Dubbayoo

if you must go carbon be sure and get a fork with an alloy steerer tube.

charles vail

Ever wonder why the carbon component manufacturers put weight limits on their stuff and special disclaimers on carbon stuff? One big company is very specific on this. Carbon stuff is strong but when it fails it often does so without warning. You may never see a crack starting before you go down hard. Aluminum has low fatigue strength as many of you know and would not be my choice for a steer tube no matter what the manufacturer said. With a more limited fatigue cycle an aluminum steerer for a big rider is a crack waiting to happen. One other point is the dissimular metals corrosion factor of pairing aluminum and carbon fiber. Steel or titanium steerers and fork ends work better in this way and are far less prone to fatigue cracking. Carbon building methods may have come a long way in the past few years but I remain faithfull to a well built steel fork, made of proper guage tubing for the heavier rider.
The "weight wars" in the minds of cyclists, have done alot to advance racing components for lightweight riders, with support crews, carrying extra bikes etc. but for the rest of us who may ride our machines for years, rather than one season, we need parts that are durable and safe beyond any doubt.

bdinger

Well, with all of this talk, I decided to put a hold on it. The new bike will be my reward for hitting 275, at which point I'll get some speedy roadie and not have to worry so much about components. Plus.. goals are a good thing .

For now I'm going to upgrade the drivetrain on my Hardrock from ASS-era to something a little more smooth/reliable. Having to adjust the FD every other month is getting... annoying .

Seamus

Since you really seem to like the geometry of your MTB, I think you could put together a second commuter rig with steel frame and fork for much less than your $600 budget. Don't limit yourself to local craigslist either, I would look at ebay. My guess is you could find a good clean rigid CrMo MTB with Deore-level components for <$300. Add 26" slicks (like the ones I got from Nashbar for $9.99/ea) and you're good to go. A lot of older steel mountain bikes have eyelets for racks/fenders as well, making them even more commuter-friendly.

Then save the rest of your budget for a new superfast roadie when you get under 300. Win-win.

Jim

FarHorizon

Hi bdinger!

I can't answer your question definitively, but I can share my experience: At weights from 260-290, I rode several "light road bikes" (one of which was a club racing bike bought used from a local racer). These bikes had a variety of carbon forks including Easton and others. I never had any fork cracking or failures. Maybe I was lucky? Maybe I didn't hit enough potholes? Maybe the forks are built with enough safety margin to tolerate abuse?

In any case, I liked the "feel" of my carbon forks. In fact, the Easton on the club racer was the most comfortable bike I've ever pedaled. Unfortunately, I broke a spoke after several months on the rear wheel & sold the bike. I've regretted that sale ever since!

Being inherently conservative, if I were you, I'd tolerate the MTB until I got under 300. Then, based on my previous experience, I'd happily ride carbon forks with no concerns. That's just me, though. Best of luck!

bdinger

Seamus and FarHorizion:
Thanks for the input! I think I'm going to basically do a compromise of the two. Seeing that I love my Hardrock beyond some components, I'll upgrade those and ride it down until I hit 275. A Deore LX drivetrain to smooth that out, and a RockShox front shock with an actual lockout (thereby alleviating one of my major grips - the !@#!@# stock RST fork). Add in some Continental Town and Country's to smooth out the roll and a set of fenders.. win-win.

Meanwhile, I'll keep working hard and dreaming of some speedy roadbike that awaits once I shed another 100lbs

Thanks everyone for your input!

Seamus

Cool plan, man. Definitely sounds like you've got the right attitude to succeed at this.

I've got a buddy who started riding off-road with me at about 370. He discovered that road cycling can be fun too, and started commuting on a fixed conversion (with a carbon fork, btw). He has dropped over 70lbs, and is thinking about his first triathlon this year.

bdinger

Well, I didn't mention it, but I also have a old steel-framed MTB laying around. One of the early 90's vintage MTB's that has a ancient Deore group. I'm going to strip it, repaint it, and make it SS/Fixed. Should give me a little hobby over the weekends, right?

cyclesick

36h wheels. I'd ditch the silly RST fork for something like a Surly 1x1, and upgrade the component group.. hrm.

