Best Bike For Beginner?

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Jamesh
Posts: 2963
Joined: 2 Jan 2017, 5:56pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Jamesh »

Cycling_Man wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 7:48pm
kylecycler wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 5:52pm As a comparison, my humble Carrera TdF
I just wanted to ask how you find your bike. They seem to pop up second hand a bit more than other bikes and tend to be cheaper bikes so if they are alright they might be a good buy maybe.
I wouldn't buy a careers tdf they are the cheapest road bikes going.

S/H I'd recommend a Carrera vanquish, decathlon rc120 Boardman but not the red one with steel forks.

New - look for double butted tubing, carbon forks and Claris or better groupset. Wheels are likely to be 32h basic ones which you can upgrade later.

I'd suggest a large for your height.

Cheers James
User avatar
kylecycler
Posts: 1378
Joined: 12 Aug 2013, 4:09pm
Location: Kyle, Ayrshire

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by kylecycler »

Cycling_Man wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 7:48pm
kylecycler wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 5:52pm As a comparison, my humble Carrera TdF
I just wanted to ask how you find your bike. They seem to pop up second hand a bit more than other bikes and tend to be cheaper bikes so if they are alright they might be a good buy maybe.
I suppose it's ok for a first road bike, but tbh although I know the theory I don't have any other road bike to compare it with either, at least so far. I cycle for transport without using a car or public transport and the group I ride with aren't roadies, so it isn't really all that appropriate (or comfy!) to use it on club rides. I used to get 'shimmy' - 'speed wobble' - when I was on the drops, but not on the hoods, but it went away, so I think it was me - once I adapted to the bike it stopped happening. Shimmy is a mysterious, scary phenomenon.

I don't think you should be too concerned about the number of gears or gearshift quality - 8-speed Claris shifts perfectly acceptably provided it's set up properly and the cables are well lubed, same with 9-speed Sora or 10-speed Tiagra. Most Shimano stuff tends to work.

My TdF is 'old school', from 2013 - Halfords were giving them away, just about, when Chris Froome won his first Tour de France, so I got it for £250 new - half price then. It's 'old school' in the sense that it came with a 52/42 chainset and 11-26 cassette, which these days is high gearing, especially for an entry-level road bike, although I'm quite a strong climber - it just meant I often had to get out of the saddle to get up hills (which they also had to do in the old days with the gearing they had then!).

I ended up fitting a 38T inner ring and an 11-32 cassette so my lowest gear is now 38 front, 32 rear (same as Froomey!), which is ok, but more recent Carrera road bikes from not long after mine was built and most other road bikes for quite some years have come with compact chainsets - 50/34, sometimes 50/36 - 'semi-compact' - and most commonly 11-28 cassettes - so, lower geared than mine was. Endurance bikes tend to have lower gears still - 'your' three all come with compact chainsets and the Giant and Trek have 34T lowest rear sprockets, the Allez 32T, so they're pretty low geared, which is a good thing for your first road bike and for long hilly rides.

The Carrera also came with 23mm tyres with only 13mm rims so the maximum width I can really fit is 25mm and it has a stiff steel fork, not springy steel or carbon, so it loosens your fillings on a badly surfaced road. The three bikes you've listed all have carbon forks, the Specialized comes with 25mm tyres, the Giant, 28mm and the Trek 32mm. Wider tyres tend to be cushier because you can run them at lower pressures for the same rolling resistance, although at the same pressures there's little or no difference, I don't think.

More recent Carrera road bikes have wider tyres and the higher spec ones have carbon forks so they have cushier rides; the very latest have disc brakes, although that tends to need a stiffer fork and can make the ride harsher than with rim brakes. Steel rim brake forks such as those on Spa Cycles framesets can be super-cushy, unlike the sort of faux-carbon-lookalike steel forks you get on entry level Carreras.

A new Carrera Vanquish would need to be the 'L' size - 58cm ETT - for you, but it would still be a lot 'racier' fit than the three bikes you listed - lower at the front, though not as low as mine, although you're 4 inches taller than me so you'd be well 'stooped' - it doesn't have 'endurance' geometry - and by and large you're getting what you pay for. Should be reliable, although the bottom brackets tend to wear out early, especially if they get water in them, although you just replace them with Shimano units which should last forever, just about.

https://www.halfords.com/bikes/road-bik ... 48526.html

Carreras are good enough bikes, for the price. Generally people who are sniffy about them haven't ever run one, although if I had more money I probably wouldn't buy one! You could come up with other alternatives and others who know better could advise.
Jamesh
Posts: 2963
Joined: 2 Jan 2017, 5:56pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Jamesh »

∆∆∆ Good post full of common sense! ∆∆∆

Some people think you need the latest touring bike or carbon road bike to enjoy cycling, which in fact you don't!

