Thinking about a new bike

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I want to thank everyone for helping me when I wanted larger tires on my current bike. I
think, however, that I'm going to buy a new bike, or a new frame for my current components.
My current bike is a 52cm Easton aluminum frame race bike. I've heard that because my frame
size is so small, that aluminum produces an exceptionally stiff and brutal ride? Is this
true? I know that there is a train of thought that says frame material doesn't matter, but
it seems to make sense that a smaller frame = a stiffer frame. Or am I way off? I had a mid
80s Raleigh touring bike when I was a teenager, and could ride it comfortably all day. The
bike I have now is very uncomfortable, but I don't know if it's the bike, the aluminum
frame/skinny tires, or the fact that I'm not a teenager any more. I'll be using my bike for
general fitness riding and commuting, but I'd like to be as comfortable as possible while
riding a drop bar road bike. I don't really want to ride a 'bent on the road here in
retiree central. I know I had a bunch of questions, but if anyone can suggest a nice
comfortable bike that will fulfill my requirements, I'd appreciate it. I'd like to be able
to run a relatively fat 700c tire, the bike must be comfortable enough for hours in the
saddle, and it must have accomodations for a rack and fenders. I'm willing to spend $1500
maximum. Thanks in advance!

Mike

Take a look at the Specialized Sequoiah series, especially the Expert and Elite (the middle and top
models, respectively). $1100 for the expert, $1400 for the Elite. Braze-ons for fenders and rack,
Shimano 105 group with STI, comes with 700x28 (IIRC) tires, and room for bigger if you want, fancier
wheels on the Elite, drop bars, suspension seat. Marketed as a more comfortable performance bike.

I've also seen some nice bikes in this range in the touring and cross- bike lines from Bianchi and
Raleigh, though I can't recall the models at the moment. Wait, I think the Raleigh is the C700.

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

Quoted message said:

My current bike is a 52cm Easton aluminum frame race bike. I've heard that because my frame size
is so small, that aluminum produces an exceptionally stiff and brutal ride? Is this true? I know
that there is a train of thought that says frame material doesn't matter, but it seems to make
sense that a smaller frame = a stiffer frame. Or am I way off?

All frames are essentially infinitely stiff when it comes to the smoothness of the ride.

You want a smoother ride, don't spend you money on a new bike, just put some bigger tires on and
don't pump em up so much.

Between a good fit and some decent sized tires, those are the keys to a comfortable ride.

jon isaacs

"Slider2699" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My current bike is a 52cm Easton aluminum frame race bike. ...
I had a mid 80s Raleigh touring bike when I was a teenager, and

could

Quoted message said:

ride it comfortably all day. The bike I have now is very uncomfortable, but

Quoted message said:

I don't know if it's the bike, the aluminum frame/skinny tires, or the

fact

Quoted message said:

that I'm not a teenager any more.

Probably Yes, Yes, and Yes. Touring bikes are designed to be ridden all day. I'm not familiar with
the Easton, but from the description as a "race bike", I doubt if comfort had as much part in its
design. Fatter tires are more comfortable, at least in the extreme. A ride on rough road in thin,
100 psi tires and then on mountain bike tires is enough to demonstrate this. And you are older.

So, maybe you want a touring bike like a Trek 520 or an REI Novarra Randonee.

Mike Kruger said:

I'm not familiar with the Easton, but from the description as a "race bike", I doubt if comfort
had as much part in its design.

I am amazed that this particular fiction gets repeated so much here. Racers in stage races have to
be able to stay on their bikes for 6-8 hours a day, day after day for a month. Clearly comfort has
to be a consideration in their design. Not, perhaps, the test-ride-around-the-block comfort of a
hybrid or FS mountain bike, but comfort once you are in shape, for the long haul.

Things like suspension seatposts, fat saddles, and upright bars are touted as being more
comfortable. But suspension components rob energy, making it harder to finish your ride, fat saddles
chafe and press on all the wrong places on your butt, making them unrideable for more than 30 miles,
and upright bars offer you only one hand position, causing hand/wrist problems, and put more of your
weight on your saddle, exacerbating the problems caused by that fat, soft saddle.

The main difference between a touring frame and a racing frame is that the touring frame has room
for fatter tires (which yes, are more comfortable), fenders, racks and lights. The slacker geometry
is the least critical of the differences.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster." --Greg LeMond _`\(,_ | (_)/ (_) |

From: "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Mike Kruger said:

I'm not familiar with the Easton, but from the description as a "race bike", I doubt if comfort

had as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

much part in its design.

