New to the road bike scene looking for first build advise

[cramil]

I'm a mountain biker looking to get onto a road bike. Been doing some reading and looking at bikes and options. I've narrowed my option so far to Cannondale CAAD10 because of the great price to performance ratio and upgradeability. First off am I missing another option to the CAAD? I did see some good deals on some SuperSix setups.

Here's my dilemma that I could use some help with. I have 2 bikes I am looking at at the same price point. Hoping to get some discussion on which would be the best base to start a beginner light weight road bike build from?

Bike 1: 2012 CAAD10 black on white
Shifters: SRAM Red
Rear Derailleur: SRAM Red
Front Derailleur: Sram Rival
Crankset: SRAM Force
Rims/Wheels: Mavic Aksium Race
Stock prologo saddle and cockpit, 105 pedals and cages

Bike 2: 2012 CAAD10 white on red
Shifters: Shimano Ultegra
Rear Derailleur: Shimano Ultegra
Front Derailleur: Shimano Ultegra
Crankset: FSA SLK Light
Rims/Wheels: Mavic Aksium
Stock prologo saddle and cockpit, no pedals no cages

[BikeAnon]

Bike 2. Because I hate SRAM shifters after mine broke on day one of the most important race-weekend of my season last year.

It looked like what happened to this guy:
http://exit17.net/2012/01/03/dear-sram/

As quickly as I could, I tossed the SRAM in the bin, and installed Shimano.

Google "sram shift lever broken". Then do the same for Shimano.

Also, the crankset on option two will be lighter.

[cramil]

I've read the durability issues on the SRAM and really it is about the only down side. I like the double tap shift feel as the Shimano lever shifting has so much throw. And then there's the weight, the SRAM stuff across the board is lighter. I do appreciate the proven durability of Ultegra and bike 2 does have Ultegra brakes vs bike 1's SRAM off brand. Some further research and the crank sets even seem close to a wash. FSA maybe a little lighter. Hmmm this is tough.

[Marin]

Bike 1, if it's going to be a light build, Red will be tons lighter than Ultegra. 1st thing you do with either options is to replace the Aksiums and get some light wheels to drop 600g.

SRAM is very durable, I have 3 bikes with Red/Force/Rival and no issues.

OTOH, Ultegra STIs sometimes eat shifter cables, which can be a pain to get out again when it happens.

[BikeAnon]

What bottom bracket do these have? Do you ever anticipate getting a crank-based power meter?

[mimason]

Which bike looks better? What shifting do you prefer? If neutral get the lighter one.

[davidalone]

As a mechanical engineer who has taken apart SRAM shifters... theres a reason why they cost less and are lighter. because the internals use very aggressive machining and in some cases, questionable design principles....

there is no doubt from an engineering perspective that SRAM's design is inherently less durable than shimano. I raced with SRAM for 3 seasons. and had 3 components fail on me- Front D, and two right shifters. Two just before major races. I had two race crashes where the brake lever popped out of the housing- repairable, but not on the roadside. This is not something that would have happened on a shimano part thanks to internal pins. I also found SRAM slightly more fussy to keep in tune.

I stuck with it for so long because I liked the ergonomics and shifting.... but I have not had a shimano part fail on me in 4 seasons, in various incarnations. I had a cable break on me while on a ride.... thats about it.

Not to say SRAM is bad. If I had a spare bike, or a full time mechanic at my beck and call, I'd choose SRAM. they obviously designed their product with lightweight, ergonomics, and cost as the main principles, and longevity and durability falling behind. If those are more important to you, then sure go SRAM. for my money I'd go shimano.

I've used both FSA-SLK and SRAM Force cranks. neither are horrible, neither are super fantastic. It would come down to what rings are on those cranks. The SRAM rings a slightly better, but not by alot. splitting hairs, here, really.

If you were going with jsut these two options I'd go with the one that aesthetically appeals to you more, though. theres not much difference between the two, and a bike you LIKE more will be RIDDEN more.

Other bang for buck options I'd look at are Canyon, the Fuji Transonic, Aluminium Giant Propel, the new aluminium specialized Venge, all of which offer alot of bike for the money.

[BikeAnon]

I'll also agree that the crank difference is minimal, with neither being what I'd buy if I were doing it all over again.

AND, I'm saying this with FSA SLK Lite on my good bike, and SRAM Force on my beater-bike. If I had to tell the difference between the two without a scale, I couldn't. With a scale... big difference. I'll see if I can get the weights for you later.

If I had to pick one over the other for maintenance, I'd pick the SRAM, because FSA MegaExo bearings are too proprietary.

If those bikes were the only ones left once I narrowed my search, I would pick things like the frame-color before I worried about the differences in these cranks.

In my example, my cranks are BSA bottom brackets.