as for the wheels, at our weight we need the rims to be double walled as well as a high spoke count. and the back wheel must have a hub body that will carry the number of gears the system uses,[6spd bikes have 6spd hubs,7spd's have 7spd hubs.......ect].also, the rear hub width must match the width of the rear drop outs. as for the fork,if your going to ride this bike mainly on the road a rigid fork is a good choice. but, be sure it has the proper correction angle because suspension forks set the head tube at a different hight. if the replacement fork doesn't have the same angle your bike will handle weird. how does the whole bottom bracket thing work out with a road BB/crank on a MTB frame? most bikes sold in this country are measured like this; 68 or 73 mm[the width of the bottom bracket shell-the lowest part of the frame]x-for instance,113mm[the length of the axle-the spindle in the center of the bb that the cranks are mounted to].most bikes have 68mm bottom bracket shells,but you should measure it to be sure. they are pretty much inter-changeable aslong as the threads are the same. as for compact cranks,they don't give you the same ratios. usually more like 50/36. You didn't mention what you used for a group as for a group, i didn't use a group per se but rather did a lot of research into what components within shimano's products were compatible. if you read my original post carefully you'll see that i pretty much gave you a detailed blueprint. all of the components i mentioned in that post WILL work together. the only thing i left out was the rear deraillure. for that use a 9spd mountain rd,such as deore. this is the only way to get the chain up on the 32t first gear. but to be sure there's no mistakes i'll do it again. shifters-shimano R440 3x9spd, front der.-shimano R4403, cranks/chainrings-any road triple shimano compatible as long as the bottom bracket matches the cranks[this insures proper chain alignment and keeps the bigger chainrings the proper distance from the the chainstay] , sram pc950 chain, sram pc 950 cassette,deore rear der. since i've done this twice now with identicle results, i think i can say with certainty that this combo WILL work and work well.

bdinger

Cyclesick - Yeah, I should have edited my reply after re-reading your post, however I forgot .

Anyway I found my old "high school bike" - a early 90's steel MTB with ancient Deore components. I'm going to ditch everything, strip the frame, paint it and use that for the road rocket. The frame is great, and already has a rigid fork. Heh, it even has the old Biopace crank!

But yeah, that's going to be my spring/summer project. Stripping it down and rebuilding it. The wheels/tires are in sad shape, so it gives me a good excuse to buy a new set. Which, in turn, will allow me to build the bike up the way I want it. I did a lot of pricing after I read your post again, and you are correct, I can build a killer road rocket for under $500 - bulletproof wheels/build included. It will be much like a Trek FX series, except mine will have Ultegra derailuers (I have a line on some for next to nothing), Salsa wheels hand-laced to good hubs (several options on this one)... AND I will have built it.

THANK YOU for the inspiration! I'm going to keep the forum updated as I start my build. I'm thinking of names... soon enough . I have to finish the upgrades to my mountain bike first, then move, but after that... watch out.

charles vail

I did this with an old Trek 850 steel MTB but I made it a commuter/road bike. The bike was hardly ridden at all when I got it and I put some Albatross Chrome moly upright bars with bar end shifters on it, along with a Brooks saddle and some nice fenders. The drivetrain parts were very servicable and the only real changes were a complete cable and housing switch along with wet weather brake pads. For tires I went with some Bontrager 1.5 inch and pump them up to about 80 psi. This has proven to be a very comfy ride and sturdy too, although the frame size turned out to be a little small for me. My wife rides it now but I may still, with a change in handle bar stem. Oh! I forgot.... I replaced the fork with a ridgid from the same period (mid 90's) for $35.00 found at a local bike shop. The bike handles great and is as light as my touring bike but slightly smaller and easier to fit into a car. I don't think a sturdier ride could be had for so little investment. Rack mounts, fender mounts, good gearing for any hill and a decent cruising speed with a 90+ inch high gear. I could have changed to a 46x36x24 crank but the 42x32x22 works fine and I like the low of 19 inches using the 28 tooth big rear cog. I live in a hilly area and don't need more high end. I am 260 now and like the confidence of riding wider tires (less flatting) and the beefy frame that I know will not fatigue crack like some lightweight aluminum frame would with my flab hanging off it! I have lighter bikes but they are old school race bikes and lighter weight road bikes and I enjoy riding them carefully on pavement only. The exception being my old Raleigh tour bike, its a work horse and built to carry a load. Unfortunately there isn't much to choose form these days for heavier riders that is quality and affordable other than Surly products or old steel mountain or touring bikes.

