Trek 5200 or Ribble Nero Corsa

2»

Comments

  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    the nero corsa has a dissappointly heavy fork I've noticed ... I'd be tempted to trade up to the scuro corsa and, if funds are the limiting factor, trade down in the groupset department, and even in the wheels department until your ship comes in.

    something like a scuro corsa with 105 and some shimano ultegra or campag zonda wheels would make a very nice upgradeable rig. could even go for aksiums if you're really up against in financially.

    that said, i prefer the look of the trek. those old style carbon treks are some of the nicest looking frames out there i think (unpopular view).
  • Coochcp
    Coochcp Posts: 131
    Well, I've made my decision which is def different from the start of the thread.

    I've placed an order for a Planet-X.

    Now for the reasoning.....

    The Trek ended up as my first choice based on the brilliant frame (not because it won the Tour de France - I don't think you can take that away from Armstrong) and it was lovely to ride with great wheels, but, it wasn't compact and I'm wanting to buy a bike and ride it.

    The Ribble definitely would have been lovely but I couldn't stretch my money to the spec I would want as for less money on the the Planet-X your getting a better wheelset and groupset (arguments campag v shimano go here)

    so £999 for a full carbon mono frame ultegra goupset, good wheels, good reviews from other forumites and at the end of the day any of the three like mentioned earlier I'm never going to take to their limit.

    so now I just wait.....

    thankyou all for your input I'll post piccy's on receipt
  • Down the Road
    Down the Road Posts: 949
    So you took Second best As you can't ride a non compact frame?
    Racing is life - everything else is just waiting
  • SDP
    SDP Posts: 665
    Down the Road wrote:
    So you took Second best As you can't ride a non compact frame?

    i think you will find its a matter of personal choice ..just because he doesnt wan to "be like you" doesnt mean its a wrong choice

    he has gone to planet X who are superb in customer service & put a lot back into british cycling

    if you cant say anything positive ..do teh next best thing & say nothing at all..he hasnt asked you to pay for it ...
    www.mjsracing.net
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Coochcp wrote:
    but, it wasn't compact and I'm wanting to buy a bike and ride it.
    I don't understand. What difference does it make being compact?
  • Coochcp
    Coochcp Posts: 131
    Down the Road wrote:
    So you took Second best As you can't ride a non compact frame?

    Harsh comment mate, I should have clarified, I was talking about the chainset not the frame, and no I didn't say I took second best I said "my first choice" and the comment "I'm wanting to buy a bike and ride" refers to changing to a compact chainset when I get the bike or in a couple of months.

    So at the end of the day I feel I took the "best bike for me"
  • Down the Road
    Down the Road Posts: 949
    No sweat. Can almost understand it now. Thought the initial statement on compact seemed odd.

    Still would have bought the trek and changed the chainset later on.
    Racing is life - everything else is just waiting
  • SDP
    SDP Posts: 665
    Down the Road wrote:
    No sweat. Can almost understand it now. Thought the initial statement on compact seemed odd.

    Still would have bought the trek and changed the chainset later on.

    is it because you are associated with a trek dealership?? :wink:
    www.mjsracing.net
  • Down the Road
    Down the Road Posts: 949
    Nope it's just the better frame That's all
    Racing is life - everything else is just waiting
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Define "better"
  • SDP
    SDP Posts: 665
    strange that as your profile is obviously linked to Bham City cycles who advertise as trek dealers ...
    www.mjsracing.net
  • Coochcp
    Coochcp Posts: 131
    Down the Road wrote:
    Nope it's just the better frame That's all

    So I take it you've ridden or know something more about the Ribble and Planet-X frames, are you not open to the possibility that it's not the better frame based on the fact that it's old technology and whilst a fantastic frame may not be the best available for the price now? I'm not saying it's not the better frame I mean how could I, I've not ridden all three and have no comparison.

    By the way what bike do you ride?
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    SDP wrote:
    strange that as your profile is obviously linked to Bham City cycles who advertise as trek dealers ...

    Aye and the link does'nt work.
    Could this be indicative of the type of expertise offered by our esteemed Mr Grumpy? :lol:
  • SDP
    SDP Posts: 665
    whitley wrote:
    SDP wrote:
    strange that as your profile is obviously linked to Bham City cycles who advertise as trek dealers ...

