Originally Posted by djbowen1
Sorry for the triple reply, i misunderstood. your statements come off as facts instead of opinion like they should be more geared toward sounding like, I think your comments on the Caad5 being one of the better aluminum frames is as bad as the one about the giant frames. You cant tell me Caad5 is one of the best alu frames around.
g'day,
these forums are about opinions...opinions are a bit like a***holes, we've all got one!. MY opinion is based upon having raced a CAAD 4 frame for 2 years (sorry no direct experience with the CAAD 5 but i think it's safe to assume that it's as good if not better than the 4). i've raced many frames over the years & a similarly specced CAAD4 frame is as good a frame as most anything else i have ridden. As an ALU frame I rate it highly. The TCR frames, (the latest on the market in Aus), ARE low end, made for the masses frames that provide little as far as innovation & are basically 'knock offs' of other peoples developments. In my recent purchase of my carbon bike, I test rode everything available in composite. I was lucky enough to be able to race a TCR, (whatever the one is with kysirriums & ultegra). I didn't like it at all. i thought it felt 'dead', unresponsive & 'twitchy' in the front end. I don't need research to tell me what I feel, (or a technical manifesto's posted on a website designed to sell me the bike). This is an opinion!. On the plus side, it was hideously cheap compared to other bikes...but you pay for what you get!...you might like it, i don't. My original post just said, compare apples with apples...the TCR is not representative of all that is available in composite frames. That's not an opinion...that's a fact Jack!
cheers,
Hitchy