Author Topic: New "Comfortable" carbon frame bike or steel folding bike for LEL 2013 (Read 18683 times)

Feanor · « **Reply #25 on:** 16 February, 2012, 05:15:14 pm »

Quote from: mmmmartin on 15 February, 2012, 10:32:30 am

To put this conversation into context, in the world of mountaineering there are people who find it hard to believe Everest was climbed by people who didn't wear Goretex.

I'm continually reminded of this when I find myself 'intriuged' at the crux of a modest HVS climb, with modern rubber-soled rock shoes, and protected with modern dynamic ropes.

Reading the guide book, the first ascent of these routes was often in the 1930s, where they were being done in hobnail boots, with hemp rope which you simply couldn't take a big-runout leader fall on. Those guys must have been nuts! There's no way I'd be able to do that grade in that kit! Bold indeed.

mrcharly-YHT · « **Reply #26 on:** 17 February, 2012, 01:25:58 pm »

They were physically extraordinary people.

One of the more famous ones, OG Jones, for a bet performed several pull-ups with one arm in the Wasdale Head Inn. He had a 17-stone man under the other arm.

Karla · « **Reply #27 on:** 17 February, 2012, 02:33:31 pm »

Quote from: mmmmartin on 15 February, 2012, 10:13:18 pm

that sort of clmbing, which is mostly like walking uphill rather than pure rock climbing, uses a rope to keep climbers together rather than to take the shock of a leader fall.

Umm, Hillary Step? Also,they were killed in some sort of fall. I'd also prefer some decent plastic boots in those sorts of temperatures and conditions to the sort they'd have been wearing - I don't want frostbite! I also prefer my modern C2 (semi clip-on) crampons to an antique pair of strap-ons I once had the displeasure to use.

mattc · « **Reply #28 on:** 17 February, 2012, 03:24:51 pm »

Quote from: Mr Bunbury on 17 February, 2012, 02:33:31 pm

Quote from: mmmmartin on 15 February, 2012, 10:13:18 pm
that sort of clmbing, which is mostly like walking uphill rather than pure rock climbing, uses a rope to keep climbers together rather than to take the shock of a leader fall.

Umm, Hillary Step?

Possibly why martin said "mostly".

I'm no climber, but even I've heard of the Hillary Step; it's only notable cos it's the one bit of 'proper' climbing on the ascent.

slohill · « **Reply #29 on:** 17 February, 2012, 04:50:10 pm »

Returning to the subject of frames---I got Justin Burls to provide me with a bespoke titanium frame based on the geometry of my steel Colnago Master Olympic (58cm). The factory in Russia (who used to make colnago ti frames) confirmed that ti would work just as well as steel in the sense that no geometry change was needed to allow for the two different metals. I asked for this frame shape because I have found from experience that bike comfort depends very much on personal geometry. With my ratio of leg/thigh/body length, race bike geometry is more comfortable that touring geometry. The only downside, fitting mudguards, can always be sorted with some thought and a rivet gun and zip ties.
I now have used the Burls for over 2 years and 10,000 miles +. After a 2 month wait for delivery,it has been faultless throughout, which shows that the russians learned a thing or two about welding up ti when producing mig fighters. It handles as well as the Colnago, but is significantly lighter. I also ride a steel Rossin race frame during the winter, which is similarly comfortable, but significantly heavier. I sold my carbon fibre Felt race bike 6 months after getting the ti Burls as a) it was the same weight; b)it is not as robust and I would rather travel with ti than CF and C) I just stopped using it in favour of the Burls.

MattH · « **Reply #30 on:** 17 February, 2012, 05:02:10 pm »

I've done a lot of miles on a reasonable steel bike (Thorn Audax Mk3) - LEL, Mille Cymru, extended the BCM into a 960k ride a couple of times etc.
I bought myself a Specialized Roubaix frameset as a redundancy present, and rode all last season's events on it including PBP and a 24H.

