|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
On 22 Jul 2005 22:11:06 -0700, "NYC XYZ" wrote:
Hank Wirtz wrote: You're paying attention to a 4-oz difference in weight, then contemplating putting on a 4-lb saddle? (FWIW, my sister-in-law has that saddle, and I guess she likes it, but it weighs more than her rear wheel). Holy Hell's Angels, that weighs more than my ass! Thanks for the info...hmm...wonder if there are any ergonomic seats that are very light? "In some distant land it is possible that bicycle seats are made out of rainbow and stuffed with cloud. In this world it's easier to just get used to something hard." Heres the deal, upright position puts more weight on your ass it also forces your legs around the saddle at an awkward angle unless you set the seat too low. Which puts yet more weight on your ass and kills your pedalling efficiency. That big sofa-like saddle will require that you set it low. There is no reason for a saddle like that to be light. It simply cannot be fast anyway. Low weight does not equal performance, except maybe psychologically. If you want to shave grams, pee before you ride. That's about the difference we're talking here. Performance is going to come from having a good-fitting bike that you ride a whole bunch. LOL -- of course! But the fit being equal, how do the specs read to you? I don't know why they bother with Shimano this and Bontrager that...do even the "pros" know what it means?? Reads like mattress advertising.... Fit is never equal. As for all the brand names and model numbers, aren't you the guy whining that the components might not be adequate to your demands. If you want to be a weenie and fuss about that sort of thing, then get weenie about it and fuss about that sort of thing. I'm a fast rider...I can keep up with my messenger friend who races on the weekends (though we've never actually raced per se, given our very different bikes). I say this so that you know I'm not stuck on components like they were magic or something. In this particular case, my natural inclination is to get the flat-bar bike, but it seems like the componentry on the drop-bar may be substantially better. Better for WHAT? For WHOM? How good do the parts have to be. Shimano LX is perfectly adequate for pounding through the mountains why won't is suffice for you? Like I say, fit is really the most important thing, and if you say you want comfort and performance, you are not likely to get either from a bike you can't test-ride first. Get yourself into a LBS and have them find you something that is just right for you. They can swap out stems and handlebars and seats (for a small upcharge usually, sometimes they'll do even trades) and get it dialled in. Mail-order shops can't do that for you. Only problem is that these particular bikes sound like real sweet deals and aren't available except online from the manufacturer. You don't know enough about bikes to be buying that way. Bottom line. What's the big deal with the "fit," though? An 18" frame is an 18"...and the seat posts adjust, etc. I really wanted to know what the components of the drop-bar are like compared to those of the flat-bar. No, an 18" mountain bike is not the same as an 18" comfort bike and not at all like an 18" drop bar road bike. The components are different to suit the fact that they are on entirely different styles of bike. They are perfectly good components and work far better than you ride. As far as caliper brakes...why not? These aren't mountain bikes. They're light enough and strong enough for 100% of the TDF field, and those guys descend at 50 mph. The _only_ reason they don't use them on dirt bikes is for tire clearance. I thought the V-brakes stop better? I went from cantilever brakes on a chromoly to the old Trek 7500 (the old one, not the current one -- why did they change the frame geometry? It seems like everyone's hybrid line has got the angled top tube now) with aluminum and V-brakes...cool stuff. How bad do you need to stop? Calipers work fine for what they are. Sorry if you're getting dogpiled here, but you really should do some test rides of both flat- and drop-bar bikes before you try to make your decision based on Ti vs. Al or 18.2 vs. 18.6. I'm sure I won't like drop-bars since I think the typical flat-bar forces me to hunch over as it is! I always raise the headset (correct term?) myself...upright means comfort! Upright means slow and your ass hurts. To answer your overall question, I'd go for the drop-bar bike, but that's because I like drop bars, not because of its componentry or frame material. I suppose I could always raise the drop-bars too? When hunched over, my back really becomes the rear suspension! Use your legs. What's it mean that the Airborne Thunderbolt comes in 10-speed (is that right, only ten speeds????) "double" or 10-speed "triple"???? Ten cogs times whatever's at the front. Ron |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
