Giant Propel Advanced 2 or Ribble R872?

smkso

Hi,

I need advice on which would you prefer between this two?

Giant Propel Advanced 2
- Shimano 105
- Giant P-SL 2 tyres
- Giant P-Elite A wheelset
- Fi'zi:k Arione MG saddle
- Shimano 105 34/50 crankset
- Shimano 105 11-28 cassette

OR

Ribble R872
- Campagnolo Veloce 10spd (or Shimano 105 11spd)
- Campagnolo Veloce 39/53 cransket
- Campagnolo Veloce 12-25 cassette
- Mavic Aksium WTS
- Selle Italia X1 flow saddle

Both costs around less than £1.4k. To be honest I particularly narrow down to this two because of their price, aero design & colour scheme. (Really, colour scheme does effect my choices massively. Maybe some disagree.) If you have any other suggestions, I'm happy to hear yours!

UPDATE: Just found Felt AR5. A good looking bike! Any thoughts?

Thank you very much!

Syed

imposter2.0

Two very different bikes - and you have given us no idea of their intended use, or what type of riding you do....

smkso

Imposter wrote:

Two very different bikes - and you have given us no idea of their intended use, or what type of riding you do....

I'm new into road cycling and would like to go for a good carbon bike within my budget. I probably use for keeping my body fit, regular long distance cycling and I also just entered a sportive this June 2015 (Velothon Wales).

styxd

Ribbles are good beginners bikes. The Propel is for advanced riders who've been cycling for several years.

darkhairedlord

styxd wrote:

Ribbles are good beginners bikes. The Propel is for advanced riders who've been cycling for several years.

why?
Does he have to take his advanced cycling proficiency test?

imposter2.0

styxd wrote:

Ribbles are good beginners bikes. The Propel is for advanced riders who've been cycling for several years.

not sure if serious...

mrb123

Both have got standard chainsets. You might want to look for something with a compact (or mid-compact) unless you are pretty fit and strong already or you're not intending to do much climbing.

DKay

styxd wrote:

Ribbles are good beginners bikes. The Propel is for advanced riders who've been cycling for several years.

Wha?

I wouldn't call the R872 an aero design in the same mould as the Propel.

Personally, I'd buy the Felt AR5, but it does cost a fair bit more.

chanjy

If we're being totally honest here, unless you're already an elite athlete OP, there is no benefit in an aero bike. Just get the one that fits best is is most comfortable. I'd suggest this leans towards Giant as they are significantly easier to source and have a try out ride on.

JCroxton

I was torn between a slightly more expensive Propel and an SL6 Emonda, I was swayed by the following conversation with one of the lads at the Bike Shed here in Devon:

Him: The Propel is an Aero road bike, with a more aggressive geo.
Me: But it does look better that way
Him: Will you be racing at all?
Me: Highly unlikely (my average speeds are 17mph)
Him: Why make yourself more uncomfortable unless you're in a race? - The more comfortable you are on the bike, the more you'll enjoy it, and the more you'll go out on the bike.

The same comparison can be made between the Propel & the R872

Also, I'd go with 105 over Veloce if you go for the Ribble, 10 speed will slowly disappear, meaning replacing a 10sp cassette will soon turn into replacing an entire groupset. In my opinion, Campag are only good when you get to Chorus and above. Personally prefer the Shimano Shifting action too.

smkso

Thanks for the replies guys!

So, does Propel will make me more uncomfortable for long distance rides? I believe both bikes have racing geometry but Propel is much more aero.

Do you guys agree Propel is an all-rounder bike? i.e climbing, racing, fondo rides etc.

Really appreciate your replies!

smkso

MrB123 wrote:

Both have got standard chainsets. You might want to look for something with a compact (or mid-compact) unless you are pretty fit and strong already or you're not intending to do much climbing.

Is 50/34 not considered as compact?

Sorry! I just noticed, it was supposed to be Propel Advanced 2 not 3! I changed the chainset description above.

trailflow

50/34 is compact.

i vote for the Giant Propel Advanced 2 based on looks.The hills will be easier with a 28t cassette + compact vs the 53/39 + 25t cassette.

I tried the current Veloce 10 speed and i wasnt too impressed with the front shifting. It felt very clunky and slow. where as the new 105/Ultegra front and rear felt quite impressive.

ai_1

JCroxton wrote:

....Also, I'd go with 105 over Veloce if you go for the Ribble, 10 speed will slowly disappear, meaning replacing a 10sp cassette will soon turn into replacing an entire groupset. In my opinion, Campag are only good when you get to Chorus and above. Personally prefer the Shimano Shifting action too.