cyclesick

bdinger-The frame you have sounds perfect, and a new set of wheels DOES increase your options. That being said, there are some things you need to be careful of, such as; if the biopace crank set is a mountain set,the Ultegra front derailuer will probably not work because the distance from one chain ring to the next will not be the same as on road cranks. Here's the explanation,[bear with me on this, it get's a little technical and wordy. I'll try to break it down as best as I can]. If you look at a derailuer, either front or rear, you can see that they use a geometrical principal called a 'variable parallelogram', sort of a semi-floating, lopsided rectangle, the same as the steering system on a car.The mechanical theory applied is that by having one or two ,[in this case two], corners fixed to act as pivot points and pulling on an opposing corner the angles of the rectangle change. But, they can only change within a pre-determined range. This range is determined by the lengths of the sides of the rectangle,[this is why some cars have a better turning radius than others]. That's where the issue of compatibility comes in. Mountain front derailuers have a different pre-determined range than their road counterparts. Because of this, front drive train components CAN NOT be mixed,[except in VERY rare cases involving much older friction style components]. If you use a front road derailuer, you must use a road crank and a shifter designed to move the derailuer the proper distance. That's why I chose the Shimano R440 set. They are spicificly designed to work with road bike cranks. And the R440 triple front derailuer is spicificly designed to work with that shifter,[and they were MUCH cheaper than a set of road shifters]. Now when it comes to rear derailuers, you have a little more room to play. Although the spaceing from one gear to the next is pretty much the same on road bikes as on mountain bikes,[as long as the number of gears are equal],the issue now becomes the length of the cage. Here are the things you need to watch out for; road bikes that use only two chain rings on the cranks, will have a short cage derailuer,while road bikes that use triple cranks will have a long cage,[just to be sure, I'll explain. The cage is the lower area of the derailuer that houses the two smaller gears known as pulleys. The length of the cage is determined by the distance between these two pulleys]. Now, the problem with road derailuers,as far as this project is concerned, is that the maxim gear size that even a long cage road derailuer will get up on to is about a 28t and in most cases even that's not a very smooth shift. The Ultegra derailuers sound really nice but if you try to use them on this project you will most likely run into a world of shifting issues. It's best to use a mountain bike derailuer if your going to use a mountain cassette like the set up I originaly described. But, even then you can run into some pitfalls. A 7/8 spd der. will work with a 9spd set up, but you will always have one shift that will be a little funkie; if you get it adjusted so that the upper and lowers are right, you'll have one shift in the middle that's 'crunchy'. If you adjust THAT in right you'll have either the upper or lower shift get weird. You can end up with a very frustrating situation. I'm telling you this because these are all the issues I ran into. It wasn't until I had finally spent way more money than was needed,[and way more than I care to disclose], that I arrived at these conclusions. Now, although the R440 system I used was a 9spd set up, I' pretty sure that Shimano has a comparable system for flat bar road bikes with 8spd rears also. That might save you the cost of the chain and rear drive components if your doner bike is already an 8spd rig. I apologize for the long winded explanations. I don't want you to get the idea that I think you an idiot. Let me asure you that I do not. However, I don't know how much aquired experience you have and, if possible, I'd like to spare you the frustrations that I went through. If you have any further questions, I'd be more than glad to answer them as best I can. Grace and peace-Cyclesick

charles vail

You might also consider tossing out the whole indexed shifting concept and use Shimano bar end shifters, among others, in friction mode. If you do this you won't need to be as concerned about mixing and matching brands and or eras of drivetrain parts, within certain limits. Indexed shifting to me is clunky and limiting, while friction shifting seems smoother and much quieter, plus less fussy about adjustment. The only drawback is that, it isn't in vogue with the average rider and winds up being used by hard core tourists and vintage buffs, because of reliability and the features listed above. The only thing to keep in mind is mountain parts work best with, mountain parts and road parts with, road parts (most of the time). I run a Sugino xd600 46x36x24 with a 105 front and a Deore rear with a 12-32, 8-speed, using, Rivendell Silver ratchet shifters, in friction mode of course. Occasionally, I have to "trim" my front derailleur to keep it from rubbing, in some gear combos but at least I can do this in friction mode!
Life can be simpler when you open your mind to older proven possibities!

