What frame for £1200

JesseD

Hi all,

I am in the process of looking for a new frame and forks, and want something carbon and of course get the most for my money. I have approx £1200 - £1300 to play with. I do not race at the moment but plan to do the Marmotte and the Dragon Ride this year and a also local crit series. I also am a bigish lad weighing in at approx 95kg at the moment but when at race weight I am more like 85kg.

So what do you guys recommend?

I am looking at:

2008 Trek 5.2 performance fit.
2008 Specialized S-works Tarmac SL2 (LBS can get me one for £1300)
2008 Cervelo RS
2009 Giant TCR Advanced (not SL)
Kuota Kebel

Has anyone ridden any of the above, if so what are they like, what are the good points v bad points, is there anything else I should be looking at?

Cheers

JD

John.T

I can fully recomend the Trek 5.2. Very responsive, very comfortable and quite light. The full bike (56cm) weighs 16.5 lbs with pedals. Handling is good, just on the stable side of exciting. Just make sure you get the right size seat mast for you. They are expensive but work well. I have the long one on mine (see pics below). You can only use through axle cranksets and need to get the correct bearings for the one you are using.
Not found any bad points yet.

dbb

if i was looking to spend that at the moment, i would be having a close look at a titanium enigma and include it for a test ride.

i've never ridden a ti bike - but i would like to.

JC.152

epiccycles have got a specilized sl2 on their ebay shop up to about £600 i think
http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Epic-Cycles-Ltd




theres always something like a custom Rourke in 953 for a bit less money but isn't carbon so could be useless for what you want.

gkerr4

instead of the tarmac - how about an 08 S-Works Roubaix for £999 - there are a few places doing them now that the new 09 frame is available - pocket the rast towards wheels etc..

lovely frame (have one built up with centaur and Eurus) ideal for the sportives and without spacers it comes pretty close to the tarmac in terms of the front end height.

there are two ads in this months cyclng plus - the concept store and certini who are doing them for £999 - id imagine that sigma-sport will have a similar deal soon too.

proto

Look 585?

http://www.jejamescycles.co.uk/id31818.html

http://www.jejamescycles.co.uk/id35240.html

06 model in carbon finish, money left to splash out on some goodies.

ascurrell

dbb wrote:

if i was looking to spend that at the moment, i would be having a close look at a titanium enigma and include it for a test ride.

i've never ridden a ti bike - but i would like to.

Titanium always worth considering, I only have an Airborne Lancer [Van Nicholas Euros equivalent], It's only the 'budget' model but is so comfortable.
With your budget you could buy a higher model.

ScottieP

I test rode a Cervelo RS just before Christmas - I thought it was fantastic. I rode a Specialized Tarmac Expert at the same time and I thought the Cervelo was in a different league even with Shimano 105 wheels the Cervelo was wearing!

ScottieP

giant_man

Out of the ones you have listed I personally would have no hesitation going for the Cervelo RS or the new Giant. I'm not a fan of Trek or Spesh.

Had Giants over the years and you can't really go wrong with any of them. Test rode a Cervelo R3 last year and was bowled over with how good it was.

For a sportive frame, which is what you are after I do believe, the RS has a more upright and comfortable riding position thanks to the longer head tube.

JesseD

I do like the look of the Giant and the Cervelo, although being a big lad the seat stays on the cervelo do worry me as they are very thin.

I tend to ride my frames big as I like a long top tube of about 57.5cm - 58.5cm, this usually also brings a long head tube as well, I have a Scott Addict SL size 56cm at the moment and even though I am only 6ft, I use a 120mm stem and want to add an extra 1cm to the toptube, I also have a stack of spacers under the stem which in my opinion spoils the asthetics of the bike. I measured the height of the headtube and spacers on the Addict and it comes out at 21cm.

I am also considering the Willier Izoard, it gets quite good reviews and is Italian.

ScottieP

If you're interested in a Cervelo as well as obviously speaking to a Cervelo dealer - it's worth checking the forum on the Cervelo website - it's very active and there are plenty of people there who can advise you too.