I don't think there's any reason to think it will become difficult to get 10 speed cassettes or chains for a long time to come. It's definitely not a reason to avoid 10 speed. My second bike is 9 speed and I've never had a problem getting cassettes and chains.
Campy, Shimano and SRAM all have different shaped hoods and different changing methods. Most people who've been riding a while will have a clear preference. For example I found SRAM double-tap shifting fine but their hoods just don't feel comfortable to me and I don't like the idea of the Campy thumb lever although I've never tried it. But for a beginner it's not possible to make an informed decision. Shimano is probably the safest option.

I'd agree with other posters about the choice of frame. There's not much point in an aero frame unless you intend to race in the near future. Your top priority when choosing a bike should generally be the fit. As a beginner you may or may not be comfortable in an aggressive road bike position, you may not know for sure until you've got plenty miles under your belt.

izza

Ai_1 wrote:

I'd agree with other posters about the choice of frame. There's not much point in an aero frame unless you intend to race in the near future. Your top priority when choosing a bike should generally be the fit. As a beginner you may or may not be comfortable in an aggressive road bike position, you may not know for sure until you've got plenty miles under your belt.

Agree - howeer, on those grounds I would vote for a Propel. I have had one for 2 years and they come with plenty of spacers to vary how aggressive you want to position yourself. IF it fits you, then it is a great all rounder. One aspect people forget with aero bikes is that the vertical compliance can make for a very comfortable bike and the beefy bottom bracket gives great stiffness for out of the saddle, shorter punchier climbing efforts.

ai_1

izza wrote:

.....One aspect people forget with aero bikes is that the vertical compliance can make for a very comfortable bike and the beefy bottom bracket gives great stiffness for out of the saddle, shorter punchier climbing efforts.

I have to disagree with this.
Better recent aero bikes may be comfortable and have stiff bottom brackets/chainstays but that's despite being aero bikes NOT because they're aero bikes.
Typically the issue with aero bikes has been the lack of vertical compliance and lateral rigidity. Aero frame tube shapes aim to reduce drag by using aerofoil or truncated aerofoil shapes and thus they are normally narrower (left to right) and longer (front to back) in cross section than tube shapes on non-aero bikes. This results in high vertical rigidity but poor lateral rigidity unless measures are taken to correct this. Generally material would be added to improve lateral rigidity but this increases vertical rigidity making for a heavier and less comforable frame. Until recently most aero bikes were not on a par with other bikes for lateral rigidity and vertical compliance. Similarly the bottom brackets on aero bikes have no advantage over conventional frames. Aero bikes which aim to reduce drag by keeping the bottom bracket narrow and the chainstays compact will make it more difficult to achieve good rigidity. Most current aero bikes don't seem to make too many concessions in the BB area so they should be fine but they're unlikely to be any better than an equivalent quality non-aero bike. So if your point is that aero bikes have some advantage in comfort and transmission rigidity I think you are incorrect. An aero bike may be comfortable and have rigid transmission but it's not because it's an aero bike. It's despite it being an aero bike.

noodleman

^totally agree with this. Aero bikes are renowned for lack of vertical compliance and excessive lateral movement compared to a conventional frameset.

DKay

noodleman wrote:

^totally agree with this. Aero bikes are renowned for lack of vertical compliance and excessive lateral movement compared to a conventional frameset.

This is a generalisation that is out of date and has been overstated in the majority of cases. Case in point, when the Scott Foil came out in 2011, you'd think that it's ride was causing people to climb off with broken bones after spending anything longer than a few hours in the saddle. The truth is, the Foil does give a direct ride, but it's still comfortable over long distances and larger tyres and carefully chosen contact points makes a huge difference to how compliant a bike feels. Also, it has amazing response under power. With regards to aero frames weighing more, you aren't going to notice an extra 150g or so.

A properly designed, modern aero bike doesn't spell out compromises these days. If you want one, then bloody well buy one. You don't have to be a hardcore racer to get any benefit. Even the placebo effect alone would probably be worth it and I'd take a Propel over a Ribble R872 any day of the week.

noodleman

Possibly a bit of a generalisation, but some aero bikes are not what is considered aero in the true sense. Take the Felt AR series of bikes and most cervelos, plus many tri bikes. I consider most of those are true aero framed bikes whereas something like the Trek madone with its huge kamtail aero tubes rather than wafer thin profiled tubes on true aero bikes is never going to give the usual flex when pushing really hard out of the saddle.