Orbea vs. Six13
 

Has anyone ridden the Orbea Lobular 100, Orbea Onix, or Cannondale Six13?
I'd like to know these compare to the other carbon and aluminium frames.
--Mario

In article ,
"Mario" wrote:

Has anyone ridden the Orbea Lobular 100, Orbea Onix, or Cannondale Six13?
I'd like to know these compare to the other carbon and aluminium frames.
--Mario

I had a reasonably long test ride on a Cannondale Six13 last Summer. It
rode substantially like my late-80s steel Pinarello, except for being
about 7 pounds lighter. That made a difference.

Of course, my Pinarello has a carbon fork,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

Thanks Ryan. New tech replicates old tech, minus some weight. In this case 7
lb is substantial!
--Mario

"Ryan Cousineau" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Mario" wrote:

Has anyone ridden the Orbea Lobular 100, Orbea Onix, or Cannondale Six13?
I'd like to know these compare to the other carbon and aluminium frames.
--Mario

I had a reasonably long test ride on a Cannondale Six13 last Summer. It
rode substantially like my late-80s steel Pinarello, except for being
about 7 pounds lighter. That made a difference.

Of course, my Pinarello has a carbon fork,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 18:06:43 -0800, Ryan Cousineau wrote:

In article ,
"Mario" wrote:

Has anyone ridden the Orbea Lobular 100, Orbea Onix, or Cannondale Six13?
I'd like to know these compare to the other carbon and aluminium frames.
--Mario

I had a reasonably long test ride on a Cannondale Six13 last Summer. It
rode substantially like my late-80s steel Pinarello, except for being
about 7 pounds lighter.

Unless I'm mistaken, that'd be about as high as praise could get for a frame.

Ron

In article ,
"Mario" wrote:

Thanks Ryan. New tech replicates old tech, minus some weight. In this case 7
lb is substantial!
--Mario

"Ryan Cousineau" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Mario" wrote:

Has anyone ridden the Orbea Lobular 100, Orbea Onix, or Cannondale Six13?
I'd like to know these compare to the other carbon and aluminium frames.
--Mario

I had a reasonably long test ride on a Cannondale Six13 last Summer. It
rode substantially like my late-80s steel Pinarello, except for being
about 7 pounds lighter. That made a difference.

Of course, my Pinarello has a carbon fork,

I should say that I am almost doctrinally agnostic about frame
materials. In my opinion, what is light and does not break is good, and
tire pressure, the seat, and fit make much more difference than the
frame composition. Also, you know, worth twice as much as my car.

The visceral impression I had from the Six13 that I rode was that the
weight difference overwhelmed any more subtle differences between that
bike and my Pinarello. Also, the FSA K-Wing bar on the team-spec bike
has shaped tops which are comfortable to grab without needing bar tape,
and I liked the Campy shifters just fine.

If one needs an audiophile analogy, tire pressures are like the volume
level: it is so much more important to the experience at hand (ride,
sound) that it easily masks any possible effects unless it is carefully
controlled for.

Honest and serious audiophiles do A-B-X tests,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

...
Honest and serious audiophiles do A-B-X tests,

The problem with A-B-X tests are well documented, as the stress of
trying to make the correct identification can influence the test to the
point it is meaningless.

Ideally, "black box" testing is what is needed, where only an alias of
the component is known, eliminating bias. Logistically, this is rather
difficult.

--
Tom Sherman - Earth (Illinois)

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:30:13 -0800, Ryan Cousineau
wrote:


Honest and serious audiophiles do A-B-X tests,

No they don't,real audiophiles trust their ears.


Life is Good!
Jeff

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:39:09 -0600, Tom Sherman wrote:

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

...
Honest and serious audiophiles do A-B-X tests,

The problem with A-B-X tests are well documented, as the stress of
trying to make the correct identification can influence the test to the
point it is meaningless.

Ideally, "black box" testing is what is needed, where only an alias of
the component is known, eliminating bias. Logistically, this is rather
difficult.

I thought by hanging over here with the bikes I'd never have to read another ABX
thread. Finding that here is sorta like going to Audio Asylum and seeing some
orifice trying to argue about helmets.

Ron

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:39:09 -0600, Tom Sherman wrote:
Ryan Cousineau wrote:

...
Honest and serious audiophiles do A-B-X tests,

The problem with A-B-X tests are well documented, as the stress of
trying to make the correct identification can influence the test to the
point it is meaningless.

They're well by people unfamiliar with the science or unwilling to
accept it. ABX testing of audio approaches the theoretical limits of
what we expect from anatomy and physiology, and gives similar results
to what other double-blind protocols give.

Ideally, "black box" testing is what is needed, where only an alias of
the component is known, eliminating bias. Logistically, this is rather
difficult.

Agreed... Blind testing of bicycles would be problematic, to say the
least. Especially since we all know that red bicycles go at least 5%
faster.

-alan

--
Alan Hoyle - - http://www.alanhoyle.com/
"I don't want the world, I just want your half." -TMBG
Get Horizontal, Play Ultimate.

ACtually it is a well documented fact that red bicycles are 20% faster
due to the decrease in Solar Friction. Everyone always forgets about
Solar Friction.

We also left out the most important peice of the discussion
Cdale 613- okay looking
Orbea lobular- Really really ugly.