New frame choice....advice appreciated.
Moderator: robbosmans
Unfortunately, having killed my SLR01, I need to get a new frame. Looking for a good all round race bike; light, stiff, some aero benefits and compliant.
I've narrowed it down to a SuperSix Evo Hi-Mod, an Izalco Max or a Canyon Ultimate C.F. SLX.
All are priced within a couple of hundred £. Can anybody with first hand experience offer advice please?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I've narrowed it down to a SuperSix Evo Hi-Mod, an Izalco Max or a Canyon Ultimate C.F. SLX.
All are priced within a couple of hundred £. Can anybody with first hand experience offer advice please?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
I don't have a ton of experience with it yet (and no race experience at all) but I just picked up a Supersix Hi-MOD this past winter (2016 version) and it's fantastic. Super light, stiff, climbs like a stabbed rat, handles like it's on rails, and it's unexpectedly comfortable.
I'd highly recommend it, especially with the nicer paint jobs of the 2017 frame.
I'd highly recommend it, especially with the nicer paint jobs of the 2017 frame.
-
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:10 am
i have an izalco max in the fourth season and absolutely love it.
the problem with topics like this one: nearly everybody will tell you, how great exactly his bike is!:-)
i think those are all good bike and one can choose bike in terms of aesthetics or geometry (cd and focus have quite similar geometry, canyon is, afaik, little different).
ps: the super six evo 16/17 generation is a no-go for me, because of pf30a and 25,4 mm seatpost, but if this does not bother you, its immaterial.
the problem with topics like this one: nearly everybody will tell you, how great exactly his bike is!:-)
i think those are all good bike and one can choose bike in terms of aesthetics or geometry (cd and focus have quite similar geometry, canyon is, afaik, little different).
ps: the super six evo 16/17 generation is a no-go for me, because of pf30a and 25,4 mm seatpost, but if this does not bother you, its immaterial.
-
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:10 am
yes, izalco uses pf30-no problems so far (around 20000 km with a lot of climbing) with rotor 4630 bb and 3d+.
I think all three bikes are in the same league.
In that case you look at things like preferred geometry or which one you think looks the nicest.
I was personally also looking at these bikes and just ordered me the izalco max. Main selling point for the focus for me compared to the other ones was that it had the most 'aggressive' geometry. (and I got a very nice deal)
In that case you look at things like preferred geometry or which one you think looks the nicest.
I was personally also looking at these bikes and just ordered me the izalco max. Main selling point for the focus for me compared to the other ones was that it had the most 'aggressive' geometry. (and I got a very nice deal)
reedplayer wrote:i have an izalco max in the fourth season and absolutely love it.
the problem with topics like this one: nearly everybody will tell you, how great exactly his bike is!:-)
i think those are all good bike and one can choose bike in terms of aesthetics or geometry (cd and focus have quite similar geometry, canyon is, afaik, little different).
ps: the super six evo 16/17 generation is a no-go for me, because of pf30a and 25,4 mm seatpost, but if this does not bother you, its immaterial.
Can you give any further information on the different geometry of the Canyon? I know the chainstays are 5mm longer (not great), but the angles look pretty similar. I think the toptube may be a little shorter?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:10 am
depends in which size. especially in smaller sizes, the focus-geometry is much-finer graded and lower.(stack/reach-relationhip).
this may, among others, result from seat angle, which is identical in all sizes at the canyon (73° if i remember right) and changing at the focus from size to size.
both offer 7 sizes, but the size range at the canyon is wider (from very small to very big), accordingly the focus geometry is finer graded.
yes, and as you say, chainstays/wheel base of canyon are significantly longer.
headtube angle canyon goes from 69,6-73,5°, Focus from 71-73,5°, fork rake focus 43 mm (regrettably no information at the canyon!).
cannondale and focus are similar, but focus is a bit more aggressive (as "weptunus" said).
quite interesting! -now i know, why i need a 15mm top cap with my focus!;-) (i am very "leggy", 174/85..)
this may, among others, result from seat angle, which is identical in all sizes at the canyon (73° if i remember right) and changing at the focus from size to size.
both offer 7 sizes, but the size range at the canyon is wider (from very small to very big), accordingly the focus geometry is finer graded.
yes, and as you say, chainstays/wheel base of canyon are significantly longer.
headtube angle canyon goes from 69,6-73,5°, Focus from 71-73,5°, fork rake focus 43 mm (regrettably no information at the canyon!).
cannondale and focus are similar, but focus is a bit more aggressive (as "weptunus" said).
quite interesting! -now i know, why i need a 15mm top cap with my focus!;-) (i am very "leggy", 174/85..)
Last edited by reedplayer on Sun May 14, 2017 10:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
reedplayer wrote:depends in which size. especially in smaller sizes, the focus-geometry is much-finer graded and lower.(stack/reach-relationhip).
this may, among others, result from seat angle, which is identical in all sizes at the canyon (73° if i remember right) and changing at the focus from size to size.
both offer 7 sizes, but the size range at the canyon is wider (from very small to very big), accordingly the focus geometry is finer graded.
yes, and as you say, chainstays/wheel base of canyon are significantly longer.
headtube angle canyon goes from 69,6-73,5°, Focus from 71-73,5°, fork rake focus 43 mm (regrettably no information at the canyon!).
cannondale and focus are similar, but focus is a bit more aggressive (as "weptunus" said).
quite interesting-now i know, why i need a 15mm top cap with my focus!;-) (i am very "leggy", 174/85..)
Great info; thanks.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:10 am
no problem-i love this "geometry-stuff". mostly affects my choice of frame, next to aesthetics.)
As far as geometry, are your highly flexible? Go for the more aggressive bike.
Ideally, you should get fitted to an adjustable stationary bike, such as the Retul Muve or Trek Precision Fit. Find out what your ideal stack and reach measurements are. No sense in spending thousands of dollars on a bike that doesn't fit like a glove.
Once you know what the ideal numbers are, it really narrows down the options. I was able to find a bike that was pretty much tailored exactly for me, as if it was custom. 98% of bikes out there were close but not cigar...
Ideally, you should get fitted to an adjustable stationary bike, such as the Retul Muve or Trek Precision Fit. Find out what your ideal stack and reach measurements are. No sense in spending thousands of dollars on a bike that doesn't fit like a glove.
Once you know what the ideal numbers are, it really narrows down the options. I was able to find a bike that was pretty much tailored exactly for me, as if it was custom. 98% of bikes out there were close but not cigar...
eyedrop wrote:As far as geometry, are your highly flexible? Go for the more aggressive bike.
Dude, the difference in most sizes (Evo vs Izalco) is about half a stem length increment. If a fit is achievable on one it's almost certainly achievable on the others as well.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
wingguy wrote:eyedrop wrote:As far as geometry, are your highly flexible? Go for the more aggressive bike.
Dude, the difference in most sizes (Evo vs Izalco) is about half a stem length increment. If a fit is achievable on one it's almost certainly achievable on the others as well.
Geometry is about much more than fit...
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk