Planet X Pro Carbon Shimano Ultegra 6800 Road Bike

Apeman14

I didn't want to start a forum war, just wanted to know if the bike was worth the money. I understand some won't like the brand, and I'd love to have the money for a top of the range pinarello or bianchi or specialized or something of that ilk. But for a Sunday morning regular, who has to deal with lots and lots of hills and would like a decent spec'd carbon frame bike that makes my rides that bit more enjoyable, I just thought that an ultegra groupset sounded like great value and wanted to know if the frame an wheels were of similar value.
And at present it seems like there's nothing else out there that provides as much for as little - unless i'm missing out on a great deal elsewhere?? :-)

bondurant

It's not that some don't like the brand as much as some have a personal vendetta against the brand.

Like Mike.

Unfortunately, until he gets banned (again), he will derail those threads that he has an interest in disrupting.

So you'll have to be discerning in the posts you choose to believe I'm afraid OP.

MikeBrew

Apeman14 wrote:

I didn't want to start a forum war, just wanted to know if the bike was worth the money. I understand some won't like the brand, and I'd love to have the money for a top of the range pinarello or bianchi or specialized or something of that ilk. But for a Sunday morning regular, who has to deal with lots and lots of hills and would like a decent spec'd carbon frame bike that makes my rides that bit more enjoyable, I just thought that an ultegra groupset sounded like great value and wanted to know if the frame an wheels were of similar value.
And at present it seems like there's nothing else out there that provides as much for as little - unless i'm missing out on a great deal elsewhere?? :-)

To be fair, all I said was that the Supersix was a better option. There is a whole thread on here filled with people of the same opinion viewtopic.php?f=40042&t=13042198 . Apparently, my view upset a few people who , presumably, see it as a direct criticism of their own buying decisions.


But for your own reference, have a look here http://www.paulscycles.co.uk/ They have a lot of extremely good deals. Not only on Cannondale, but others marques too. The Dale was just one example. As said before, a decent frameset is the first on the wish list for a decent bike. Components, can be updated as and when - but in reality 105 5800 is a direct match for 6800 as far as functionality is concerned. Ultegra only costs more due to some very meagre weight savings. In fact the difference in weight between the two framsets would very likely cancell out the Ultegra saving altogether.

Semantik

The Planet x Pro carbon has been out for donkey's years now with no updates apart from paint schemes. Competent as it may be there are much better offerings out there. I mean, I think it has been out for 8 or 9 years now that frame. Things have moved on. Putting Ultegra on it does not make it a great buy ,even at £899. My money would go elsewhere.
I have ridden one and I have ridden a CAAD 10. I would take the alu bike any day.

svetty

I have 2 Planet X Pro carbons in the stable I look after - they are a decent budget carbon frame, albeit the design is getting a little long in the tooth. For £899 you can't go far wrong HOWEVER the Paul's cycles SS Evo deal for only an extra £100 is a steal!

TBH if the geometry works for you I'd get the SS Evo but there's nowt wrong with the PX at that price either.

mostly

How about the 720 at decathlon http://www.decathlon.co.uk/mach-720-car ... 39670.html or the 700 AF for £750, I've ridden the 700 and given my time again I would have bought that instead of my TCR with full ultrega. Other than slightly better brakes I wouldn't say theres that much improvement between the 105 and ultrega. Theres very little difference in ride quality between it and my TCR.

iron-clover

The planet X certainly is good value for what you get, but I would also personally invest a little more money into a really good frame and upgrade the groupset over time. Otherwise you'll probably end up thinking "What if?" later down the road and buy a good frame anyway- buy cheap, buy twice!

The offer on the Supersix highlighted would be a steal- that frame would blow the PX out of the water- BB30 or not (and you can always get screw together BB30 BBs- it's just a little niggle really).

However, if you are thinking of it as a second bike for fast winter duties (if you don't use mudguards!) or as an expendable crit frame then the frames themselves are probably a decent option for building up using spare parts. I've been tempted in the past, but the lack of mudguard clearance has always put me off.

ic.

MikeBrew wrote:

ibbo68 wrote:

The compromise with Planet-X is the frame.My mate had an On-One 456C and he had a similar experience with it feeling harsh to ride.

