Originally Posted by
dr_lha
"4-5 lbs heaver with the same components" isn't true, except maybe if you have a steel fork also.
Sounds like we agree. I guess you didn't bother to read the last paragraph of my post? The one where I said, "Do an apples-to-apples comparison
without a fork swap and the "steel" bike ends up with
a 1-2 pound weight advantage due to component selection. Most steel bikes the OP could afford will also include
a steel fork which means gaining another 1-2 pounds of weight
(2-4 total)."
But this thread has devolved into the usual frame material argument, far from what the OP originally was asking hasn't it?
I think it's important that the OP understand when he's being misled, and the pictures of the Roubaix/Gunnar comparison were
definitely misleading since no mention was made of the missing components nor the differences in component selection. Let's also not forget that while the "considerably less expensive" description is accurate, the Gunnar is still
way out of the OP's price range. His budget would allow purchase of a Gunnar frame and Enve fork... but he couldn't afford the wheels and components necessary to turn it into a working bicycle.