# New Bike?



## Goblin84 (Mar 29, 2007)

Well...I am lookin into a new road bike and thought I would ask you all what you think.  I am mostly look at Specialized and its really between the Allez Comp/Elite.

However has anyone used a Roubaix?  I am just wondering how different it is from a more traditional frame.  I will of course test out all the bikes before I buy anything just thought you all might have some input.


----------



## bruno (Mar 29, 2007)

are they carbon? i would stay away from carbon as they are generally one crash bikes. i'm afraid of carbon. probably irrationally but still. . .:roll: :roll: :roll: 

but duder! new bikes are the jam!!!! go for it!!:flag: :grin: :flag: :grin: :flag:


----------



## andyzee (Mar 29, 2007)

Love carbon, probably the only thing better is titanium, but also more $$ . Bruno is right though, carbon is not a durable in a crash.


----------



## bruno (Mar 29, 2007)

andyzee said:


> Love carbon, probably the only thing better is titanium, but also more $$ . Bruno is right though, carbon is not a durable in a crash.



maybe if i learned to properly ride, i'd be ok with carbon! but i crash sometimes!:x :lol: :x :lol: :flag:


----------



## marcski (Mar 29, 2007)

I'm extremely happy with my Giant Carbon TCR.  Although, its my first roadbike since my panasonic, which I got almost 30 yrs ago.  

I'm aiming to keep my falls and crashes to the Mtn. Rig in the woods and not on the road.


----------



## cbcbd (Mar 29, 2007)

bruno said:


> maybe if i learned to properly ride, i'd be ok with carbon! but i crash sometimes!:x :lol: :x :lol: :flag:


I guess you just need more practice and time on the bike. In time you won't be crashing anymore after you get rid of those training wheels


----------



## KevinF (Mar 29, 2007)

bruno said:


> maybe if i learned to properly ride, i'd be ok with carbon! but i crash sometimes!



These attitudes of "carbon is unsafe in a crash", "titanium can't be broken", etc. have always mystified me.  Carbon, aluminum, steel, titanium -- yes, they all have their individual properties.  But you're not riding around on a solid block of whatever -- you're riding on a bike.

Part of the process to make bikes lighter is to remove material from the frame where it isn't likely to do any good.  If you crash any bike wrong it will break.  I've known people who have broken steel, aluminum and carbon frames in crashes.  Their owners were pretty broken too and had other more pressing concerns.

Carbon and steel bikes are repairable should something break.  There are several companies out there that offer very long warranties on their frames, sometihng they probably wouldn't do if they really thought their bikes would break every time a rider crashed on one.

Crashes on bikes are a fact of life.  They'll always happen, no matter how good you are.  Just remember Keith Bontrager's famous words "Strong.  Light.  Cheap.  Pick two"


----------



## Goblin84 (Mar 29, 2007)

ok, I am probably going with aluminum with a carbon fork and maybe a carbon seat stay.

The difference I was wondering about is the more traditional frame vs the Roubaix frame.  A Roubaix has a slanted top tube which makes it a bit shorter.  Because of this there is a longer seat tube.  The idea is that the rider is more upright however they are not loosing to much aerodynamics.  A couple teams raced in this style bike during the last Paris to Nice race this year.  It is supposed to be a bit easier on the body for those longer rides.  

here is an example...
http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/latest-bikes/road-bike/specialized-bicycle/PRD_290734_5668crx.aspx


----------



## andyzee (Mar 29, 2007)

Goblin84 said:


> ok, I am probably going with aluminum with a carbon fork and maybe a carbon seat stay.
> 
> The difference I was wondering about is the more traditional frame vs the Roubaix frame. A Roubaix has a slanted top tube which makes it a bit shorter. Because of this there is a longer seat tube. The idea is that the rider is more upright however they are not loosing to much aerodynamics. A couple teams raced in this style bike during the last Paris to Nice race this year. It is supposed to be a bit easier on the body for those longer rides.
> 
> ...


 
If you're thinking of putting in some big miles, be careful, aluminum is stiff and can add to fatigue. Whatever shock your bike doesn't absorb, your body does.




KevinF said:


> Just remember Keith Bontrager's famous words "Strong. Light. Cheap. Pick two"


 
Like that one 

Yes you are right all material can fail in a crash, but I believe a Carbon frame is more likely to get damaged especially from force to the side of the frame. Keep in mind, it's also more expensive then steel.


----------



## Goblin84 (Mar 29, 2007)

yeah, i put some decently heavy miles on my bike.  I just got into it last summer and avg around a 100+ miles a week.  most rides were in the 25-35 mile range (3-4 days a week) and then I would have one long ride (50-70miles) a week.

I am a poor recent college grad (less then a year out) so I can afford much more then $1500 or so on a bike and it would take me most of the summer to get that amount of money up.  was thinking used?  however I like the idea of getting something at a local bike shop because of the help offer.  Me being new into the activity I need a TON of help. 

actually some would argue I need help in almost every facit of my life


----------



## andyzee (Mar 29, 2007)

Unless something changed since I last owned an aluminum bike, 1993, you should be good up to about 50 miles. After 50 miles, you will definetley start feeling the effects of shock on your body. After riding aluminum, I went to carbon, and boy what a difference that was. Where I previously had to slow down on some bumpy roads, I was now able to fly over them at about 25 mph. At least that has been my experience. 

If money is an issue, then your options for a new bike would be aluminum or steel. 

Aluminum: 

Pro - Light and stiffness allows for a good transfer of power since the frame doesn't have as much play in it. 

Con - Aluminum doesn't absorb shock as well as other materials

Steel (Chrome Molly):

Pro - Less expensive, a good frame can still be fairly light.

Con - Not as stiff as aluminum, power transfer is not as efficient.

My 2 cents


----------



## marcski (Mar 29, 2007)

Goblin.  This is what I got in October of last year.  

http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-US/bikes/road/1/11457/

Mine was a 2006 model right after the 2007's came out.  I got it for 1400.  (Plus pedals and shoes).  I am very very happy.

Also, the stem on this bike is reversible.  So, you can flip it and bring the handlebars in a higher position which will bring your body in a more upright position, which according to my LBS will have the same effect as having a more upright riding position.


----------



## Charlie Schuessler (Mar 30, 2007)

The Allez is an aluminum frame with high-grade components.  The Roubaix is a Carbon frame with 50/34 compact crank and high performance components.  I've ridden the Tarmac Pro and the Roubaix Pro and loved them both.  The Tarmac had traditional 53/39 crank gearing, seemed a bit stiffer.

If you're looking for speed go Tarmac, if you're looking for comfort and bit easier making it up the steep climbs, go for the Roubaix.  I’m considering the Roubaix...


----------



## Goblin84 (Apr 1, 2007)

yeah, I would love to get into racing however i figured i might learn a thing or two about cycling before I even think of that.  Just Cat5 stuff...nothing major


----------