ScottieP

giant_man

JesseD wrote:

I do like the look of the Giant and the Cervelo, although being a big lad the seat stays on the cervelo do worry me as they are very thin.

I tend to ride my frames big as I like a long top tube of about 57.5cm - 58.5cm, this usually also brings a long head tube as well, I have a Scott Addict SL size 56cm at the moment and even though I am only 6ft, I use a 120mm stem and want to add an extra 1cm to the toptube, I also have a stack of spacers under the stem which in my opinion spoils the asthetics of the bike. I measured the height of the headtube and spacers on the Addict and it comes out at 21cm.

I am also considering the Willier Izoard, it gets quite good reviews and is Italian.

I do understand what you're saying about the seat stays but I haven't heard of any stays crakcking or failing in any way. There is a 'limited lifetime warranty for the original owner'. If the worst happens of course, well that's what the warranty is there for. Cervelo's site doesn't state a maximum rider weight for this model and if you can get it for 1200 quid this frame that's just damn good value, the rrp (according to official sources) is £1761.

The RS to me looks the 'beefiest' looking frame out of all their bikes. I think you'll be fine on this frame. But the proof is in the pudding so for gods sake go and see a Cervelo dealer and get to ride the thing. Only then wil you be sure.

Toonraid

If you are going to Blow 1300 I would move the marker up one scale or two and get a designer brand which would also have a better resell value - Giant, Trek & Spec all focus on the Low to Medium end of the market while their high end products are made more as a marketing tool - in actual fact the frames the sponsored Pro's ride are not even the same as the one's sold in shops. Besides I am not a big fan of Giant or Cervelo - seen too many broken Giants and also cervelo's seem to suffer from frame noise and problematic seat posts and if you are spensing that much u want peace of mind.

Like you I am also a big guy - 100 kg & 6'4 and I definitely recommend the Ridley Damocles and as some one else said the Look 585 - both are great rides for us big guys, firm and responsive without beating you up - ideal for sportives and both have brand appeal which comes in handy for resale.

John.T

Toonraid. The pros do ride the same Treks as we can buy. In fact the 2007 tour was won on a 5 series frame as the 6 series were not ready in time. They just painted them as 6 series. I would not call my 5.2 a low to medium bike. I am sure I would not notice much difference if I spent £1000 more.

Monty Dog

Yup, Treks are sooo good, when they asked the riders of the GB team what bikes they wanted they said 'Specialized' so guess what bike Team GB are gonna be riding next year? I think Wiggle are doing the Cervelo RS with 20% discount too.

Monty Dog

Yup, Treks are sooo good, when they asked the riders of the GB team what bikes they wanted they said 'Specialized' so guess what bike Team GB are gonna be riding next year? I think Wiggle are doing the Cervelo RS with 20% discount too.

rockmount

£1252 for the RS at wiggle :shock:

edit: ... or even cheaper http://www.slanecycles.co.uk/productdetail.aspx?id=1322&subid=328&catid=72 :shock: :shock:

ScottieP

You can do better than that on the Merlin at various places like Merlin or the TriStore. You can easily get it for £1,195 maybe less.

gkerr4

yep - the RS is a good price - i was tempted by it myself last year but the cheapest I got offerred it at the time was £1600 and the offer of an S-Works roubaix frame for £999 was too good to passup.

