New to cycling

[SumoDog68]

Originally Posted by GTpilot

You are 100% correct about REID.
Actually chances are it's from Taiwan. Probably the same factory as my 9 yr olds MTB. But who's keeping track. For $900 with FULL 5800 series groupo, I challenge you to find anything better...brand new that is not made in china/Taiwan. Where 100% of the worlds aluminium bike frames are made.
This is not a conversation about 2nd hand bikes.
As for top end specialised or s-works yeah, news flash, they are made in Taiwan too.
You missed my point dude. We are talking sub 1k NEW bikes here.

Reid frames are made in China . Taiwan is the world leader in mass producing bikes . Many of advanced frames are still made in USA , France ,Germany ,Italy and even in Australia.
Ofcourse complete 105 groupset bike under 1 k is a good value but is it a good buy ?
If you want generic , online buy there are other options :
http://www.bikeradar.com/au/road/gea...d-bikes-40753/

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by kazawaki

Ok I have a 58 cm Trek 1.2 in stock at $995.00.
Madone models are made in china , Taiwan and the USA Depending on the level of the carbon used,just for your info Trek have 5 levels of carbon frames .Yes I didn't read all the thread So my bad.If some people on this thread want some real life advise I have 39 years in the trade in all sections,bike specification, Mechanics,Wholesale and running a succesfull import company for 20 of those years as well as a fair stint in retail,you talk to anyone in the industry and they will know me but if you just want to sat FFS well good luck to you.

Out of interest sakes, what is the equipment level on the Trek? Personally I think Trek are very overpriced for what they are.

[geckoGT]

Don't worry I just looked it up. A reasonable frame based on reputation although I can not compare as I have not had a good look at either.

The Trek is seriously let down by components with Sora gears and cheap no name brakes. I would go the Reid if I was looking for a starter bike, there is a better fit out and really a novice is not going to challenge either of those frames.

Interesting to note that many owner reviews of the Trek 1.2 suggested people fork out the cash for the 2.1 with 105 components, no real surprise there.

I guess the big lesson here is you get what you pay for and often paying a few hundred more to by from a good bike shop will ensure you have a trouble free introduction to cycling. Sure I build my own bikes but that is after a lot of experience and time working in bike shops doing the mechanical repairs and bike building. I am not sure it is a good idea buying a bike you have to assemble yourself (or check assemble) and then expect to be able to do 60 km/h down a hill on.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I am not sure it is a good idea buying a bike you have to assemble yourself (or check assemble) and then expect to be able to do 60 km/h down a hill on.

whoops i would consider myself fairly mechanically minded though, and it was only adding bars and seat really, so not too much to 'assemble'. plenty of 'bike fit' vids on you tube. 3 years on and its never been inside a shop.

bike prices haven't really changed much. entry and mid level carbon bikes have dropped a bit but looking up prices on cannondale caad8's (what i have) and they are more expensive than 3 years ago. i paid $1k for mine (caad8 tiagra) and its currently about $1400 i think (only 1 dealer in adelaide) and the caad8 105 is close to $1800. 3 years ago the caad8 105 was $1250. i often kick myself for not stumping up the extra for the 105, but considering i started off with a very small budget (i had no idea about cycling and bikes - did i Lynton) i was already quite stretched to get to $1k.

i've never ridden any other bike but i'm not sure the average social rider would pick too many differences between frames.

[geckoGT]

Your bike was definitely better value than the Trek 1.2, tiagra is a significantly better group set than Sora. If you look in the right places a 105 or even Ultegra group set is not crazy expensive and would work well with the rest of your setup when your present gear starts to show its age.

