B'Twin 6.7kg £3,499.00

mfin

neeb wrote:

mfin wrote:

I'm sorry but you will have to accept that most experienced people can assemble carbon components and bikes without exceeding stated torque values on components. I've never in my life later gone and checked any bolt with a torque wrench on any bike I have worked on without one and found I have exceeded recommended torque. I've checked plenty of times out of interest and am always under torqued. I think you'll find there are a hell of a lot of people who've worked on bikes for years who are like me.

A clueless person working on a carbon bike/components with a torque wrench is better than a clueless person working without a torque wrench. A lot of people aren't clueless though and don't need a torque wrench. If you're not sure if you are clueless, a torque wrench is worth using just in case.

If you do up all of your bolts by feel and have never over-torqued them you are probably under-torquing them, possibly quite considerably. That's potentially just as dangerous as over-torquing them.

Well, I can't see what's dangerous in under torquing them even if I did. Most torque markings are for maximum torque anyway, only some are the intended specific torque. Unless you think I'd be so daft as to have something like my bars done up so lightly they will come loose on a descent (which I wouldn't) then I don't really know what you are on about. My example has nothing to do with carbon specifically either. So, perhaps you have examples of what components are dangerous to under torque when they are made of carbon?

neeb

mfin wrote:

Well, I can't see what's dangerous in under torquing them even if I did. Most torque markings are for maximum torque anyway, only some are the intended specific torque. Unless you think I'd be so daft as to have something like my bars done up so lightly they will come loose on a descent (which I wouldn't) then I don't really know what you are on about. My example has nothing to do with carbon specifically either. So, perhaps you have examples of what components are dangerous to under torque when they are made of carbon?

How do you know if your bars might come loose on a descent if you don't know how under-torqued they are? Admittedly with bars it's more likely that if they were torqued up enough to ride with they would start to loosen gradually and slip a bit before they loosened catastrophically, but you can't be sure of that under all circumstances. But you could easily have very asymmetric settings on the front plate bolts which could lead to the plate or the stem digging into the carbon of the bars and setting up a stress point that could lead to failure over time.

With the steerer it's possible that the stem could catastrophically loosen under heavy lateral load (say a twisting impact to the front wheel hitting a pothole when descending), leading to the bars turning suddenly out of alignment and causing you to crash. Again, more likely that the headset would start to loosen slightly first and you'd notice it, but the first scenario is quite possible.

The clamping force created by the torqued bolts is all that's holding the front end of the bike together, personally I feel a lot more comfortable knowing that these torques are within spec..

neeb

As regards this being carbon specific, of course under-torquing metal components would have the same potential consequences, but you are less likely to do that because you know that there is a little more leeway for over-torquing. The range of safe torques is narrower with carbon, hence the advisability of using a torque wrench.

mfin

I don't agree. I think you are over thinking it and still assuming that competent people can't consistently do up a bolt a suitable amount and not over torque anything. If you're not so competent then yes using a torque wrench might help you, and if you are competent but anal about things then it might give you peace of mind to use one too (see your knowing comment above).

neeb

Well, there's a continuous scale in the compromise between being slap-dash and being obsessive and we all find our own places on that scale according to personality - I fully admit to being more of the obsessive type. There are places where that helps and places where it doesn't, but I think attaching your bars to your bike is in the former category..

Matthewfalle

neeb wrote:

Anyway, this is one of those helmet-type debates that has been done to death - many threads on the subject, including this one where Matthewfalle is singing the praises of torque keys..

viewtopic.php?f=40004&t=13072783&hilit=torque+wrench

yes. i agree with that Matthewfalle bloke. Yet again he is correct.

Smithy was right you know. Thank you for pointing this out.

imposter2.0

Imposter wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

i (and I am sure if Garry does - we don't know each other so I can't say) am a member of a club but only because they pay me to race for them. There is no prejudice involved because they pay me filthy lucre and give me clothes.

Which club?

sorry, which one..?

Matthewfalle

neeb wrote:

mfin wrote:

I'm sorry but you will have to accept that most experienced people can assemble carbon components and bikes without exceeding stated torque values on components. I've never in my life later gone and checked any bolt with a torque wrench on any bike I have worked on without one and found I have exceeded recommended torque. I've checked plenty of times out of interest and am always under torqued. I think you'll find there are a hell of a lot of people who've worked on bikes for years who are like me.

