Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

Xplora wrote:The true test is the fastest bike, which is limited by 6.8kgs right now.

The "fastest bike" has nothing to do with the weight of the bike. The speed of a bike is inversely proportional to the size of the engine's beer gut... among this crowd if your comment about high school is correct, anyhow...

I'd rather one of these anyway...slightly heavier (4.9kg) but with Di2 and all round better components, wheels and brakes. (IMO). Also something a bit different, in fact I havent seen any in Australia.

http://www.stevensbikes.de/2014/index.php?bik_id=233" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mitchy_ wrote:

Nice chart but where is the Cervelo R5CA? A size 56 weighs 676g painted and with hardware.

Arlberg wrote:I'd rather one of these anyway...slightly heavier (4.9kg) but with Di2 and all round better components, wheels and brakes. (IMO). Also something a bit different, in fact I havent seen any in Australia.

http://www.stevensbikes.de/2014/index.php?bik_id=233" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

At €12,999 I'm not surprised you've not seen any.

Nice manipulation of the scale on the frame weight graph too, making the Spesh look drastically heavier...

I had a look at a few of these things the other day when I was in Clarence Street Cyclery putting a wheel in to get a new hub.

They didn't have the SLR, but they did have the lower spec models. They all seem pretty decent. All the ones in store had dreadful colour schemes though.

They probably sold the good ones already

I'm wondering how much more mileage Trek will get out of the six-letter combination?

I am waiting for their new e-bike, the O-Damn!(E)

nezumi wrote:I'm wondering how much more mileage Trek will get out of the six-letter combination?

I am waiting for their new e-bike, the O-Damn!(E)

what about the women's model: Moaned

That's a Yellow card jasonc

I reckon a Daemon could be on the cards, but I don't know how that would apply to a bike... unless it was a phatty or something.

I reckon at sub 5 kg a bike would be too fragile over the long term to ride on anything but smooth hotmix. Our carp Aussie roads would splinter it in short time.


Blame tapatalk

Considering carbon tech these days, I doubt it'd be too difficult to go from 6.8kg to 4.6 odd and still make a strong enough bike.

Without being too much of a retrogrouch, to get to a weight that low the frame and components have to be pretty damn thin walled. I'm not doubting it's possible to make it, but to make it also durable. I wouldn't trust it. I have enough trouble at 75ish kg fatiguing bits on 7-8 kilo bikes.
Special occasion race bike, maybe. Regular use sport/race bike no thanks
Chuck TLL or Twizzle on it and see how long it lasts

Xplora wrote:That's a Yellow card jasonc

I reckon a Daemon could be on the cards, but I don't know how that would apply to a bike... unless it was a phatty or something.

daemon for a gravel grinder or CX would work

warthog1 wrote:Without being too much of a retrogrouch, to get to a weight that low the frame and components have to be pretty damn thin walled. I'm not doubting it's possible to make it, but to make it also durable. I wouldn't trust it. I have enough trouble at 75ish kg fatiguing bits on 7-8 kilo bikes.
Special occasion race bike, maybe. Regular use sport/race bike no thanks
Chuck TLL or Twizzle on it and see how long it lasts

Carbotanium should work. It has the properties that are desirable for this use.

g-boaf wrote:
Carbotanium should work. It has the properties that are desirable for this use.

Blame tapatalk

And in any case, 4.6kg is hardly pushing extremes - if I remember right, there was a 2.7kg bike in the USA that clocked up tens of thousands of kilometres.

Mmmm, except that this is a production bike backed by a warranty.

Sam

Strange Rover wrote:Mmmm, except that this is a production bike backed by a warranty.

Sam

I know a number of guys with problems on specific frame runs with Madones etc. Having a warranty doesn't mean Treks don't fail, it's confidence that your investment in a good brand is worthwhile compared to a China frame, and confidence that Trek expects their frames to last longer than the 12 month race season. I own several Treks, I like the brand, but let's not pretend that Emonda is magically more reliable because it is a production frame.

Xplora wrote:but let's not pretend that Emonda is magically more reliable because it is a production frame.

Not because it is a production frame but because it is backed by a " Trek lifetime warranty"

I buy this bike today and I won't ever have to buy another one if it fails because Trek got their manufacturing or design wrong.

I'm betting that Trek know what they are doing and that this frame will perform as it should for many, many years...this is how Trek makes their money.

Sam

And just in case I'm considered biased against Trek, I've got a Trek as well - and it is trouble free.

I don't care what anyone says ......... I just want one........ and seeing I'm 70 years of age a life time warranty sounds pretty good to me..

Light bike but I fail to see $15000 worth of "technology"

It's been mentioned on here many times previously (and should be able to be found with a forum search, from memory AUbicycles was the last to post about it), but you've gotta be mindful what in fact Trek (or any other manufacturer for that matter) define as being a "lifetime warranty".

It probably isnt going to be what it sounds like or what it says on the tin... These bikes (especially in carbon) do have a defined and usable lifespan unfortunately. Outside of that, you arent getting a new bike if it busts in 10 years (or whatever it is that they deem a 'lifetime' for that frame). One would think that the lifetime warranty may even be less on this frame, given how light it is.

In short, make sure you read the fineprint before committing or laying down your hard earned.

greyhoundtom wrote:I don't care what anyone says ......... I just want one........

May I refer you to http://www.hsv.com.au" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LOL.