The foundation of any bike is the frameset, hence it's the part on which you should compromise the least. There of plenty of great deals out there to be had at circa £1000. A 2015 Cannondale Supersix(from Pauls cycles), for instance, can be had for £1000(reduced from £1499, and just a hundred quid more than the PX), giving you a vastly superior frameset. It's 105 5800 groupset is, functionally, every bit as good as Ultegra, albeit a minuscule amount heavier.
Something like the Cannondale would give you a bike with a frameset worthy of component upgrades over time, though in reality, the bike is as good a machine straight out of the box, as most riders will ever need. viewtopic.php?f=40042&t=13042198


The ProCarbon, on the other hand, has a dated, generic frameset of uncertain origin, that PX where selling for under £200 as recently as xmas 2015.

The other thing to bear in mind, is that we're at a point in the year where great deals on many 2016 models are just around the corner. Also, it's not a given that any carbon frame is better than any aluminium one. CAAD10's and 12's, for example, are vastly superior to many entry level carbon offerings - including the PX Pro Carbon.

This post tells you everything you need to know. Frameset first, always.

cougie

I think it always used to be invest in the frame when the best frames were hand built from steel.
Now everything is mass produced you don't need to go mad on investing in the frame.

dwanes

cougie wrote:

I think it always used to be invest in the frame when the best frames were hand built from steel.
Now everything is mass produced you don't need to go mad on investing in the frame.

I agree
Components probably add to the pleasure of a bike more than frameset for most people.
Most probably cant tell the diference from one frameset to another anyway as long as the fit is right.
Also most people will change their bike after a few years once it starts looking tired anyway so investment in a frame is a bit of a nonsense.

rickeverett

Bros pro carbon I rode was actually pretty good. Yes it's an old frame but as others have said the components as as important nowerdays. Wheels for me give you the biggest difference in terms of performance vs money. Not frame.

faster97

My first post - so go easy on me.

I'm a relative beginner to road cycling and have to confess, I own an Ultegra Pro-Carbon that many in this topic have been slating. I love mine. It's quick, light and looks amazing to me. The compact geometry really suits an XL frame. I love the simple graphics and straight tubes - a lot of the more expensive bikes look like an explosion in an clown factory IMHO.

Serious question this, as I'm willing to learn. What difference would it make to me if I replaced my Pro-Carbon frame with, for instance, the Cannondale that would 'Blow any Planet X out of the water'. Exactly how much quicker would I go? What is it about these Cannondales that makes them so fast? What big strides forward has there been in bike technology since the Pro-Carbon came out?

Here's what I think about what makes bikes fast - remember, I would welcome being corrected on this! I think it's nearly all about the position you can get in to on the bike (for both aero and biomechanical reasons), quick tyres make a bit of a difference, aero wheels make a small difference, low weight is good too. After that, you're really scraping the barrel. I honestly think that for 99.9% of people in 99.9% of situations, a Planet X frame set up correctly will be just as fast as any other non-aero road bike frame (I don't think the Cannondale has any aero features - has it?).

Am I wrong?

MikeBrew

Well to be fair, faster97, what really makes any bike "faster" is the body that's sat on it pushing the pedals around. What makes a one bike handle better; steer better; be more comfortable over rough roads and long distances and hence less fatiguing to ride than another bike, well these are more subtle attributes than simply being "faster".
From your userID I'm guessing that being "faster" is your main focus. Simply riding more miles, riding with more intensity, and riding more often are your best allies in achieving that aim.
As others have said, the pro carbon is competent. Riding a Supersix would make it clear to you, in a way than a thousand words couldn't, the real life difference between the two bikes in question.
In truth, you will only get to know that first-hand in a couple of years time, when you get the itch to upgrade . The OP has the chance to know much sooner than that, for a mere £100 more than he would of spent on the PX. If he buys-right, now, he won't need to upgrade for a very long time indeed.

darkhairedlord

MikeBrew wrote:

