8.5Kg Giant Propel or 6.5Kg Ribble SL?
Comments
-
Let's be clear, the ribble will not weigh 6.5KG. Not a chance.0
-
minnnt wrote:VinnyMarsden wrote:I’ve had a Ribble Pro Carbon... excellent bike, a Scott Foil... another nice machine but my current bike is a TCR Advanced Pro 0 with lightweight kit and it trumps both the others by a long margin... if I were the OP I would just go with what he wants.... NOBODY on here will agree with him!
This is Bike Radar forum for heavens sake!!!
(That is tongue-in-cheek humour btw )
Couldn’t agree more Vinny. My TCR rides beautifully. It’s the perfect bike for my style of riding... It does sound pretty ideal for the OP too. The Giants also come setup tubeless which has been noticeably more comfortable so far!
I’d be after some guarantees from Ribble on the weight you’ve quoted.
You're not allowed to like Giants as they are not cool! In my club of 100+ regular riders I am the only one with a TCR. The rest have much fancier options. Iv'e got an Enigma Ti too but I'm much faster on the TCR.0 -
Haha, I didn’t realise this until after I’d bought it
saw a few posts saying ‘I wouldn’t have a Giant even if they paid me’ and tbh I’m not sure why. I get the whole ‘Halfords Bike’ with the Boardmans (which is ridiculous as they’re great bikes) but I’m not sure why it’s uncool to have/like Giants... I also considered a Canyon which seem Uber Kool amongst the snobs but preferred to get one from a shop. 0 -
minnnt wrote:Haha, I didn’t realise this until after I’d bought it saw a few posts saying ‘I wouldn’t have a Giant even if they paid me’ and tbh I’m not sure why. I get the whole ‘Halfords Bike’ with the Boardmans (which is ridiculous as they’re great bikes) but I’m not sure why it’s uncool to have/like Giants... I also considered a Canyon which seem Uber Kool amongst the snobs but preferred to get one from a shop.
The problem with cyclists is that they spend too much time at cafes, where other folks tend to admire anything which looks exotic and expensive. Peer approval is very important if one lacks self esteem and confidence.
If you don't stop at such places, I don't see why you should care about what the sticker says. Some bikes are ugly, but there are ugly Pinarello and Planet X in equal measure.left the forum March 20230 -
minnnt wrote:Haha, I didn’t realise this until after I’d bought it saw a few posts saying ‘I wouldn’t have a Giant even if they paid me’ and tbh I’m not sure why. I get the whole ‘Halfords Bike’ with the Boardmans (which is ridiculous as they’re great bikes) but I’m not sure why it’s uncool to have/like Giants... I also considered a Canyon which seem Uber Kool amongst the snobs but preferred to get one from a shop.
It was a tongue-in-cheek comment. A lot of people see Giant as the Ford Mondeo of the bike world and therefore wouldn't be seen dead riding one. The way I look at it is when I'm riding the bike it matters not what's on the down tube but how the bike performs. My TCR is beautifully engineered and does all I ask of it. The fact that Giants are also superb value for money helps. I like the new Tarmac too but at 3 times the price of the Giant for an identical spec I'll have the Giant thanks.0 -
Camcycle1974 wrote:A lot of people see Giant as the Ford Mondeo of the bike world
The problem with comparing bikes with cars is that it makes no sense. A car is boring because the engine and transmission are designed to be boring... nothing to do with the way it looks... a Focus SR (if there is such a thing) is not a boring car...a bike comes with no engine and all transmissions are the same... although some might see a differece between brands, but ultimately they all have the same gear ratios.
So, if you have an exciting engine, you can get a very lively yet boring looking bike, whereas if you have a very dull engine, then even the most exciting looking Colnago turns into a boring bike...left the forum March 20230 -
Ugo,
Some Ford models are said to be driver's cars in terms of handling - this includes models and their less exciting variants - for example the Ford Fiesta with its less than exciting sounding 1.0l ecoboost engine is still described as a driver's car - it handling capabilities are supposedly better than other superminis. Likewise, there are posters who would argue the handling characteristics of a TCR or Supersix evo are superior to other brands at that pricepoint. To this extent I think Camcycle's analogy holds.0 -
letap73 wrote:Ugo,
Some Ford models are said to be driver's cars in terms of handling - this includes models and their less exciting variants - for example the Ford Fiesta with its less than exciting sounding 1.0l ecoboost engine is still described as a driver's car - it handling capabilities are supposedly better than other superminis. Likewise, there are posters who would argue the handling characteristics of a TCR or Supersix evo are superior to other brands at that pricepoint. To this extent I think Camcycle's analogy holds.
As you know, handling is 100% down to frame/fork geometry.
The same people would argue that an open mould with exactly the same measurement of a De Rosa, doesn't handle like a De Rosa... and this is down to decals
What Chinese do well is to copy European models, so you can bet the measurements are exactly the same and the handling accordinglyleft the forum March 20230 -
A rather clumsy analogy but it got the point across. I was trying to say that some people value style over substance I suppose.0
-
Camcycle1974 wrote:It was a tongue-in-cheek comment. A lot of people see Giant as the Ford Mondeo of the bike world and therefore wouldn't be seen dead riding one. The way I look at it is when I'm riding the bike it matters not what's on the down tube but how the bike performs. My TCR is beautifully engineered and does all I ask of it. The fact that Giants are also superb value for money helps. I like the new Tarmac too but at 3 times the price of the Giant for an identical spec I'll have the Giant thanks.
The TCR is a good looking bike though. The Propel on the other hand is vomit inducing.0 -
I have a TCR Advanced Pro 0 as stated, and yes, fabulous bike...but when I built it I was VERY tempted/torn between that and an Enigma Ti frame...and all things as they are I would still consider a swap for a decent Ti bike..thats just me...the Tinker Man.....so if anyone is interested, drop me a PM......!!!0
-
VinnyMarsden wrote:I have a TCR Advanced Pro 0 as stated, and yes, fabulous bike...but when I built it I was VERY tempted/torn between that and an Enigma Ti frame...and all things as they are I would still consider a swap for a decent Ti bike..thats just me...the Tinker Man.....so if anyone is interested, drop me a PM......!!!
I have an Enigma Evade as well as the TCR and The TCR is as comfortable and feels faster to me than the Enigma. Both lovely bikes which serve different purposes. I use the Enigma for longer Sunday rides and the TCR for faster chain gangs.0 -
ugo.santalucia wrote:As you know, handling is 100% down to frame/fork geometry.
The same people would argue that an open mould with exactly the same measurement of a De Rosa, doesn't handle like a De Rosa... and this is down to decals
What Chinese do well is to copy European models, so you can bet the measurements are exactly the same and the handling accordingly
Absolutely not true, yes they may copy dimensions etc exactly the same as the original but how the bike feels and handles (which comes from stiffness and weight as well as geometry) is down to how the lay up of the carbon on the frame and around key points such as the headtube and bottom bracket area has been done. Carbon weave running in different directions and thickness of the carbon layers changes stiffness/comfort etc etc and so while a Chinese copy frame may look identical, that does not mean it will feel or behave the same.0 -
Craigus89 wrote:Bottom briquettes wrote:The Ribble is going to be an ‘open mold’ frame, using lower spec materials the Giant is going to be a Giant proprietary frame, with higher grade materials. I’d always go for the bike with the better frame, and not worry too much about the weight. There are lots of easy ways of clawing a bit of weight advantage back, it’s much harder to compensate for a gash frame.
That is utter b0llocks in many ways.
I’d love to ask you to explain that statement, but as I know you can’t argue with the hard facts, without looking like an utter buffoon, I won’t. Unless you think the frame mold, Carbon Fibre materials, and layup on the Ribble are superior than the Giant. Made by the same hands in the same factory, they may be, but the Giant is made from higher grade materials, in a Giant mold. If you think you can compensate for that by making a bike a bit lighter, I’d love to hear how.0 -
Bottom briquettes wrote:Craigus89 wrote:Bottom briquettes wrote:The Ribble is going to be an ‘open mold’ frame, using lower spec materials the Giant is going to be a Giant proprietary frame, with higher grade materials. I’d always go for the bike with the better frame, and not worry too much about the weight. There are lots of easy ways of clawing a bit of weight advantage back, it’s much harder to compensate for a gash frame.
That is utter b0llocks in many ways.
I’d love to ask you to explain that statement, but as I know you can’t argue with the hard facts, without looking like an utter buffoon, I won’t.
What are the "hard facts" in your original post?0 -
Bottom briquettes wrote:but the Giant is made from higher grade materials, in a Giant mold
Presumably you must know exactly what materials both frames are made from, in order to have made that comparison? Presumably you also know the tolerances of the molding process, as the Giant mold is apparently superior?
Or is this just more milemuncher/bikergrovish bullsh1t and bluster...?0 -
VinnyMarsden wrote:I have a TCR Advanced Pro 0 as stated, and yes, fabulous bike...but when I built it I was VERY tempted/torn between that and an Enigma Ti frame...and all things as they are I would still consider a swap for a decent Ti bike..thats just me...the Tinker Man.....so if anyone is interested, drop me a PM......!!!
Replied to your pm. Not sure if it sent or not. Pm page is weird on here.0 -
Bottom briquettes wrote:Craigus89 wrote:Bottom briquettes wrote:The Ribble is going to be an ‘open mold’ frame, using lower spec materials the Giant is going to be a Giant proprietary frame, with higher grade materials. I’d always go for the bike with the better frame, and not worry too much about the weight. There are lots of easy ways of clawing a bit of weight advantage back, it’s much harder to compensate for a gash frame.
That is utter b0llocks in many ways.
I’d love to ask you to explain that statement, but as I know you can’t argue with the hard facts, without looking like an utter buffoon, I won’t. Unless you think the frame mold, Carbon Fibre materials, and layup on the Ribble are superior than the Giant. Made by the same hands in the same factory, they may be, but the Giant is made from higher grade materials, in a Giant mold. If you think you can compensate for that by making a bike a bit lighter, I’d love to hear how.
Kudos on the stealth edit.
All you've done is reword the nonsense in your original post. Can you substantiate the bit in blue?0 -
0
-
Moonbiker wrote:
Urban myth rather than fact. I had a Ribble 872 for a while so wanted to believe it. Went to the NEC bike show a few years back and they had an 838 which is purported to be the same as the 872 and whilst there are similarities they are not the same. The chainstays on the 838 were markedly different and so too is the carbon lay up. They may look similar but they are not the same. R872 apparently is the number of the mold Ribble use for that bike.0
