Jump to content

HC Bike/Cycling Thread


boomana

Recommended Posts

other than wheels, or the crank, and differences that weight distribution could cause, is removing bike weight the same thing as removing rider weight?

Rotating weight (wheels) is more important than static weight. I think they used to say that 1lb in the wheels was worth 2 anywhere else. Weight mainly effects acceleration, and climbing. Rider weight far exceeds bike weight. In my opinion, reliability/longevity trumps weight any day. Of course I'm not racing. And I am paying for my own parts/maintenance. What the tour teams do (and who/what kind of sponsorship deals they cut) has no bearing on me. And stuff like Schleck dumping a chain 2-3 years ago seems asinine at that level to begin with.

 

And pics or it didn't happen Chris :lol:

Edited by Pars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the same one from Paceline.  The guy paid just over $2k for it, lightly modified a few things (skewers, stem, bottle cages) and now expects to be able to mark it up 25%.  No thanks.  From where I sit it's an odd fitting bike (longish 60cm ST for a 58cm TT) so the market is limited.  The generic carbon clinchers are also a negative from where I sit.  Why lace up nice hubs to crap hoops?  Still, I'm watching it carefully...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the same one from Paceline.  The guy paid just over $2k for it, lightly modified a few things (skewers, stem, bottle cages) and now expects to be able to mark it up 25%.  No thanks.  From where I sit it's an odd fitting bike (longish 60cm ST for a 58cm TT) so the market is limited.  The generic carbon clinchers are also a negative from where I sit.  Why lace up nice hubs to crap hoops?  Still, I'm watching it carefully...

 

i responded to a 'my used bike is special' ad as well. He said "good luck finding a CAAD10."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got my $1700 Garmin Vectors today.  Piece of shit broke during install.  Terrible engineering with the pods and even worse build quality.  The shop was torquing it to spec and the pod mount snapped in half and the pod dropped to the floor.  Now I am back on the waiting list for pedals that look to be very poorly made.  Even the pedals themselves look like chinese knock offs of Looks with sharp edges and poor engraving.

 

Also the crowfoot adapter you have to use to change out these pedals is back ordered months at all of the online places I can find.  It is evidently one of very few thin enough to fit into the poorly engineered space you  have to access to torque the pedals so they measure correctly.

Edited by VPI
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I probably will. The mounts are cheap because they will be broken so often due to poor design so the aluminum is very brittle.  Trying to find the crowfoot adapter somewhere as that is the only way to change them out between bikes.  If I can't find that I will probably give up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2013-Cannondale-CAAD10-Black-Inc-Di2-15-lbs-Super-Custom-Awesome-shape-/200965402047?pt=US_Bicycles_Frames&hash=item2eca78adbf

 

good luck with the price (since i paid just over half that for a new standard 2013 build)

 

i thought this was interesting though as it is a 52cm:

 

 

 

Depending on your body proportions this frame will fit someone between 5'6" and 5'11". I'm almost 5'10" (around 175cm, I think) and I fit nicely on this 52cm frame. And for those that think that they need a 54cm frame, think again because Cannondale's reach geometry between a 52 and a 54cm frame are EXACTLY the same! Check out the geometry numbers yourself on Cannondale's website: Cannondale.com

 

is any normal person 5'11" and riding a 52cm?  The stem on it looks real short too, probably 90mm as its the same stem I have and thats what they'd include w/ a 52cm 

 

I did just look at the geometry chart again, but more closely, and it looks like pretty much the only difference between a 52cm and a 54cm is that the top tube is 2cm lower on a 52 and they reduce the height of the head tube by 2cm as well. The difference in the reach dimension is only 1mm.  Pretty much everything else is identical - seat tube angle changes 0.5 degrees as the bottom bracket is moved down 3mm. Difference in wheelbase is only 1mm. So if you add 2cm of spacers to raise the bars on a 52cm, and replace the stock 90mm stem with a 100mm, would it not be the exact same bike as a 54cm except with an additional 2cm of standover clearance?

 

Just makes me rethink the whole "you look cramped on a 52cm" observations from bike shops. If all the frame manufacturer is doing is taking the same frame and moving the top tube downward, this does not change the size of the bike other than requiring an additional 2cm of seatpost and 2cm of spacers under the stem to create the same setup. Maybe the whole "cramped" look is just the shorter stem they put on a 52cm, maybe the handlebars also have less reach but im not familiar with the specs on those, and maybe they cut the fork shorter and include fewer spacers

 

Gn9YzRL.png

Edited by justin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone stole one of Nechama's employees cyclo-cross racing bike the other day. 

I don't really follow any of the bike message boards, and I know this is an insanely long shot, but if anyone comes across it in their travels LMK. 

 

The rundown:

Ritte Van Vladdnderen Carbon Crossberg Size Medium

SRAM 10spd

Mavic rims with tubeless tires

Powertap g3 rear wheel

Blue Bartape

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.