rctoyguy

I'm shopping for a new road bike (first road bike, actually) and at the $1200-$1700 range, it looks like I can do an aluminum frame with nicer components (Ultegra) or a carbon frame with a step below in components (105).

Which would be a better way to go? I don't expect to ever upgrade anything other than *maybe* wheels/tires, so basing this on keeping the bike as it comes from here on out..

55/Rad

Frame. A great frame with average components can still be a great bike. An average frame, no matter the components, is still an average ride.

55/Rad

pathdoc

I firmly believe in buying the best frame you can afford. You can always swap out components.

astrodaimler

Lungs

woodcycl

I agree with Pathdoc and 55!! But, if you throw in another option ... I'd say the "engine" ... i.e. Your Fitness. Otherwise, go with a nice frame ... and upgrade as you go along.

rctoyguy

Oh, I agree - the engine definitely needs work - but I can't buy one of those, I just have to make it myself and I'm looking for the best tool to do it.

I guess I was thinking that "average" components might cause enough trouble that the rides would be too frustrating to stay with it --- on the other hand, 105 components are probably good enough to be reasonably trouble free. Is that a safe assumption? I'm only talking about the difference in 105 and Ultegra.

merlinextraligh

Definitely the frame. Componets wear out and get replaced. A good frame will last a long time.

BillyBob

I have Ultegra on an AL frame, and 105 components on a nice steel frame.

The Ultegra components on the AL frame are gathering dust.

105 components are solid performers.

soccerismylife

The only thing I would be worried about is if the all carbon frame is really any better than the aluminum frame. Trek has the 2000 series with an aluminum frame and carbon seatstays. For the most part, its ultegra components. Now they also have the 5000 series which are all carbon but with 105. (I don't know what brand you're looking at, but this seems like it's the same situation.) The full carbon model was about 400 dollars more expensive than the al model but when I test rode it, it felt noodely and unresponsive. The al model was much stiffer and felt better for what I was going to do with it (mostly racing and fast group rides). So just because it's all carbon doesn't mean it's necessarily better (the frame).

About the components, 105 and Ultegra are very good components and there is not a noticable difference, excpet in weight. Both will last the same amount of time.

Cheezerod

Man 105 stuff is great stuff! the new 10 speed set up for 105 is just awsome. I have 9speed and they are solid performers as said. as for the frame Al or CF its up to you. just because its CF doesnt mean its better then AL. it is really in the bikes feel under you. some frames flex more then others and some riders like more or less flex,....yada yadayada...the piont, 105 is a wise invesment on a good frame.

pathdoc

I'd put more money into the frame, I didn't say I'd go carbon.

operator

Custom lugged steel would be the way to go. AL is unrepairable and always have a finite life span. Until very recently same with CF, i've had no reports confirming the quality of these repairs.

You also don't need n-speed latest greatest everything. It wears out faster and is more expensive to replace.

brundle_fly

I'd get a steel Bianchi or something with 105's or better if I had $1200-$1700.Should last you decades

KevinF

105 componentry level is way more then enough to be reasonably trouble free. I doubt that most people could tell the difference between 105 and Ultegra in a blind test.

DLH

I would consider the prices:
New Groupo vs. New Frame

What will be the final cost if you upgrade one vs the other and visa versa. If you get a top of the line component set on an inexpensive frame and then upgrade to a higher quality frame I think you may come out better than if you buy a bike with an expensive frame and then upgrade all of the components later.

Yes, I have a inexpensive frame with better components and wheels. I think if I upgraded my frame I would come out on the better end financially and have a frame for a bad weather bike.

Plus my inexpensive frame leaves many expensive frames behind.

EventServices

For a new rider, I might suggest that components are more important than the frame.

Most riders can't feel the difference between one frame or the next for the first few years of riding. In the meantime, they'll be able to tell if the bike isn't shifting or braking well.
Plus, the components are going to get a bigger workout during the first few years. They'll need to be durable.

Just an opinion.

7rider

Frame. Lot easier and cheaper to replace components than a frame.

DLH

I guess this depends on how expensive of a frame that you want. I believe an Ultegra Groupo or better runs over a $1000.