maxo wrote: A quality steel frame weighs about a pound more than a ti or carbon frame. Not insisting that you go with steel, but go with the frame that's got the feel that you like, no matter what the material. Weight's a hell of a lot more important when it comes to wheels. Ah, another misconception clarified! Thanks...now, how would anyone tell whether it's a "quality" steel frame?? When you see a carbon or ti bike built up with an advertised spec of something crazy like 15 pounds, it's due to all the components being the lightest of of breed, not just the frame. Oh yes, I totally realize that...that aluminum Thunderbolt is actually slightly lighter than the titanium hybrid! Is titanium a better material, generally? I'm thinking of the Thunderbolt Triple now, even though my first impluse was towards the titanium hybrid.... |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
Gooserider wrote: Aluminum can be SCARY light, and steel isn't 5-10 pounds heavier. Try 1-2 pounds. So what's generally lighter, all other things (frame geometry, etc.) being equal -- ti, carbon fiber, aluminum, or quality steel? I'm sure you couldn't stand to lose 5 pounds off your body, right? Hehehe...5'11" and 230 lbs. -- I was statistically overweight for my age and height even at my best shape of 185 lbs.! If you want to be comfortable, frame material is the least of your concern. Well, part of comfort for me would be not carrying so many pounds, whether portaging over stairs or climbing long New Jersey hills! Tire size and frame geometry have far more to do with it. Frame geometry affects weight?? That being said, don't you wonder why so many touring bikes are STEEL? :-) LOL -- didn't know they were! |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
Gooserider wrote: Airborne is fine, if you don't mind buying a Chinese bicycle. Indeed! Oddly enough, Airborne notes on its website that although the frame comes from a Chinese aerospace and satellite company (?!), their bikes still qualify under US Trade regulations as American Made! I don't support communist dictatorships. This is so interesting...what Red China products do you do without, and what do you substitute them with? Like everything's made there these days. I own three Taiwanese bikes, and an American bike. The American bike is head and shoulders above the Taiwanese quality wise, but it was far more expensive, too. I wouldn't buy the Airborne, but that's purely on an ethical level. I'm sure the quality is fine. Are you sure those so-called "Taiwanese" bikes aren't perhaps made in some mainland China factory? I understand everybody's got factories in China. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
Zoom wrote: I don't mind buying Chinese bikes, I have three of them from this manufacturer. Whether a dictatorship is communist or capitalist is all the same to me. Indeed! As GEN Patton said of the Soviets and Nazis -- "it's just like the Democrats and Republicans!" Seriously...the country winds up going to war whether you care for it or not. My titanium mountain bike has taken a pounding and is still going strong. Is titanium inherently stronger than aluminum or carbon fiber? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
RonSonic wrote: "In some distant land it is possible that bicycle seats are made out of rainbow and stuffed with cloud. In this world it's easier to just get used to something hard." Ah, straight out of the '80s Charmin commercial! Heres the deal, upright position puts more weight on your ass it also forces your legs around the saddle at an awkward angle unless you set the seat too low. Which puts yet more weight on your ass and kills your pedalling efficiency. That big sofa-like saddle will require that you set it low. There is no reason for a saddle like that to be light. It simply cannot be fast anyway. Ah, yes, conventional wisdom. That's why it's so hard for me to find a "comfort bike" with "performance" specs! Fit is never equal. We're talking theory, here, and necessarily so, since there's no exact way to quantify "comfort" and "fit," least not over usenet! As for all the brand names and model numbers, aren't you the guy whining that the components might not be adequate to your demands. If you want to be a weenie and fuss about that sort of thing, then get weenie about it and fuss about that sort of thing. ??? Better for WHAT? For WHOM? How good do the parts have to be. Shimano LX is perfectly adequate for pounding through the mountains why won't is suffice for you? I'm asking the questions, and if you hear them, then I'm obviously soliciting your