I always thought that the maximum pleasure is inversely proportional to the amount money spent!

Cheers James
iandusud
Posts: 1577
Joined: 26 Mar 2018, 1:35pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by iandusud »

Cycling_Man wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 7:09pm Many sites and others on here have suggest effective top tube length but others have also said stack and reach. However I don't know if there is a why to determine a persons stack and reach without actually getting on a bike.
There is no ideal stack and reach measurement for a given person. What those data give you is reference point by which you can compare different bikes. However a lower stack will give a lower riding position of the bars in relation to the saddle height. This will give a more aggressive and more aerodynamic position. Being able to make the most of such a riding position depends on a number of factors. The most significant one is how powerful a rider you are. The typical stack height of racing bike is suitable for racing cyclists. I doubt that many of us here are producing that sort of wattage. This is significant because the harder you push on the pedals the more of your weight you are supporting with your legs and also the faster you will be going, which where you get the most benefit of the better aerodynamics. The flexibility of your body is also important as to whether or not you can comfortably maintain such a low position for extended periods of time. The reach figure is pretty much a function of the top tube length as previously discussed. So you need to ask yourself how strong a rider you are and what sort of riding you want to do (be realistic about your goals. Do you want to race short time trials? Do you want to be able to ride all day long?). For someone who is reasonably fit and looking for light bike for recreational riding rather than touring or commuting then I think the sort of "endurance" bikes that you are looking at would fit the bill and I wouldn't get too hung up one of them over the other.
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

kylecycler wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 11:14pm
Cycling_Man wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 7:48pm
kylecycler wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 5:52pm As a comparison, my humble Carrera TdF
I just wanted to ask how you find your bike. They seem to pop up second hand a bit more than other bikes and tend to be cheaper bikes so if they are alright they might be a good buy maybe.
I suppose it's ok for a first road bike, but tbh although I know the theory I don't have any other road bike to compare it with either, at least so far. I cycle for transport without using a car or public transport and the group I ride with aren't roadies, so it isn't really all that appropriate (or comfy!) to use it on club rides. I used to get 'shimmy' - 'speed wobble' - when I was on the drops, but not on the hoods, but it went away, so I think it was me - once I adapted to the bike it stopped happening. Shimmy is a mysterious, scary phenomenon.

I don't think you should be too concerned about the number of gears or gearshift quality - 8-speed Claris shifts perfectly acceptably provided it's set up properly and the cables are well lubed, same with 9-speed Sora or 10-speed Tiagra. Most Shimano stuff tends to work.

My TdF is 'old school', from 2013 - Halfords were giving them away, just about, when Chris Froome won his first Tour de France, so I got it for £250 new - half price then. It's 'old school' in the sense that it came with a 52/42 chainset and 11-26 cassette, which these days is high gearing, especially for an entry-level road bike, although I'm quite a strong climber - it just meant I often had to get out of the saddle to get up hills (which they also had to do in the old days with the gearing they had then!).

I ended up fitting a 38T inner ring and an 11-32 cassette so my lowest gear is now 38 front, 32 rear (same as Froomey!), which is ok, but more recent Carrera road bikes from not long after mine was built and most other road bikes for quite some years have come with compact chainsets - 50/34, sometimes 50/36 - 'semi-compact' - and most commonly 11-28 cassettes - so, lower geared than mine was. Endurance bikes tend to have lower gears still - 'your' three all come with compact chainsets and the Giant and Trek have 34T lowest rear sprockets, the Allez 32T, so they're pretty low geared, which is a good thing for your first road bike and for long hilly rides.

The Carrera also came with 23mm tyres with only 13mm rims so the maximum width I can really fit is 25mm and it has a stiff steel fork, not springy steel or carbon, so it loosens your fillings on a badly surfaced road. The three bikes you've listed all have carbon forks, the Specialized comes with 25mm tyres, the Giant, 28mm and the Trek 32mm. Wider tyres tend to be cushier because you can run them at lower pressures for the same rolling resistance, although at the same pressures there's little or no difference, I don't think.

