Bike frame recommendations?

[kgt]

If you really appreciate high quality and you can get the Time Alpe d'Huez at a good price just go for it. If you just want to ride the frame for a season or two any frame will do the job fine.

[reedplayer]

izalco max only for those who think, they can stand its simple, reduced design for a longer period of time (no design embellishment at all, no refernce to any current fashion.... be aware of this). i am on izalco max since about 5 years, but its simplicity is not everybodys taste (especially on boards like tis..)

the timealpe d` huez imo is intriguing.

[Drappo]

+ 1 Cervelo R5
Alhoa

[Zoose]

Can I ask why you don't want to buy a Ridley again? What about the helium slx put you off?

[froze]

Welcome to the world of Ridley, glad you could join us. I had a Ridley Scandium bike and the frame cracked at the top of the head tube extending about a 1/2 inch from the headset, Ridley wouldn't cover it under warranty saying it was due to fatigue...fatigue after 8,000 miles? right, anyway it would have cost me more in court to fight it then it was worth.

Not sure why after a frame broke you're still incessant about getting a sub 900 gram frame, you can't have both light weight and strength, you have to choose one or the other. Changing discipline from road to cross
or a gravel bike will get you a stronger CF bike because they have to be made to take more punishment.

The Trek Boone 5 is a good example, it even has a shock absorption system built into the frame; also the Specialized CruX Elite X1 is another serious contender. Both of those two have excellent warranty service and Specialized has a bit better quality control then Trek, but either would be good bikes. However going back to road bikes, Bianchi does make a road bike called the Intenso that is designed for abusive roads that most people ride on. Bianchi is the only company using NASA aerospace CF for extreme conditions called countervail viscoelastic material which is embedded across the entire frame, and it's designed for heavier riders that most people are, this is a very tough frame; these can be had with either 105 or Ultegra, with disk or no disks on either groupset. Personally I think 105 is just fine, it's what I have on my Lynskey and it's been great, though I do have a Ultegra rear derailleur. Disk brakes? I could care less about using disk brakes on a standard road bike unless I was using carbon wheels which I will never use. Another option is the Trek Madone LTD (the one that has the IsoSpeed decoupler, I think that one does) anyways the IsoSpeed not only makes the bike more forgiving to ride but in increases the durability of the frame by reducing the constant banging that eventually wears out a CF frame, and Trek goes on to strengthen the frame as well, so that too is a great bike to consider on the road end of things. Another option is Giant's Endurance CF bike called the Defy Advanced, this is built very strong as well.

Keep in mind too that if you go with either a road bike or a cross bike your most durable frames will be from the low to mid level range of bikes, from high mid to high the durability will drop considerably. You "should" be looking at bikes at the 1000 gram area if you want it to last, which is what I'm gathering from your comments about the previous frame breaking. 100 gram difference is nothing! yet it adds considerable strength to the frame, for example, when I chose my CF fork for my Lynskey after a lot of research I settled on Enve, Enve makes two forks a 1.0 and a 2.0, the 1.0 was rated for a 240 (if I remember this figure correctly) pound rider, and the 2.0 was rated for a 350 (this figure is correct) rider, I only weigh 170 so the 1.0 would be fine right? Yes it would except I like my stuff over engineered, so I got the 2.0; the 2.0 only cost me 42 grams of weight which is nothing but I got a much stronger fork as you can see. The same thing can be said for wheels, the higher end wheels have less spokes but those spokes are under higher tension which means the spokes are more liable to snap, plus more spokes under less stress are not only more durable but also ride more comfortable to ride, but if you're a lighter rider this isn't as critical as the frame is for durability.

Like everyone here i'm just giving an opinion. But I hope I gave some valid options for you to consider and the reasons why. I went with titanium because I wanted a lifetime frame like steel is but lighter than steel, and I wanted a more comfortable frame to ride on then what any CF frame has to offer...not sure how comfortable the Trek's Iso decoupler rides because it wasn't around when I test rode a bunch of CF bikes but it sounds interesting, just not interesting enough for me to buy one! LOL!!

[Neoides]

Can I ask why you don't want to buy a Ridley again? What about the helium slx put you off?

I've had several Ridleys. The heliums SLX seemed a bit too fragile. Previous to the car crash, a different frame i had broke because the bike merely fell over, inside the house.

