Which New Bike?

There is a huge amount of choice out there.

Your first step seems to be choosing what sort of bike-and the fact you might want to carry paniers and also ride on occasional gravel suggests a hybrid or a tourer/winter trainer style roadbike rather than a pure road racer. You could not put panniers on that Scott and it certainly will not like dirt tracks much, certainly not on those wheels/skinny tyres. All-rounder here seems to be a relative term! Be clear what you want your bike for. You'd not really ride a triathlon on a hybrid.

I cannot stress too much the best way to choose your bike is first to identify a good bike shop and pick there brains before buying. With so many different brands it can be bewildering but in truth a lot of bikes are pretty similar to each other and the important thing is to get the type of bike you want, one that fits properly and the supporting bits of kit to get you up and running.

There are very few 'bad' bikes out there, but some that will definitely be wrong for you.

I always tell friends that Specialized, Giant and Trek are mainstream brands with good value and great choice. I'm not going to recommend a specific model because in the end it will be what is available near you etc. Don'y buy a bike you have not tried out.

Carbon is seductive and racy, but not all carbon bikes are that light or indeed comfy. They are not terribly tolerant of being bashed about either too so don't rule out a good alloy or steel frame. Ti might be a stretch for your budget. Choose the bike not the material!

Bruce

(Parlee Z1 carbon, Zullo Vergine Columbus XCR stainless and Burls steel road bikes currently)

Thanks Bruce

I appreciate what you say. It's only my driveway that's gravelled, the rest is road or cycle-path. But a few lips and curbs. I would like to be able to accomplish the 40km ride to and from work more quickly, even at the slight expense of comfort, but I will need to transport stuff occasionally (otherwise it becomes another excuse to take the car)

The Triathlon thing is very much subsidiary, I have neither the space nor the money to contemplate two bikes, so I do need an all-rounder.

I'd like a road bike that can be happily used for commuting, rather than a commuting bike that I might be able to go fast on at a pinch. If that makes sense.

My problem is that, although my French is pretty fluent these days, I risk getting into a "Not-The-Nine-O'Clock-News-Hi-Fi-Shop" type discussion in a specialist shop. Having run shops myself, it is very useful when the customer has narrowed down what it it that they want before starting the conversation, hence my post. 

Will look for some Giant and Trek models (they seem to be available here). Are Cannondale any good for this kind of thing - they have good distribution in France?

What kind of try-in-advance is it normal to get for bikes? Just round a car park? Take it home and back for the weekend to see? I've really no idea, although I'm sure there is an element of risk in that long term use will confirm or deny absolute suitability.

Thanks again.

Rod

Something like this would be ideal IMO - full proper mudguards and would carry panniers if you wish but decent handling and fast - you could race it.

http://www.kinesisbikes.co.uk/bikes/racelight/gf-ti

You could upgrade components later as budget/requirements evolve - the frame will outlive you in all likelihood

Not sure re availability en France but would suggest this sort of thing would be what you consider

Svetty

Roadbikes: Cannondale Supersix Evo, Look 585, Kinesis Ti GF, Boardman AiR 9.2

The frame on that is certainly worthy of future upgrades. I wouldn't necessarily be looking for something with fenders (mudguards) unless you ride in the rain a lot. Virtually any bike can be retrofitted, although some are more difficult than others.

For paths and occassional gravel, a full road bike setup (as opposed to a hybrid) is just fine. Check you get 25mm tyres at least on it, though (rare that you can't). I've been riding quite a bit of gravel on 23mm/25mm tyres and light wheels. Zero problems, although wider tyres are admittedly faster and easier to handle as the surface gets roughr/softer. If the ride less than 25% gravel, I prefer just to be on a standard road setup, rather than compromise the bitumen performance for the other 75%+.

