-
-
But they are half the price of the bikes he's talking about.
So the same.
And specced the same...:)
-
You're just pissed nobody wants the 'midfoot' fad. Because it sounds like an Edwardian disease.
It's not a fad, it's just a solution to a problem I had and as for its popularity the only thing that annoys me about it being basically unknown is the difficulty in getting shoes for it.
As for wonky rings - chicks hate 'em. Fact.
-
Okay. The Canyon Ultimate CF looks good with 105. BUT, I can't test ride it...
I have an Athena-equipped one (52cm) you could try
-
Roll up, roll up, roll up. Cadence-enhancing juice! Roll up!
Ha. Its a suptle effect, and thats being generous.
I had a cadence average of < 70 when I started giving a shit about such things. This wasnt great for maintaing a smooth pedalling action. Pushing this up to 85 has made me far more effecient. The point was that the oval rings slightly worsened my stroke when low cadence mashing, and subsequently made it slightly more smooth when I improved my cadence. So the improvement curve was slighly steeper.
I assume Wiggo could pedal his bicycle proper before using them though.
I did have a thought while doing climbing intervals with a friend using the same cassette, and compact cranks. But round rings. When moving from seated to standing he shifts 2 sprockets. On my oval rings I only shift 1.
thats probably all bullshit.
But I'm not opposed to spending out on cool looking components. So meh.
[/Buyer]
-
Tenners would probably need a 62!
A 58, maybe...
In response to the PXs that were linked to that I cba to go back and quote now I pressed on JB's comment; The spec may be the same, but I doubt that the weight or characteristics of the frame will be up to speed with the Scott or a BMC. Or am I being naive?
-
A 58, maybe...
In response to the PXs that were linked to that I cba to go back and quote now I pressed on JB's comment; The spec may be the same, but I doubt that the weight or characteristics of the frame will be up to speed with the Scott or a BMC. Or am I being naive?
The PX Pro Carbon frame is respectably light. Can't vouch for 'characteristics'. But IME 'cheap' carbon frames are very good now, and it's not a huge difference to the high end stuff - and those are functionally no different, really. Just a nicer ride, classier finish/branding etc.
My brother's just gone for one of the Ultegra ones (he would probably have got a Canyon, as would I, but the Roadlite ALs are out of stock) so I'll have a test ride when it arrives and offer my opinion.
-
I have the Nanolight from Planet-X and have been stoked with it.
They fucked Andy.W around no doubt, maybe he nerged them one too many times, I'm not sure - but my experience with them has always been pretty good and I would consider using them again, in September.
-
what happened to andy?
-
I believe (but this is worth checking) that he bought a frame which when he put a wheel in with a 23c tyre it jammed against the brake bridge, Planet-X then dicked him about with regards to returning it, and there was some issue (possibly the same one?) with the replacement frame.
Basically, they had an opportunity to deliver really good customer service by making sure that a mistake was put right, but instead they were wankers about it.
hippy
miro_o
Tenderloin
JB
Shannonball
Smallfurry
Tenners
andy.w
Dammit
deleted
Regal
Oswald
dancing james-
Post a reply
About
Road bike recommendations
Posted by
@mashton
They helped me get my cadence up. They're hard work if you mash up and down with low cadence. But nice when you spin well. That's true of cycling in general of course. I just feel it's more pronounced with rotors.
Maybe perhaps.