[Frame question] Orbea Orca or Madone 5.9 ?

Dear all,

I've spent most of the day hunting the net on informations on those
bikes. While positive feedback is plenty for the trek madone 5.9
(everyone loves it), Orbea Orca's is another story. Some articles put
it above the trek, some put it under. Whatever, I need to make a choice
;-)

Practically, I'm a heavy rider (85 kgs), enjoying comfort on distances
in the 50-100kms range. I'm looking at longer distances too. I'm
planning to move my Ksyrium elites and Shimano group to the new frame.

So far, I'd be tempted to look at it and think they're the same
quality. Therefore the best design wins (and here Orbea wins all the
time over Trek).

Are there other feedbacks ? Any reason why I should prefer one vs the
other ?

Thanks !

NetWiz.

I test rode an Orca last weekend that was built up with American
Classic 350 wheels and Ultegra.

It was pretty sweet - I would guess about 17 pounds with pedals.

On the flats it felt like I was traveling faster than I normally would
on my Pinarello. I was using a higher gear with the same effort - hard
to quantify though as the Orca did not have a cyclocomputer.

Standing and sprinting there was no deflection at all. Despite the
stiffness there was no chatter and the bike tracked really well.

I made sure to include a short ridiculously steep climb during the
ride. It is a little ring grinder but I managed to get half way up in
the big ring before dropping to the 39. It felt like every bit of
pedaling force was transformed into forward movement - pretty awesome.

I have ridden a few carbon bikes and a lot of alum and the Orca was the
best by far. I have not tried out the Madone yet. I am also considering
the Cervelo R2.5 with Chorus as it is a very good deal (much less than
the Orca).

I forgot to mention that I am 190 pounds (and falling)

On 7 Aug 2005 09:21:26 -0700, "NetWiz"
wrote:

Practically, I'm a heavy rider (85 kgs), enjoying comfort on distances
in the 50-100kms range. I'm looking at longer distances too. I'm
planning to move my Ksyrium elites and Shimano group to the new frame.

So far, I'd be tempted to look at it and think they're the same
quality. Therefore the best design wins (and here Orbea wins all the
time over Trek).

Are there other feedbacks ? Any reason why I should prefer one vs the
other ?

Everything is the comfort. Anything about your wheels will be
mitigated by your selection of tire its size and the amount of air you
use. The comfort of the frame will be directly proportional to how
well the bicycle fits and how you setup the bars, chair and cleats.

I test rode this bike, a Kestrel Talon, a Scott CR-1 and the Madone 5.9. In
the end, I selected the Madone.

I ended up with the Madone because of the good compromise between comfort
(I ride on alot of chip-sealed roads) and stiffness, and Trek's reputation.
It would say that it wasn't quite as lively as the CR-1 (to scary light if
you ask me) or the Orca, but I would say that the latter was not as
comfortable as I wanted.

It is also really difficult to be objective about any of these bikes, since
the wheels and tires that you put on them also influence road feel.

The simple answer is to ride both. Either would be an excellent choice, and
it really comes down to personal preference. Don't believe everything that
you read.

BTW, I weight 172 lbs.

Bob

NetWiz wrote:
Dear all,

I've spent most of the day hunting the net on informations on those
bikes. While positive feedback is plenty for the trek madone 5.9
(everyone loves it), Orbea Orca's is another story. Some articles put
it above the trek, some put it under. Whatever, I need to make a
choice ;-)

Practically, I'm a heavy rider (85 kgs), enjoying comfort on distances
in the 50-100kms range. I'm looking at longer distances too. I'm
planning to move my Ksyrium elites and Shimano group to the new frame.

So far, I'd be tempted to look at it and think they're the same
quality. Therefore the best design wins (and here Orbea wins all the
time over Trek).

Are there other feedbacks ? Any reason why I should prefer one vs the
other ?

Take a test ride (or two or three) on each bike and pick the one you like
best.

Bill "uncomplicated when possible" S.

Dans le message de
oups.com,
lewdvig a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
I forgot to mention that I am 190 pounds (and falling)

After extensive comparison testing, all European magazines report that the
Orbea is less forgiving of clumsy, pudgy guys who keep falling over.

You're rich enough - buy both.
Or, if you're humble enough, buy less.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

I meant my weight is falling if that is what you are refering to.

"Bob" wrote in message
.. .

I ended up with the Madone because of the good compromise between comfort
(I ride on alot of chip-sealed roads) and stiffness, and Trek's
reputation.

Except for fit, please explain how road frames differ in comfort?

My understanding is that what your seat, hands, and feet feel is mostly
influenced by the tires/inflation pressures, the saddle, the fork, perhaps
the wheels, stem, and bar somewhat and of course your fit or position.
Aren't most standard (meaning not something way different like a softride)
incredibly stiff in the vertical direction so that any force applied to the
rear dropouts is immediately transferred to the rest of the frame and to the
seat post without any flexibility or compression? Isn't any force applied
to the headtube likewise transferred directly with without any shock
absorption?

It would say that it wasn't quite as lively as the CR-1 (to scary light if
you ask me) or the Orca, but I would say that the latter was not as
comfortable as I wanted.

What does lively mean?

BobT

On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 17:09:53 -0500, BobT wrote:


Except for fit, please explain how road frames differ in comfort?


One major factor is the amount of high frequency vibration (road buzz)
transmitted throught the frame. Composite frames have less of this. But
between these three frames, my _subjective_ impression was that the Trek
did a better job of damping this than the Orbea.


My understanding is that what your seat, hands, and feet feel is mostly
influenced by the tires/inflation pressures, the saddle, the fork, perhaps

Go back and read my original post.


It would say that it wasn't quite as lively as the CR-1 (to scary light if
you ask me) or the Orca, but I would say that the latter was not as
comfortable as I wanted.

What does lively mean?

The CR-1 felt very light (accelerated quickly), and had a spring-like feel
when climbing. It also seems to be a fast steering bike as well (meaning
the bike reacted quickly to user input).

Bob