Cell bikes or others offering value for money?
- Brods1675
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:46 pm
- Location: Flinders Island, Tasmania
Cell bikes or others offering value for money?
Postby Brods1675 » Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:58 pm
I've read a bit about Cell bikes through these forums. Can anyone tell me if their frames are, firstly not compact and large enough for my height of 200cm. I see they do a 62 cm frame. They look to provide good components for a reasonable price, especially when compared against some of the bigger names.
I've been particularly looking at the Cell Triumph and Cell Team. However in the 62cm frame the top tube in these two bikes seems to differ by a fair bit, with the Triumph being the longer, hence perhaps more suitable for my height and reach. The Triumph has carbon rear & forks, carbon seat post, a mix of Ultegra & 105 and R550 wheels. It also looks tasty, which lets face it, is important.
As always I'm looking for the thoughts & input of all you geniuses out there.
Cheers, Andrew.
- sogood
- Posts: 17168
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Sydney AU
- Brods1675
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:46 pm
- Location: Flinders Island, Tasmania
- sogood
- Posts: 17168
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Sydney AU
Postby sogood » Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:35 pm
Ok, so it is based on subjective judgement.Brods1675 wrote:I understand your point of view, but a mate of mine has a Giant with a large frame, and frankly looks silly perched on top of it. I'm the one who has to feel comfortable on the bike, and part of that is 'feeling' comfortable with the look.
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
- europa
- Posts: 7334
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:51 am
- Location: southern end of Adelaide - home of hills, fixies and drop bears
- sogood
- Posts: 17168
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Sydney AU
Postby sogood » Sat Sep 01, 2007 6:13 pm
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
- Brods1675
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:46 pm
- Location: Flinders Island, Tasmania
Postby Brods1675 » Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:09 pm
- europa
- Posts: 7334
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:51 am
- Location: southern end of Adelaide - home of hills, fixies and drop bears
Postby europa » Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:55 pm
Sadly though, at 6'7", I doubt anything off the rack is going to fit you - used to that are you?
How about you contact Tim at Velosmith and see what he can build you. I nearly bought from him but chased a cheaper price instead ... and wound up spending more on the exercise than his bike would have cost to get something that's not quite right whereas from him, the chances of that would have been less or none (when I consider what went wrong).
You can put stupid seat posts and ridiculous stems on frames that are too small. 'tis better to have the right frame to start with. Have a yarn with Tim and see what he can do, and don't be put off by the price - how many duds do you want to buy before you accept the inevitable (again, I'm thinking of your unusual by cycling standards, height).
Richard
- Brods1675
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:46 pm
- Location: Flinders Island, Tasmania
Postby Brods1675 » Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:30 pm
As indicated the fun police has stepped in and said that $2K was too much, so I'm now working inside that sort of price range.....
- sogood
- Posts: 17168
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Sydney AU
Postby sogood » Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:11 pm
Not true. With compact frames, you have to get their virtual top tube lengths to compare with traditional geometry frames. At the end of the day, all you'll need to worry are the three contact points. At 200cm, you might care to consider custom frames.Brods1675 wrote:From what I've seen of bikes with compact frames the top tubes and overall geometry are smaller than more standard frames. I'm 200 cm, or 6'7" in the old language, so need something to accomodate this. hence my talking about top tube length and overall reach to the handlebars.
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
- toolonglegs
- Posts: 15463
- Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
- Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!
Postby toolonglegs » Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:21 pm
- mikesbytes
- Super Mod
- Posts: 22182
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
- Location: Tempe, Sydney
- Contact:
Postby mikesbytes » Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:31 pm
http://www.honedesign.com/sites/giant/m ... _road.html
At your size, I would guess that the features of a compact frame are negated. It would be interesting to hear from some really tall guys who ride compacts.
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Sydney
Postby triode12 » Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:41 pm
A fellow rider on a Bike North ride today, recounted a crash he witnessed involving a person on a Cell carbon bike.
Apparently the owner of the cell bike tried to overtake him and his female companion on the left (inside). This was just before his friend was about to turn left. The Cell bike owner crashed and turned his carbon frame into splinters.
-
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:28 pm
- Location: Sydney south
Postby Zujan » Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:02 pm
From Cervelo site;
A sloping frame is a frame that has the toptube higher and the headtube than at the seattube, as opposed to a traditional frame that has a horizontal toptube. It really doesn't change anything important in the geometry, the headtube, bottom bracket and saddle, the only points you connect with on a bike, are still in the same spot.
