What a brilliant bike.

milemuncher1

I bought myself one of these yesterday.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-720-af ... 31274.html

What an awesome bike for the price :shock: .

I went on a proper ride on it today. It's really good.

That is all.

WinNT

Milemuncher1 wrote:

I bought myself one of these yesterday.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-720-af ... 31274.html

What an awesome bike for the price :shock: .

I went on a proper ride on it today. It's really good.

That is all.

Congratulations!
Enjoy!

Bobbinogs

Nice bike. Just shows what you can get for the money. The rake on the front fork is pretty big though, makes it seem like a really long wheelbase which is good for stability but at a small cost to responsiveness (which is probably not a bad thing for many cyclists).

milemuncher1

Bobbinogs wrote:

Nice bike. Just shows what you can get for the money. The rake on the front fork is pretty big though, makes it seem like a really long wheelbase which is good for stability but at a small cost to responsiveness (which is probably not a bad thing for many cyclists).

You're quite right. It has a 'lay down ' geometery, but I actually quite like that. The frame is as light as my 2 year old Carbon, and everything works superbly well. The brakes are 'keen' and that took some getting used to. But it really is a very nice package.

neeb

Actually a marginally larger rake on the fork will (marginally) increase rather than decrease responsiveness by reducing trail, although a 45mm rake combined with 73 degree HTA gives a very normal trail anyway (if anything tending a bit towards shorter, = responsive). If the wheelbase is a tad longer or the bike feels any less responsive it'll be because the chainstays are 3 or 4mm longer than on some full-on race bikes, but it'll be very minor difference.

As usual the weirdage comes in with the smaller sizes - the same 45mm rake fork is specified across the range, including on the XS small size which has a 71 degree HTA... This gives a pretty massive trail of 69mm! It should really have a fork with about 55mm rake to make the trail the same as on the medium/larger sizes.

Nearly all of the manufacturers do this, because they don't want to make a completely different fork for small size frames that they don't sell many of anyway. They get away with it because it's always M or L sized frames that get reviewed, and most buyers don't understand geometry (especially the rather counter-intuitive relationship between HTA, rake and trail). I've been looking at potential S & XS size frames for a friend recently and it's well-nigh impossible to find any with sensible geometry!

bernithebiker

neeb wrote:

Actually a marginally larger rake on the fork will (marginally) increase rather than decrease responsiveness by reducing trail, although a 45mm rake combined with 73 degree HTA gives a very normal trail anyway (if anything tending a bit towards shorter, = responsive). If the wheelbase is a tad longer or the bike feels any less responsive it'll be because the chainstays are 3 or 4mm longer than on some full-on race bikes, but it'll be very minor difference.

As usual the weirdage comes in with the smaller sizes - the same 45mm rake fork is specified across the range, including on the XS small size which has a 71 degree HTA... This gives a pretty massive trail of 69mm! It should really have a fork with about 55mm rake to make the trail the same as on the medium/larger sizes.

Nearly all of the manufacturers do this, because they don't want to make a completely different fork for small size frames that they don't sell many of anyway. They get away with it because it's always M or L sized frames that get reviewed, and most buyers don't understand geometry (especially the rather counter-intuitive relationship between HTA, rake and trail). I've been looking at potential S & XS size frames for a friend recently and it's well-nigh impossible to find any with sensible geometry!

I had my fork replaced recently under warranty (2015 Sworks Tarmac 'SL5' in a 52) and the fork was marked as being for frame size 52 and below.

neeb

bernithebiker wrote:

I had my fork replaced recently under warranty (2015 Sworks Tarmac 'SL5' in a 52) and the fork was marked as being for frame size 52 and below.

Specialised are much better than most. Some manufacturers have two fork sizes, and Specialised as well as doing that also match the HTAs pretty well to the fork rakes. The trail is consistently 56 or 57 from size 52 right up to 58. However the smallest size (49) is still a bit of a compromise with 62mm of trail.

bernithebiker

neeb wrote:

bernithebiker wrote:

I had my fork replaced recently under warranty (2015 Sworks Tarmac 'SL5' in a 52) and the fork was marked as being for frame size 52 and below.

Specialised are much better than most. Some manufacturers have two fork sizes, and Specialised as well as doing that also match the HTAs pretty well to the fork rakes. The trail is consistently 56 or 57 from size 52 right up to 58. However the smallest size (49) is still a bit of a compromise with 62mm of trail.

You know much more about this than a big Specialized Centre I use!!

First off they sent me a 2nd hand fork to tide me over, which was a) from an SL4, so had a larger lower bearing than my SL5, and b) was clearly from a much bigger bike, so when I cut the steerer down (this was before I realized about the bearing), the internal smooth part was cut off and what was left was rough inside. So could not fit the expander bung....!

Matthewfalle

Cool looking ride - nice work that man.

iPete

What the devil, we can't have shops selling off the peg bikes with decent groupsets, wheels and saddles, what will people talk about on here?

milemuncher1

iPete wrote:

What the devil, we can't have shops selling off the peg bikes with decent groupsets, wheels and saddles, what will people talk about on here?

They have pretty much thrown the ( frankly superb, UCI compliant frame) in for free. Happy days. I've never found an off the peg bike that tick as many boxes as that bike does.