It's just over half the weight of the steel bike, and lovely to ride - it feels like riding on a cushion of air, even on 23 or 25mm tyres compared to the 28mm I use on the Audax MK3. However, it doesn't have good mudguard clearance so I have to use compromise clip ons, it doesn't have rack fittings, and it makes absolutely no difference to my times on rides. It's a fact that my fastest ever 10mile TT ride was on my Audax Mk3, complete with rack on the back, full mudguards, carradice saddlebag and a dynohub on the front wheel, rather than the same course on my stripped down Roubaix - both ridden with tribars fitted.

If I do LEL again it'll probably be on the Roubaix because it is such a lovely smooth ride.

MattH · « **Reply #31 on:** 17 February, 2012, 08:31:31 pm »

Dolan's Ti was mentioned here

Doo · « **Reply #32 on:** 26 November, 2012, 08:21:11 am »

I have just purchased a specialized roubaix frameset! Woo hoo!

Rainmaker · « **Reply #33 on:** 26 November, 2012, 08:39:52 am »

What's going on here, I cannot believe it! Carbon, titanium, race frames, you'll be telling me next that you don't have beards and don't wear sandals, I don't know what AUK is coming to, I can hear the rumblings in the local cemetery.

MattH · « **Reply #34 on:** 26 November, 2012, 08:42:34 am »

I don't have a beard (except the beginnings of one towards the end of a 1000k+), but I have been known to ride my bling carbon bike with SPD sandals.

ian_oli · « **Reply #35 on:** 26 November, 2012, 09:18:13 am »

Another vote for Burls. Mine is lugged/set-up for Audax/Light Touring. I have a Ti Seatpost (a bling luxury) carbon forks - as recommended by Justin Burls himself - and just a cheap alloy stem that I keep promising myself to replace with carbon. I have had it 2 1/2 years I have taken panniers across France to Italy, ridden MMiglia, PBP and just done Lejog on it. Frame has been faultless, the ride comfortable and I am on the heavier side. I also like the idea that I don't have to pay the frame much attention - and don't.

Rhys W · « **Reply #36 on:** 26 November, 2012, 09:54:42 am »

I can't say much about long-distance (riding it or geometry) but I do own two Colnagos which are the models the pros rode around the early 90s (steel Master) and early 00s (C50) respectively. They're the same size and the geometry is identical, similar groupset and practically identical wheels and tyres (only difference is saddles and quill stem vs aheadset). As much as I prefer the idea and even the look of a light steel lugged frame, I'd have to say the carbon frame is by far the most comfortable to sit on and ride (even though it has the racier, slightly less comfortable saddle). At the risk of sounding like a vague Cycling Plus review, the carbon frame seems stiffer underneath me yet soaks up small bumps better.

This is a comparison of two identical geometry frames from the same maker, I'd expect a frame tweaked for long-distance riding from a different manufacturer to be very different to either.

alotronic · « **Reply #37 on:** 26 November, 2012, 03:03:17 pm »

I have a carbon frame which is 1 mph faster than my lovely Salsa LaRaza steel frame. That's an HOUR saved every 12 hours isn't it? Thats an hour extra sleep

The carbon (Orbea onix) is faster, more comfy and way better uphill and down. BUT it doesn't have mudguards. I bought it for fast fun and now just want to use it all the time. If I were buying another carbon frame I would get something like a dolan dual or a giant defy which both take guards, or there's ribble which fits this bill now too I believe.

Previously I would have thought a custom Burls to be a top choice, and I suspect it still is... but I will have to wait for the carbon bike to crack now!

3peaker · « **Reply #38 on:** 26 November, 2012, 07:40:03 pm »

I have enjoyed catching up with this thread, as after PBP11, after saddle break and finding myself TT-ing the final 60k (with JJ up front) to finish with 11mins to spare, I determined that lack of sleep was a contributory factor to my pace. Riding steel 725, I determined the best (only) way to continue these ultra-Randonneurs would be to lighten the frame. I like the look (price £500 f+f) of the Ribble 365 but they are out of stock. Meanwhile, I have converted an ALAN 2002 CF+ Alu Cross frame to Audax standard and must say the ride is comfy and I feel a zip in my pedalling on the 3x200s I have done to date. Could be a stiffer BB. It 's certainly the way forward for LEL13 (went and won a free entry) and the template for PBP15. Just need to continue breaking-in the Ti B17 saddle that replaced the one that snapped in PBP11.

Want to preserve the CF for 300+ events and stick to the steel and Campy8s for 200s and winter.

Must confess that for summer 200s I love my LOOK CF sportif (ex-race) bike; surprisingly comfy and zippy.

Bairdy · « **Reply #39 on:** 26 November, 2012, 10:14:07 pm »

I don't think it matters what you ride as long as you've ridden it a lot before hand and know what to expect from it.

8 Miles from John O Groats in 2008 we passed a woman pushing a "shopping" bike up a hill, it had a Strumey Archer 3 speed set up. We stopped to ask if she was O.K, turned out she was riding LEJOG too, she'd set off three weeks before us, she looked like she'd just gone out for a pint of milk. (maybe she had!

)

If I ride LEL it will be on my Aluminium Cannondale CAAD8 which cost me £700, I've spent about another £700 changing and upgrading etc but it's seen me through 6000 + miles this year without any problems.

BlackSheep · « **Reply #40 on:** 26 November, 2012, 10:19:16 pm »

Quote from: heinim on 14 January, 2012, 03:01:15 pm

...............
......I'm very interested to hear from people who switched from a "traditional" randonneur (steel frame) to a modern "comfortable" carbon bike.

I don't have a cabon frame, I have lots of steel ones and an 7075 ally frame (Vitus 979) . So perhaps, my input might not be of much use, but it does raise an important issue ....
My steel frames :-
Holdsworth Criterium - Reynolds 501. Bob Jackson International - Reynolds 531. Bob Jackson Audax Club - Reynolds 531C. OLMO - Columbus something. Mercian - Reynolds 531. Columbia - Reynolds 725? and a Rourke - Reynolds 953.

Mrs BlackSheep also has a Rourke - Reynolds 953.

I'm about 6'1", Mrs BlackSheep is 5'0", our frames are custom built, so mines bigger and heavier than hers. However, my bike is considerably lighter than hers.

The reason? The groupset and wheels. Her groupset - Campag Centaur, Campag Proton wheels. My groupset Campag Record, Mavic Ksyrium SL wheels.

I've weighed all of my frames, and the more exotic metals have yielded the lighter results, but the groupset and wheels is where you'll make the biggest weight saving. And with lighter wheels you'll save a lot more energy when it comes to propelling yourself along.

EdinburghFixed · « **Reply #41 on:** 26 November, 2012, 10:56:05 pm »

The OP asks about a bike with higher efficiency that isn't too uncomfortable. Naturally enough the discussion has centred on carbon frames suggested by the LBS, but really there are two things that glared out at me (I know this advice is almost a year too late - meh!).

First, what size are the wheels on the folder (and what tyres are fitted)? Second, how low is the riding position?

Weight isn't going to make a significant impact on the amount of sleep time you have when the difference between a carbon frame and a steel one is less than 1% of your kerb weight - that means at most it could be holding you back by 1%, or 36 seconds per hour (if you were constantly climbing with no wind or rolling resistance). Physics for the win.

On the other hand, there can be a really dramatic difference between tyres (much more than 1% of your power, if you average ~150-200W on a brevet) - see here for examples.

Similarly, if the folder has a relatively upright riding position (and 'relatively' really is the operational term), moving to a relatively tucked riding position will be felt constantly. I don't have a good link handy for this comparison but when I compared my drop bar racer with a local recumbent using my Powertap, my drop-bar bike was 3mph slower at just 150W (16.5mph vs 19.5mph). Some of that you will feel just going between positions on a diamond frame and even if it's 1kph faster, that puts you an hour ahead every 15 hours of a long event (=4 hours extra sleep on PBP).

