Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    :jarckass: deathhare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    6,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Mark V vs. Angus price difference?

    Thinking about getting my wife an IRO. Im a little torn between the Mark V and the Angus. The main difference i see is that the Mark V has the threadless fork and the Angus doesnt. The Angus complete costs about 80 bucks more and i cant see why. Anyone care to enlighten me?
    Noticed the Angus says Reynolds 631 tubing..the Mark V doesnt say anything about the tubing. This is the reason maybe?

  2. #2
    crotchety young dude el twe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    SF, CA
    My Bikes
    IRO Angus; Casati Gold Line; Redline 925; '72 Schwinn Olympic Paramount
    Posts
    4,818
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, it's the tubing. I *heart* my Angus, for what it's worth.
    Quote Originally Posted by CardiacKid View Post
    I explained that he could never pay me enough cash for the amount of work I had put into that bike and the only way to compensate me for it was to ride the hell out of it.
    IRO Angus Casati Gold Line

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    223
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i think the Mark V is 4130 tubing.

  4. #4
    Senior Member gwhalin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn
    My Bikes
    White IRO Angus
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    +1 on the tubing. Also, despite threaded forks being disliked by some as dated or inferior, I like the looks of it.
    Take back the bikelane!
    http://www.mybikelane.com/

  5. #5
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    While we're on the the topic, does anyone know how Tony measures the TT length on the frames? And S/T? Something seems off. Speak dumb to me, I'm sort of clueless.

    BTW, asthetically I prefer the Mark V. The round tubing on the Angus just seems so...plain. Especially on the bigger sizes.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    +1 on the tubing. Also, despite threaded forks being ... dated (and) inferior, I like the looks of it.
    There, fixed.


  7. #7
    :jarckass: deathhare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    6,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks guys. Im guessing the tubing wont be of issue with my wife so ill probably go with the Mark V. I also like the threaded fork look with a quill stem.
    The threadless feels more solid though and will be something i think she'll prefer.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Danhalen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    Urbanite Road Bike, Mielle Fixed Gear Conversion, Vintage Lejeune Track Bike
    Posts
    1,025
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathhare
    Thanks guys. Im guessing the tubing wont be of issue with my wife so ill probably go with the Mark V. I also like the threaded fork look with a quill stem.
    The threadless feels more solid though and will be something i think she'll prefer.
    One thing to consider. If your wife has long legs relative to her torso (average for women I think), she might not fit on an IRO as well. It seems that they are fairly "long" in the sense that each size has a long TT/ST ratio. Just something to consider: if her size in TT is going to mean a huge saddle to bar drop which might be okay. I've noticed that most built IRO's I've seen have a pretty big saddle to bar drop relative to most bikes. I would assume the reason for this is the "long" geometry. Am I off track guys?

  9. #9
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,418
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Angus is made out of reynolds 631 tubing, mark v is just straight no-name 4130 cro-mo tubing.

  10. #10
    :jarckass: deathhare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    6,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Danhalen
    One thing to consider. If your wife has long legs relative to her torso (average for women I think), she might not fit on an IRO as well. It seems that they are fairly "long" in the sense that each size has a long TT/ST ratio. Just something to consider: if her size in TT is going to mean a huge saddle to bar drop which might be okay. I've noticed that most built IRO's I've seen have a pretty big saddle to bar drop relative to most bikes. I would assume the reason for this is the "long" geometry. Am I off track guys?
    Thanks. Never thought about it really with the IROs. My wife is japanese and so is short (surprise!) ......so in the case youve described i think she'll be fine.

  11. #11
    ass hatchet slopvehicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,284
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Has the angus always had 631 tubes? I don't recall tubing type mentioned when I bought mine this spring.

  12. #12
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,418
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by slopvehicle
    Has the angus always had 631 tubes? I don't recall tubing type mentioned when I bought mine this spring.
    Tony has always stated that the angus has 631 tubes, but the frames have never had a 631 sticker on them..which makes me wonder why?

  13. #13
    ass hatchet slopvehicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,284
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BostonFixed
    Tony has always stated that the angus has 631 tubes, but the frames have never had a 631 sticker on them..which makes me wonder why?
    Interesting, and good to know. I wonder if adding the Renoylds brand name would increase the cost of the frame.