More recent Carrera road bikes have wider tyres and the higher spec ones have carbon forks so they have cushier rides; the very latest have disc brakes, although that tends to need a stiffer fork and can make the ride harsher than with rim brakes. Steel rim brake forks such as those on Spa Cycles framesets can be super-cushy, unlike the sort of faux-carbon-lookalike steel forks you get on entry level Carreras.

A new Carrera Vanquish would need to be the 'L' size - 58cm ETT - for you, but it would still be a lot 'racier' fit than the three bikes you listed - lower at the front, though not as low as mine, although you're 4 inches taller than me so you'd be well 'stooped' - it doesn't have 'endurance' geometry - and by and large you're getting what you pay for. Should be reliable, although the bottom brackets tend to wear out early, especially if they get water in them, although you just replace them with Shimano units which should last forever, just about.

https://www.halfords.com/bikes/road-bik ... 48526.html

Carreras are good enough bikes, for the price. Generally people who are sniffy about them haven't ever run one, although if I had more money I probably wouldn't buy one! You could come up with other alternatives and others who know better could advise.
Thank you for your reply and sorry I haven't been able to reply. Been a little busy haha. Your reply was a a very informative and pack full of useful information.

When I first started looking I was looking at Carrera bikes and decathlon bikes, since these were the first ones that came up in my searches really and were fairly affordable. I thought that the decathlon bikes looked a bit better and had better reviews so I was planning on getting one of those. I was thinking of getting the Triban 120 Disc Brake Model for £500 as it had goof reviews and wasn't too expensive. However I just thought the bike did not look good at all. I know a bike is a bike at the end of the day but I just wanted a bike that I found appealing and want to ride and the look of a bike is something that I do want to take into consideration as I would enjoy the bike more if I liked the look of it. My partners brother has a road bike that he got second hand and I really liked the look of it. It was a bianchi vio nirone 7. I don't know what year, I have been trying to figure this out for a while now, here are some pictures of the bike, maybe you know what year it is. Anyway, I personally think the Trek bike looks a lot better than the Triban. In my opinion it looks really nice and sleek compared to the Triban and I wouldn't mind saving up that bit longer to get a bike that I really like the look of. It also isn't much more expensive than the Triban, the rim brake domane al 2 is around £200 more than the Triban. The Triban could possible have better parts, I don't know, but I don't mind saving up and paying that extra sometimes to get something I really like if you know what I mean. Saying this I really liked the look of the Triban 120 rim brake edition. I like the black and grey but wish they did it in the disk brake version as the disc brake version is only around £70 more expensive.

I also wanted to ask you a question on why the three bikes I have listed are not "racy". Take the Trek Domane AL 2 I listed and the Carrera Vanquish you listed.

To me the Trek bike looks like it would be more "racy" because the seat is higher than the handle bars meaning that surely you would have to be leaning over more to get to the bars. I know this is probably wrong as even on Trek's website they say this is an endurance geometry.

The Carrara bike on the other hand has a seat position much lower than the trek and so surely to be that makes me think you would be sitting up more as you wouldn't be leaning over the bike as much. Again, most likely wrong here but just asking as I am confused on this.

To me these bikes look totally identical apart from the fact that the seat is higher on the Trek. Surely however you would be able to lower the seat on the Trek to make it more "racy" and raise the seat on the Carrera to make it more of an endurance fit. I know this is probably completely wrong which is why I want to understand this because to me both bikes looked the same apart from the seat height.

One other thing. Just because the bikes I listed are more "endurance" type geometry that doesn't mean they are slower does it? I understand that endurance bikes don't put you in the fastest position but would it wouldn't be slow compared to another bike of a similar price?

Thanks for helping me btw and for making it a little more easy to understand haha.
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

Jamesh wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 10:31pm
Cycling_Man wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 7:48pm
kylecycler wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 5:52pm As a comparison, my humble Carrera TdF
I just wanted to ask how you find your bike. They seem to pop up second hand a bit more than other bikes and tend to be cheaper bikes so if they are alright they might be a good buy maybe.
I wouldn't buy a careers tdf they are the cheapest road bikes going.

S/H I'd recommend a Carrera vanquish, decathlon rc120 Boardman but not the red one with steel forks.

New - look for double butted tubing, carbon forks and Claris or better groupset. Wheels are likely to be 32h basic ones which you can upgrade later.