I realise this is pretty much tangential to the OP but couldn't resist punting my 2p out there. Buy great tyres and get a fit that is as low as you're comfortable with at the distance, then worry about tiny concerns of weight

frankly frankie · « **Reply #42 on:** 29 November, 2012, 09:45:26 am »

Carbon frames are not about the weight though. See thread title. They're about pleasure. You will go faster on a bike you enjoy riding.

The cheapest 'quick fix' to go round an event faster is to use a GPS (if you don't already).

tiermat · « **Reply #43 on:** 29 November, 2012, 10:46:08 am »

Quote from: frankly frankie on 29 November, 2012, 09:45:26 am

Carbon frames are not about the weight though. See thread title. They're about pleasure. You will go faster on a bike you enjoy riding.

^This in spades.

Out of the three bikes I ride regularly, the one I ride the most is the heaviest. I haven't weighed them all lately (maybe I should for comparison purposes), but as a rough scale, from lightest to heaviest they go:
Holdsworth 531 Avanti (steel, obviously)
Ridley Triton-T (6061 ally)
On-One Inbred 29er (4021 DB steel) (This I know is 13KG without the mudguards, as I took it to Catalonia like that in April and the baggage scales told me how much it weighed

)

the reason I ride the heaviest one the most? It's like FF says, it's the most comfortable, it's not fast, but then neither am I! It rolls and rolls and rolls without giving me any major problems (outside of the rare puncture (see pubbe run thread for last night) and needing a regular wipe down of the chain which appears, for some reason, to be a dirt magnet)

ETA frame materials

mrcharly-YHT · « **Reply #44 on:** 29 November, 2012, 10:59:01 am »

Quote from: EdinburghFixed on 26 November, 2012, 10:56:05 pm

Buy great tyres and get a fit that is as low as you're comfortable with at the distance, then worry about tiny concerns of weight

Absolutely.

Jethro · « **Reply #45 on:** 29 November, 2012, 11:33:09 am »

Just to add my little bit.

My favourite bike for a long time was an all steel Argos 753 custom built with Campag Record. That was until I recently bought a Van Nicholas Yukon titanium with a mixture of Campag Centaur/Chorus.

I also have a Pinarello Dogma carbon and a custom built Bob Jackson 953. Will road test the Van Nicholas extensively on Audax next year, but if I ever get myself another bike I would consider either the Hewitt carbon audax or Ribble 365 carbon (expected to be available April 2013) or quite possibly another custom built steel bike again.

derico · « **Reply #46 on:** 29 November, 2012, 12:29:48 pm »

Bike fit (size, tube angles, handlebar width etc) is key to comfort on a long ride.

The difference between a set of hand built wheels and harsh factory made ones would be more significant to bike feel than frame material.

GrahamG · « **Reply #47 on:** 29 November, 2012, 06:36:52 pm »

Quote from: frankly frankie on 29 November, 2012, 09:45:26 am

Carbon frames are not about the weight though. See thread title. They're about pleasure. You will go faster on a bike you enjoy riding.

The cheapest 'quick fix' to go round an event faster is to use a GPS (if you don't already).

This is why I'm scared to test ride one..

heinim · « **Reply #48 on:** 04 December, 2012, 05:42:36 am »

After reading the initial answers at the beginning of this thread I found a new 2008 mode of a Cervélo RS. I've done around 8000km with it in France and Switzerland and I'm quite happy. If I carry more than 3-4 kg in a saddlebag, the characteristics of the bicycle are changed in a very negative way, but with more experience I learned what I really need to take with me. The compact 12-25 is not enough for the passes in the Alps but should be ok for Scotland?
Concerning the tires, I have Michelin Pro 4 23mm with latex tubes. Are the roads in UK better or worse than the ones on PBP?

EdinburghFixed · « **Reply #49 on:** 04 December, 2012, 01:49:31 pm »

Plenty of people use 23's on all roads here - but to answer your question, it seems to be generally agreed that the roads on PBP are quite a lot nicer!