bassjones

Anybody know the weight limits on Gunnar frames? I'm looking to do a steel distance bike build over the winter and looking at either a Gunnar Sport or saving a little money and doing a Soma ES build. The American craftsmanship thing really appeals to me and Gunnar seems to be the best price for American made steel. $500 more than the Soma, which means the total build will push $2000 vs $1500 for the Soma (Rival build). Other option is Gunnar Roadie vs Soma Smoothie. I'm pretty sure I'm going with the longer wheelbase and more relaxed geometry frame though. Not interested in touring bikes, but more Endurance type.

dr_lha

Silly question but have you tried asking Gunnar? Or, I guess, Waterford. They're usually pretty good about answering email. Do you have a local Gunnar dealer? They don't sell online IIRC.

TheManShow

If you e-mail, or call Waterford they are the experts. I have been considering buying one of their frames. The lady, and guy who answer questions are the true experts. Spend the dime for the call, or e-mail they.

JohnJ80

Part of the process of buying a Gunnar frame is they ask your shop about your weight and adjust the tubing accordingly. I can attest first hand that they tend to be overly conservative and overdo it a bit. I bought a Gunnar Crosshairs 3 years ago and they went with oversized tubing based on the weight info that they got from the LBS (which was accurate). Frame is super stiff to the point of being too stiff for me. Too stiff is sort of like "too good" and I can tell you that the lateral stiffness in the BB is high. I can't stomp on the pedals hard enough to make the FD rub like I can with my 1980's Basso racing frame.

If I had to do it again, I'd give them weights that were considerably less. Short answer - I don't think you need to worry about it. They'll build it to accommodate you instead of the other way around. In point of fact, that's the whole point of having a frame from someone like Gunnar.

But the point about calling Gunnar is a good one. They are very willing to discuss the design with you and to tell you what they can and cannot do. Part of what they pride themselves in is that they can fit all sorts of out of the norm bodies. And they do it well. You don't find too many people with Gunnars who don't like them.

That all said, I like the bike and it came out well. Once I added some compliance back in with seatpost, tire and bar selection, it's a great frame and a nice ride. If I had it to do all over again, I'd get the Sport over the Crosshairs for sure. I toy with the idea of getting a Sport frame and selling my Gunnar one (~56-57cm frame) still. I think that is the frame most people need but are not thinking about because of all the race focus by most other brands and their marketing. The Roadie meets that need, but I think for sure the Sport is the better choice for most everyone who is not interested in race or near race performance. If you want an all day ride, it's the Sport. The Sport will be very responsive, quick handling and fun to ride but isn't going to require the constant rider input that a race style frame would - that matters over a long endurance ride.

What I also would do is add a carbon fork instead of the Gunnar fork. While the Gunnar fork is pretty - gorgeous even - and rides well, it's heavier than a boat anchor - again, a product of Gunnar's conservatism. I'd pick one of the Enve forks for that bike - you can get the weight rating specs from Enve's website. I'd get that fork custom painted to match the bike and it would be a sweet looking and riding bike. And then I'd think that you could probably get yourself a light, responsive bike that would be easily <20lbs (depending on wheel selection) and even down as low as 16 lbs or so if you really wanted to go at it.

Gunnars are great bikes. Good choice.

J.

bassjones

That's what I was looking for! Thanks! I'll talk to my LBS. I was just going with a standard size frame (62), so I don't know if that will matter or if they'll need to do a custom build to accommodate weight or not. I'm 290ish right now, down from 420, shooting for 220... I may wait and make the frame a reward for hitting my goal too

MRT2

As someone whose weight has fluctuated over the years, I would advise to spec your custom frame conservatively. Just in case.

Jarrett2

I was talking to my LBS about building a custom steel (they say go Ti) bike yesterday and he substantiated what JohnJ80 said. You don't have to worry about weight limits like you do off the rack. Part of the custom build process is that they size the tubing to your weight. When I frowned at that, my LBS guy said "we're talking about half a pound difference here."