Compact crankset is a good ideas if you ride (even a few) decent hills, otherwise either compact or full-sized will do just fine. These days, compacts are becoming the norm as they have lower gearing at the bottom end and few disadvantages, especially with the now ubiquitous 10 and 11 speed cassettes keeping the steps between gears small. Disclaimer - I still prefer a standard set-up as I like the smaller jump in gearing when I shift between the front chainrings as it means fewer double shifts (front and back together). Shifts a little better, too - but these days everything shifts pretty well if correctly adjusted and maintained.

Disc brakes on road bikes becoming fashionable. Not quite there yet in terms of engineering, design and options in my opinion, but for an all-round bike that gets a LOT of wet weather use, I'd consider them. My next commuter for Vancouver winters will almost certainly have discs, but I'm in no rush to convert just yet.

Steel or Al will be certainly better than cheap carbon at lower price points. Ti is different to carbon but just as pricey. Ti is probably better for long-term all-round use, but is a slight compromise at the bleeding edge of weight and stiffness. "One bike to do it all" for someone who rides a lot, doesn't race at the highest levels, and doesn't replace their bike every two years should probably be Ti in my opinion. (There are some mass-produced cheap Ti options (e.g. Motobecane) out there. Some people seem to like them. I don't know too much about their quality, though.)

Sounds to me like you should be looking at a "fondo" bike. It's a fairly new concept of a rage parallel to the manufacturer's race bike range. Similar components and price points, right up to very high-end specs, but a frame built to suit the general population and usage rather than pure racing. Trek's Domane, or Specialized's Roubaix range are the best known examples. All other major manufacturers have a similar range of these more versatile, and comfortable, but still high performance road bikes. Major manufacturers mostly offer just Al and Carbon - with ranges split at about the mid-price point.

Don't exclude the option of considering smaller manufacturers selling steel frames, though. A lot of these are really nice, well thought out bikes that aren't continuously "improved" just for marketing's sake.

Thanks both.

The Kinesis bike does indeed seem very appropriate, I have e-mailed them to see if they have distribution in France. I could - at a pinch - make two trips to the UK, one to try/buy/spec and a second to collect/ship, so this needn't be an absolute bar.

Must say I would have instinctively shied away from anything with mudguards (don't know why really), so I have already learned something! And you have confirmed what 'compact' means for me.

Rain is not really an issue, but as Winky has uncovered, hills are! Many round here, including one large up/down I need to manage on my daily journey.

Here is my commute:

http://www.mapmyrun.com/workout/360928775

(Weekend riding involves even more hills)

Cheers

wrt mudguards, there's nothing like spraying water and road grit up your back and backside on the commute to persuade you to use the car.

Removing them for the summer is a 10 minute job but they do make riding in the wet so much better in the winter

I rode in the pouring rain to work this morning. No fenders. I got exactly as wet as I would have with fenders. That is, 100%. Everything saturated. No problems. It's just water. It washes right off.

You've got it right. In that (wonderful) part of the world, a compact crankset and larger rear cassette (27t or larger) will be invaluable. Fenders will be unimportant.

Hi

have a look at the soon to be available Orbea Avant....looks very, very, interesting...quite a few dealers in France.

I currently run a couple of Cannondale Synapse bikes , very good bikes, however not really kitted for fenders or pannier rack...but should tick all the other boxes..

Anthony

Discs on a road bike are a little pointless, unless it is a bike that gets ridden in the rain a lot. And anyway, I would never have those monstrous SRAM brake hoods on any bike I owned. Beyond ugly. Honestly.

Hi

fair comment..

they also do Shimano versions with 'normal' brakes...

for my money a 2014 model Synapse HM Ultegra (with some better wheels/tyres, and maybe Di2) looks tempting..

disc brakes will likely be readily available on many carbon road bikes for the 2015 models....

Beyond ugly.

That applies to all modern racing bike IMO. Ugly sloping crossbar, ugly fat downtube, ugly fat forks, ugly fat headtube, ugly brake levers, ugly wheels, usually in ugly black.

Discs probably are pointless, but there again 10 cog cassettes. carbon frames, indexed shifters are pointless for 99% of the riders that use them. 5 or 6 cogs, steel frame and downtube shifters are quite adequate, certainly adequate for your needs Rod.

Good quality vintage frames with a good quality groupsets are an absolute pleasure to ride. Very easy to set up and the components will last a lot longer than the stuff they put on today's bikes.

Doesn't this look a lot nicer.

If you want panniers a vintage mixtie fits the bill.

Have to disagree. The aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder. I love the look of vintage bikes, but I don't want to ride them, other than for a short distance. I even have one, 1976 Nuovo Record equipped Wilier. But with noodly handling, lack of stiffness, dire brakes, far fewer gearing options and levers on the down-tube that are harder to use, and that require me to take my hands off the levers it is never my bike of choice.

Modern bikes are demonstrably better in every functional sense. Lighter, too. My new Colnago is much, much nicer bike to ride than my vintage bike in every conceivable way. There is absolutely no contest.

Hi fatcat

nice looking bikes, reminds me of similar bikes I rode many miles on in my younger days...

however times move on, and whilst I have fond memories of them, the modern bikes are an absolute pleasure to ride and I can still cover long distances with comfort and speed, safely...

each unto his own...

You'd expect a modern bike to be functionally better than a vintage bike. But 99.999% of riders don't actually need these improvements. But if it makes you happy to believe you ride at manner/standard that requires state of the art equipment, so be it.

I'm quite happy using downtube shifters, at my age I struggle to remember what levers do what.

My father in law had one of these newfangled bikes. Can't say I found it better to ride than my vintage bike, certainty not at the speed I ride at. Had to go for a service every 12 months, after 5 years the bike shop recommended a new groupset was required, it was so expensive to repair he bought a new bike.

My vintage bike needs no more than oiling and the occasional tweak. It's still got it's original 35 year old dura ace groupset, apart from new headset and bottom bracket, and I don't find the massive weight, 10kg to be a problem.

The only real benefit the modern bike has over vintage is the seat. Didn't realise how uncomfortable my old seat was.

I bet you're one of those people who think these new flat screen TV's are better than the old CRT's.

I don't need a HiDef TV because I don't have HiDef eyes, in the same way I don't need a fast bike as I don't have fast legs.

I'm not saying all vintage bikes are worth having, but high spec ones certainly are. Who wouldn't be happy riding a bike of similar spec as that ridden by Merckx or Henault in the 70.

Well, we don't "need" much at all. But is an investment in a bike the rides, shifts and brakes better (and is faster) only sensible for professional racers? of course not.

Your last sentence is a bit snarky. And I'm not talking about "state of the art" here. It is an old Vs new discussion. Use the analogy of a small sports car. Yes, you could choose an MGB over a Mazda Miata, but in doing so, you'd be choosing car that is demonstrably worse in every possible way except for the "look" and "history" of it. To suggest I should buy a MGB rather than a Miata because I am not a race car driver is kind of crazy.

New bikes are functionally better than old bikes, regardless of the price point at which you are comparing, and also regardless of the skill of the rider. I'd argue that bike with more responsive brakes, wide gear ratios and shifters that don't require a rider to take their hands off the bars is even more important to inexperienced and occasional riders. New riders don't "need" less.

Durability is not necessarily an issue. The only frame and fork failures I've had have been (decent) steel frames. None with carbon frames. I have far fewer wheel issues with factory-built wheels than I ever had with traditional hand-built wheels that were always breaking spokes and going out of true. Yes old-style bearings are serviceable, rather than replaceable, but they required this service far more frequently than modern cartridge bearings need replacing. I just replaced the BB bearings on a bike after 5 years. You would never have gone 5 years between services on an old-style BB. The new narrower chains don't last as long, but that's a small price to pay for the better gearing options. Brake blocks still need replacing. That hasn't changed. New tyres are MUCH better than old ones. Both lighter and more puncture resistant.

Great cycles are not necessarily complicated. Old classic styles are not - in absolute terms, better - but they are longer lived [as in half a lifetime] and less easy to use ... while modern cycles are more convenient, but require the attention of a knowledgeable person far more often than the old style cycles, even of the best sort - and the best sort did not require much attention.

