SHIM_105

Right now I'm riding a steel frame Pinarello Asolo. I was looking at getting a Pinarello FP1. I did some reading and discovered a lot of pro reviews and bike sites list it as an entry level bike. I beg to differ. Personally I would rank a wallmart or target bike as entry level. I know it's not a Dogma or Prince, but I don't compete so weight is not a real concern. I could have the top of the line bike, and a guy like Lance Armstrong will still beat me using a BMX on any tour.

roby

entry level bike, in it's category. As in, racing category. The walmart bike doesn't even enter the racing category.

Mike F

From my experience an entry level bike is any bike that costs less than the guy's bike your talking too. Im guessing its going to be called entry level because of Tiagra componants.

speedemon

I would consider the Sora components more entry level than Tiagra!

pdedes

wally world specials are rear entry level

John_V 

Some companies, like Giant, classify entry level bikes according to frame material and components. The Defy aluminum series are Endurance Road bikes and are classified as entry level. However, the Defy Advanced are CF frames and are not entry level bikes. The Defy's are also 9 speed drivetrains (2300, Sora and Tiagra) whereas the Defy Advanced are 10 speed (105, Ultegra and Dura Ace). I'm sure that all the manufacturers follow the same line of thinking.

hhnngg1

Entry level = $700 bike at LBS today.

Walmart bike = bike-shaped object.

There is no comparison between the two - not even close. However, there is only a marginal speed difference between a $700 bike and a $10,000 bike - like <2%, for real. Entry-level bike typically have lowest-end components by Shimano for road bikes (Either 2200/2300 or Sora.)

abikemechanic

I am going to disagree with the <2%. I think there is quite a difference between an aluminum trek 1.1 and andy schleck's cf madone 6.9 he rode in the tour de france.

datlas 

Agree. Maybe 3 or 4%.

StanSeven

This answers it all. Entry level is a generic term manufacturers use as starters for racing. You can read as much or as little into it as you want.

Nerull

Most hobbies are that way. 'Entry Level' is generally a sizable step from from the 'toy' level, which is where I would put walmart bikes.

urbanknight

I like that. Mind if I use it some time?

Mike F

By all means

ultraman6970

Entry level is in the eye of the beholder in my opinion. Some people doesnt know any better than sora and they love that junk and anything that is ultegra for them is like a machine coming from god land no matter how good the frame is.

Another good example, some ugly frames are being sold with Dura - ace components, do you call them entry level? Racing worth level?? the frame is so bad that I wouldn't race on that at all but it has dura - ace. New class? fugly level?? All depends.

eippo1

Entry level can also refer to entry level carbon, which means nothing more that it's the cheapest all carbon bike they sell. These bikes are hardly entry level and it is a misnomer.

fenny

In this case, the FP1 is not a carbon bike, it's aluminum with carbon seat stays and fork.

haaseg

So... on the 2% vs 4% difference thing... you're basically talking about what?

I have 105 groupo on my Fuji SL-1 Comp and recently rented a CAAD8 for a week while on a business trip. In climbing various hills around the area where I rented, I found two significant differences:
1. Going from a 10-speed cassette to an 8-speed cassette resulted in rougher climbing because there are more teeth between shifts
2. With the Sora shifters, you can't actually shift to a higher gear while you are in the drops - I found this to be a huge pain.

I found the differences to be quite significant and I am very glad I opted to spend a little more for something with 105 or better.

hhnngg1

We're talking speed difference. There is no doubt that Ultegra shifts more smoothly than Sora, but does it actually get you any faster? No.

I'd be surprised if it was as large as a 4% difference. That would mean that riding those two bikes in one-hour time trial, that there would be a 2 and a half minute difference between the finishing times.

In comparison AEROBARS can't even give that big a difference, and aerobars are considered the single biggest structural advantage you can make to a bike to actually make it faster. (Far exceeding wheels, helmet, aero frame, by a 3-4x factor.) Most tests have had an aerobar equipped bike (with proper TT position) coming in at 40sec/hr, maybe 1 minute tops over a non-aerobar equipped bike. And the aerobars are going to give you way bigger of an advantage between an entry level bike and a $10k bike sans aerobars with today's generation of bikes.

Even on hills, where weight is more of a factor, the difference isn't significant enough - today's entry level bikes are 19,20 lbs max. (My Giant Defy3 is 20.5 lbs with heavy clunker wheels and pedals.) Even on a all uphill one-hour course, a 3-4 lbs difference (or even a 7lbs difference) isn't going to give you a 2 minute gap, and that's the best of circumstances.

I'd be surprised if the actually difference between today's entry level bikes and the high-end ones is greater than 2% speed difference given this. Aero frames, regardless of design, give only a fraction of the gains of aerobars (like 1/8th-1/10th), and again, aerobars don't even give you a 2% advantage.

I won't deny however, that shifting with Di2 and riding a Cervelo brand name with bling all over your bike may give you a mental advantage that gives you 2 minutes in training! And of course, shifting will be superior on the expensive bikes - but shifting doesn't win races.

haaseg

You're talking about some fantasy measurement where you have the absolute perfect rider doing things absolutely perfectly with perfect form in a perfect environment.

My personal experience is that climbing hills with a 10 gear cassette is much smoother and much easier than with an 8 gear cassette, which means I can climb faster, climb smoother with less jarring to the system, and climb more efficiently. It equates to less suffering and more energy for the rest of the ride. Just coasting down hill, I don't have that all perfect form, and I can get about 3-4 mph faster if I'm in the drops vs on the hoods. Which... when going between 30 and 35 miles an hour is what... 10%?

So taking into consideration the abilities of your average cyclist trying to decide between entry level and enthusiast level, I'm going to say it's a much bigger difference.

patentcad

Ultegra Di2 is now the new entry level kid.

roadwarrior

Defy 3 with Sora comes with an 8 speed casette.

roadwarrior

Just ignore him. He's attracted to bright shiny things and easily distracted. When the next new thingy comes along, he'll be first in line to buy it.

STP

lol!

tessartype

Tell that to Schleck.

I ride a Sora-equipped Trek 1.2 (from the year before they got Tiagra RDs) and, well, it sucks. The components, not the frame. Sure, when freshly adjusted, even the FD shifts reasonably quick, and the RD can cope with pressure and - but even my huge hands can barely shift from the drops (which costs time & aero-position). At the same time, the easy rotation of the brake-lever (to shift) can be unnerving - a single-purpose lever would be my choice.

And what makes this entry-level, then? Because while the frame weighs 1.5kg (reasonably light - just ~300-400g more than same-vintage carbon weighed) and works out reasonably stiff, just upgrading the groupset (or wheels!) would double the money spent on that bike. For the price of a high-mid level grouppo (say, Rival, Athena or 105/Ultegra), plus a set of reasonable wheels (Ksyrium Equipes, say - just my rear wheel weighs more than a set of those), installation and other bits'n'bobs, I could have... A brand-spanking new Canyon CF frame with exactly those parts, and it'd weigh 7.3kg.

znomit

Entry level