JesseD

I just had a look at the most expensive model they are selling for £2500 and even if you bought all the components yourself you would be paying more than for the complete bike?

B'Twin Ultra 740 CF - £2500

or

Mavic Cosmic 40 Wheels with tyres £1500
Fizik Anteras Saddle with carbon rails £115
Shimano 6870 Di2 groupset £850
Deda Carbon bars - £130
Deda Superleggera Stem - £65
Bar Tape - £10

Total - £2640

So you actually pay £140 less and get a free frame and fork????????

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-740-cf ... 39669.html

bernithebiker

That's a hell of a lot of bike for the money.

Anonymous

What will they say to Canyon?

philbar72

coriordan wrote:

What will they say to Canyon?

Probably something about delivery times and snapped rear seat stays?

BenBuzz

Milemuncher1 wrote:

I bought myself one of these yesterday.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-720-af ... 31274.html

What an awesome bike for the price :shock: .

I went on a proper ride on it today. It's really good.

That is all.

What is the ride like? I looking to move on from my old Trek 1.1...I expect most things are an upgrade in terms of comfort but was wondering what it's like on our British roads!

milemuncher1

BenBuzz wrote:

Milemuncher1 wrote:

I bought myself one of these yesterday.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-720-af ... 31274.html

What an awesome bike for the price :shock: .

I went on a proper ride on it today. It's really good.

That is all.

What is the ride like? I looking to move on from my old Trek 1.1...I expect most things are an upgrade in terms of comfort but was wondering what it's like on our British roads!

It's got 25 mm Mavic Yksion pro griplink tyres, which make for a comfortable ride, the saddle is superb, so that helps with comfort. The Carbon Fork blades take out a lot of buzz, but be aware that the crank lengths vary with frame size. They've put 175 mm Cranks on the Large frame, which works for me, but can be a bit of a mare with a big enough speed hump. All in all its really comfortable, even on some nasty, cracked up roads I ride regularly.

BenBuzz

Thanks! I was up at Decathlon at the weekend and really liked the look of the 720. Can't believe the spec for the money, no one seems to have much of a bad word to say about them!

kiteloopy

I do love the look of the Ultra 740CF.
They are really upping their game.

milemuncher1

kiteloopy wrote:

I do love the look of the Ultra 740CF.
They are really upping their game.

That is a sweet bike as well. As long as you can cope with the Athena thumb shifters.

gusaments

Milemuncher1 wrote:

It's got 25 mm Mavic Yksion pro griplink tyres, which make for a comfortable ride, the saddle is superb, so that helps with comfort. The Carbon Fork blades take out a lot of buzz, but be aware that the crank lengths vary with frame size. They've put 175 mm Cranks on the Large frame, which works for me, but can be a bit of a mare with a big enough speed hump. All in all its really comfortable, even on some nasty, cracked up roads I ride regularly.

Are you still happy with the bike? Thinking about getting exactly the same large 720 AF too. How has the rear brake position been for you? Has it collected a lot of road gunk? I ride in London and will be using it for commuting and then also long country rides. I went down and saw it in the shop and liked what I rode on.

Would love to hear what you honestly think Thanks!

Alex99

Milemuncher1 wrote:

I bought myself one of these yesterday.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-720-af ... 31274.html

What an awesome bike for the price :shock: .

I went on a proper ride on it today. It's really good.

That is all.

Looks great. Even seems to be full ultegra.

lukesween

Great bike for the money. Full ultegra as well as other components for that price deserves praise for Decathlon

deejaysee

Amazing bike for the money

milemuncher1

gusaments wrote:

Milemuncher1 wrote:

It's got 25 mm Mavic Yksion pro griplink tyres, which make for a comfortable ride, the saddle is superb, so that helps with comfort. The Carbon Fork blades take out a lot of buzz, but be aware that the crank lengths vary with frame size. They've put 175 mm Cranks on the Large frame, which works for me, but can be a bit of a mare with a big enough speed hump. All in all its really comfortable, even on some nasty, cracked up roads I ride regularly.

Are you still happy with the bike? Thinking about getting exactly the same large 720 AF too. How has the rear brake position been for you? Has it collected a lot of road gunk? I ride in London and will be using it for commuting and then also long country rides. I went down and saw it in the shop and liked what I rode on.

Would love to hear what you honestly think Thanks!

I've done 3 100 mile + rides on it now ( and a few less leggy rides ) it is absolutely superb. I've had to de clag the rear brakes, and adjust them a bit, and had no problems ( they seem to have raised the bottom bracket slightly, in order to accommodate / give better access to the rear brakes). I have had to be careful to keep the indexing correct, as the cables ride in, but overall, it's a gem of a bike.

milemuncher1

Alex99 wrote:

Milemuncher1 wrote:

I bought myself one of these yesterday.

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/ultra-720-af ... 31274.html

What an awesome bike for the price :shock: .

I went on a proper ride on it today. It's really good.

That is all.

Looks great. Even seems to be full ultegra.

6800 Ultegra, so 11 speed, and a UCI frame, with Carbon blades up front, crackingly good wheels / tyres, and a lovely saddle as well.