This sort of raised a new concern for me about building a custom bike. Ever since I started riding two years ago, skinny LBS guys have looked and me and said, "Oh you need a 30 pound bike with 50 spoke wheels and 2 inch tall tires" and I've found that to be BS. I've ridden for thousands of miles on bikes that were supposedly built for 150 lb guys. Light frames, 32 spoke wheels, 25mm tires. All of which people say won't work for me. But somehow after 7500 miles, these things are still working.

So the concern is, if you talk to your LBS guy about spec'ing your custom bike, they are going to overbuild it for you. Likely way over build it. And that's not the type of bike I enjoy riding. It makes me wonder how to approach a custom build in the future. If it's truly a half a pound, that's fine, but if I get the equivalent of a Surly Long Haul Trucker back when I asked for a light, go fast bike; I'm going to be pissed.

MRT2

Or indeed, whether to do a custom build. If you have the bike you love riding, just upgrade bits here and there. I am getting to the point where I am reluctant to change anything on my bike beyond just replacing worn or broken components. 3 years in and I think the only thing that really needs upgrading is me. Even things like shoes, which I changed out this year and still find myself trying to get comfortable on.

Jarrett2

Yeah, but you know how it is. You walk into the LBS and they say, "what you really need to do is let us build you a custom bike..." It's their mantra.

I can only assume one day my current bike will have a problem. I mean it's not even supposed to hold my weight at all. If it does, I might try custom next.

Wingsprint

As suggested already, just call Gunnar. They are great people who love to talk about bikes. A few years ago I called Gunnar to inquire about touch up paint for my wife's old Gunnar Sport and the man I spoke with was the one and only Mr. Richard Schwinn.

JohnJ80

Exactly. I just built a custom stainless steel framed bike with a local custom builder. That frame came in about 3.6lbs. The overbuilt Gunnar frame I have is about 3.9-4lbs. I would be much more interested in the compliance of the design so that the ride comes out to be like what you want it to be. In general, in a bike about a third of the weight is in the bike, a third in the wheels and the rest in the components. So the impact is not going to be huge from oversized to undersized tubing in terms of weight. That said, the compliance, ride and handling of the frame are seriously impacted by the geometry of the design and the tube selection.

With regards to weight, my stainless frame comes in (without pedals) at 16.3lbs. That bike is set up with Ultegra Di2, DA crank, carbon tubular wheels, and low weight components. The Gunnar which is set up with Ultegra 6800, tubular AL rims, etc... steel fork comes in ~20lbs or so without pedals (haven't weight it but should be about right. With that bike set up as it is, it has been ridden hundreds of miles on mountain roads as well as having done a lot of gravel road riding. So it's no slouch at all and a very comfortable bike that performs well. Going to a carbon fork would drop about a pound. Going to tubulars over clinchers - which I definitely recommend for larger riders (no pinch flats) - also drops about a pound. Judicious selection of seats is another place to drop a bunch of weight.

As far as materials go - Steel vs Stainless vs Ti vs Carbon - I think the differences are hugely overblown for most riders. If a shop is focusing in on the material first, then I'd wonder about their experience with dealing with frame builders. It's possible to get a light, fast and comfortable bike in any of those materials. Equivalently, it's very possible to build a heavy dog in any of these materials too. It's really pretty difficult to discern the frame material from the ride as a matter of fact. The big advantages to steel is that it is the easiest material with which to work and to do a custom geometry and there is a large pool of frame builders that makes for competitive pricing. The advantages to Ti and Stainless are their corrosion resistance and their unique appearances but they are harder with which to work.

It is totally false that a clyde has to ride a heavy bike.

A standard bike isn't going to come apart or anything. What will happen is that you can get the FD to rub or the RD to shift if the bottom bracket is too flexible for the power the rider is putting out. It's things like that. Most of the time, there is no issue on too flexible of a frame but it's better to get it right sized up front.

But, you should make sure you are upfront with the frame mfg about weight but just work with them to keep it from getting out of control on the oversizing of the tubing.