It is difficult to know which way people should go when they are starting, so many spend big money and then lose interest yet so many others take the cheaper option only to find the bug bites and they want better later.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Your bike was definitely better value than the Trek 1.2, tiagra is a significantly better group set than Sora. If you look in the right places a 105 or even Ultegra group set is not crazy expensive and would work well with the rest of your setup when your present gear starts to show its age.

many reviews stated the caad8 was the best aluminium frame on the market, and cannondale are widely regarded as being leaders in aluminium frame manufacturing. whether or not, as a social rider, i will ever fully appreciate this is another thing entirely.

i often look at upgrading to a better drivetrain, but everytime i think i can afford it, something else pops up that is a higher priority. then other times i think, for the type of riding i do, my bike works... having said that, bikes are no different to cars, and having something that 'does the job fine' has never stopped me from upgrading before

Originally Posted by geckoGT

It is difficult to know which way people should go when they are starting, so many spend big money and then lose interest yet so many others take the cheaper option only to find the bug bites and they want better later.

there is also the risk that by buying a cheap bike to test the waters, it may not be the right bike, and thus make the experience not enjoyable. i've heard a few stories where people want to get in to cycling so go and buy a bike from kmart or big w. they then find it a chore chugging around the streets on these behemoths so they give the sport away due to their bad experience.

if someone isn't sure if they'll stick at it, then the Reid is pretty good value. if someone knows they are in it for the long term, i would still recommend getting a bike with a decent frame reputation. components can be changed and upgraded, but the frame is arguably one of the most critical parts.

as you may recall, i tried the 2nd hand route first with a worn out bike off ebay. thankfully i was able to sell it again for what i paid. i only had it for about a week. it was enough to show me the false economy of buying a used bike especially if you weren't looking to spend much, so i went straight to looking at new bikes with reasonable reviews.

[geckoGT]

I have had 2 Cannondales, a 2.8 series and then a CAAD 3 and as far as aluminium goes you can't fault them. There would be no need to change out your running gear although upgrades are always nice.

A lot of my preference for the Reid over the Trek is due to a complete 105 group set compared to a incomplete Sora group set with some significant budget cuts. Just the fact that 1 is 11 speed when the other is 9 speed is a significant compromise and not one that a frame will make up for.

In terms of weights the Reid is lighter than the Trek with much better components and interestingly for the cost of approx $200 you can option a wheel upgrade to Mavic Aksium which would be a great option. User reviews on the Trek show some worrying trends particularly with function of the brakes, gear train failures and significant wheel issues.

[geckoGT]

I am probably being a bit of a pain on this topic but considering the question is so relevant to the thread title I think it is worth discussing.

I have done a bit of research on both the Reid Falco and the Trek 1.2 and I think there are a number of other things to consider when someone that is starting out in cycling is choosing between the two. For the sake of discussion I am going to assume they have a budget of $1k (perhaps a little wiggle room is available for the right reasons) and that there is a potential they may enjoy it and end up riding more than originally planned.
Two trains if thought appear common so far, some are saying get the best frame in budget and compromise on components which is not bad advice. Some are saying take a compromise on frame in exchange for better components, again not necessarily bad advice. I think the difficult thing here is how much of a compromise on frame is the Reid over the Trek? Only those that have ridden both can really answer that but personally I do not put too much weight in the name alone(says the guy that rides a Merckx). Both are Asian built with the Reid made in China and the Trek either China or Taiwan (not sure which as Trek don't make that known). One thing that needs to be considered is that better name costs you money but doesn't necessarily result in better products, someone has to pay for all that marketing and sponsorship and that expense is passed onto the consumer. To really work out how much of an advantage the Trek frame is over the Reid research will have to be done to assess the quality, performance and also reviews by users that have lived with them for more than just a test ride.

In terms of the components the Reid is without doubt ahead with the full 105 group set and a much better optional wheel set in the Mavic Aksiums.
Personally I think the component strength of the Reid over the Trek may be a great equaliser and put both bikes on par for the novice cyclist. Sure the Trek frame may handle better comparing directly to the Reid but the stiffer cranks, better gears, 11 speeds and better brakes of the Reid may equalise that out.
Now I am going to assess upgrade ability of the two because this is an important element. For the Reid a modest investment of $200 gives you Mavic Aksiums which is a significant upgrade over the standard wheels of both, one that would cost at least $400 to do later. That is a $400 upgrade on the Trek as they do not have that option. Also the 105 11 speed group set is the upgrade over the partial Sora group set of the Trek. The 9 speed group set of the Trek will also make upgrades difficult. For example to upgrade the wheels you will either need to convert you new wheels to 9 speed or convert your bike to 11 speed. A conversion to 11 speed will require new shifters, cranks, dérailleurs, chain, cassette etc so really it is a new group set. Just a wheel and group set change on the Trek will cost approx $1k without looking at really high end stuff. Unfortunately because of the incompatibility of mixing 9 and 11 speed components a partial upgrade is not an option. On 105 you can partial upgrade components up to Dura Ace if you wish as they are cross compatible. So after doing a $1k upgrade on the Trek you will have the running gear of the Reid effectively paying $2k on the Trek to get the same as $1200 on the Reid albeit with a better frame.
An upgrade option on the Reid is get the upgrade wheels and then as you ride more and want better upgrade the frame. $800 can get you a Merckx EMX1 carbon frame (made in Taiwan by Giant) which is a much better frame than the Trek aluminium. The 105 and Aksiums will be right at home on that frame but as a comparison the running gear of the Trek 1.2 would be crying shame transferred to a nice carbon frame. Besides that Sora will not give the longevity required to make it worth transferring to a nice carbon frame, it will be worn out by that stage.