Well to be fair, faster97, what really makes any bike "faster" is the body that's sat on it pushing the pedals around. What makes a one bike handle better; steer better; be more comfortable over rough roads and long distances and hence less fatiguing to ride than another bike, well these are more subtle attributes than simply being "faster".
From your userID I'm guessing that being "faster" is your main focus. Simply riding more miles, riding with more intensity, and riding more often are your best allies in achieving that aim.
As others have said, the pro carbon is competent. Riding a Supersix would make it clear to you, in a way than a thousand words couldn't, the real life difference between the two bikes in question.
In truth, you will only get to know that first-hand in a couple of years time, when you get the itch to upgrade . The OP has the chance to know much sooner than that, for a mere £100 more than he would have spent on the PX. If he buys-right, now, he won't need to upgrade for a very long time indeed.

so have you ridden both, back to back, in a way that would make it clear to you what the difference is or are you just acting out your vendetta?

MikeBrew

Isn't that some sort of ice cream ? Seriously though, if you go back a page you'll see that I'm not the only person expressing such an opinion. Or maybe you think that they're all Viennetta fans too....

diamonddog

As I own both I have ridden and ride regularly the Pro Carbon and a supposedly far superior framed Canyon Ultimate CF SL and there is very little difference in the bikes IME. Both are very responsive and both are as fast as each other as long as I put in the effort, the Canyon is a bit more comfortable with wider tyres being fitted.

philbar72

have ridden a generic low cost carbon frame and several high end frames. the differences are not great, but they are there. the clichés around the bottom bracket allowing all of your watts to go through the drive train are not exactly true in these examples , but some days it feels that way. the bike I rode was a ribble carbon and it would have been great to get some steady miles in on but was a little uninspiring compared to the BMC's I currently use.

mankybianchi

I've been riding a pro carbon for just over a year now. I bought it as a frame and put it together to suit my particular preferences.

This is my first carbon frame, my previous bikes being steel. I can tell you in this case, there is a whole world of difference in how the pro carbon compares to the steel; it's lighter, faster off the mark and more comfortable.

But it's not all the frame. Its geometry is a little different to my steel frames but all the components are different so in reality it's the sum of the parts, particularly the wheels/tyres/tubes.

My oldest steel frame I use for fixed wheel riding and I can feel a little beaten up afterwards but I swapped its Michelin Lithion tyres and standard tubes for Pro4 service course and ultralight tubes and could immediately notice the difference in ride quality.

Really to compare frames, you have to replicate at least the wheelset and tyres in my experience.

faster97

MikeBrew wrote:

Well to be fair, faster97, what really makes any bike "faster" is the body that's sat on it pushing the pedals around. What makes a one bike handle better; steer better; be more comfortable over rough roads and long distances and hence less fatiguing to ride than another bike, well these are more subtle attributes than simply being "faster".
From your userID I'm guessing that being "faster" is your main focus. Simply riding more miles, riding with more intensity, and riding more often are your best allies in achieving that aim.
As others have said, the pro carbon is competent. Riding a Supersix would make it clear to you, in a way than a thousand words couldn't, the real life difference between the two bikes in question.
In truth, you will only get to know that first-hand in a couple of years time, when you get the itch to upgrade . The OP has the chance to know much sooner than that, for a mere £100 more than he would have spent on the PX. If he buys-right, now, he won't need to upgrade for a very long time indeed.

Sorry about the slow response, but thank you for the reply Mike. I think you've hit the nail on the head - being faster is my main focus. First and foremost, I'm a runner, where pace and covering fixed distances in the quickest time seems so much more important than they do in cycling. You've not actually said it, but I think you're inferring that a Supersix wouldn't be any quicker than the a Planet X, although I accept I could have misinterpreted that. If the differences are unquantifiable (and they sound very subjective to me), I think I'll stick with what I've got.

It does concern me that people test bikes back to back and think they can pick the best one. Set up is so critical - in my experience 10-15mm difference in seat height or fore/aft position is the difference between efficient pedalling and ruined hamstrings and a degree or two in seat angle is the difference between comfort and sore balls. I've not messed around with the front end too much, but I assume small changes in position there will have a profound effect on handling (not surprising when the rider probably weighs around 10x the weight of the bike). It would be quite time consuming to compare bike properly. Who has actually tested the Supersix against the Pro-Carbon to see which is better? Have you?

You seem very convinced - what are you basing this opinion on?