opinion, as I haven't a clue what Shimano-this and Bontrager-that means. You don't know enough about bikes to be buying that way. Bottom line. It's true I'm a noob when it comes to technical stuff like this, which is why I'm asking here! Thing is, I do know I don't want some pig-heavy Huffy from Walmart, if you take my meaning.... No, an 18" mountain bike is not the same as an 18" comfort bike and not at all like an 18" drop bar road bike. Which is why I'd noted earlier about "all other things being equal" -- an 18" comfort bike is not different in that respect than another 18" comfort bike. Of course, I'm asking about a hybrid and a road bike, and I know there are differences...just wanted to pick your brains for any I may have missed, noob that I am. The components are different to suit the fact that they are on entirely different styles of bike. They are perfectly good components and work far better than you ride. ? On my old Trek 7500, I must have put $500 worth of "work" into it over about eight years...new cables, chains, cranksets, etc. I really wear things out! But I can't imagine riding any other way -- don't see what I might be doing wrong, if I'm prematurely wearing parts out somehow. How bad do you need to stop? Calipers work fine for what they are. Let's put it this way...I was riding like an NYC messenger in midtown rush-hour traffic before I actually did it for a summer spell! =) Upright means slow and your ass hurts. That's intersting! I understand the "slow" part -- but I ain't racing, just wanted as "fast" as possible given how I ride (which means components, etc., to my way of thinking) -- though I don't see how upright means up the ass, either. =) Do you mean "crotch" or literally ass?? My ass rarely hurts...it's the crotch...ouch! Use your legs. I do, but it's the ol' suspenders-and-belt theory: two systems are better than one. After all, I'm already using my legs anyway! And it always gets to your back, in any case, eventually.... Ten cogs times whatever's at the front. OIC! Ron Sorry for the noob questions, but thanks for your feedback! |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
Gooserider wrote: The problem with buying Chinese goods is the very real possibility that doing so supports our enemy.War with China over Taiwan is not out of the question. Of course, the other school of thought counters that this is precisely why you must keep 'em engaged through trade. As their economy becomes ever more dependent on foreign trade, etc., war becomes more and more "impractical"...if Nixon hadn't gone to China, China might be just another North Korea now. The Chinese have a horrible human rights record, you know. So do many US allies. That doesn't stop us from buying Saudi oil, etc. People there are routinely put in re-education camps, undergo forced sterilization, are placed in forced labor camps, and face other such horrible acts. I totally agree. I just don't think that I can have any more effect on those issues than the US government, which has very limited effect on issues it considers even more important. Every dollar you spend on Chinese goods goes to strengthen them both economically and militarily. I would no more buy Chinese goods than I would buy conflict diamonds. Conflict diamonds? What are these, please? |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
"NYC XYZ" wrote in message oups.com... Gooserider wrote: Aluminum can be SCARY light, and steel isn't 5-10 pounds heavier. Try 1-2 pounds. So what's generally lighter, all other things (frame geometry, etc.) being equal -- ti, carbon fiber, aluminum, or quality steel? I'm sure you couldn't stand to lose 5 pounds off your body, right? Hehehe...5'11" and 230 lbs. -- I was statistically overweight for my age and height even at my best shape of 185 lbs.! If you want to be comfortable, frame material is the least of your concern. Well, part of comfort for me would be not carrying so many pounds, whether portaging over stairs or climbing long New Jersey hills! Are you serious? An extra 5 pounds on a rider plus bike all up weight of 230+20lb bike weight i.e.250lb is 5/250 =2%!! Have you ever stopped to consider why these bikes are being offered at such a massive discount. There aren't any free lunches. Also if you aren't familiar with -as you put it "Shimano this and Bontrager that", why are we having this discussion?. You really need to buy a copy of Bike 101 and read it. I don't understand your comments caliper brakes. Virtually all performance road bikes have them including ALL the TdeF iders -same thing with drop bars I'm not trying to be rude but are you on the level -or are you trying (-successfully!)to wind us up? Cheers Roy |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
How Do These Airborne Specs Look?