I'd suggest a large for your height.

Cheers James
Thanks for commenting on my post and for giving your adice.

The first bike I actually looked was was a decathlon rc120. I thought it was really good and it looked arlight. However I saw that there was a disc brake version of the 120 which wasn't too much more expensive. However I was saddened when I saw that they only did this model in one colour and I didn't really like it. I really liked the black and grey on the rim brake model but the disc brake version wasn't much too expensive. This led me to looking at other options and potentially buying something that was good and looked nice second hand.

Thanks for the advice on what I should be looking out for. I will keep these in mind when looking for bikes, especially second hand bikes.

Thank you for you advice on the sizing too. From what I have gathered from my own research and the kind help of others on this forum commenting on my post is that a large / 58 cm would be best for me. However the Trek says I need a 61 but apparently the sizing of the trek bike is a little weird so there 61 is like a 58 in other brands I believe others have said and it does look to be that way somewhat.

Thanks again for taking the time to assist me in understanding bikes more and my bike buying journey.
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

iandusud wrote: 8 Apr 2021, 5:57pm
Cycling_Man wrote: 7 Apr 2021, 7:09pm Many sites and others on here have suggest effective top tube length but others have also said stack and reach. However I don't know if there is a why to determine a persons stack and reach without actually getting on a bike.
There is no ideal stack and reach measurement for a given person. What those data give you is reference point by which you can compare different bikes. However a lower stack will give a lower riding position of the bars in relation to the saddle height. This will give a more aggressive and more aerodynamic position. Being able to make the most of such a riding position depends on a number of factors. The most significant one is how powerful a rider you are. The typical stack height of racing bike is suitable for racing cyclists. I doubt that many of us here are producing that sort of wattage. This is significant because the harder you push on the pedals the more of your weight you are supporting with your legs and also the faster you will be going, which where you get the most benefit of the better aerodynamics. The flexibility of your body is also important as to whether or not you can comfortably maintain such a low position for extended periods of time. The reach figure is pretty much a function of the top tube length as previously discussed. So you need to ask yourself how strong a rider you are and what sort of riding you want to do (be realistic about your goals. Do you want to race short time trials? Do you want to be able to ride all day long?). For someone who is reasonably fit and looking for light bike for recreational riding rather than touring or commuting then I think the sort of "endurance" bikes that you are looking at would fit the bill and I wouldn't get too hung up one of them over the other.
Hi, thanks for taking the time to comment it really helped me understand the different fits more. Just to be clear, you are saying that a lower stack (position from the cranks to the headtube/handlebars) gives you a more "racy fit" because you are lower down in the seat and so are more flat?

I would like to say that I am someone who is reasonably fit. I used to go to the gym everyday before lockdown and when the gyms shut I did nothing for about a month and found it boreing so I started running and loved it. I did a few runs in the first lockdown, nothing much though, my longest run was probably around 5k and was going to a faster time. At first I couldn't' run at all. 2.5k felt really hard for me but I was determined to get better and push myself and in the end I was able to get a 5k under 20 minutes and finished my first marathon which I was quite pleased about. I was running everyday at one point to improve. It was just like the gym, working on yourself and seeing the improvements was fun and I liked competing against myself to run further, faster and stronger. This led me to cycle and I really enjoyed this as well and want to get better at it also.

In terms of my goals I kind of want a bike that is suited for both speed and distance. I recently got into running and enjoy improving my 5k times (speed) but also love pushing my endurance more (marathon distances). There are a few reason I want a nice bike.

1. To have fun - I just want to get on the bike more and be able to go to different places and get out on the road
2. Training - I like working out. I used to go to the gym everyday and when they shut I took up running instead. I enjoyed running as I liked that I could see the progression of my work, being able to run stronger, faster and further everyday. I started cycling more just because I enjoy it but it would also be fun to try to push myself on the bike too, going faster and further over time and seeing that progression.
3. To commute - I also want to use the bike to commute to my partners house, my place of work and just to shops and around town etc

I want to be able to ride long distances but I also want a bike that quite fast. I want to be able to ride distances of hundreds of kilometres and also want a bike that can be quick enough to get me to where I want to go fast and for when I just feel like going faster haha.
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

Jamesh wrote: 8 Apr 2021, 7:31am ∆∆∆ Good post full of common sense! ∆∆∆

Some people think you need the latest touring bike or carbon road bike to enjoy cycling, which in fact you don't!