So in my scenario the end result assuming our subject buyer enjoys cycling and wants to upgrade to something a bit more competitive and pleasurable to rack up some km's. First option is a Trek 1.2 frame and upgrades to Mavic Aksiums and 105 11 speed for approx $2000 or a Merckx EMX1 with Aksiums and 105 11 speed for approx $2000. I know which way I would go.

[prydey]

Of course all that is based on the 2 examples already mentioned but the method for deciding which bike is right is very sound.

Instead of the trek you could compare an entry level giant or similar brand with 105 already. Not sure if tiagra is 11 speed yet or still 10 speed.

Basically you can buy the Reid with the option wheels (I would get zondas or fulcrum 3's over aksiums) and upgrade the frame for roughly $2k, or you can look at what $2k will get you in a different brand. Either way, the Reid does represent pretty good value.

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by prydey

Of course all that is based on the 2 examples already mentioned but the method for deciding which bike is right is very sound.

Instead of the trek you could compare an entry level giant or similar brand with 105 already. Not sure if tiagra is 11 speed yet or still 10 speed.

Basically you can buy the Reid with the option wheels (I would get zondas or fulcrum 3's over aksiums) and upgrade the frame for roughly $2k, or you can look at what $2k will get you in a different brand. Either way, the Reid does represent pretty good value.

A couple of the SSRC guys ride Reid bikes and recommend them. For the price point and for those just wanting the casual ride without going all out, it's a good option.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by blueoval

A couple of the SSRC guys ride Reid bikes and recommend them. For the price point and for those just wanting the casual ride without going all out, it's a good option.

I reckon Harley (durianrider) has done a you tube vid on one going up Norton's.

[Batmobile]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I am probably being a bit of a pain on this topic but considering the question is so relevant to the thread title I think it is worth discussing.

I have done a bit of research on both the Reid Falco and the Trek 1.2 and I think there are a number of other things to consider when someone that is starting out in cycling is choosing between the two. For the sake of discussion I am going to assume they have a budget of $1k (perhaps a little wiggle room is available for the right reasons) and that there is a potential they may enjoy it and end up
riding more than originally planned.
Two trains if thought appear common so far, some are saying get the best frame in budget and compromise on components which is not bad advice. Some are saying take a compromise on frame in exchange for better components, again not necessarily bad advice. I think the difficult thing here is how much of a compromise on frame is the Reid over the Trek? Only those that have ridden both can really answer that but personally I do not put too much weight in the name alone(says the guy that rides a Merckx). Both are Asian built with the Reid made in China and the Trek either China or Taiwan (not sure which as Trek don't make that known). One thing that needs to be considered is that better name costs you money but doesn't necessarily result in better products, someone has to pay for all that marketing and sponsorship and that expense is passed onto the consumer. To really work out how much of an advantage the Trek frame is over the Reid research will have to be done to assess the quality, performance and also reviews by users that have lived with them for more than just a test ride.