H1449-6

1. Fit
2. Frame style (crit race to touring with a few stops in between)
3. Frame construction/material
4. Components

hiromian

In this order:

1.The engine: as you said. Make it your self
2.The peddles: If the are not clipless then going for clipless is the most effective thing you can buy to improve performance.
3. The seat. Comfy is good.
4. The bar tape. Comfy is good
5. The wheels: Say you have 1,2,3 and 4 above, then the wheels can make a good improvement to a great improvement depending on how crapy the original wheels are.
6. The frame. A crapy frame can run very well with 1,2,3,4,and 5 in place. A great frame will have an improvement in geometry and stiffness and reduced weight which will improve efficiency some.

Case study:

I have a sweet all original Peugeot UE8 I use for rain day commuting.

My engine is fine and improving,
I swapped out the platform peddles for my old mountain bike clipless and noted an immediate improvement with the ride times rivaling that of my racing bike.
I covered the old bar tape (vinyl) with cork tape to get a thicker and more comfy grip. This is probably a more important upgrade than the wheels.
I am looking to swap out the steel rims with some used aluminum jobbies to get better braking in the rain. I do not expect to see a huge improvement in ride times.
The leather seat is ok and fits me well.
The original Simplex DTS work flawlessly.

The frame is fine for a flat land touring style bike with a full fender rack and generator light set up so at this point no other upgrades are necessary.

Conclusion: Since most bikes are already with clipless peddles and aluminum wheels then the best thing you can do to improve your bike is to over wrap your old bar tape with new.

ac29593

I would say frame. 105 and Ultegra is great stuff. My bike has Dura Ace on it, but Im actually replacing my cassette and going with Ultegra. I couldnt tell the difference between the Dura Ace cassette and my old Ultegra cassette, but I do notice a difference between my old frame and some of the other bikes I rode compared to my new bike. And I wouldnt say that a carbon frame is def. better than aluminum or steel, just depends on how you like the ride. I rode an all carbon frame and still opted for the aluminum/carbon blend. Just felt better to me. I used to love my old steel bike, even though it weighed a ton.

fruitless

I think you have to draw a balance. Try and determine what is a good frame and just how good you really need for the riding you are doing. There are loads of asian origin aluminum, carbon/aluminum and full carbon framesets available for a relatively low cost. Lately my formula is that I want to have the same amount of money in my wheels as my frameset but then out of principle I don't think I would spend more than $1500 on a frame even if money was no object. BTW I think with some shopping-around $1500 will get you all the frame anyone needs even if you are racing at really high level. I like the way DA stuff works so I have it on all my bikes but I'm sure 105 is sufficient if you are on a budget.

rufvelo

You don't have to over analyze things...just remember to save for accessories and come up with a workable budget.

A good component group, either 105 or Ultegra, plus a decent properly sized ALu or Carbon or mixed frame, that is within your budget, will work well for you. If owning carbon makes you happier, get the carbon(certainly won't make you faster) + 105(certainly won't make you slower).

Lithuania

I agree with this. In the long run I think the frame is more important but more in the geometry then the material. A very nice expensive frame isnt going to do you much good if you end up not being very comfortable. At least the better components should be able to transfer to another frame down the road.

fmw

I also vote for the components. I've tested frames made from every available material at every price range you can imagine. Personally, I sense very little difference between them. Yes, aluminum is stiffer and slightly less comfortable than the others and CF is a little less durable than the others. I understand that. Some are prettier than others. I understand that too. Differences in geometry are subtle but noticeable. I understand that too. But they all serve their purpose competently and in a fairly similar fashion.

I've never had a frame break but I've had several components break and every single one was made by Shimano. I've been stranded and forced to walk while carrying my bike 3 times in the past 3 years due to Shimano component failures while riding. I've never been stranded by a frame (or a flat tire.) I've switched to Campy completely because I feel they are better made and more durable. In a half century of riding Campy components, I've never broken one. In three years of riding Shimano I've broken about a half dozen. Luck? Maybe. But I still recommend the same approach to everybody.

The fit of the bike to you is important. I view reliability as important. Other things like the weight of the bike, type of frame etc are way less important in my view. That puts me squarely in the minority doesn't it?