I always thought that the maximum pleasure is inversely proportional to the amount money spent!

Cheers James
Thanks for your input.

I totally get what you are saying. You don't need the best bike to enjoy cycling. Trust me I can tell you this. At the moment I ride a mountain bike that is probably 2-3 sizes to small for me but I still really enjoy riding haha.

I just want a decent road bike that looks good, has good parts, is reliable and doesn't brake the bank. I'm probably asking for too much I know but I will have to have a look haha.
iandusud
Posts: 1577
Joined: 26 Mar 2018, 1:35pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by iandusud »

Cycling_Man wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 12:14am
In terms of my goals I kind of want a bike that is suited for both speed and distance. I recently got into running and enjoy improving my 5k times (speed) but also love pushing my endurance more (marathon distances). There are a few reason I want a nice bike.

1. To have fun - I just want to get on the bike more and be able to go to different places and get out on the road
2. Training - I like working out. I used to go to the gym everyday and when they shut I took up running instead. I enjoyed running as I liked that I could see the progression of my work, being able to run stronger, faster and further everyday. I started cycling more just because I enjoy it but it would also be fun to try to push myself on the bike too, going faster and further over time and seeing that progression.
3. To commute - I also want to use the bike to commute to my partners house, my place of work and just to shops and around town etc

I want to be able to ride long distances but I also want a bike that quite fast. I want to be able to ride distances of hundreds of kilometres and also want a bike that can be quick enough to get me to where I want to go fast and for when I just feel like going faster haha.
I would say that an "endurance" bike is the one that will fit the bill with the proviso that you can carry what you need for your commute in a small back pack. I have used my Giant Defy for all of the above and it is an ideal bike. It's not what I would choose as a dedicated commuter and therefore not the bike I commute on but if you're looking for one bike to do all of the above it's what I would recommend.

You are clearly fit and I'm sure you'll really enjoy getting into cycling. IMO so much more fun than running! :)
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

iandusud wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 6:09am
Cycling_Man wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 12:14am
In terms of my goals I kind of want a bike that is suited for both speed and distance. I recently got into running and enjoy improving my 5k times (speed) but also love pushing my endurance more (marathon distances). There are a few reason I want a nice bike.

1. To have fun - I just want to get on the bike more and be able to go to different places and get out on the road
2. Training - I like working out. I used to go to the gym everyday and when they shut I took up running instead. I enjoyed running as I liked that I could see the progression of my work, being able to run stronger, faster and further everyday. I started cycling more just because I enjoy it but it would also be fun to try to push myself on the bike too, going faster and further over time and seeing that progression.
3. To commute - I also want to use the bike to commute to my partners house, my place of work and just to shops and around town etc

I want to be able to ride long distances but I also want a bike that quite fast. I want to be able to ride distances of hundreds of kilometres and also want a bike that can be quick enough to get me to where I want to go fast and for when I just feel like going faster haha.
I would say that an "endurance" bike is the one that will fit the bill with the proviso that you can carry what you need for your commute in a small back pack. I have used my Giant Defy for all of the above and it is an ideal bike. It's not what I would choose as a dedicated commuter and therefore not the bike I commute on but if you're looking for one bike to do all of the above it's what I would recommend.

You are clearly fit and I'm sure you'll really enjoy getting into cycling. IMO so much more fun than running! :)
I just want to ask something. How do I tell the difference between an endurance focussed bike and a different kind, e.g a racy fit bike.

Let's say I am looking for a second hand bike, how would I know what fit it is without looking it up, what should I look out for?

Also why do you choose to not commute on your Giant bike. Is it too uncomfortable to do that or is there another reason. Is the Defy not endurance geometry? Also is there anything wrong with an endurance bike. I don't want a slow bike but I also don't want an uncomfortable bike haha?

Thanks, James.
hayers
Posts: 168
Joined: 27 Apr 2016, 1:50pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by hayers »

In simple terms, it's about trading two/three parameters:

1) saddle setback
This is how far the saddle is behind the bottom bracket (crank bearing).
Further back = less weight on hands, further forward = more racy. Too far forward for your type of riding will put excessive weight on hands leading to aches & pains.

2) height of, and distance to the handlebars
Typically closer to saddle and higher for leisure riding, lower and further away for a "racy fit".
You want the height and reach to be such that.you can use the drops comfortably - this then gives the most usable positions.

As.others have said what.dimensions achieve these vary depending on fitness, flexibility and core strength. Friends of mine are happy touring in a position I'd struggle to hold for a 10 min sprint whereas others might struggle to adopt even my position.

If you are unsure, find a bike that feels comfortable set up so you could move all the above either way - gives you options.

People often don't commute on 'best' bikes as they may have drivetrains that are more expensive and/or susceptible to wear, may have fast rolling, rather than robust, tyres, and perhaps no mudguards or rack - which most (but by no means all) will want for commuting.

The main thing is to get riding and enjoy it!
Jamesh
Posts: 2963
Joined: 2 Jan 2017, 5:56pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Jamesh »

Hi

Take one brand Cannondale.

The synapse is the endurance model whilst the supersix is the race bike.

Re endurance bikes....

Some are particularly upright. Like a specialized Roubaix or trek domane.

Other are more racey like the canyon endurace. Or the cervelo Caledonian.

If your wanting to go fast over shorter distances it take my focus race bike if I'm doing 100 miles I'll take my Cannondale six - synapse geometry.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/9cC6Mq6jd7AMEFsp9

Cheers James
iandusud
Posts: 1577
Joined: 26 Mar 2018, 1:35pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by iandusud »

Cycling_Man wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 12:40pm
Also why do you choose to not commute on your Giant bike. Is it too uncomfortable to do that or is there another reason. Is the Defy not endurance geometry? Also is there anything wrong with an endurance bike. I don't want a slow bike but I also don't want an uncomfortable bike haha?

Thanks, James.
Others have answered your other questions. The reason I don't commute on my Giant is because I have another bike that is better suited to my needs which has a rack fitted, as I always carry my laptop and often carry a lot of shopping on my return journey. It also has very good mudguards and wider tyres which are better suited to the cycle path I use. The Giant would cope with it but not as well. As I said earlier I have used the Giant for commuting (using a back pack) and it is perfectly up to the job. I'm in the fortunate position of having several different bikes so I can choose the one best suited to type of riding I'm doing. But that is a relatively new situation for me. Most of my (long) cycling life I've only had one road bike and a mountain bike. As I said previously for the use you describe an endurance type bike should fit the bill nicely.
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

iandusud wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 4:24pm
Cycling_Man wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 12:40pm
Also why do you choose to not commute on your Giant bike. Is it too uncomfortable to do that or is there another reason. Is the Defy not endurance geometry? Also is there anything wrong with an endurance bike. I don't want a slow bike but I also don't want an uncomfortable bike haha?

Thanks, James.
Others have answered your other questions. The reason I don't commute on my Giant is because I have another bike that is better suited to my needs which has a rack fitted, as I always carry my laptop and often carry a lot of shopping on my return journey. It also has very good mudguards and wider tyres which are better suited to the cycle path I use. The Giant would cope with it but not as well. As I said earlier I have used the Giant for commuting (using a back pack) and it is perfectly up to the job. I'm in the fortunate position of having several different bikes so I can choose the one best suited to type of riding I'm doing. But that is a relatively new situation for me. Most of my (long) cycling life I've only had one road bike and a mountain bike. As I said previously for the use you describe an endurance type bike should fit the bill nicely.
Ok, thanks for the information.
Cycling_Man
Posts: 61
Joined: 7 Apr 2021, 12:41pm

Re: Help Of Choosing Correct Frame Size (Road Bike)

Post by Cycling_Man »

Jamesh wrote: 9 Apr 2021, 1:15pm Hi

Take one brand Cannondale.

The synapse is the endurance model whilst the supersix is the race bike.

Re endurance bikes....

Some are particularly upright. Like a specialized Roubaix or trek domane.

Other are more racey like the canyon endurace. Or the cervelo Caledonian.

If your wanting to go fast over shorter distances it take my focus race bike if I'm doing 100 miles I'll take my Cannondale six - synapse geometry.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/9cC6Mq6jd7AMEFsp9

Cheers James
Thanks for helping me understand the geometry more and sorry for not replying. I haven't used this site before and it's a little tricky to see who I have replied to. In your personal experience if you were to have one road bike would you choose a racey one or an endurance one. I probably won't be getting two bikes so want to know what you think. I personally think the endurance fit would be best for me as they can go reasonable fast, are comfortable and you can go for long distances on them but it's hard because I also would like to do some time trail stuff haha. Guess I'll have to save up for both maybe.
Post Reply