Good excuse to stop upgrading.

Posted by: Calum F on 06 August 2012

I think I have a decent lower-mid range set-up (CD5XS/DAC/200/202/NAPSC/PL into HC (DR's to come) and started thinking about 282 due to a recent thread.

 

But then, last week I went in to my local bike shop by chance and picked up a stunning new racing bike (cancelled order, 15% off) for less than half the cost of a 282.

 

I will still be on the forum as I'm still interested in the discussions and the NAIM gear but I am so glad to get the monkey off my back (upgrading) as I have now run out of money and will just have to make do with what I have and forget about having a 282. Might also help be lose some timber.

Posted on: 09 August 2012 by naim_nymph

Renolds 531 was surpassed…

 

with 531c

 

I owned two of these frames custom made back in the 80’s.

Wish I still had them : (

 

I think the ‘c’ stood for competition, can’t remember what the difference was but it wasn’t much. The important thing was how the bike tubing was assembled [and by whom], which lugs were used, and the frame geometry.

 

753 was common place with racers, very lightweight, back in the 80’s the tubing was only supplied to frame builders who had passed a test of competence. My friends bike was 753, had a go on it once, it felt so light it floated up hill.

 

Nowadays my aluminium framed Trek is very light, a stiffer frame too, but I find it uncomfortable after an hour or so of riding, by then i’m happy to get off it.

Perhaps the more expensive ones are better.

 

The old steel 531 frames had a nice 'elasticity' in the frame which gave a more comfortable and less fatiguing ride.

 

The more modern carbon-fibre bike frames are quoted for being comfy and light and wonderful to ride, but one prang can easily write them off.

 

Debs

 

 

 

 

Posted on: 09 August 2012 by Bruce Woodhouse

Debs

 

Not true re carbon bikes being necessarily fragile. Any bike will break if you whack it, including Ti. I wrote off a Ti Colnago some years ago. Aluminium tends to crack, steel more likely to bend or a weld to fail. Some carbon bikes can also be repaired (if they are not monocoque designs). Carbon cannot be that fragile-used lots in high end MTB's that take serious abuse, F1 cars etc etc.

 

As for ride comfort, some are, some are not. Like all bikes whatever they are made from it is about the design and the application. My carbon bike (Parlee) is sublime, it is very different to my steel one (Columbus spirit tubes largely). I like both.

 

Perhaps try a carbon post in your aluminium Trek, it might tame some of the 'buzz'.

 

Steel is of course not dead, I just ordered a custom Columbus XCR (stainless) frame!

 

bruce

Posted on: 09 August 2012 by cyclo

Joined the forum last week and posted an audio question straight away (82 versus 282) but all this biking chatter is a complete bonus. My two passions on the one forum.

 

Only managing an hour of comfort on what is probably a decent bike is not good. This is where some parallels with audio are drawn. Do I spend some money trying to improve it and on what would I spend it and will it make a difference?

 

My suggestion would be to mess around a little with positioning, a millimetre or two with saddle or bar height makes a world of difference.

Maximum 80psi tyre pressure and fattest tyres your frame will take.

Gel bar tape . 

 

Mike