I stand buy the purchase - i'd still say the £999 2008 S-Works roubaix!

i disagree with the earlier poster about trek and specialized going for low-end market - if the madone is good enough for young albert and his mates and the S-Works good enough for young tom (ok ok - boonen does look like he gets some individual bits - but his quickstep mates are all on the usual S-Works SLs - as are gerolsteiner and now Saxo Bank too!)

if anything the "upper" price frames from boutique brands really only exist to give our worlds top earners a place to blow their cash!

ozzzyosborn206

i have a tarmac pro and while i love it and it has never had any problems to do wish i had got something like a ridily or a pinerello, just because they are rarer and cooler makes, out of your list i say cervelo, but have a look around, your spending a lot on just a frame so i would say stay away from mainstream companys and go more exotic

gavintc

I have the 08 Cervelo RS. It was a replacement for a Bianchi 928L. It took me a little bit of time to get the handlebar height correct, but it is far faster than the Bianchi as the power transfer is better through a stiffer BB. I do like it,

PS, I have a brand new Biianchi 928 T Cube 57 cm frame for sale (warranty replacement for my 928L that I broke), Am looking for around £750 for it.

Toonraid

John.T wrote:

Toonraid. The pros do ride the same Treks as we can buy. In fact the 2007 tour was won on a 5 series frame as the 6 series were not ready in time. They just painted them as 6 series. I would not call my 5.2 a low to medium bike. I am sure I would not notice much difference if I spent £1000 more.

In some ways I agree with you, you may not realize the difference between your bike and a pro's bike as I assume you are not pushing it as much as they do. Truth is the big manufacturers are producing their top level bikes for the enthusiasts who are mostly middle aged (like me) with disposable income to blow 5 grand on a bike who may do 5k easy miles at 150 - 200 W and perhaps a couple of sportives per year where comfort is usually a big requirement but the pros do around 20-30k on each bike at 300 - 1200W and the last thing you want is a broken frame LIVE on TV so they add a few layers of carbon to ensure efficient power transfer at high watts and the frame stiff as hell with no vertical or lateral comliance as they really want to feel the road and after spending 40-50 000 miles year in year out are not concerned about the comfort as their anatomy has adopted itself to such harsh treatment.

Of course the higher end brands are exclusively made for high end performance and therefore do not make special models and that's why they top of the range models usually weight more than equivalent models from mass producers - Ridley and Scott are both made by the same factory but the Helium weighs more than Scott's top of the range not because they don't have the know how but because they feel the extra weight is more than compensated for by the performance and long term quality of the bike.

You have to have some inside knowledge and also read between the lines to arrive at such conclusion. Sure the marketing department of the manufacturers always say that the bike has come-off the production line and its just special paint but if you analyse the bike then you will arrive at a different conclusion. For example, calculate the weight of Ricco's bike - how can a frame weighing 840g be mated to SRAM red gruppo and end up with the legal 6.8 kg bike!

Next read this article on Boones's spec http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/pr ... _tarmacsl2

And then take a close look at Canvendish's bike at last year's tour and you will see lots of differences to Giant's stadard line.

alfablue

Interesting post Toonraid, maybe a dumb question, but do they add ballast weights to achieve legal weight ever?

Toonraid

In the old days they used to use all sorts of things such as frozen ice & chains in seat tube etc but I think UCI has wised up a bit now and are familiar with all the tricks of the trade - besides I think the riders themselves would prefer a heavier and more power efficient frame to dead weighs such as ballasts. If you remember the really steep hill climb TT at last years Giro the "Plan de Corones" was an obvious place to weigh the bikes and at the time I heard Jurgen Van den Broeck had to have his bike weighed twice to reach the limit which was sorted with the help of a couple of water bottles http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id= ... /may27news

I have since wondered how Ricco's bike passed the test as his frame is 60g lighter than a Ridley Helium which VDB was using - he also uses 1 size smaller frame so thats another 60g less and he was using SRAM red which is at least 100g lighter than record so Ricco's bike should have been at least 220g lighter than VDB so my guess is that Scott's pro frames have a few layers of carbon added to make them more power efficient and that would go a long way to explain the missing grams.