Ron Ruff wrote: Both of those bikes are decent deals, but it is difficult to advise you intelligently. What makes them "only" a "decent" deal to you? Oh, I guess I just wanted a general opinion like the sort that Human Resources do when scanning resumes and deciding how to file them, know what I mean? Of course you need to interview the candidates, not to mention monitor them during a probationary period of employment -- etc. -- but for starters you start with the theory of it all, the looks of the resume. I was just wondering about the opinions of serious riders like yourself. Me, I'm only more serious than the average rider in that I ride a lot -- but commuting and touring, not racing or centuries. You want speed *and* comfort (ie an upright position with a big cushy saddle). These are somewhat exclusive traits. Yes, as absolutes. I was just hoping to get a nice balance -- and I totally understand where you're coming from with your hesitancy: my question is like the sort folks have about "what's a good computer"...naturally, it all depends on what you plan on doing mostly and how much you're willing to spend. But bikes are rather simpler so I imagined the question much more relevent, if still difficult. Speed is primarily a function of how much power you can produce, how much you weigh (important only on climbs), and what your air resistance is (important only on a fairly flat road or descent). In all of these, your body and position is much more important than the bike you have. Saving 8 lbs (on the bike or the rider) will only effect your climbing speed significantly, and that will only improve by a few % at the very most. It's true, you're right. I can definitely outclimb the "average" rider in my whale of a chromoly. If you want to go fast on the flat, you need to be in an aerodynamic position with your back nearly flat. You call this "uncomfortable" (you like to sit upright), but the most important property of a "fast" bike is that it allows this position. If this is difficult for you, then you will have to work towards it slowly, with stretching and training. Basically, you need to *make* it comfortable if you really want to go fast. Now there's a thought! I just never imagined bicycling as something to train for, though...I never did think of it as "exercise" -- it's just a pick-up-and-go affair for me, ever since as a kid. I guess that's my thing he I'm still stuck in the same kiddie mentality I had when I first got into bikes -- couldn't drive, but didn't need to with a bike! Same for the saddle. The skinny, hard saddles are actually comfortable once you get used to them... much better than the fat cushy ones that come on cheap bikes. You need to be wearing decent shorts, of course. Decent shorts? See, this is the thing -- I do look like an average rider, the sort that doesn't wear the spandex and jerseys and helmets (oops) and carry water bottles.... How about that Serfas RX, the skinny racing one? It's got an interesting hole in the middle of it...I'm thinking I won't be grinding my, uh, whatchamacallit-bone with that space there.... Personal experience... I recently upgraded my "road" bike from a $300 MTB with a long low stem, barends, rigid fork, and 1.25" slicks, to a $3,000 Ti racing bike with Dura Ace. The new bike is about 10 lbs lighter, and I could get slightly more aero... I also think the tires have a little less rolling resistance. All of this resulted in a speed increase on my regular time-trials of 1-2%... and this is more than I expected. Whoa! So, the bike alone isn't really that important. But if you would like to get a new one, and you are truly interested in going fast, then get a road bike with drop bars (they afford more position options that also have access to the brakes), adjust the position so it is comfortable *now*, and as you become more flexible, lower the bars and extend the reach. This is pretty economical and easy to do by changing the stem... as long as you get the right size frame to start with. BTW, Ti is great but aluminum and steel are also fine. Best not to spend too much money at this point, and make sure you get a good fit. But just what is a "good fit"? Bikes have always been uncomfortable to me...I just put up with it; just figured that's how they are. What's "comfort" on a bike? It's a damned unnatural position, to be hunched over with that thing between one's legs like that! Anyway, good luck, -Ron Thanks! Looking to get a recumbent next year, too! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How Do These Airborne Specs Look? | NYC XYZ | General | 160 | July 28th 05 01:53 PM |
Need torque specs for Easton EA70 stem | GT | Techniques | 1 | May 30th 05 06:18 PM |
Where can I find torque specs for Easton EC90 Equipe? | GT | Techniques | 2 | May 29th 05 11:05 PM |
Prescription Lens Sun Specs | Roger | UK | 19 | March 18th 04 06:39 PM |
specs for a 1990 Bridgestone MB-5 fork? | Kevin Gammon | Mountain Biking | 1 | July 28th 03 05:20 PM |