[Neoides]

Welcome to the world of Ridley, glad you could join us. I had a Ridley Scandium bike and the frame cracked at the top of the head tube extending about a 1/2 inch from the headset, Ridley wouldn't cover it under warranty saying it was due to fatigue...fatigue after 8,000 miles? right, anyway it would have cost me more in court to fight it then it was worth.

Not sure why after a frame broke you're still incessant about getting a sub 900 gram frame, you can't have both light weight and strength, you have to choose one or the other. Changing discipline from road to cross
or a gravel bike will get you a stronger CF bike because they have to be made to take more punishment.

The Trek Boone 5 is a good example, it even has a shock absorption system built into the frame; also the Specialized CruX Elite X1 is another serious contender. Both of those two have excellent warranty service and Specialized has a bit better quality control then Trek, but either would be good bikes. However going back to road bikes, Bianchi does make a road bike called the Intenso that is designed for abusive roads that most people ride on. Bianchi is the only company using NASA aerospace CF for extreme conditions called countervail viscoelastic material which is embedded across the entire frame, and it's designed for heavier riders that most people are, this is a very tough frame; these can be had with either 105 or Ultegra, with disk or no disks on either groupset. Personally I think 105 is just fine, it's what I have on my Lynskey and it's been great, though I do have a Ultegra rear derailleur. Disk brakes? I could care less about using disk brakes on a standard road bike unless I was using carbon wheels which I will never use. Another option is the Trek Madone LTD (the one that has the IsoSpeed decoupler, I think that one does) anyways the IsoSpeed not only makes the bike more forgiving to ride but in increases the durability of the frame by reducing the constant banging that eventually wears out a CF frame, and Trek goes on to strengthen the frame as well, so that too is a great bike to consider on the road end of things. Another option is Giant's Endurance CF bike called the Defy Advanced, this is built very strong as well.

Keep in mind too that if you go with either a road bike or a cross bike your most durable frames will be from the low to mid level range of bikes, from high mid to high the durability will drop considerably. You "should" be looking at bikes at the 1000 gram area if you want it to last, which is what I'm gathering from your comments about the previous frame breaking. 100 gram difference is nothing! yet it adds considerable strength to the frame, for example, when I chose my CF fork for my Lynskey after a lot of research I settled on Enve, Enve makes two forks a 1.0 and a 2.0, the 1.0 was rated for a 240 (if I remember this figure correctly) pound rider, and the 2.0 was rated for a 350 (this figure is correct) rider, I only weigh 170 so the 1.0 would be fine right? Yes it would except I like my stuff over engineered, so I got the 2.0; the 2.0 only cost me 42 grams of weight which is nothing but I got a much stronger fork as you can see. The same thing can be said for wheels, the higher end wheels have less spokes but those spokes are under higher tension which means the spokes are more liable to snap, plus more spokes under less stress are not only more durable but also ride more comfortable to ride, but if you're a lighter rider this isn't as critical as the frame is for durability.

Like everyone here i'm just giving an opinion. But I hope I gave some valid options for you to consider and the reasons why. I went with titanium because I wanted a lifetime frame like steel is but lighter than steel, and I wanted a more comfortable frame to ride on then what any CF frame has to offer...not sure how comfortable the Trek's Iso decoupler rides because it wasn't around when I test rode a bunch of CF bikes but it sounds interesting, just not interesting enough for me to buy one! LOL!!

My first Helium slx cracked a top tube by falling over from a static position onto carpet. no joke.

I have a proper 700X43c gravel bike and it is a lot of fun. I do XC trails with it (and hopefully in a couple of months will be able to again), but it isn't really a lot of fun on road rides (although a 1:1 gear ratio was quite handy at times). I Just want to have a light climbing bike around the uci limit and properly useable. I hope that technology has advanced enough to have great bikes that are a tad bit durable too. It isn't like I want to do dirt jumps with them. The Helium SLX could be ridden through hell, but had its weak spots, i'm hoping its competitors will be a bit more sturdy.

Thanks for the input, though, I appreciate it. And BTW the iso decoupler is black magic. I rode the new Madone SLR and it was something else; incredible. Just not into aero frames at the moment