JesseD

I think I have it narrowed down a bit now, I have decided that I want carbon, Ti can wait a little bit for now and the 4 frames I am looking at are listed below, looking at what deals are about, I can get it is between:

2008 Trek 5.2 Performance fit, I rode one and it felt rock solid, ok it's not the most desirible brand but I actually like the shape of the frame and how it rides (although it may be a little uninspiring compared to more exotic brands)

2008 Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL2, I haven't ridden one of these yet but I like the look of it and it gets really good reviews (and the colour will match the decals on my Fulcrums)

2008 Cervelo RS, Again I really like this bike but as I am a big lad I am worried about the thin seat stays.

2008/9 Willier Izoard, looks good and gets a good write up, and is italian (not sure why this is important :? )

All can be had for less than £1300 and all are far better than my standard of riding (then again so is a Grifter), so out of those above which would be the one you would buy?

gkerr4

i'd have the RS - don't worry about the seatstays - i'm sure they will be fine.

curios to know why you have went for the RS - which is a 'sportive' bike and put it against the Tarmac which is the racier model and not the roubaix which can be had for under a grand?

even the madone is more sportive oriented than the tarmac.

RS for me though from that lot!

redddraggon

JesseD wrote:

which would be the one you would buy?

Tarmac

John.T

The Trek is really a race frame but with a longer head tube. Everything else is the same as the Pro model. Still very comfortable though.

JesseD

gkerr4 wrote:

i'd have the RS - don't worry about the seatstays - i'm sure they will be fine.

curios to know why you have went for the RS - which is a 'sportive' bike and put it against the Tarmac which is the racier model and not the roubaix which can be had for under a grand?

even the madone is more sportive oriented than the tarmac.

RS for me though from that lot!

All the bikes listed have pretty much the same geometry (the spesh brouchure I have states that the 58cm has a 20cm headtube. I am not ness looking for a sportive bike, I just need a bike with a longish TT 57cms-58cms and with a tallish headtube as I am not that flexible and prefer to have no spacers under the stem (purely asthetics). All 4 bikes have long headtubes in a size 58cm, the cervelo RS has a 20cm headtube, the Trek has a 19cm HT, the Wilier has a 19.5cm HT and the Spesh has a 20.5cm HT. As for the comparrison between the Roubaix and the Tarmac, its just me being a bike tart and prefering the look of the tarmac over the roubaix.

don key

gkerr4 wrote:

yep - the RS is a good price - i was tempted by it myself last year but the cheapest I got offerred it at the time was £1600 and the offer of an S-Works roubaix frame for £999 was too good to passup.

I stand buy the purchase - i'd still say the £999 2008 S-Works roubaix!

i disagree with the earlier poster about trek and specialized going for low-end market - if the madone is good enough for young albert and his mates and the S-Works good enough for young tom (ok ok - boonen does look like he gets some individual bits - but his quickstep mates are all on the usual S-Works SLs - as are gerolsteiner and now Saxo Bank too!)

if anything the "upper" price frames from boutique brands really only exist to give our worlds top earners a place to blow their cash!

My question would be, how many weeks do they have them for before the frame fairy fabricates them a new one? I know a top older amatuer sprinter who gets through two frames a year.

gkerr4

JesseD wrote:

gkerr4 wrote:

i'd have the RS - don't worry about the seatstays - i'm sure they will be fine.

curios to know why you have went for the RS - which is a 'sportive' bike and put it against the Tarmac which is the racier model and not the roubaix which can be had for under a grand?

even the madone is more sportive oriented than the tarmac.

RS for me though from that lot!

All the bikes listed have pretty much the same geometry (the spesh brouchure I have states that the 58cm has a 20cm headtube. I am not ness looking for a sportive bike, I just need a bike with a longish TT 57cms-58cms and with a tallish headtube as I am not that flexible and prefer to have no spacers under the stem (purely asthetics). All 4 bikes have long headtubes in a size 58cm, the cervelo RS has a 20cm headtube, the Trek has a 19cm HT, the Wilier has a 19.5cm HT and the Spesh has a 20.5cm HT. As for the comparrison between the Roubaix and the Tarmac, its just me being a bike tart and prefering the look of the tarmac over the roubaix.

nothing wrong with being a bike tart mate ! - didn't realise that the tarmac was as high at the front end!