In terms of the components the Reid is without doubt ahead with the full 105 group set and a much better optional wheel set in the Mavic Aksiums.
Personally I think the component strength of the Reid over the Trek may be a great equaliser and put both bikes on par for the novice cyclist. Sure the Trek frame may handle better comparing directly to the Reid but the stiffer cranks, better gears, 11 speeds and better brakes of the Reid may equalise that out.
Now I am going to assess upgrade ability of the two because this is an important element. For the Reid a modest investment of $200 gives you Mavic Aksiums which is a significant upgrade over the standard wheels of both, one that would cost at least $400 to do later. That is a $400 upgrade on the Trek as they do not have that option. Also the 105 11 speed group set is the upgrade over the partial Sora group set of the Trek. The 9 speed group set of the Trek will also make upgrades difficult. For example to upgrade the wheels you will either need to convert you new wheels to 9 speed or convert your bike to 11 speed. A conversion to 11 speed will require new shifters, cranks, dérailleurs, chain, cassette etc so really it is a new group set. Just a wheel and group set change on the Trek will cost approx $1k without looking at really high end stuff. Unfortunately because of the incompatibility of mixing 9 and 11 speed components a partial upgrade is not an option. On 105 you can partial upgrade components up to Dura Ace if you wish as they are cross compatible. So after doing a $1k upgrade on the Trek you will have the running gear of the Reid effectively paying $2k on the Trek to get the same as $1200 on the Reid albeit with a better frame.
An upgrade option on the Reid is get the upgrade wheels and then as you ride more and want better upgrade the frame. $800 can get you a Merckx EMX1 carbon frame (made in Taiwan by Giant) which is a much better frame than the Trek aluminium. The 105 and Aksiums will be right at home on that frame but as a comparison the running gear of the Trek 1.2 would be crying shame transferred to a nice carbon frame. Besides that Sora will not give the longevity required to make it worth transferring to a nice carbon frame, it will be worn out by that stage.

So in my scenario the end result assuming our subject buyer enjoys cycling and wants to upgrade to something a bit more competitive and pleasurable to rack up some km's. First option is a Trek 1.2 frame and upgrades to Mavic Aksiums and 105 11 speed for approx $2000 or a Merckx EMX1 with Aksiums and 105 11 speed for approx $2000. I know which way I would go.

Dont forget with Trek you're having to pay as well as marketing and sponsorship , but importantly research . Research on materials, ride quality , etc . You are not going to get that from a manufacture who has build a product from a copy sheet

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Batmobile

Dont forget with Trek you're having to pay as well as marketing and sponsorship , but importantly research . Research on materials, ride quality , etc . You are not going to get that from a manufacture who has build a product from a copy sheet

True, but how much of that research on high level competition carbon frames benefits a low spec aluminium frame. I agree with your point but question the relevance across the spectrum of their product lineup.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by prydey

Of course all that is based on the 2 examples already mentioned but the method for deciding which bike is right is very sound.

Instead of the trek you could compare an entry level giant or similar brand with 105 already. Not sure if tiagra is 11 speed yet or still 10 speed.

Basically you can buy the Reid with the option wheels (I would get zondas or fulcrum 3's over aksiums) and upgrade the frame for roughly $2k, or you can look at what $2k will get you in a different brand. Either way, the Reid does represent pretty good value.

Tiagra is still 10 speed but in terms of wheels 10 and 11 speed is cross compatible, 11 speed wheels will accept 10 with the use of a spacer.

I agree Fulcrum or Campag would be better options over the Aksiums but with a price increase. I used Aksiums in my post due to that being a good value upgrade on the Reid.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I agree Fulcrum or Campag would be better options over the Aksiums but with a price increase. I used Aksiums in my post due to that being a good value upgrade on the Reid.

My zondas were under $400 but that was on special. I don't rate aksiums that highly. Ksiriums would be an upgrade.

[paule11]

Originally Posted by prydey

My zondas were under $400 but that was on special. I don't rate aksiums that highly. Ksiriums would be an upgrade.

I have aksiums have held up well to my weight flex a little but have performed well. Have been thinking of upgrading to Zondas or maybe Ultegra wheels or Swisside Heidis. What have you found better about the Zondas than Aksiums.

[Batmobile]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

True, but how much of that research on high level competition carbon frames benefits a low spec aluminium frame. I agree with your point but question the relevance across the spectrum of their product lineup.

