Originally Posted by
m_yates
If this is going to be your ONLY bike, I would suggest not discounting utility of being able to carry things. Racing bikes (like the caad10 5) are really meant for racing. I would just make two points to consider: (1) For most people (who aren't serious about racing), a racing bike is not useful or needed.
Yes, and for people who aren't racing it can suffer from other annoying drawbacks - like the handlebars being to low to get comfortable on for someone who's not a racer and doesn't want to doing stretching to increase their flexibility to racer levels, and "responsive" handling than can sometimes be described as "twitchy and fatiguing" to people who don't race...
[QUOTE=m_yates;16870314](2) The weight savings of carbon fiber or other high end materials and components are irrelevant for the average person.
That's really annoying phrasing, the usual reason for buying low end carbon fiber is improved ride quality that's less fatiguing, not weight. (Not all carbon fiber is less fatiguing, but "endurance" designs for better ride quality like the specialized roubaix, trek domane, etc are).
Originally Posted by
m_yates
If you buy a bike that has the option of attaching fenders and racks, you can always take them off and still ride fast if you want (not serious racing fast, but fast enough for most people). A steel frame touring-type bike with tiagra components may weight a few pounds more than a carbon fiber bike with higher end components. That weight difference is important for serious racing, but it doesn't really matter if you are commuting at 15 mph.
I agree, but...
Originally Posted by
m_yates
The extra weight provides utility, and I wouldn't discount the value of that.
I wouldn't say the extra weight is a big deal, but I don't know that you get extra utility out of it either. If the CAAD doesn't have rack mounts I would probably agree with you, but most other aluminum and steel frame bikes (even the "racing" ones) usually do have rack mounts.
Originally Posted by
m_yates
If you buy a racing bike and decide you need to carry something (food, clothes, laptop computer, etc.), then usually your only option is to strap on a hot and uncomfortable backpack. I've commuted thousands of miles with a backpack and also with panniers. Panniers win hands down.
I agree that panniers win. However, there are racks available for most bikes without rack mounts, racks like the Axiom Streamliner. They attach through the wheel skewer on the bottom, and the brake mount on the top.
Originally Posted by
m_yates
If you want to commute and train for racing at the same time, then that is a different story.
Sure.
I haven't ridden a CAAD, I've heard it's a full on aluminum racing bike, and as I said above it might have disadvantages - handling so responsive it's twitchy and annoying, a riding position that requires bending to far forward so it's uncomfortable for non-racers who don't do stretches to improve their flexibility, and a lack of rack mounts, which are convenient though it can be worked around.
But one doesn't have to go all the way in the opposite direction of a cargo bike either. Some people like the slower and more stable handling of those kind of bikes, but I like something that feels a little faster and more responsive without going into "twitchy" territory, which most of the "endurance" bikes do, and even many of the supposed "race" bikes.