MikeBrew

That's OK, there's no time limit on responses (well within reason) , it's not a race afterall. And some of us need more time to think than others - we're all different. But listen, this is not about making anyone feel dissatisfied with a purchase that they've already made : it's a buying advice forum (therein lies a very clear implication there that the advice is asked for pre purchase rather than post). So I think it's important that you enjoy your bike, and no one was suggesting that you didn't stick with what you've got. The main focus of posts is clearly the OP, who still had his options intact when he asked the question. The difference between the bikes won't change your life - it's only a bicycle afterall.
That said, as I said before

Riding a Supersix would make it clear to you, in a way than a thousand words couldn't, the real life difference between the two bikes in question.

...
Enjoy your bike - and getting "faster" . It's good to set goals. If your do ever get to ride a Supersix, maybe you'll be able to appreciate the difference. If that never happens, well it's not the end off the world is it. You're happy with what you've bought, it's your money - so your opinion is really all you need to worry about, now that actually have the bike.

Quicker wrote:

You've not actually said it, but I think you're inferring that a Supersix wouldn't be any quicker than the a Planet X, although I accept I could have misinterpreted that.

Yes you did misinterpret that. I certainly wasn't inferring any such thing. BTW, I wasn't implying it either

imposter2.0

faster97 wrote:

First and foremost, I'm a runner, where pace and covering fixed distances in the quickest time seems so much more important than they do in cycling.

Are you familiar with 'cycle racing'...?? There are various disciplines....

stronginthesun

ive had mine for 2 years now and think it was great value I paid £1000 so 899 seems a bargain , set up perfectly out of the box , light fast and looks good in light blue . I wouldn't listen to the nonsense written on here about Chinese frames ect , its bordering on racism . I think de rosa used the same frame for a while and charged twice as much . can anyone tell me a better buy than 899 with full ultegra carbon frame decent wheels and finishing kit ? oh and free postage

MikeBrew

stronginthesun wrote:

ive had mine for 2 years now and think it was great value I paid £1000 so 899 seems a bargain , set up perfectly out of the box , light fast and looks good in light blue . I wouldn't listen to the nonsense written on here about Chinese frames ect , its bordering on racism . I think de rosa used the same frame for a while and charged twice as much . can anyone tell me a better buy than 899 with full ultegra carbon frame decent wheels and finishing kit ? oh and free postage

You know PX products first hand. You think that they're great value for money. What's stopping you buying The EC130E that you're so keen on, when it's already £500 (25%) below RRP ?
Sounds a little to me as though you have a similar view of their pricing policy as I do : You don't appear to believe that they're straightforward and "NO NONSENSE" - to use PX's own terminology.

As for the bit where you say that pointing out where in the world PX frames are made i.e. China, is " bordering on racism", really ? What are you going to object to next, Swiss Cheese and Belgian chocolate ? De Rosa used the Pro Carbon frame ? Are you sure, or just talking yet more nonsense ?

imposter2.0

Zzzzzzzz.....

(by the way, the correct comparison is between the De Rosa and the Ribble 872)

MikeBrew

stronginthesun wrote:

I think de rosa used the same frame for a while and charged twice as much

It appears that this is a fallacy on your part, based on your misunderstanding of a popular misconception...

So it would appear that you're wrong on this point, and that you're even wrong about exactly what it is, that you're actually wrong about. Or put another way, it appears that you're talking nonsense. :idea:

ugo.santalucia

Meanwhile, Planet X launch the new range of XLS cross bikes... love them!!

http://www.planetx.co.uk/c/q/bikes/cycl ... 5b45270412

stronginthesun

I havnt bought the ec130 as I don't really need it , I already have a good bike

stronginthesun

mike brew back to the original post . carbon frame and forks , full ultegra 6800 , decent wheels , decent finishing kit, £899 , free postage . good value , yes or no ?

hazy_day

Certainly is good value for a full Ultegra kitted bike.Frame is OK and has been enjoyed by countless cyclists.Unlike some top brands this is a full Ultegra kitted bike not one with a different chainset or brakes. The RT90 DI2 specced bike also seems great value for someone wanting electronic shifting.

cougie

I'd not worry about Mike Brews opinion on a planet x bike if I were you.