I think you just need to be on top of this. Even if it is overbuilt you can deal with the compliance issues of too stiff with component and tire selection. A top end seat post that is built for compliance (I like Ritchey Flexlogic ones), carbon bars, and larger diameter tires (I use 25c tubulars) will be huge in improving ride quality. The real issue, and it's sort of in the category of cyclist OCD, is that you'd know it's heavier than it needed to be. Is that going to impact it's fun factor? No. You can handle the stiffness issues with component selection.

My only and main concern with Gunnar is their heavy forks. I also prefer the ride and handling that I get with my carbon forks over the ones that Gunnar builds. But, that said, it's personal preference - some swear by steel forks and won't ride anything else. I also dislike the weight of a steel fork just because I'm getting older, have a bum shoulder and I like the bike to lighter rather than heavier for putting it up on the car and, well, just because I like light bikes.

Gunnar will work with you. They are great about it and it's one of the big reasons they exist. I'd have no concerns about getting a bike from them. The trick is communication and being direct and clear about what you want. If you don't know what you want, how are they supposed to figure it out?

J.

Jarrett2

Thanks for taking the time to type all of that up. Great info.

illusiumd

The big difference between ES and Sport (correct me if I'm wrong) is frame geometry. I wish now that I would have forked over the extra $ for the Gunnar Sport. I was looking for a little bit more of a relaxed position but just didn't want to spend the extra on the Gunnar. When you compare headtubes the Gunnar is much longer than the Soma. Surly's have this problem too. So I wound up maxing out how high the handlebars can raise up. I've got a 120mm 30d stem and with an uncut steerer tube on my 64cm ES it just does level out with the seat.

Wingsprint

The big differences other than geometry would be the Gunnar is made in the US, uses a better tube set, and has a much higher quality paint job. For those who have never seen a Gunnar or Waterford in person- they have a better paint job than some custom cars.

tarwheel 

Very interesting information here. I owned a size 60 Gunnar Sport that I bought used, and it was the stiffest frame that I've ever owned. Perhaps the original owner was a Clyde and it was designed accordingly. The tubing was very large, which would make sense. I ended up selling because I found the ride too harsh but it was a great bike in other respects. Excellent finish and construction, mounts for fenders and racks, clearance for larger tires and fenders. I would buy another one in the correct size for me in a minute knowing that they could adjust tubing for a more compliant ride.

BTW, I also own a Waterford RST-22 in size 58 that I also bought used, and it is the nicest riding bike I've ever owned. The geometry is similar to the Sport but it has tubing that is much less stout. Ironically, I bought the Sport because the Waterford rode so nicely, thinking they would ride the same, but they were different as night and day.

wvridgerider

I need a new picture but I like this one. The bike is great.

wvridgerider

Oh I forgot, I never put the bike on a scale, I need to loose weight before I worry about the weight of my bike.

JohnJ80

This, I think, is the caution in buying a used Gunnar - even though it's more of a "production" bike than other more custom brands, every frame is going to get a different set of tubing based on the weight of the rider. One needs to understand what this might do to the frame characteristics.

That said, it's really easy to soften up the ride of almost any bike if the frame is too stiff - in many ways "too stiff" is better than the opposite problem. You can mellow out the ride if the frame is stiff but you can't stiffen up the frame if the ride is too compliant or the frame to soft. "Too stiff" lands in the category of "good problem to have" with the exception of the weight impacts.

My Gunnar is stiff. Done again, I'd push back on their conservatism and soften the frame. Then again, I know how to ride a more flexible frame after the '80's Basso frame I had. Technique has a lot to do with it and you have to be smooth - not a bad thing but can get aggravating at the end of the day when you're tired. That Basso frame couldn't be made stiffer.

