allez Comp Double begins "Had been riding a
1976 Peugot PR-10 w/ Reynolds 531 aluminum frame..."

Since Luke says "Be selective when reading these reviews; they are often
erroneous" I may be repeating his message. If so, I am reinforcing his
thoughts.

I am old enough to have ridden in high school with Mike Jacoubowsky. He's
kept riding hard and I havenn't. He pursuaded me to get my first "really
good" bike (a Gitane Tour de France, at $199.50). I still ride and love
that bike.

Quoted message said:

1976 Peigot PR-10 w/ Reynolds 531

sounds like the PX-10 to me. The Peugot equivalent to my same-era Gitane.
The lesser Peugot (PR-8, PX-8 -- I can't remember but think that '8' was in
it) wasn't 531 -- or at least wasn't double-butted 531 as the PX-10 and the
Tour de France were.

Quoted message said:

w/ Reynolds 531 aluminum frame

I KNOW that this is wrong. My 531 frame is decidely steel and not aluminum.
IIRC correctly, the Klein was one of the first popular aluminum frames, and
came to market much later than this 1976 vintage.

- Skip
(the longest continuous membership in the Western Wheelers bicycle
club, but I certainly don't ride as much as I should. Perhaps I'm
fat-dumb-and-lazy. I really adimire Mike J.)

Quoted message said:

I am old enough to have ridden in high school with Mike Jacoubowsky. He's
kept riding hard and I havenn't. He pursuaded me to get my first "really
good" bike (a Gitane Tour de France, at $199.50). I still ride and love
that bike.

Which color is yours? It's been quite a few years since I've seen it! I
owned two of them; my first was a too-large 25" (63cm?) green one that Nick
Lynch sold me. He did try initially to sell me one the right size, but I
didn't like the color. I bought a second one for use as a 'cross bike/spare
bike, but it seemed they'd gone downhill quite a bit in the couple of years
between them, as it didn't handle nearly as well and seemed to be quite a
bit more flexible. They'd also begun to sneak in "Durifort" tubing wherever
they could and still, in not-so-good conscious, call is "531."

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

1976 Peigot PR-10 w/ Reynolds 531

sounds like the PX-10 to me. The Peugot equivalent to my same-era Gitane.
The lesser Peugot (PR-8, PX-8 -- I can't remember but think that '8' was
in it) wasn't 531 -- or at least wasn't double-butted 531 as the PX-10 and
the Tour de France were.

The lesser bikes were in the "U0- series. The U08 was in incredibly-popular
bike back in the day.

Quoted message said:

- Skip
(the longest continuous membership in the Western Wheelers bicycle
club, but I certainly don't ride as much as I should. Perhaps I'm
fat-dumb-and-lazy. I really adimire Mike J.)

Yet it's you with the family history of cycling. It's only recently that
I've made significant inroads in that area (with my son). And he still
resists; the appeal of paintball and video games is strong. Sigh. In any
event, as much as we love cycling, if there's anything to be truly admired
it would be in doing a good job raising our kids. Maybe 10 years from now
I'll be able to look back at that one and see how I did.

Meantime, we can think about those Western Wheelers meetings back in the
day, when we'd be causing trouble at the back of the room and old man
Peterson was getting upset with us. Those were the days.

Hey, did you ride the San Andreas No Fault Century back in whatever year it
was ('72?)?

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Gooserider said:

"Jorg Lueke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Gooserider said:

"Jorg Lueke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Right now I have an alumunum frame, carbon fork and seat post (Trek
> Pilot 1.2). I ride mostly commuting 500-600 miles per month. Now I
> am thinking about upgrading at some point, though maybe not though the
> winter. One thing the better models have (Roubaix or a Virata) is the
> carbon frame. Besides being lighter does this help with road
> vibrations? I do notice some effects specially in my elbows from time
> to time.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you're feeling some "effects" from the road, your problem isn't frame
material, IMHO. You're having fit and/or tire problems. If I were you, I
would try to get weight off my hands(raise the bar) and put the widest
possible tire on the Trek, first.

Quoted message said:

It's a matter of degree too. I notice when I go over the rougher
streets but it's not horrible or long lasting. I like the overall fit
now on this bike. I do probably still have a little extra pressure on
my hands but the bars are up as far as I can go. I think it's partly
a size issue, I'm tall but moreso in my legs than in my arms.

Are your elbows locked out? I have a tendency to lock my elbows and death
grip the bar, and that will make elbows sore, for sure.

That could definitely play a role. I try to menatlly check how
relaxed I am on the bike every few minutes but when one is in traffic
that does become secondary to making sure one avoids accidents.