[cramil]

Thank you everyone for you feedback so far. Really trying to take it all in.

So one of these is a 56 and the other is a 58. I road the 56 around a bit without dialing in the seat and in sneakers on 105 pedals and it didn't seem too far from acceptable. Haven't laid hands on the 58 but have thrown my leg over and sat up on one in a LBS. definitely seemed bigger but again didn't get the seat right and no pedals or ride on it. At first i assumed 56 or 58 should be about right for my 6'0" long arm long leg frame, but after sitting on the 58 and doing a little reading I thought I should check out a fit calculator. Problem is these numbers are difficult to cross reference to the Cannondale geometry.

From the CC fit calculator
My Measurements:
Inseam: 89
Trunk: 61
Forearm: 38
Arm: 72.5
Thigh: 66
Lower Leg: 59.5
Sternal Notch: 151
Total Body Height: 182.5

Competitive Fit:
Seat Tube Range c–c: 57.6 - 58.2 cm
Seat Tube Range c–t: 59.4 - 59.9 cm
Top Tube Length: 56.2 - 56.6 cm
Stem Length: 11.9 - 12.5 cm
BB–Saddle Position: 78.5 - 80.5 cm
Saddle Handlebar: 56.4 - 57 cm
Saddle Setback: 7 - 7.4 cm

I know that sizing is a complicated thing that the Internet can't directly solve. Just hoping this could get me in the ballpark then fine tune with adjustments and components as needed. I jus hope that a 58 wouldn't put me to far to one end of the spectrum.

Thanks!

[Multebear]

If the two you choose between are different sizes, then forget everything else than choosing the right size. You can forget all about SRAM vs. Shimano, and SRAM vs. FSA. If the size isn't right, you will eventually switch bike or at least frame. You'll need to try both with cycling shoes and with the right saddle hight, preferably the right stem as well. The right fit is everything.

If we are only looking at groupset difference, I would take the following statement under consideration. If you really want to ride your bike, and ride the sh*t out of it, then durability trumps weight any day. Shimano Ultegra has proven itself over decades.

As a mechanical engineer who has taken apart SRAM shifters... theres a reason why they cost less and are lighter. because the internals use very aggressive machining and in some cases, questionable design principles....

there is no doubt from an engineering perspective that SRAM's design is inherently less durable than shimano.

[BikeAnon]

I'll echo what Multebear just said. Fit is most important. I would rather have a mid-range bike that fits over a top-end bike that doesn't.

That said, there's not a ton of difference between 56 and 58. I'm 6'2", and ride 58cm with 100mm stems, and short-reach (80mm) handlebars. If I swapped to a 56cm bike, and put on a 120 stem, I'd be fine. With "virtual frame sizes" and long seat tubes available, I'm now convinced that stack and reach are the only things that matter in bike fit (when it comes to picking the frame).

There are plenty of people who run 56 frames, that could use 58s. I doubt that the opposite is true. If a 56's top tube is too long, using an 80 stem isn't going to feel great.

[cramil]

Well I'm in an interesting position now. I ended up with two bikes (don't ask lol). One was the 58cm CAAD10 3 Ultegra 6700 10spd and the FSA SLK Light cranks. It is in pretty good shape with minimal component wear. The other is a CAAD10 56cm Bike Doctor edition which I love the look of. Has all new Ultegra 6800 11spd including a new crankset with Hawk racing adapter/bearings. They are both set up differently for reach etc. I have ridden around on both and the size does seem close. First thing I did was swap the 25mm setback post from the 58 to the 56 and the 0 setback post from the 56 to the 58. That got them feeling pretty close. With some work on stem length I'll be able to get the size dialed in.

I think the only sticking point I have now is with the crankset. Carbon FSA SLK Light vs Alloy Ultegra 6800? Looking just at price of these cranks you would think the FSA would win out. After way to many hours searching the interwebs I don't think it will be worth it to swap the cranks.

Thoughts in general on my ramblings?

I'll post up some pics of the final build, but for now I just wanna get out and ride. (oh yea and sell an extra CAAD10 I have lol)

[Tinea Pedis]

Google "sram shift lever broken". Then do the same for Shimano.

Google 'cable frayed in shifter Shimano'. Then do the same for SRAM.

No grouppo is perfect.

[Dez33]

I think the only sticking point I have now is with the crankset. Carbon FSA SLK Light vs Alloy Ultegra 6800? Looking just at price of these cranks you would think the FSA would win out. After way to many hours searching the interwebs I don't think it will be worth it to swap the cranks.

Thoughts in general on my ramblings? )

I've used both, keep the Ultegra 6800, way better than the FSA.

[Wookski]

It sounds like spreadsheet time- $ per gram saved will fast become the key metric moving forward!