  14. #14
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,418
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by slopvehicle
    Interesting, and good to know. I wonder if adding the Renoylds brand name would increase the cost of the frame.
    If the frame is truly made out of 631, which only reynolds makes, then it is just a sticker that's not applied..

    I'm not doubting tony, but it don't see why there isn't a sticker?

    edit: from the iro site: "Do you want something a little more "old school?" the Angus Fixed Gear Bike is for you. The frame is made from Reynolds 631 tubing. Sleek and simple lines..."

    http://irocycle.com/iro/index.php?ma...&products_id=2

  15. #15
    ass hatchet slopvehicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,284
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    please excuse my butchering of "Reynolds"....

  16. #16
    Should be out Riding
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Blacksburg, VA
    My Bikes
    Bob Jackson Vigorelli
    Posts
    1,904
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mark V is a 1/2 lb heavier due to the tubing.

  17. #17
    Danger! Danger! Rugen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    My Bikes
    CAAD10, Norco A1, Bob Jackson WT
    Posts
    216
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    MMMMMMMmmmmm... All this talk of Angus makes my mouth water.


    My last bike had Reynolds tubing. I miss it. I would say well worth the difference.
    The extra digit is crucial to my success.

  18. #18
    aka mattio queerpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    5,397
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nouia
    While we're on the the topic, does anyone know how Tony measures the TT length on the frames? And S/T? Something seems off. Speak dumb to me, I'm sort of clueless.
    The top tube is measured center to center and is an accurate measurement. The seat tube is measured center of bb to the center of the top tube. notice that the seattube extends above the top tube a few cm's. that's why the given Size of an IRO, and the seattube measurement, are off from each other by a few cm's. i'd suggest paying less attention to the actual seattube measurement, and more attention to the given Size, if you're trying to figure out what fits ya. does that clear things up?
    the hipster myth.

    i practice vagabondery.

  19. #19
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by queerpunk
    i'd suggest paying less attention to the actual seattube measurement, and more attention to the given Size, if you're trying to figure out what fits ya. does that clear things up?
    Pretty much. Let me clarify
    Last edited by Nouia; 12-20-06 at 09:29 PM.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    223
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    is there a big difference in quality between Reynolds 631 and 4130? ride quality? weight? strength?

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Somerville, MA
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Things to note:

    a) IRO measures their bikes in a pretty goofy manner. a "59"cm frame is measured from the center of the bottom bracket to the /top/ of the seat tube, which sticks way out there. You have to check the sizing chart that is posted on the site, the c-c numbers are the relevent ones for comparing from past bikes to IROs

    b) In my opinion, top tube length is more important for bike fit than seat tube length. Raising or lowering your seatpost is easier than swapping out stems.

  22. #22
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,418
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by odie91
    is there a big difference in quality between Reynolds 631 and 4130? ride quality? weight? strength?
    631 is lighter, has "better" ride quality, it's strong enough

    I think someone mentioned that there is a half pound savings over the 631 tube set on the angus versus the 4130 set on the mark v..but I don't own either..

  23. #23
    Senior Member sers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salem, MA
    My Bikes
    Land Shark, Level Professional, Tsunami singlespeed, Giant Reign 1
    Posts
    2,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I found that my old Mark V had a bit too short a seat tube for the top tube length - at least for me. It treated me well though, and I sort of miss it.

  24. #24
    crotchety young dude el twe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    SF, CA
    My Bikes
    IRO Angus; Casati Gold Line; Redline 925; '72 Schwinn Olympic Paramount
    Posts
    4,818
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, my Angus (same geo. as the V) has a sort of long TT for me.
    Quote Originally Posted by CardiacKid View Post
    I explained that he could never pay me enough cash for the amount of work I had put into that bike and the only way to compensate me for it was to ride the hell out of it.
    IRO Angus Casati Gold Line

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    109
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    don't mind the weight - 0.5 lbs is not that much overall - BUT the quality of the steel is VERY DIFFERENT. 4130 - and I speak out of riding a 4130 bike for almost 15 years is sturdy, but tough unforgiving and basically just a "basic" steel" frame. On a road bike that may be OK, but if you ride single speed and/or fixed gear these qualities Quadruple (IMHO), and you may want to look for a little better stuff, definitely if you care about your gf.

    631 steel is thinner, thus more flexible ( most noticeable when clearing a pothole, while seated), while still very strong on torque.

    Material-wise I would always opt for the 631 (definitely at only $80 difference)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •