First Look: 2013 Kona Jake
#7
Fat Cyclist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 673
Likes: 1
From: Florida
Bikes: '11 Cannondale SuperSix Dura-Ace
Are the Kona road bikes over priced? $5499 for an aluminum frame and carbon for with Di2. Di2 is nice, but is that the only reason why it's so expensive?
#9
Fat Cyclist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 673
Likes: 1
From: Florida
Bikes: '11 Cannondale SuperSix Dura-Ace
Yeah. That seems over priced, but I'm probably wrong. A Cervelo S2 has a carbon frame and is equipped with SRAM Rival, yet it's $2,800 compared to Kona's $5,499. What am I missing?
Last edited by Axiom; 08-16-12 at 11:02 PM.
#12
Fat Cyclist
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 673
Likes: 1
From: Florida
Bikes: '11 Cannondale SuperSix Dura-Ace
#13
Banned
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,543
Likes: 41
From: England / CPH
Bikes: 2010 Cube Acid / 2013 Mango FGSS
interesting. i think you guys in the US have a much broader selection of CX bikes than us. it looks like an interesting machine, but i'm still not sure about drop bars/brifters.
#14
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
From: Kansas City
Bikes: Trek 9th District, CAAD 10, Crux
First Look: 2013 Kona Jake
Andy - That is a great looking bike. I just love the Kona line.
What's your opinion on the brakes? I'm sure they stop the bike, but anything else come to mind?
What's your opinion on the brakes? I'm sure they stop the bike, but anything else come to mind?
#18
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,733
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes

Yeah, that was a tough call, but it was either that or build a bigger garage. The Cross Check didn't fit me nearly as well as this does anyway.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
#19
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,733
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes
I've only ridden the bike for about 8 miles so far, but my first impression is that when applying both front and rear brakes the stopping power is similar to applying the front BB7-160 and rear Shorty 4 cantilever on my old bike. With just the front brake, I think it's noticeably weaker than the BB7, but even that could be my imagination to some extent. I'll have a better evaluation in a couple of weeks. I had been toying with the idea of switching over to BB7's right away, but I decided I'd give the Lyras a try. After one ride, I'm not really in hurry to change them. I think I'll at least wait until the first rain and see how they do.
One thing I will say is that the LBS mechanic spent a good 5 minutes tinkering with the front brake, truing the rotor and such and it still had a bit of a scrape this morning. By the time I got to work I didn't notice it anymore. I am of the opinion that disc brakes are self-truing within the range of minor adjustments, but it's something I'll be keeping an ear out for.
As you can see in the pictures, the Lyras have a built-in barrel adjuster. They have slots for an allen key on both sides of the brake caliper. I can't seem to open the user manual from the Tektro website, but an old manual I found online somewhere else indicates that only the fixed pad is meant to be adjusted with the allen key, with the barrel adjuster being used to move the other pad. I'm not sure if the outside bolt is there for assembly purposes or if it also move the pad. The manual also claimed there was something on the caliper to let you adjust the spring tension, but I can't find that.
I also think the Lyras are better looking that the BB7's, but that doesn't help stop the bike.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
Last edited by Andy_K; 08-17-12 at 12:59 PM.
#20
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 312
Likes: 1
From: Columbus, Ohio
Bikes: All City Nature Boy, Salsa Ti Fargo, Kona Electric Ute
I was in the market for a cross check, but Im liking this one too. If the Surly had fit you better, would you still be riding it instead of this?
#21
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,733
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes




So, I might have a bit of a bias.
That said, I would have gotten the 2013 Jake regardless, because it's exactly what I've been looking for for years. I decided to sell the Cross Check instead of the 2008 Jake in part because I have more sentimental attachment to the Jake, but also in part because I like the 2008 Jake better than I liked the Cross Check. My 2008 Jake is a 52cm and is actually a bit small. My 2008 Major Jake is a 54cm and fits me like a glove. My 2013 Jake is a 53cm and fits exactly like the 54cm Major Jake. My Cross Check was a 54cm and was, to my tastes, too long in the top tube and too short in the head tube -- meaning it was simultaneously too small and too big by my standards. In reality, it probably fit me pretty well according to its intended design. That just turned out not to be the geometry I wanted.
The Cross Check fits more like a road racing bike, I think. The proportion of its head tube to its top tube means that it is built for an agressive riding position, low and stretched out. If you want that, then it's probably a better choice than the Jake. The Jake geometry is more compact and upright, but moderately so. The new Kona Rove is even more upright, kind of like the Salsa Vaya. It's all a matter of what you're looking for. For the way a bike fits, stack and reach (which roughly describe the relative position of the pedals and bars) are a good numerical indicator. The 54cm Cross Check has a stack height of 539mm and a reach of 395mm. The 53cm Jake, by comparison, has a stack height of 558mm and a reach of 385mm. The proportions are just different, by design. Of course, you can change that somewhat with tall spacer stacks and sloping stems, but then the geometry of the bike is working against you.
Anyway, I actually did like the Cross Check. It was just my least favorite of the bikes that I had that would be worth selling.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
Last edited by Andy_K; 08-17-12 at 02:58 PM.
#22
Thread Starter
Senior Member


Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,733
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes
The Jake geometry is actually pretty good for racing, and I have raced my 2008 Jake, but the selection of components on the base level Jake tips the fact that it's really intended as an all-around bike. Specialized has recognized this division by making two different lines of bikes, the Crux and the TriCross. The Ridley X-Bow also seems to be targeted at general purpose use. It makes me wonder if Ridley developed that one for the U.S. market. I notice that Raleigh's website lists their Roper and Furley in a 'cyclocross' subcategory under 'steel road' rather than with the rest of their cyclocross bikes.
Eventually someone will come up with a marketing term for these general purpose CX-like bikes and they can split off as a new category. The old "sport touring" bikes or the 70's served essentially the same purpose.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LittlePixel
Folding Bikes
114
05-08-24 04:54 PM
carbonframe
Professional Cycling For the Fans
11
08-24-13 06:45 PM

