I was trying to point out - the equipment either fitted to either one frame or another , is in the main going to function equally . A 105 group set on a Reid or Trek will function equally - however , the frame having come from very different backgrounds , may weigh and look similar will in the main function somewhat differently today and possibly into the future .
In my view , I tip my money into an organization whom a vested interest into the sport , outside the other reason of $
I agree with your points and was simple trying to add , marque models are more expensive for other reasons than marketing and sponsorship
It would surprise me to learn that the Trek frames (was build outside USA) are built in the same factory as a Reid frame . However, it would surprise me to also learn that the Reid frame or other entry level frames / bikes from a non established brand , if you will are build from a copy sheet - their is no rime or reason why , it's just tubes connected together to provide you a bike

[Batmobile]

Just as a follow on note .. A few years ago a family friend of ours , who deems himself to be a venture capitalist & entrepreneur, set out with some investors to have carbon frames build identical to the Pinarello Prince in the Asia Pacific region . They visited various factories , and had several samples produced having agreed on a supplier .
He brought home samples ,and I passed on the frames to a bike builder , whom found all sorts of tolerance issues , especially in the areas of the bottom bracket / head set and chain stays
To look at the finished product painted , you would be hard press to know that you hard a copy . Would the bike builder own or ride one - No!!!!!
The bike builder wasn't even happy to allow me to own one as a training ****ter . He has the same opinion on copy carbon wheels . Seen too many fail to warrant the risk

[kazawaki]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Out of interest sakes, what is the equipment level on the Trek? Personally I think Trek are very overpriced for what they are.

The 1.2 that I have in stock has tiagra rear with sora shifters.It wasn't that long ago I had a 1.5 which was tiagra deraliers and shifters which was the last one and it went for $995.00.It pays to keep an eye out for Trek factory sales which happen twice a year ,generally you will save a minimum of 20-25% and get some great bargins.There are a lot of reasons why a Trek is better than a lot of brands They make and develop product, 29er mountain bikes would not be around if it was not for trek and gary fisher.Check out the Domane road bikes with the first version of ISO Speed decoupler which this system has filtered down to a number of models.There dual suspension bikes that the suspension is custom valved and tuned by Trek and Penske racing and the list goes on.I always say to customers don't make a decision until you have riden a Trek and those that do generally buy it.

[geckoGT]

I see your point but in the end you are insinuating the Reid is a copy and a bad one at that. Is it really or is it just another aluminium frame like all the others. Really when you are talking aluminium frames Trek are a copy too, Cannondale and Klein were the real originals in aluminium road bikes (actually Alan were long before them but they were lugged).

In the end the basic geometry of your standard road bike is not that new, it is a time old formula that is tweaked to different purposes but the basics are the same, aluminium is old technology as is the process of constructing the frame. Have Reid copied someone else spec sheet or do they have someone that designs the frame based on their knowledge of building frames? Is your assertion they are a bad copy known fact or an assumption based on the fact that Reid does not have a label based on historical value? It is interesting doing some research on user reviews and I have not found any that mention frame failures, some fit issues and gears needing adjusting but no frame failures. Do a search on Merckx, Pinnarello, Cannondale (crack and fail), Trek, Orbea and just about any other high end reputable brand you can think of and you will comments about frame failures.

Yes technology has a massive bearing on carbon frames but not so much a basic aluminium frame. I am just not so sure a novice rider will be able to tell the difference or the duration they own the bike or the use they put it to. Yes this may change if their abilities improve but then the components will let them down. You can not say that 105 will perform the same on the Trek as it will the Reid but the Trek frame is better, to keep in budget you don't get the 105 so it is not a comparison that represents the budget options.

There are a lot of reasons why a Trek is better than a lot of brands They make and develop product, 29er mountain bikes would not be around if it was not for trek and gary fisher.Check out the Domane road bikes with the first version of ISO Speed decoupler which this system has filtered down to a number of models.There dual suspension bikes that the suspension is custom valved and tuned by Trek and Penske racing and the list goes on.I always say to customers don't make a decision until you have riden a Trek and those that do generally buy it.

Yes I get it and not denying that the technology makes the bike better, on the ones it applied too. But how does ISO speed decouplers, OCLV hi tech carbon layup, dual suspension and all sorts of other high end wizardry give better value to the buyer of a low spec 6061T6 aluminium frame? You have to admit that a lot of any perceived value is in the name.

[kazawaki]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I see your point but in the end you are insinuating the Reid is a copy and a bad one at that. Is it really or is it just another aluminium frame like all the others. Really when you are talking aluminium frames Trek are a copy too, Cannonade and Klein were the real originals in aluminium road bikes (actually Alan were long before them but they were lugged).

In the end the basic geometry of your standard road bike is not that new, it is a time old formula that is tweaked to different purposes but the basics are the same, aluminium is old technology as is the process of constructing the frame. Have Reid copied someone else spec sheet or do they have someone that designs the frame based on their knowledge of building frames? Is your assertion they are a bad copy known fact or an assumption based on the fact that Reid does not have a label based on historical value? It is interesting doing some research on user reviews and I have not found any that mention frame failures, some fit issues and gears needing adjusting but no frame failures. Do a search on Merckx, Pinnarello, Cannonade (crack and fail), Trek, Orbea and just about any other high end reputable brand you can think of and you will comments about frame failures.

Yes technology has a massive bearing on carbon frames but not so much a basic aluminium frame. I am just not so sure a novice rider will be able to tell the difference or the duration they own the bike or the use they put it to. Yes this may change if their abilities improve but then the components will let them down. You can not say that 105 will perform the same on the Trek as it will the Reid but the Trek frame is better, to keep in budget you don't get the 105 so it is not a comparison that represents the budget options.

I will end this here ,there is no such thing as basic road geometry,some bikes have good geometry as in the right length top tube ,the right height and size head tube and head tube angle and the correct seat tube angle and chain stay length ,apart from that there is also the fork rake and steerer tube angles to be considered .I have a saying this is in regards to group sets which are a bolt on part as the handling of a bike can not be altered as the frame is the heart of the bicycle . You can put a set of wheels of a BMW 7 series car on to a hiaundi and reverse but the hiundi is still going to drive like a hiundi not a bmw.

[geckoGT]

Thanks I had no idea after 30+ years of racing that there were differences. I was suggesting that at the novice level manufacturers are generally within the ball park of the characteristics they design into their frames because entry level bikes tend to want the same thing. That is what I meant by "standard" geometry.

Anyway, I will leave it at that as I have done some research and short of getting my hands on the two frames, putting them in a jig and checking specs as well a stress testing them I am not going to be able to add any more value. Personally I know which way I would go and in fact it is a way I have been before.

In 2003 I bought a Monoc TC2 Compact frame with 9 spd dura ace and Campagnolo Eurus wheels topped off with Ritchey WCS bars and stem and a good carbon post. All told it cost me as much as the Giant carbon fibre with Dura Ace of the day. Many will argue that the Giant frame is better, it was a bit lighter but had a bit more flex. The Monoc was not a top of the line frame for that price range and I could have gotten better Treks, Cannondales etc but at a cost. It is just a mediocre for the time mix of 6061 aluminium with carbon rear stays and fork. That bike took me through 3 road seasons riding at the top of my club, a state triathlon championship and a Ironman triathlon in under 10 hrs. That is all before work got in the way of competition. I actually only had a drop out on that frame fail last year when it was back into service while the BB on the Merckx was being repaired.

I then bought the Merckx in 2011, largely because I wanted a carbon frame and I wanted to treat myself with something nice. I have always been a fan of the Merckx ever since watching Phil ride the tour with Motorola. So I built that frame with all the same running gear and components, only the frame changed and I got another 4 or so years out of it.

Now I have replaced most of the components with a Campagnolo Record mechanical groupset and Mavic Ksyrium SLS wheels, the bar and stem will be replaced very soon, all onto the Merckx frame. The end result is yet another nice bike that I enjoy riding, the added bonus is the history of the name brings a smile to my face. It is like having a Tag Huer over a Casio, they both tell the time but you just enjoy having one more than the other.

My point is you don't have to have a big name frame to have one with reasonable geometry for your needs and one that fills the intended purpose. I suppose it is like comparing a 105 equipped aluminium Trek with a 105 equipped aluminium Colnago or Pinarrello, is the price worth it or is there a possibility that they all will fill the needs of the purchaser. . Yes I could have gone for a bigger name quality frame but it would have cost me more and I would have to have taken compromises in other areas, perhaps even 105 instead of the Dura Ace. The way I did it allowed me to have the quality where I needed it and allow reasonable compromise where I could. Sure my bike never really turned heads at the coffee shop but my legs silenced the critics on the road.

[GUTLES]

I've owned a Reid Bike & wouldn't hesitate owning another one.

Really all depends on your budget, as has been said for a bike under 1k you get a fair bit.

[Captain Stubing]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

$800 can get you a Merckx EMX1 carbon frame (made in Taiwan by Giant) which is a much better frame than the Trek aluminium. .....

By coincidence, I was asking one of the LBS's about Merckx frames, as they had a few assembled Merckx bikes, and they suggested I could buy the frame by itself. The price for an EMX3 with forks was $3000!
Plus I was told how they were hand made in the Merckx factory, with one guy painting each frame, etc etc.

I was surprised to see your price, Gecko, so I did some Googling, coming up with the 2013 EMX-3 frameset for $799. It's given me some food for thought, since I thought upgrading the frame was going to cost thousands!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by swanny

By coincidence, I was asking one of the LBS's about Merckx frames, as they had a few assembled Merckx bikes, and they suggested I could buy the frame by itself. The price for an EMX3 with forks was $3000!
Plus I was told how they were hand made in the Merckx factory, with one guy painting each frame, etc etc.

I was surprised to see your price, Gecko, so I did some Googling, coming up with the 2013 EMX-3 frameset for $799. It's given me some food for thought, since I thought upgrading the frame was going to cost thousands!

Originally Posted by DBourne

Ultegra pedals on campag cranks! Don't let the "purists" see you!!!

I've never used campag stuff. What are the differences in feel and operation, compared to Shimano?

Just so you know a Merckx EMX 1 and I pretty sure a EMX 3 are not made in Italy, only the top level Merckx frames are. I am pretty sure the Taiwan built frames are made by the people that make giant.

[Captain Stubing]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Just so you know a Merckx EMX 1 and I pretty sure a EMX 3 are not made in Italy, only the top level Merckx frames are. I am pretty sure the Taiwan built frames are made by the people that make giant.

I also read that Merckx entered an agreement with Pinnarello, where Pinnarello build some of the frames designed by Merckx at their Taiwan factory. This is probably the EMX-1 and EMX-3, maybe some of their other lower end frames.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by swanny

I also read that Merckx entered an agreement with Pinnarello, where Pinnarello build some of the frames designed by Merckx at their Taiwan factory. This is probably the EMX-1 and EMX-3, maybe some of their other lower end frames.

Different to what I heard but you may be right. I do know the middle to lower spec Merckx are not made in Italy. The 1XM was so mine is Italian made. Not that it really matters that much as long as the design is good and the quality is good. I have not heard many bad reports about Merckx frames. Mine had the bottom bracket sleeve shift in the shell but that was probably my fault over torquing the bottom bracket cups.

[geckoGT]

Just finished a ride up O'Reillys and have found that annoying click I have been searching for. It has gone now and is replaced by a horrible rattle every time I stand. Riding 40 km on a broken saddle shell was pretty uncomfortable.

Now I have a good excuse to go looking for a new saddle.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Just finished a ride up O'Reillys .

So I guess I'm p2 now....

Without a heart rate monitor or power meter I found it a challenge to pace myself on such a long climb, esp the first time riding a new route. Always wondering if I was going too hard or if I could go harder... that 12% ramp at the end is nasty as well. Even the road surface and nature of the road constantly going to one lane meant you can't even relax too much on the decent.

When I did it I had planned before hand to go a bit extra at the end to pad it out to 100, but once I got back to canungra, I was done.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by prydey

So I guess I'm p2 now....

Without a heart rate monitor or power meter I found it a challenge to pace myself on such a long climb, esp the first time riding a new route. Always wondering if I was going too hard or if I could go harder... that 12% ramp at the end is nasty as well. Even the road surface and nature of the road constantly going to one lane meant you can't even relax too much on the decent.

When I did it I had planned before hand to go a bit extra at the end to pad it out to 100, but once I got back to canungra, I was done.

No you still have the KOM as your effort failed to track properly on the road, my effort did so apparently I deviated from the segment. Looks like you will hold that KOM for quite a while.

I did a comparison, I was only about 5 mins quicker from Canungra to the top of O'Reillys so not much in it.