|
Post by utriban on Aug 4, 2017 8:09:41 GMT
I still don't get this bike. They forgot the rack mounts... about as poor as forgetting the fork. Why? I mean, Ultra 900 and Ultra 720 or Mach don't come with rack mounts either. Nobody asks the same question about them?
|
|
|
Post by chas on Aug 4, 2017 9:09:10 GMT
I still don't get this bike. They forgot the rack mounts... about as poor as forgetting the fork. Why? I mean, Ultra 900 and Ultra 720 or Mach don't come with rack mounts either. Nobody asks the same question about them? See my previous post. Why do you want disc brakes on an Ultra? The direct mount brakes are better than a lot of discs in the dry and can take 28mm tyres. I want discs on my next bike for cx/winter but have heard enough stories of problems with contamination and sqealing to change for little percieved benefit on a summer bike. It may be the problems with disc development prompting B'twin to release them first on a premium sportive bike with quality components so as to avoid possible issues with a budget Triban allrounder which would be more practical in winter.
|
|
|
Post by chas on Aug 4, 2017 9:16:24 GMT
Or just forget discs for the time being and get a Triban 520, the new Sora works a treat and is cheap to maintain, the new wheels look strong and have cartridge bearings and it has the clearance for 28mm tyres and full guards Not sure that the 520 has enough on it for me to consider - I have the T5 with Aksiums and Cruds. The 'new' Sora and 28mm tyres on their own aren't enough for me to change. For me, potentially lighter, more responsive and a compact chainset need to come with the next commuter - In addition to the discs) If you're happy with Cruds then go for it, or the 500 due soon which has compact Sora. I have full SKS on my current winter bike but can only fit 23's, for me going to Cruds would seem a backward step despite the other benefits.
|
|
|
Post by r0b1et on Aug 4, 2017 9:21:51 GMT
I still don't get this bike. They forgot the rack mounts... about as poor as forgetting the fork. Why? I mean, Ultra 900 and Ultra 720 or Mach don't come with rack mounts either. Nobody asks the same question about them? Because they aren't setup to cope with load. I have locked up rim brakes. the brake is not the limiting factor on a bike's stopping and discs are ugly, heavy and unaerodynamic. Discs would be perfect on a tourer/light tourer. I'd rather like to buy a light tourer/winter bike. This would have been the bike, if they had put the holes in the frame. I am certain in Britain they would have sold many more if they had the mounts... it would be unlikely to put any buyer off, but the lack is completely putting off many.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisD on Aug 4, 2017 10:25:44 GMT
Or just forget discs for the time being and get a Triban 520, the new Sora works a treat and is cheap to maintain, the new wheels look strong and have cartridge bearings and it has the clearance for 28mm tyres and full guards Not sure that the 520 has enough on it for me to consider - I have the T5 with Aksiums and Cruds. The 'new' Sora and 28mm tyres on their own aren't enough for me to change. For me, potentially lighter, more responsive and a compact chainset need to come with the next commuter - In addition to the discs) I think this is the nub of the issue Paul. If you're experienced with Cruds (which I know you are), and can run with a seat post mounted rack cor the commutes, then you've got a bike that can take all the rigours of winter in its stride and maybe even tempt you to chose it over the Mach when the weather is good, especially if you want to mix it up with some multi-surface adventure or go out after a poor spell like we've had recently.
|
|
|
Post by utriban on Aug 4, 2017 11:27:14 GMT
Why? I mean, Ultra 900 and Ultra 720 or Mach don't come with rack mounts either. Nobody asks the same question about them? See my previous post. Why do you want disc brakes on an Ultra? The direct mount brakes are better than a lot of discs in the dry and can take 28mm tyres. I want discs on my next bike for cx/winter but have heard enough stories of problems with contamination and sqealing to change for little percieved benefit on a summer bike. It may be the problems with disc development prompting B'twin to release them first on a premium sportive bike with quality components so as to avoid possible issues with a budget Triban allrounder which would be more practical in winter. I did not say I wanted DB on Ultra, where did you see that? I asked why people were asking for rack mounts on GF? Looks to me like everybody pigeon-holes disc equipped road bike into some kind of work horse. I'm comparing those 3 to GF as, if you check the specs, GF is lighter and has better group-set and wheels than both 900 and Mach. That would, on paper, make it better road bike. And then, it comes with superior brakes, to boot. 720 with ultegra is only 200 grams lighter if that matters at all. HRD Rival, are simply better than rim brakes. You said yourself, in this country ... there's no such thing as guaranteed dry Sunday ride , but they are better dry or wet. Benefit to rims too. To answer you own concerns - contamination and squealing? 'They' talk a lot, don't they (to quote Tarantino's Mia). Nothing that can't be remedied with a squirt of water over the caliper.
|
|
|
Post by utriban on Aug 4, 2017 11:42:34 GMT
Why? I mean, Ultra 900 and Ultra 720 or Mach don't come with rack mounts either. Nobody asks the same question about them? Because they aren't setup to cope with load. I have locked up rim brakes. the brake is not the limiting factor on a bike's stopping and discs are ugly, heavy and unaerodynamic. ... Neither is GF. As mentioned in other post, GF is, on the paper, better road bike than Ultra 900 or Mach (lighter, better wheels and groupset). And then it has a superior brakes. Why not accept it for what it is - a road bike? It is not about locking up a rim brakes, it is about not locking them and getting more braking efficiency. And getting a faster and consistent reaction from your brakes. Discs are not overall heavier (GF is lighter than Mach and Ultra 900). Aerodynamic wise, not sure how much it really matters in this segment, but I've seen guys with bigger ears than brake calipers, and nobody went to have it corrected. Ugliness wise - I can think of quite a few things that take away more grace from the bike, but won't list them here
|
|
|
Post by r0b1et on Aug 4, 2017 11:50:43 GMT
Because they aren't setup to cope with load. I have locked up rim brakes. the brake is not the limiting factor on a bike's stopping and discs are ugly, heavy and unaerodynamic. ... Neither is GF. As mentioned in other post, GF is, on the paper, better road bike than Ultra 900 or Mach (lighter, better wheels and groupset). And then it has a superior brakes. Why not accept it for what it is - a road bike? It is not about locking up a rim brakes, it is about not locking them and getting more braking efficiency. And getting a faster and consistent reaction from your brakes. Discs are not overall heavier (GF is lighter than Mach and Ultra 900). Aerodynamic wise, not sure how much it really matters in this segment, but I've seen guys with bigger ears than brake calipers, and nobody went to have it corrected. Ugliness wise - I can think of quite a few things that take away more grace from the bike, but won't list them here But you are comparing totally different prices. you get the Ultra 720AF for LESS than the GF - so you get better groupset, better wheels, lighter bike. And as for superior brakes... tyres are the limiting factor, not the brake - and I use really high grip tyres compared to many on this forum, I can't see a disc being of any use at all on gatorskins for instance. You won't convince me disc brakes have a place on a summer road bike - or one not intended for taking load.
|
|
|
Post by utriban on Aug 4, 2017 12:18:35 GMT
Neither is GF. As mentioned in other post, GF is, on the paper, better road bike than Ultra 900 or Mach (lighter, better wheels and groupset). And then it has a superior brakes. Why not accept it for what it is - a road bike? It is not about locking up a rim brakes, it is about not locking them and getting more braking efficiency. And getting a faster and consistent reaction from your brakes. Discs are not overall heavier (GF is lighter than Mach and Ultra 900). Aerodynamic wise, not sure how much it really matters in this segment, but I've seen guys with bigger ears than brake calipers, and nobody went to have it corrected. Ugliness wise - I can think of quite a few things that take away more grace from the bike, but won't list them here But you are comparing totally different prices. you get the Ultra 720AF for LESS than the GF - so you get better groupset, better wheels, lighter bike. And as for superior brakes... tyres are the limiting factor, not the brake - and I use really high grip tyres compared to many on this forum, I can't see a disc being of any use at all on gatorskins for instance. Not it also has mechanical brakes, not hydraulics, and that's a pretty crap downside, loses almost all the benefits of discs and adds some issues. You won't convince me disc brakes have a place on a summer road bike - or one not intended for taking load. I'm not trying to convince you. You being a scientist type, I was hoping that facts would . But, this being a friendly exchange of opinions, it doesn't matter who gets convinced of what as long as we all consider each other's points. And your are well taken. You are right that those bikes are somewhat cheaper, but they are in the same ball park of equipment level, GF is even lacking on the frame. That's why I use them for a question of eyelets and weight comparison. Disc would work even better on gatorskins (I'm assuming those are notoriously brittle and skid-ish), because of better modulation. Disc finesse would enable you to get all you can from those tires, even as little they have to offer. BTW, GF has a hydro brakes, why would you think otherwise? Also, you are right about mostly summer bike, but the original poster is talking about winter commuting too. And, I'm coming from a similar place, where, living in a central London flat, I had to find one bike that does it all - year round commuting and year round fun riding, while keeping a reasonable chance of survival. For me, Rival HRD equipped bike delivers and that's why I'm pushing this one up for consideration. Having said all this, I would not get GF specifically, but for different reasons.
