Originally Posted by
Wildwood
You rode a bike that felt better and immediately jumped to geometry/ frame material as the primary sources of difference. Is that true? Same size tires? Similar wheelsets? Cockpit accoutrements?, etc.
I missed why the Salsa was a 'dream'. More stable?, Less twitchy?, Softer ride?, Better position?
edit: More stack, less reach, longer wheelbase (per [MENTION=23624]Trakhak[/MENTION]) = more upright on a sport touring/touring geometry.
I don't mean to jump immediately into a steel/aluminum debate. We have a few Surly bikes at home, and although they're too small for me, they ride so much smoother than my CAADX that I find myself wanting a ride like that. I want a bike that feels as good or better than that Salsa. If my current bike can do that, then all the better. Add to that, the there is only one Salsa dealer anywhere near my home so I'm okay with taking my time to explore and learn about other options.
To be clear, it's a totally different ride . . . definitely felt more stable AND less twitchy. Softer? I guess. Better postion? I don't really know and need to test ride some more. Some will tell me to stop worrying and just Salsa if I love it that much, but I have some real interest in design and fit.
Direct comparison between these bikes . . . my CAADX has 35mm tires, and the Salsa was stock (which means likely 40mm). Wheelsets? They're both on stock wheels, and I don't have the specs. Cockpits are similarly -- maybe wider drop bars on the Salsa, but the brakes and shifters aren't noticeably different (I didn't spend a lot of time shifting on the Salsa).