Unless you are serious performance cyclist, steel frames offer the most useful combination of length of service versus lightness ...

Good gearing that lacks user difficulty may be had from Rohloff.

ATB from George

Do you realise, more responsive brakes, wider ratios and lever shifters will allow the inexperienced rider to ride FASTER. Is this really a good thing.

I find it puzzling that you're using safety issues as an argument when you dismissed the use of disc breaks.

Reliability is not only an issue with the casual user of modern equipment, but the pros who do use state of the art, are having more problems than ever. Wiggins had a mechanical in the Giro time trial. Scarponi had a low speed slide in the giro, his rear mech fell off and Evans lost the runners up spot due to a mechanical on a mountain stage finish. In the good old days a pro team would chose a reliable component over a light component.

Modern tyres are quite acceptable. I use Michelin Axial Select Kevlar, i doubt they'd suit the modern bike though. heavy and stylish.

This comment is at the heart of the matter.

Some pointers:

• Get yourself fitted by a cycling shop that knows how to do that properly including measuring your flexibility. In the UK you get Cyclefit and Serotta fitting. France will have many similar options. Even if you don't follow the precise prescription you will learn useful things from the process.
• Go with titanium or stainless steel. The former is good but George is right steel can be good too. His suggestion of a Rohloff hub for a bike which may enter a triathlon does require an immediate forum ban though.
• 1500 Euros on a carbon bike will leave you disappointed in the long run I suspect.
• Buy a frame which is custom built to your fit or seek out an 'off-the-peg' bike that has geometry close enough to your bike fit. This will involve dull primary research on your part or a shop may help. Some minor adjustments can be made in components like the stem to an off-the-peg.
• Ensure said frame has pannier mounts in case you wish to use them. Don't forget this bit!
• Buy handbuilt wheels. Use at least 32 spokes on Mavic Open Pros or CXP33 rims. For hubs look at Ultegra which has a nice steel freeehub body and beautiful quality. Still made in Japan too. Don't underestimate the value of good hand-built wheels. The wheels on the majority of shop sold bikes in your price range are ho-hum on several levels.
• Find a mate who is into cycling and can help you buy the components in the end of season sales (on now) of at least Shimano 105 standard plus fit them. If you bung a few quid to a local cycling club they will probably have someone who can help. You can get the whole thing kitted out for a fraction of the 'normal' prices by picking up bits like this.
• For UK brands look at Enigma and Roberts. Must be loads more choice in France though.
• Get yourself fitted.

Just looked at this: http://www.enigmabikes.com/bik...enigma-extensor.html

It is their top end stainless steel frame £1650.

Handbuilt wheels as described above £250.

Shimano 105 group in sales (you probably won't need hubs as well because of wheels above) £300

Assorted bits in the sales £300.

Total = £2500 (they will throw in the pannier mounts no doubt)

You can find steel or titanium frames for less to bring the cost down. Probably as little as £500 for steel in fact. They won't quite have the ride or finish of the higher end but you might like to see the cost come down to £1500 for something that will still ride better than the shop carbon bike IMO.

PS I don't own an Enigma or have any commercial interest in them. Just an example of something that will blow away a £1500 carbon shop bought bike IMO.

And then drill it full of holes.

Yes. Correct fit is the best value performance and comfort enhancement around.

Not a safety issue. It is just that discs are heavier, more expensive and ugly.

They generally work well, although there are some horror stories of disc brake failure on road-bikes descending. Braking on bitumen (compared to off-road) can place great demands on brakes as the traction is better and you can brake harder, thus requiring faster heat dissipation.

If you ride in the rain a lot, discs are a great choice as rim brakes in the rain are pretty dire. My next winter commuter will almost certainly have discs, but I wouldn't consider them for a race/performance bike at this stage.

There is a good point re mudguards above. With a good bike in hand, you will want to ride all year round plus take on a few cols in France in variable conditions.

If you want to keep the option to have mudguards fitted you need deep drop brakes and a suitable frame.