A clueless person working on a carbon bike/components with a torque wrench is better than a clueless person working without a torque wrench. A lot of people aren't clueless though and don't need a torque wrench. If you're not sure if you are clueless, a torque wrench is worth using just in case.

If you do up all of your bolts by feel and have never over-torqued them you are probably under-torquing them, possibly quite considerably. That's potentially just as dangerous as over-torquing them.

As I said above, I've also worked on bikes for years (decades), and have have a reasonably good feel for 5nm too. I've sometimes had to tighten a stem on the road when a headset has worked loose without a torque wrench, but I'd always check the torque was within range when I got back home. I'd be surprised if many people could *consistently* tighten bolts to 5nm to within a 2nm margin of error. Professional mechanics who are doing it every day perhaps.

Of course you can tighten everything by feel and 99% of the time you won't have a problem. But given the consequences of a steerer tube or handlebars failing on the road it's just not worth the risk. To say that you've been doing it for years without issue isn't the point - that's just the "my uncle smoked 50 a day all his life and lived to be 110" argument.

sorry - first of all you are crushing steerer tubes over tightening things the next you are going riding without doing things up and stems are falling off as you ride along.

This is unbelievable!

Matthewfalle

and as an aside, you still haven't explained your hatred of dentists.

pray tell.

imposter2.0

Imposter wrote:

Imposter wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

i (and I am sure if Garry does - we don't know each other so I can't say) am a member of a club but only because they pay me to race for them. There is no prejudice involved because they pay me filthy lucre and give me clothes.

Which club?

sorry, which one..?

I thought milemuncher was the only walt on here....

slowmart

I know my limitations and I'm happy to spend a few quid to pay someone to sort any mechanical issues.

neeb

Matthewfalle wrote:

and as an aside, you still haven't explained your hatred of dentists.

pray tell.

It's a trope. The fat Pinarello-riding dentist. I'm sure that in reality, dentists aren't any more likely to be fat and Pinarello-riding than any other reasonably well-paid profession. But by referencing fat Pinarello-riding dentists I was able to concisely present a fairly detailed cycling-media stereotype. Conveniently one that was also relevant to what sort of help you might need if you face-planted as a result of a broken steerer. It's all a bit meta you know, you wouldn't understand..

I edited that post after submitting it because I'd also gone on about bankers before I remembered that it was Gary rather than you who said he was a banker. It was funnier with the banker references, but as I'd also talked about reading comprehension I thought that mixing you up with Gary could be seen as a bit of a faux pas (however reasonable in practice).

As it happens my dentist used to be heavily into triathlon until he had a pulmonary embolism a few years back - now he just rides a bit for fun. He may very well have a Pinarello for all I know, I'll ask him next time I see him. I don't hate him in the slightest, but then I have very good teeth.

Wilf Roberts

Matthewfalle wrote:

bollox, patronising and plain rude - no reason at all to say this.

I have to say it's an interesting snapshot of t'internet to re-read Matthewfalle's response to my post and then go through this thread!

surfercyclist

Most if not all internet forums get some friction from time to time but this place seems rather high on the scale for some reason. Lots of one-upmanship type posts and my Dads harder than yours type crap. Fun reading though...

davidof

Interesting to read the comments on French forums

"Don't rely on the workshop to maintain it" - they say.
One guy says that in Toulouse they now have a "real workshop" but if you take your bike in to the local store it is sent to this workshop to be worked on with long delays.

http://www.vo2cycling.fr/forum/materiel ... -decathlon

Decathlon should have the capacity to train people properly. They also have a huge R&D and production facility in Lille; they build a lot of bikes there now although there are complaints about the "zero hours" contracts they offer.

I do my own maintenance so don't know much about their bike workshop but would never take my skis to them. I would imagine they are about average in competence though.

socrates

Cheap and nasty. What nonsense. That is nothing less than snobbery. Decathlon get good reviews on their bikes in every review I have read.

daniel_b

Looks like a stonking bike for the money, only ever heard good things about the BTwin bikes.

One thing I will say, is that when I was looking, I did notice that they have pretty long top tubes, which may or may not suit me - doesn't suit me alas.

Re the quality of the mechanic - it's variable whereveer you go, but what I will say is that last year I took a mate to buy his first roadbike, he ended up with a 56cm 520 SE IIRC, and took it for a small test ride in the store.
On returning, he said it felt a little low at the front end, so the mechanic got his multitool out, and said he would adjust it.

I stood back, expecting him to go about removing, and flipping the stem, but all he did was loosen off two of the faceplate bolts, and rotated the bars upwards :shock:

I kid you not - the look on my face was apparently priceless.

I guess running a long day they have different people on different shifts, and we just got unlucky, I know having spoken to their mechanics over the phone, a lot of them seemed really switched on, just at the time we came, only this one chap was there - and don't get me wrong, he was perfectly nice, he just wasn't very skilled when it came to bike setup - perhaps something he was due to be trained on.

dodgy

Maybe the Decathlon bike guys can be working on and selling bikes one day, then working in the camping section the next and be expected to be knowledgeable in both. A bit like Salespeople in Currys, expected to know TVs, fridges, microwaves etc etc.

neeb

socrates wrote:

Cheap and nasty. What nonsense. That is nothing less than snobbery. Decathlon get good reviews on their bikes in every review I have read.

I do find it amazing how so many people feel entitled to come out with inflammatory statements based on misreadings of other people's posts..

Nobody said that the bike in question was cheap and nasty. Clearly it's a very well specced bike, personally I think it looks great, and if the frame is good then it's a bargain.

The "cheap & nasty" comment wasn't aimed at the Decathlon brand (it's NOT the case that a Decathlon bike at any given price point is cheaper and nastier than a bike from any other manufacturer at the same price point - in fact the opposite is probably true, because the more "prestigious" brands can knock the price up and still sell bikes), but rather that Decathlon doubtless sell a much greater proportion of low / entry level bikes than the average boutique bike shop does, or than Evans does for that matter. This is their best selling bike: https://www.decathlon.co.uk/rockrider-3 ... 51519.html (despite clearly being cheap and nasty it's probably extremely good value).

Now, clearly they sell plenty much better bikes, but their market orientation is much more towards cheaper bikes. It's perfectly reasonable to be cautious about whether the person on duty at your local Decathlon store is ideally suited to put together a £3500 bike. Probably he/she is - but it wouldn't be unreasonable to check.

ryan_w-2

It would be ok for a cheap commuter.

Shame it doesn’t have disc brakes.

PS: Spec weights are wrong. 303s are more like 1,600g...

frankcannondale

The Ultegra Di2 would be my choice at £500.00 cheaper. The frame & forks specifications are used for several bike models so the VFM is clearly available throughout the B'Twin range.

I hear very favourable comments by owners of the bikes both for value and efficiency.

I understand Sports Direct may sell road bikes in the future.

All competition has to be welcomed by potential customers, which should reflect in competitive prices throughout the industry. I would like to think it's a win, win situation that's going to develop for cyclists.

Time will tell ?

chippyk

Sports Direct have bought TriUk which as well as Tri specific kit do sell a lot of road bikes too

daniel_b

ChippyK wrote:

Sports Direct have bought TriUk which as well as Tri specific kit do sell a lot of road bikes too

But they already sell road bike......................

https://www.sportsdirect.com/muddyfox-race-200-road-bike-933090?colcode=93309048

milemuncher1

A whole lot of bike for the money. I’m a big fan of the Decathlon bikes, I’ve got 3 of their road bikes, and a hybrid. I’ve not been disappointed by any of them. The only components I’ve found to be ‘cost saving’ are bits that I’d ordinarily upgrade pretty quickly anyway, so no great shakes. The Ultra 940 you’ve linked to there is a seriously nice bike, if I had any space, I’d have it in a heartbeat. I’ve owned a few ‘big brand’ bikes, and with the exception of one ( a Bianchi Infinito CV) I’d have to say the B’Twin’s have been more than a match for them, but yet cost far less.

natrix

Ryan_W wrote:

Shame it doesn’t have disc brakes.

Their mechanics might be able to fit some if you asked nicely ....

Matthewfalle

natrix wrote:

Ryan_W wrote:

Shame it doesn’t have disc brakes.

Their mechanics might be able to fit some if you asked nicely ....

so may the mechanics at your local lbs as they are just as likely to be of an equal standard.......

snob alert methinks....

natrix

Matthewfalle wrote:

natrix wrote:

Ryan_W wrote:

Shame it doesn’t have disc brakes.

Their mechanics might be able to fit some if you asked nicely ....

so may the mechanics at your local lbs as they are just as likely to be of an equal standard.......

snob alert methinks....

No snobbery on my behalf, I love Decathlon stuff (my local store even organises rides ). You'd have to ask any mechanic very nicely though as the frame doesn't have disc mounts and you'd have to change the wheels, shifters, cables..................