    Aye and the link does'nt work.
    Could this be indicative of the type of expertise offered by our esteemed Mr Grumpy? :lol:

    yes but if you use some common noggin you can make it link to BCC ..
    :wink:
    www.mjsracing.net
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    I'm curious now to know what bikes he did ride the Tour with. For historical accuracy, can you enlighten us?
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/to ... ce_bikes07
  • Down the Road
    Down the Road Posts: 949
    Coochcp wrote:
    Down the Road wrote:
    Nope it's just the better frame That's all

    So I take it you've ridden or know something more about the Ribble and Planet-X frames, are you not open to the possibility that it's not the better frame based on the fact that it's old technology and whilst a fantastic frame may not be the best available for the price now? I'm not saying it's not the better frame I mean how could I, I've not ridden all three and have no comparison.

    By the way what bike do you ride?

    Currently the New Madone 5.5 Pro. Bfore that Time Edger Racer and Before that Look 486.

    If I place an order for 50 frames I can have the Planet X or the Ribble painted and labelled as i like. They are just Generic frames that anyone can buy and la bel up if they have the cash.

    Yes I have ridden both of these frames and know why the whole bike is £1K and ALL the big boys frames cost a lot more (not marketing as this cost is offset by VOLUME)

    Give you a parallel Which is the better car a 1970 ferrari or a 2007 Golf?
    Racing is life - everything else is just waiting
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Down the Road wrote:
    Yes I have ridden both of these frames and know why the whole bike is £1K and ALL the big boys frames cost a lot more (not marketing as this cost is offset by VOLUME)
    No convinced you understand marketing, or indeed the factors which affect the price the consumer pays.

    Anyway, please give a bit more detail on the difference between a 5200 and a PX. Stiffer, lighter, handles better?

    Your analogy is pretty good though. A 2007 Golf has much more sophisticated engineering than a 1970 Ferrari, though the Ferrari obviously has much better snob value.
  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    good to see the Trek, for so long the bike that made it's owners cry "snob", get the same treatment from the Planet X crowd!

    can we please re-start the condor vs. ribble thread.
  • Down the Road
    Down the Road Posts: 949
    aracer wrote:
    Down the Road wrote:
    Yes I have ridden both of these frames and know why the whole bike is £1K and ALL the big boys frames cost a lot more (not marketing as this cost is offset by VOLUME)
    No convinced you understand marketing, or indeed the factors which affect the price the consumer pays.

    When you show me your degrees I'll show you mine
    Racing is life - everything else is just waiting
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    Down the Road wrote:
    aracer wrote:
    Down the Road wrote:
    Yes I have ridden both of these frames and know why the whole bike is £1K and ALL the big boys frames cost a lot more (not marketing as this cost is offset by VOLUME)
    No convinced you understand marketing, or indeed the factors which affect the price the consumer pays.

    When you show me your degrees I'll show you mine

    :roll: :roll: :lol::lol:
    Hilarious.
  • JWSurrey
    JWSurrey Posts: 1,173
    wildmoustache wrote:
    ...can we please re-start the condor vs. ribble thread.
    Heh heh!
    Yeah, I remember that one!
    I think the comment regarding the fork says something regarding the difference between the quality Italian frame in the hands of the two different companies - albeit at two different price points.
    Planet-X is naturally going to have a price advantage for the same technology, given that it's made in a cheaper location. (Doesn't make it any worse or better on this alone).

    Looking forward to the pictures - the white Planet-X TT bike I saw at the Thames Turbo was awesome.

    As for the 1970 Ferrari - I think I'll go with the Golf - Same performance, better brakes, better handling, and room for the bikes :D
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Down the Road wrote:
    When you show me your degrees I'll show you mine
    Rather not mention my qualifications on here thanks, since that would imply I'm asking people to trust me based on my education, and that I can't actually argue my point properly. I'll note that in order to understand something properly you should be able to explain it (at least in simplified form) to a layman.
  • top_bhoy
    top_bhoy Posts: 1,424
    I'm not convinced that having a bottom end carbon bike is of great benefit compared to a decent alu bike - certainly there is no discernable weight advantage, in fact the carbon bikes I've picked up in shops, often feel heavier. Is the road ride on the low end carbon bike actually superior to one on a decent alu bike? I can't say having a bad ride on my alu - either the RC2 (at present) or the Specialized S-Works (great frame)!

    When you hold and view the top end carbon bikes however, they just ooze class and until I can afford one at this price point, I think for now I'll be sticking to decent alu frames. That way you will in all probability either get to save a few quid or maybe get an upgraded groupset and/or wheelset for the same cost of a low end carbon!!!