charles vail

Unless those ancient parts are worn out completely, you might want to re-consider using them.
My old 90's bike wasn't used much (with the average bike being ridden less than 1000 miles and then thrown in the back of a garage) I found my derailleurs to be fine, once cleaned and re-greased with new cables etc. The chainrings weren't worn and neither was the rear 7-speed cassette. If the wheels are just out of true you might be able to wait on new wheels but excellent true running wheels are important. I know its hard to avoid getting something new. Afterall, it is a hobby for most of us.

cyclesick

Charles Vail- [by the way, Charlie is my first name too], good point about the difference between friction & indexed. But, the other draw back is that friction shifters are not as acurate. This makes them much harder to become proficient with. Inexperienced riders have a greater chance of missing a shift when climbing or racing. This is the whole basis for the debate of campy vs. shimano. I heard a racer once describe as "Campy is the art of shifting and Shimano is the science of shifting". I do agree that friction shifters are far more versitile. But, as for my preference, I just don't have the patience required to develope that specific skill. I find that a properly adjusted indexed system requires less thought to use. One click=one shift. Does'nt get easier than that. Help for the mentally lazy. Grace & peace, Cyclesick

FarHorizon

Hi cyclesick!

Having used both index and friction shifters extensively, I understand the preference for index. For new riders, the "learning curve" is essentially zero for index shifters versus about two weeks for friction. Once accustomed to friction shifters, though, accurate and positive shifts are virtually thoughtless. After two weeks, one can friction shift without having to think about it at all.

At the moment, my current bikes have index shifting, but if I wanted the ultimate in reliability and versatility, for example on a touring bike, friction would be my choice.

charles vail

Friction shifting was all we had when I first started riding a multispeed bike back in the early 1970's. It did take about one week to figure it all out. You could hear when your derailleur was "out" in the back and a slight tweak was in order and you could easily see and hear if the front cage was rubbing the chain. "Feeling the gear change",when pedaling, is also an intuitive process that you soon get the hang of.
I have indexed shifting on my recumbent and like it o.k. but its noisy and I am concerned about the durability of the twist grip shifter. Every time I shift, it goes, clack! clack! with a plastic sound that I am sure is wearing out too fast for my comfort. On my old retro bikes the zzzzip! of the ratchet or the silent gear change on the forward direction is all I hear and its kind of crisp and smooth feeling, at the same time. I plan to switch over the recumbent soon, along with a gearing change and a new chain. IMHO all of the new gear is not an improvement.......for real racers, it may help to be on a level playing field, equpment wise but the last I checked, when I am 30 miles from home, I don't have a support car with a spare bike following me.

bdinger

Welp, went to the LBS to pick up some components...

..and they cut me a great deal on a new Trek 7.3FX. Rode it quite a bit and REALLy like it. I think I'll call it zing.

cohophysh

pictures...we need pictures of the 7.3x

bdinger

Well, horrible cameraphone pic, but it gets the idea. Pardon the mess, we are in the midst of moving I promise a better pic whenever I can find my digicam...

Lost Pup

You want speed, I put IRC Metro Slicks on my Trek 8000 MB set up as a commuter. With my panniers loaded on a steep downhill I clicked past 35 mph before I knew it. Really begin to think more about stopping at that moment.

txroadie0

I have to agree with the people who suggested looking as Surly bikes. I bought a Surly Pacer a few months back and I love it. I'm 270 lbs. and the bike feels very solid under me, but it does not slow me down. The bike is 4130 Chromoly which is used in making bmx bikes, so you know it's sturdy, without being to terribly heavy. It came with a steel fork which I used for a few months before switching to a carbon fork to save a little weight. However, the ride of the original steel fork is so nice, I'm thinking about switching back. Anyway, the Surly is my answer to most of the same issues you had. It's a speedy steel ride that I don't have to be worried about when I want to hammer. I bought it as a frame and fork, so I was able to build it with the components that I wanted and/or had on hand.

Nycycle

Hey there bdinger, I think you did good, I agree with the words you say about the no flex thing, a Milano Seat will help a lot. Wide soft tires do too, but I put those 195 Crossroads on mine, goes a lot faster.
I too want a road bike but my wallet is a lot thinner than I am.

Congrats on the new bike.