What's the difference?

[The Saint]

Fundamentally bicycles all look the same and have the same design - well to the average Joe in the street like me. I mean if you took the stickers off 3 or 4 different makes would you be able to tell the difference? Most of us swear by certain brands maybe through reliability or just plain looks.

But what really make one bike better than the other (other than fitted components) or is it just plain straight forward perception by the rider.

 

[turtlek]

individual aspects engulf the rider to disapprove or approve of the bike

[Canaris]

mux, it is like beers, wine and brandies and whiskey, most people just drink the stuff and make it up as they go along to "be" cool. ?However, there are those that can tell the diference. ?A well set-up bike is better than a poorly set-up bike. ?Some frame geometeries make it easier to fit the bike to the rider. ?Some bikes are stiffer ext, but it takes a guy with some experience to tell the difference though.

[The Saint]

Ja fair enough but what would those individual aspects be - such as would a bike with a curved rear stay be better than a bike with straight rear stays - is there any noticable difference in the ride.

 

So what I really want to know for want of an example is what makes people say that one full carbon frame is better than another full carbon frame. I mean if the fundamental design is the same and they both have 5 layers of carbon or whatever the case may be surely they should be equally as good.

[Canaris]

eeeeyooo,

toomuchinformation

pm scorpione or johan boardman, they love that type of suff

[turtlek]

then it is up to personal prefference or up to an experienced rider as Kona pointed out

[The Saint]

Sorry guys I know it is late but I really just want to know why people say things such as a Cannondale is better than a Look and so on.

 

I need some justification to those sorts of statements. Dura Ace on a Look is the same as Dura Ace on a Cannondale so that can't be it. Fit exacty the same components to different frames and what makes one better than the other?

 

Or is it maybe just Amstel vs Castle and a matter of taste rather than technicality?

[The Saint]

eeeeyooo' date='

toomuchinformation

pm scorpione or johan boardman, they love that type of suff

[/quote']

 

LOL Johan was here, I think he ran away when he saw this one

[turtlek]

taste v technicality xcept if you look at a 10grand carbon frame and a 20grand carbon frame then there is a big difference

[Canaris]

 

Sorry guys I know it is late but I really just want to know why people say things such as a Cannondale is better than a Look and so on.

?

I need some justification to those sorts of statements. Dura Ace on a Look is the same as Dura Ace on a Cannondale so that can't be it. Fit exacty the same components to different frames and what makes one better than the other?

?

Or is it maybe just Amstel vs Castle and a matter of taste rather than technicality?

 

crux luvs cannondale. ?enough said.

I luv what I cannot afford.

[IanJ]

Mine is the Best !

 

End of discussion

 

 

[The Saint]

MMMM Ok let me go do some research on Frames with reletivly the same building components by different manufacturers and I will then ressurect this thread so we can find the technical differences as to what would make one better than the other. 

[The Saint]

Mine is the Best !

 

End of discussion

 

 

Ian you are not helping

[IanJ]

Mine is the Best !

 

End of discussion

 

 

Ian you are not helping

 

Precisely, that is my point, it boils down to personal opinion. Much the same as with cars etc.

 

I ride a Bianchi with Dura Ace components and I make a point of not getting involved in the Shimano/Campy/XYZ debates because everyone will always have their favourites and you get used to what you ride.

 

I don't think I would be able to feel much difference between most of the top end frames and i don't think it would affect my race times that much.

 

 

[Tumbleweed]

i get asked this in the lbs every weekend. most alu bikes are made of the same grade material. there's not much diffs in carbon weaves, although read the bumpf and they actually provide molecular diagrams, which is, like, gonna sell how many frames to chemical engineers? it is a top-end thing. i read a bike review that marcel wust did recently, in which he said the bike (note to self: find copy of procycling and insert brand here) tested was the best ever. i reckon he does that every six months or so...a compact bike is going to give you a harder, more reponsive ride, but is that what is best for you, blah, blah...

 

 

 

i'm going with ianj on this one.

[AndreZA]

I will go with fit.  The best bike I've ever had was my 1994 Sancini. Looking past the fact that it was steel, the fit was perfect. I could ride days on this thing never feel any discomfort. I know you can tweek todays frames with stem lenghts and layback seatpost but with the staight off-the-floor parts that hing was perfect for me. I've got longer legs then torso. So I need a 57 frame with a 56 top tube. You do not get those except in Bianchi (and the Sancinis were build using their geometry).