    I'm not convinced low end carbon is the way to go except for bragging rights to say 'mines a carbon' :lol:
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys Pedal Force:
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys RC2:
  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    I'm not convinced that having a bottom end carbon bike is of great benefit compared to a decent alu bike - certainly there is no discernable weight advantage, in fact the carbon bikes I've picked up in shops, often feel heavier. Is the road ride on the low end carbon bike actually superior to one on a decent alu bike? I can't say having a bad ride on my alu - either the RC2 (at present) or the Specialized S-Works (great frame)!

    When you hold and view the top end carbon bikes however, they just ooze class and until I can afford one at this price point, I think for now I'll be sticking to decent alu frames. That way you will in all probability either get to save a few quid or maybe get an upgraded groupset and/or wheelset for the same cost of a low end carbon!!!

    I'm not convinced low end carbon is the way to go except for bragging rights to say 'mines a carbon' :lol:

    That is a fair challenge Top_Bhoy. Does anyone here have both a low-end and a high-end carbon frame, and a high end alu frame ideally????
  • SDP
    SDP Posts: 665
    Have had -

    generic carbon - 1300gms

    have got TCR alu ( anodised version ) - 1350gms

    have ridden TCR composite ( 1070gms ( with my wheels which had been in both above bikes ) & same groupset

    i would say Composite was most comfy / TCR alu best allrounder / generic ( i wont put name on here ) was poorest ..

    you can "dial" in comfort - carbon seatpost / type of wheel etc /bars etc & get similar ride with a good aluminium frame

    i would say my TCR alu ( anodised model in large with Easton SL90aero forks ) gives best allround performance of any bike i have had/ridden ..i could afford to buy any frame within reason & i have stick with this

    i have a "generic" alu winter bike which is fine but cant hold a candle to the TCR in terms of ride quality..

    i think build quality is more important than frame material to a point
    www.mjsracing.net
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    I'm not convinced that having a bottom end carbon bike is of great benefit compared to a decent alu bike - certainly there is no discernable weight advantage, in fact the carbon bikes I've picked up in shops, often feel heavier.:
    Are you going WOT here, or are you referring to PX & Deda Nero Corsa frames (Or maybe even a 5200 8) ) as "bottom end"? In which case I'd love to know where I get a decent <1050g alu frame from?

    Actually can i just check, at £900 is a Condor Baracchi a bottom end carbon frame? :twisted:
  • top_bhoy
    top_bhoy Posts: 1,424
    Whats a WOT? (Its a Voltampere :lol: )
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys Pedal Force:
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys RC2:
  • simbil1
    simbil1 Posts: 620
    WOT = way off topic

    SDP, would you mind giving a few more details - looks like a useful comparison. I'd be interested to know too if there are other factors that may effect your ratings such as the wheels the bikes have and even seat post / saddle?
    It's not clear if your ratings are for feel of efficiency (good power transfer), comfort, handling or something else?
    http://picasaweb.google.com/thefirstsimbil/Bikes
  • SDP
    SDP Posts: 665
    simbil1 wrote:
    WOT = way off topic

    SDP, would you mind giving a few more details - looks like a useful comparison. I'd be interested to know too if there are other factors that may effect your ratings such as the wheels the bikes have and even seat post / saddle?
    It's not clear if your ratings are for feel of efficiency (good power transfer), comfort, handling or something else?

    its all really subjective !

    i prefer alu frame with carbon seatpost ...feels liek it ssoaks up more road buzz...i also think tyres & pressures make more difference than diffs between top end frames..

    i would say the TCR composite i used felt better uphill with power transfer
    i would say for belting along on the flat & downhil the alu feels best
    i would say generic carbon was no better than any alu i have had ...

    best upgrades are IMHO

    1, good forks for a nice precise feel
    2. good quality seatpin to absorb road buzz./ good saddle
    3. right size bars ( i use alu bars )
    4.right tyres for your style & experiment with width & pressures
    & get it all set up right so you are comfy at your contact points..

    see my bike spec on best bikes..taken a long time to get it just right !
    www.mjsracing.net
  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    have to say i like good quality alu (have an E5 in stable), but in no way does it absorb nearly as much road buzz as good quality carbon (e.g. Look 585). Not even close, even with same wheels, tyres, pressure, seatpost, saddle, thicker bar tape etc.

    But you might have a point on lower quality carbon. on smooth roads, the top-end alu frames rock i agree.

Categories