There are however some small differences between sloping and traditional frames that can be exploited in design. If you have two frames that are made identically except for the sloping vs. horizontal toptube, then the following can be observed:
1) slightly higher bottom bracket stiffness for the sloping frame
2) slightly higher torsional stiffness for the horizontal toptube frame
3) slightly lighter frame with the sloping toptube
4) slightly lighter seatpost with the horizontal toptube frame
5) slightly more seatpost compliance with the sloping frame.
Issues 3 and 4 are a wash, and for us at Cervélo the choice between sloping and horizontal depends on what combination we are looking for out of 1, 2 and 5. For our Road bikes, which have plenty of bb and torsional stiffness anyway, we go with a sloping toptube (or a dropped toptube on the tri bikes which has the same effect) to get a bit more seatpost compliance.
Compact geometry is the use of a sloping toptube to convince people you only need to make 3-4 sizes. As is obvious from the above, nothing changes in the way a bike fits when you make the toptube sloping. So if you need six sizes in a traditional geometry, then you still need six if it is sloping. Henceforth we're not big believers in compact geometry. But the terms compact and sloping are really used interchangeably by many people, so make sure you understand
2010 Cervelo R3/SRAM Red, 3T Team,Fulcrum Racing 1
- Brods1675
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:46 pm
- Location: Flinders Island, Tasmania
Postby Brods1675 » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:44 am
Just as a side line I saw that Trek 1.5 is available in a 64cm frame. I have considered Cannondale, and even know the local dealers. My biggest problem is I got in big trouble for wanting to spend $2000 on a Trek 1.7 (new 2008 model which comes out soon), so this sort of rules out Cannondale, as from my understanding they're more than that.
I note the comment about the Cell carbon frame, presumably still under warranty but you've got to survive the prang to claim the warranty.
- toolonglegs
- Posts: 15463
- Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
- Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!
Postby toolonglegs » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:47 am
No warranty in prangs...wish there was Bicycle Aus insurance thou.
A trek 64 sounds pretty good.
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Sydney
Postby triode12 » Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:57 am
The Cannondale CAAD9 Optimo with 105 drivetrain and tri bars was $2300. It was a current model back then so it should be cheaper now, it being the end of the model year.
What about a custom 531 Lugged Steel Frame from Cecil Walker?
http://www.cecilwalker.com.au/category105_1.htm
$1100 for the frame
$290 for Shimano 550 wheels from Cell bikes
$590 for Ultegra gruppo from Pro Bike Kit.
$200 build fee from LBS
$2185
Just a bit over your budget. But it'll last for years and fit you right (that is if you get your measurements right tho).
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Sydney
Postby triode12 » Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:09 am
The CAAD models are designed for racing while the Synapse models are more for recreational riding (more comfy geometry).Brods1675 wrote:what's the difference between the Cannondale CAAD and Synapse models? There seem to be so many different models offered I'm getting a bit lost....
CAAD9
Cannondale Advanced Aluminum Design. The starting point that leads to finish lines. For riders who race, not pose. The all-new Cannondale CAAD9—advanced aluminum design, advanced further. CAAD9: Rated #1 in torsion-al stiffness by VeloNews magazine.
SYNAPSE ALLOY
An overachievement in aluminum frame design. Sloping top tube, longer head tube, hydroformed S.A.V.E. chain stays, and biaxial hourglass sloping seat stays combine for all-day performance riding comfort.
And the CAAD models are made in the US while the Synapse models are made in Taiwan.
I have a suspicion that Giant manufactures the Synapse frames for Cannondale. Like they do for many other manufacturers including Trek and Specialized.
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Sydney
-
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:35 am
- Location: Sydney
- Brods1675
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:46 pm
- Location: Flinders Island, Tasmania
Postby Brods1675 » Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:49 am
Just a bit over your budget. But it'll last for years and fit you right (that is if you get your measurements right tho).[/quote][/quote]quote]What about a custom 531 Lugged Steel Frame from Cecil Walker?
http://www.cecilwalker.com.au/category105_1.htm
$1100 for the frame
$290 for Shimano 550 wheels from Cell bikes
$590 for Ultegra gruppo from Pro Bike Kit.
$200 build fee from LBS
$2185
This certainly becomes an option but means creative accounting becomes necessary. Perhaps I order the frame and tell her the 'bike' cost $1100.
Return to “Buying a bike / parts”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.