|
|
|
Post by jondxxx on Aug 4, 2017 12:33:13 GMT
You won't convince me disc brakes have a place on a summer road bike - or one not intended for taking load. No one's convinced the pro riders either, not even the sponsors.
|
|
|
Post by chas on Aug 4, 2017 19:20:34 GMT
See my previous post. Why do you want disc brakes on an Ultra? The direct mount brakes are better than a lot of discs in the dry and can take 28mm tyres. I want discs on my next bike for cx/winter but have heard enough stories of problems with contamination and sqealing to change for little percieved benefit on a summer bike. It may be the problems with disc development prompting B'twin to release them first on a premium sportive bike with quality components so as to avoid possible issues with a budget Triban allrounder which would be more practical in winter. I did not say I wanted DB on Ultra, where did you see that? I asked why people were asking for rack mounts on GF? Looks to me like everybody pigeon-holes disc equipped road bike into some kind of work horse. I'm comparing those 3 to GF as, if you check the specs, GF is lighter and has better group-set and wheels than both 900 and Mach. That would, on paper, make it better road bike. And then, it comes with superior brakes, to boot. 720 with ultegra is only 200 grams lighter if that matters at all. HRD Rival, are simply better than rim brakes. You said yourself, in this country ... there's no such thing as guaranteed dry Sunday ride , but they are better dry or wet. Benefit to rims too. To answer you own concerns - contamination and squealing? 'They' talk a lot, don't they (to quote Tarantino's Mia). Nothing that can't be remedied with a squirt of water over the caliper. Sorry for any confusion, it was meant as why would anyone want discs on an af,not you specifically. If you read my first post it said the afgf was designed for a different market as a sportive bike, we're talking about a workhorse in this thread because that's what Paul want's it for, and to me that means mudguard and rack eyes. My concerns aren't just based on 'them' talking, I've heard several squealing on clubruns, had to help someone who couldn't get his wheel back in after a puncture and tried to rectify squealing ineffective contaminated pads in the workshop and to suggest it can be remedied with a quick squirt of water is frankly bo**ocks. I appreciate the advantages in some situations, I built my daughter a cx bike with them on a few years ago but ended up replacing them with cantilevers... things have admittedly moved on since then and my next bike will probably have them but they're not the magic cure for all ills that some seem to think.
|
|
|
Post by Paulinblack on Aug 4, 2017 21:17:10 GMT
Good to have debates going on here about this.....
So, to take it off on another tangent.
Does the 520 AFGF represent VFM ?
How does it compare with other manufacturers?
The price tag seems a little high to me (for what I want it for).
|
|
|
Post by ChrisD on Aug 4, 2017 22:24:10 GMT
Good to have debates going on here about this..... So, to take it off on another tangent. Does the 520 AFGF represent VFM ? How does it compare with other manufacturers? The price tag seems a little high to me (for what I want it for). Quite a range out there with SRAM Rival HRD groupos on alloy frames. From PX London Road at £999 (though it's a 1x drivetrain and has Gippemme Roccia wheels) through the Alpkit Sonder Camino (also 1x) up to CAAD 10 at £1800 (Fulcrum Racing Sport wheels) although this is now an old model bike and can be had for about £1200 or less now. I think the CAAD 10 is the closest match as a sportive bike with 22 speed drivetrain. The other two bikes are all clearly rounders with mounts all over the place, especially on the Camino. Looking at the reviews on the Deca website it seems there are other folk who want the bike to be an all purpose workhorse come gravel/CX bike and I think we have to face that fact that this is a designed as a long distance race machine that might be a little more flexible and forgiving of British weather and road surfaces than your usual race pedigree bike. EDIT: I note in a response to one of the reviews on the Deca site that there is mention of the gravel bike that Deca have planned for 2018, which I believe is likely to have a 1x drivetrain.
|
|
|
Post by KiwiBeard on Aug 8, 2017 23:53:45 GMT
Good to have debates going on here about this..... So, to take it off on another tangent. Does the 520 AFGF represent VFM ? How does it compare with other manufacturers? The price tag seems a little high to me (for what I want it for). Merida have a new 'Gravel' range coming out soon. Google is failing me atm, but from what I remember: disc brakes 35mm tyres as standard (something something Maxxis), clearance for more 40-something not sure if it has rack mounts, but they have new bikepacking bags designed to fit
|
|
|
Post by KiwiBeard on Aug 9, 2017 0:00:46 GMT
|
|