I am amazed that this particular fiction gets repeated so much here. Racers in stage races have to
be able to stay on their bikes for 6-8 hours a day, day after day for a month. Clearly comfort has
to be a consideration in their design. Not, perhaps, the test-ride-around-the-block comfort of a
hybrid or FS mountain bike, but comfort once you are in shape, for the long haul.

Again, I'm not familiar with the Easton, but I would imagine that speed would be a prime
consideration in a racing bike, and comfort a necessary but secondary consideration. These
considerations are basically reversed on a touring bike.

To be honest, I was really forgetting about stage races, since the races I see in person are
criteriums far shorter than 6-8 hours, or velodrome races which tend to be even shorter (and use
track bikes). I hear they have a nice stage race somewhere in France in the summer, though 😉

The riders who might be particularly interesting to hear from on this speed/comfort topic are the
riders doing brevets this year to prepare for Paris-Brest-Paris. Doing 1200 km in 90 hours, or even
200 km in 13 hours, demands both speed and comfort. Plus, there are a fair number of middle-aged
butts on those bikes, whereas there are darned few 50 year old stage racers.

Quoted message said:

Things like suspension seatposts, fat saddles, and upright bars are touted as being more
comfortable. But suspension components rob energy, making it harder to finish your ride, fat
saddles chafe and press on all the wrong places on your butt, making them unrideable for more than
30 miles, and upright bars offer you only one hand position, causing hand/wrist problems, and put
more of your weight on your saddle, exacerbating the problems caused by that fat, soft saddle.

You make good points that refer to comfort considerations in general. Just to be clear, though,
these aren't things I recommended in my original reply, just good advice you are offering the
original poster.

Quoted message said:

The main difference between a touring frame and a racing frame is that the touring frame has room
for fatter tires (which yes, are more comfortable), fenders, racks and lights. The slacker
geometry is the least critical of the differences.

Slider2699 <[email hidden]> wrote:
: My current bike is a 52cm Easton aluminum frame race bike. I've heard that because my frame
: size is so small, that aluminum produces an exceptionally stiff and brutal ride? Is this
: true? I know that there is a

Hm, think frame stiffness is a very good thing, because of better power transfer?

: I had a mid 80s Raleigh touring bike when I was a teenager, and could ride it comfortably
: all day. The bike I have now is very uncomfortable, but I don't know if it's the bike, the
: aluminum frame/skinny tires, or the fact that I'm not a teenager any more. I'll be using my
: bike for general fitness riding and commuting, but I'd like to be as comfortable as possible
: while riding a drop bar road bike. I don't really want to ride a 'bent on the road here in
: retiree central.

Get a real bike, not a department store "comfort" bike. Also make sure it fits you perfectly - maybe
you are currently having some fit issues with the bike?

--
Risto Varanka | helsinki.fi~rvarankaOpen ↗ varis at no spam please iki fi

"Slider2699" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I want to thank everyone for helping me when I wanted larger tires on my current bike. I
think, however, that I'm going to buy a new bike, or a new frame for my current components.
My current bike is a 52cm Easton aluminum frame race bike. I've heard that because my frame
size is so small, that aluminum produces an exceptionally stiff and brutal ride? Is this
true?

No.

Quoted message said:

I know I had a bunch of questions, but if anyone can suggest a nice comfortable bike that will
fulfill my requirements, I'd appreciate it. I'd like to be able to run a relatively fat 700c tire,

That's about the only requirement, if road shock is making you uncomfortable.

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

Quoted message said:

The riders who might be particularly interesting to hear from on this speed/comfort topic are the
riders doing brevets this year to prepare for Paris-Brest-Paris. Doing 1200 km in 90 hours, or
even 200 km in 13 hours, demands both speed and comfort. Plus, there are a fair number of
middle-aged butts on those bikes, whereas there are darned few 50 year old stage racers.

I've been doing brevets for years, and I'm over 50. Aluminum is my choice for frame material (and
wheel rim, handlebar, stem, crank, seat post and hub material). Steel is good for spokes, fasteners,
axles and bearings, plastic for electronics housings and seat shells. I haven't seen a compelling
use for titanium yet. None of these materials have anything to do with comfort.

Peter Cole said:

Steel is good for spokes, fasteners, axles and bearings, plastic for electronics housings and seat
shells. I haven't seen a compelling use for titanium yet. None of these materials have anything to
do with comfort.

Well, the plastic seat shell is more comfortable than a steel seat shell would be.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combikeOpen ↗

Mike Kruger said:

To be honest, I was really forgetting about stage races, since the races I see in person are
criteriums far shorter than 6-8 hours, or velodrome races which tend to be even shorter (and use
track bikes). I hear they have a nice stage race somewhere in France in the summer, though 😉

Yeah, I heard that Lance somebody won it. You know, the guy who is sponsored by the company that has
the reputation for being slow...

Sam