What I did to soften the ride of my Gunnar had a dramatic impact on the ride quality. Now, it rides super smooth and with that "all day" sort of ride. I changed out my Aluminum Fizik Cyrano seatpost for a Ritchey Flexlogic post. The difference there alone is dramatic - the Ritchey is built to have a lot of compliance to the point where you can actually see it. It's an amazing post and does a superb job at taking the hard edges off of bumps and the road buzz you feel with a stiff frame.

The next thing I did was to go to 25c tubulars at about 88lbs on the front and about 100 lbs on the back compared to 23c tubulars at 110psi on the front and 125PSI on the rear. That has a major impact. I found that after studying some charts for recommended inflation based on a 15% deformation of the sidewall height. No increase in flats and it rides much better and faster.

The final thing I did was to put the same carbon bars on the Gunnar that I had on my road bike that I loved so much. That really ended the ride issue. If I went to a carbon fork over the Gunnar fork, I'd smooth it out even more. Maybe "smooth" isn't the right word, but I'd remove all of the high frequency vibration that is so annoying when riding a stiff frame.

So that will make a stiff bike a very comfortable bike that has top performance.

FWIW, I weighed my Gunnar last night with pedals, a computer mount, a Spurcycle bell, sensors and an Italian Bike Mirror on the bars. The weight was 21.48 lbs for a 56/57cm frame. That includes the heavy Gunnar steel fork. If I took off the accessories and pedals, I'd drop at least 500 grams (conservatively). If I swapped out the fork for a carbon one, I'd lose another 500-600g for a total of 2.43lbs or coming in at 19lbs. If I didn't have the oversized heavier tubing of Gunnar's conservatism, I'd probably save another 200g and the bike would be at about 18.61lbs. Lighter skewers would save about 70g, lighter cages another 40g so it would be reasonable to get this down to 18lbs. Carbon rims would take it down to 17lbs. Sub 20 lbs is sort of my benchmark weight for a bike. At that or below, it makes it easy to wrangle it up on top of the car or into tight spaces (up stairs etc...). I don't think there is much ride quality difference below 20 to 15 lbs. So the difference in component cost below 18 to go to 16 isn't worth it unless you've got the weight weenie thing bad (which I do).

I need to quit looking at this or I'll be talking myself into a Sport frame before a whole lot longer. I think that is just about the perfect geometry for most people.

I'm now completely without a plastic bike. I just replaced my 2007 carbon frame with a full custom stainless steel frame for my full on road bike. Now, my bikes are perfect. I get on them and start riding and always marvel at the ride quality.

J.

dr_lha

Interesting. I was always under the impression that Gunnars had a bad reputation for their paint jobs, which I had read on many occasions are extremely liable to chip. Maybe this was true on older Gunnars but not new ones. You're certainly the first person I've heard praising Gunnars for their quality paint!

bassjones

Gunnar emailed me a reply next business day. I'm going to call them later today and discuss. I do think I'm going to wait and see where my weight is at tax return time before I order the frame. Then I may just swap all the parts off my Cannondale and sell that frame. Pending budget of course. May upgrade to Rival 22 instead and sell the CAAD9 complete.

JohnJ80

This isn't accurate. Gunnar has always had beautiful paint work but there was a period in time where they were apparently easy to chip. That's a function of the paint not of the painting. The paint work on my Gunnar is quite good and much better than I would expect for a frame in it's price range.

That said, I'm not sure that the comments about paint chipping were well deserved. Paint chips. Same thing happened on my plastic bike where it was painted. Your car's paint chips when it gets hit by a rock too. That's part of why I bought a partially unpainted stainless steel frame. You fix dings in the finish with a scotch brite pad.

J.

dr_lha

That period of time gave their paint a sh*tty reputation then! All I ever hear about Gunnars is that they're "nice but have crap paint". Good to hear that's not the case.

JohnJ80

All I can tell you is that the paint job on the Gunnars we have is better than any stock bike I've ever owned. And they haven't got chips any differently that any other bike we own.

J.

dr_lha

Sure, it just shows a bad rep is hard to shake.

wvridgerider

Dark Blue Pearl. It looks really good in the sun.