Originally Posted by blacksquid

If you're going custom Ti, why keep an offset seatpost? IMHO it would become an unwanted part of the bike geometry and detract from the bike's aesthetics.

Originally Posted by x43x

I'm afraid of tubulars. Afraid I'll be out on some 80 mile ride and get a flat 40 miles away from home. Is it even that big of deal? With those edge wheels, the bike would probably weigh less than 13 lbs....hmmmmmmm

I was going with setback just because it is going to be a long distance bike and I thought the setback would be more comfortable. I suppose I could just have the setback built into the frame?

Has ti with red highlights been done to death or should I stick with only silver and black?

Originally Posted by Bob Ross

I've heard the exact same argument made for not using a straight seatpost!

Originally Posted by x43x

I'm afraid of tubulars. Afraid I'll be out on some 80 mile ride and get a flat 40 miles away from home. Is it even that big of deal? With those edge wheels, the bike would probably weigh less than 13 lbs....hmmmmmmm

Originally Posted by x43x

I'm aware of spare tires and pumps, but having no experience with tubulars, the whole stretching, gluing, and repair process seems annoying. You can pre-glue a spare or use an old tire that still has some glue on it in the event you flat, but taking it easy for 40 miles as I limp back home seems hardly worth the effort. But maybe I should just HTFU.

Originally Posted by x43x

I thought the offset seatpost wasn't for fit adjustment, but for comfort and positioning of the legs when pedaling. Most off-the-rack bikes are sold with offset seatposts aren't they? No setback seatposts are for those wanting a more aggressive and forward position over the pedals, resulting in more power. That is why time trial bikes have no setback.

Originally Posted by wikipedia

Road and triathlon bicycles

A road racing bicycle is designed for efficient power transfer at minimum weight and drag. Broadly speaking, the road bicycle geometry is categorized as either a traditional geometry with a horizontal top tube, or a compact geometry with a sloping top tube.

Traditional geometry road frames are often associated with more comfort and greater stability, and tend to have a longer wheelbase which contributes to these two aspects. Compact geometry road frames have a lower center of gravity and tend to have a shorter wheelbase and smaller rear triangle, which give the bike quicker handling. Compact geometry also allows the top of the head tube to be above the top of the seat tube, decreasing standover height, and thus increasing standover clearance and lowering the center of gravity. Opinion is divided on the riding merits of the compact frame, but several manufacturers claim that a reduced range of sizes can fit most riders, and that it is easier to build a frame without a perfectly level top tube.

Road bicycles for racing tend to have a steeper seat tube angle, measured from the horizontal plane. This positions the rider aerodynamically and arguably in a stronger stroking position. The trade-off is comfort. Touring and comfort bicycles tend to have more slack seat tube angle traditionally. This positions the rider more on the sit bones and takes weight off the wrists, arms and neck, and, for men, improves circulation to the urinary and reproductive areas. With a slacker angle, designers lengthen the chainstay so that the center of gravity (that would otherwise be farther to the back over the wheel) is more ideally repositioned over the middle of the bike frame. The longer wheelbase contributes to effective shock absorption. In modern mass-manufactured touring and comfort bikes, the seat-tube angle is negligibly slacker, perhaps in order to reduce manufacturing costs by avoiding the need to reset welding jigs in automated processes, and thus do not provide the comfort of traditionally made or custom-made frames which do have noticeably slacker seat-tube angles.

Road racing bicycles that are used in UCI-sanctioned races are governed by UCI regulations, which state among other things that the frame must consist of two triangles. Hence designs that lack a seat tube or top tube are not allowed.
A cyclist riding a time-trial bicycle with aerodynamic wheels and aero bars

Triathlon- or time-trial-specific frames rotate the rider forward around the axis of the bottom bracket of the bicycle as compared to the standard road bicycle frame. This is in order to put the rider in an even lower, more aerodynamic position. While handling and stability is reduced, these bicycles are designed to be ridden in environments with less group riding aspects. These frames tend to have steep seat-tube angles and low head tubes, and shorter wheelbase for the correct reach from the saddle to the handlebar. Additionally, since they are not goverened by the UCI, some triathlon bicycles, such as the Zipp 2001, Cheetah and Softride, have non-traditional frame layouts, which can produce better aerodynamics.

Originally Posted by x43x

Whats wrong with Soul wheels? Hampsten and Mad Fiber are about as local as you can get. The MF office/factory is about 2 miles from my job. If I can't get a good deal on the MF's, the Souls have the best price to weight ratio I've seen. But those Edge wheels, even the 45 clinchers are drool worthy. The Souls come in around the same weight as the Edge 45's for $1000 less. I'm not sure the Edge/Enve decals are worth that much. Rolf wheels are ok, but too heavy for their price point in my opinion. Plus they're from Oregon, which smells.

Originally Posted by entukay

Price to weight isn't a good method when choosing wheels in my opinion. Its true its one of the easiest places to shed weight on a bike, but wheels take the most abuse on the bike, buy something durable, from a quality manufacturer with a history of building products and thorough testing. If you ride 1000 miles a year, then fine get something that looks flashy, but if you want wheels you can ride the hell out of, buy some real dream wheels. Maybe go custom even, there are a lot of great wheel builders out there who know what they're doing.

Originally Posted by x43x

I should have stated that I'm only 130 lbs, so I can get away with light wheels that can still be abused. Both of my bikes have custom wheels on them currently. One set built by Mike Garcia at Odds & Endos and the other set built by Troy Watson at Ligero (both of which I heard about on this forum). The wheels Troy built for me are alloy clinchers weighing around 1300 grams, but are set up for Shimano/SRAM. Instead of converting, I would rather put that money into an aero set of wheels that weighed roughly the same. The Soul C4.0/5.0s fit that bill for a decent price. I've only heard good things regarding Soul wheels and I trust Sean & co. as wheel builders. I had a set of S2.0Ls build for my wife and was very happy with his communication and the wheels look and ride great.

Having said that, I am eagerly awaiting the clincher that Mad Fiber should release sometime this year. I'm hoping I might be able to test a prototype or something before buying.

Originally Posted by blacksquid

My whole point is that if you're getting a custom frame built for you, the geometry will also be modified from stock to accommodate your physical characteristics and desired ride charateristics. Thus, you would not need an offset seat-post.

Originally Posted by x43x

I settled on the Deda Zero100 stem and Deda Presa Bars. Should look good. I've also narrowed wheel selection down to two choices:

1. Mad Fiber Clinchers (No release date though. Their goal weight is going to be 1250 grams for the set)
2. Enve 45 Clinchers, Extralite hubs, CX Ray spokes (I could get them built now and they should come in under 1300 grams)