Cycling UK Forum

iandriver wrote:

rmurphy195 wrote:Isn't the merlin Cysles product a bolt-through?

The aksiums linked are bolt through. DT Swiss usually come with thru axle to qr adaptors.

iandusud wrote:The DT Swiss wheels are considerably lighter and replacement rims are available. I have a pair of Dicut 22 wheels (rim brake) which have proved very reliable and I will be rebuilding the rear one this winter with a new rim. However if I was thinking of buying a new pair of wheels I think I would look to these people. https://scribecycling.co.uk/collections ... ibe-race-d (I'm assuming you need disc wheels from the link you sent).
These wheels come in at a very respectable weight and replacement rims and bearings are readily available. Price £370
For me it's a no brainer as I'd much rather support an independent British firm than some vast multi-national.

mattsccm wrote:Rilkal must be me. Exactly the same here, even down to the "down". Been as low as 50 but to my mind they got a bit draggy and the handling wasn't as sharp.

Paradiddle wrote:

Rilkal47 wrote:I am looking for one of these and from what I can tell your phone will do most of what a computer does just at the expense of your battery life and risk of damage.

Especially as Wahoo sell the Speed, Cadence and Heart monitor which connect via Bluetooth to your phone.

What app do you use on your phone? I'm quite addicted to logging on Strava but as I mentioned in my last post it looks like they've removed sensor connectivity completely.

I've got a OnePlus 7t and so far Strava hasn't impacted my battery life much and feels pretty safe in my jersey pocket. I usually bring my phone anyway in case of emergencies.

iandusud wrote:

Rilkal47 wrote:I have Schwalbe G one Speeds 700x30c, they are rated between 50 and 80 PSI. I have them down at 70 and they are very comfortable.

Pedant Warning: Wouldn't that be up at 70 unless they are supplied the pre-inflated!

djnotts wrote:I cannot understand why anyone who has ridden even low to mid end carbon would ever willingly choose any other material. It's just better. Ti comes closest, though in comfort terms varies a lot. Then Columbus SLX. Must have had many dozens of bikes in last 20 years, carbon the winner. Only problem is that few carbon framesets for over x25mm tyres, but then carbon with 25s equal to any other material with up to x32s!

Marcus Aurelius wrote:At that price point the CF will be relatively low grade. Probably manufactured by Toray, and at the lower end of their range. Which means it would make for a relatively heavy frame, as they need more material to achieve the stiffness. Forget the trinkets / bells and whistles, you can’t polish a turd, and at that end of the CF spectrum, that’s what you’ll be getting. I’d be more inclined to go for a decent AL alloy frame and spend the difference on trinkets.

Phytone3d wrote:

Rilkal47 wrote:

Phytone3d wrote:
Mind if I ask what you paid in total? I really like the look of it and it’s got rave reviews.

Sure it was Bob on £2K - i also had the casette changed to the ultegra climbing set (11-34). The anthracite is a great looking colour.

Bonzo Banana wrote:Planet X do some very high quality CF frames at low prices. I think some of them are coming from either dengfu or hongfu from memory which are really good certainly better than many top brands who charge a fortune for their bikes but use quite low end factories. I had a feeling Ribble was also using the same factory but perhaps I have remembered wrongly. I remember Canyon moved CF frame production from I think Giant to Quest Composites and Quest Composites are garbage compared to the good factory that Planet X was using. At that time Canyon were using Giant for their aluminium frames who are probably the best large scale manufacturer of aluminium frames. I'm personally of the viewpoint why muck about with these importers why not go directly to the best manufacturer 'Giant' and buy one of their bikes either aluminium or carbon fibre. All these brands that don't manufacture themselves often change factories when they find a cheaper factory etc and just don't see the point. So if I'm spending serious money on a bike get something you know is good from the actual manufacturer. Giant do some amazing bikes based around a more advanced 6011 aluminium frame, super lightweight, very strong with a lifetime warranty. Why buy a Canyon with a short warranty, low weight limits that you think may be made by Giant etc. Also Canyon has had some shocking customer service in the past. I remember reading on a forum a Canyon CF road bike that had its frame fail on its first ride and had some difficulty getting it sorted.

Worth checking out Luescher Technik on youtube who shows how poorly manufactured some CF frames are even top end price stuff, he is a big fan of CF though but its quite eye opening how poorly manufactured some frames are. That is one area where aluminium is far better the frames are far more consistently manufactured with a much lower failure rate however there is the disadvantage that all aluminium fatigues and it will always fail given enough use, that may be 3 years or could be 20 years but an aluminium frame always weakens over time but you don't tend to get the early failures like CF. In theory a perfectly made carbon fibre frame doesn't fatigue but in reality imperfections in the manufacture of all CF frames will cause failure at some point.

If you want a lightweight bike for performance riding which won't be vulnerable to damage (i.e. left in a bike stand etc) then either material would be fine, I would look for the best deal in components and overall weight of the bike and not worry about the material. I have no use for such a bike myself as I like a strong abuse-able bike that I can lock up, get knocked, leave outside shops, needs little maintenance etc and doesn't need regular inspection so I'm not speaking as someone who really gets performance bikes I must admit but that is my viewpoint anyway.

roubaixtuesday wrote:

Rilkal47 wrote:

tim-b wrote:Hi
Do you really need disc brakes? Unless you're regularly going out in wet, gritty conditions or hammering down lots of steep descents then they aren't necessary on UK road bikes. Mountain bikes and adventure/gravel bikes are a different story by virtue of being off-roaders
If you can see beyond discs then you can open the market up more and lower your budget as well (and rim brakes are simpler and lighter)
Regards
tim-b

Yeah I would prefer disc brakes, I am on the heavier side at 95kg which will only increase once the gyms reopen as well as the local area being quite hilly I would prefer them for descents.

I'm nearly 90kg and ride in a very hilly area.

You will get very good quality rim brakes on a bike of that budget, and discs will make no difference to your braking power, as either variety will lock up your brakes if applied fully - you're limited by tyre grip.

Discs have their applications, but for your stated use, rim brakes are the obvious choice. If it were me, I'd put the money into better wheels or frame rather than brakes.