oilman_15106

From the postings on 50+ the Jamis line of steel road bikes is popular. I am a fan. Having started with an 853 steel frame, moving to carbon rear, then a mixed carbon tube/steel frame, off the market for a year(?) the Jamis Eclipse has now returned to an 853 steel frame.

I think this is great news. I have ridden all three of the Eclipse frame styles and the all steel is the smoothest of the bunch. The rear carbon/steel comes in a close second and the carbon/steel mix frame is just ok. Only thing different between the older 853 models and the 2009 is that the frame looks like it is a slightly sloping geometry vs. the traditional.

Here is the link: https://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebik...9_eclipse.html

NOS88

I beg to differ. While all three versions are fine bikes, I find the carbon/steel mix frame to be the smoothest of the three. The rear end is a bit more skittish on fast downhills than the full steel version (the carbon rear only seems to me to be about the same). Personally, I'd rather they kept the carbon/steel mix for the model. Not only was it a smooth ride, it looked classy, and we all know that makes you go faster.

Tom Bombadil

That '09 wheelset is sure ugly, with those twin monster-sized decals on each wheel. Really detracts from the overall appearance of the bike.

stapfam

Don't know the Jamis range- but Take it that it is a Respectable bike for the use.

Always get the feeling that if a bike has been off the market for a year- and then comes back in a completely different guise- then they should have come up with a new name for the model. This eclipse may be filling the same hole as the last one- but it does seem to be a different bike.

BengeBoy 

I was in a bike shop the other day and was really struck by the look of the 2009 Aurora Elite.

Seems to be me that would be great bike for commuting and light touring.

I know that forum member SaiKaiTai got an '08; also a nice bike. I understand that the 2009's have changed:
- steel fork instead of carbon
- traditional touring geometry instead of 'cross geometry

At $1500, a fine alternative to another classy bike in that price range - the Salsa Casseroll. And, while a couple of hundred dollars more expensive than the Surly LHT, it's also a few pounds lighter, I think.

Not as racy at the Eclipse, but I think it really hits the sweet spot for a lot of riders.
https://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebik...roraelite.html

SaiKaiTai

Yep, they changed a few things between the '08 and '09 Aurora Elite.
The '08 was more in line with what I wanted... glad I could still find one.
I've already put 300 or 400 miles on this baby and, I'll tell you, I could not be happier
Seems the more I ride it, the comfortable it gets.
I haven't pulled my Giant off the hooks since the Jamis came home.

robtown

I've got this 2002 Jamis Eclipse in 52cm - 853 with Reynolds Ouzo Carbon fork that I just rebuilt. The new DA bar end shifters only work in friction mode; I have to see if there is a recall to fix index mode. I'm not sure if I'll sell, rent, loan, or foist this on a relative.

BluesDawg

The new Eclipse looks like a nice riding bike. I hope the gaudy decals are removable from the otherwise good American Classic wheels. But some will actually consider the racer boy graphics a plus.

It looks like a natural competitor to the Salsa Pistola (which could use a better wheelset).

oilman_15106

No intent to start a war on the different frame materials. Ya, you can go faster on the carbon mix frame cause it is a bit lighter, same geometry as all the rest.

American Classic decals are easily removable. Great wheels.

BluesDawg

Many people choose to believe this (that a minutely lighter frame will make a bike faster) with no empirical evidence to support it. I choose not to believe it with an equal lack of evidence.

stapfam

The feel of a frame does make a difference- even if it is just mentally. I have top rate ally frame and a good C.F. The C.F. does give a comfortable ride and it took some sorting to get the thing to handle at speed. Hill climbing on it is a dream though- it just seems to sail uphills. The Ally frame does have C.F. seat post and forks and does not have the harshness that most ally frames give me.

So I have two different bikes. I cannot tell you which bike is my favourite- but if lots of hills are involved- then the C.F. is ridden. The ally frame gets taken on longer distances and if I want a bit more enjoyment on the ride.

It would be interesting to take two bikes made of different materials- but same geometry and fittings for a ride sometime just to compare them. I'll have to chat to my LBS and see if I can borrow an Alliance sometime. It compares to my TCR on geometry- just different materials.

BengeBoy 

Here's a widely used online bicycle power calculator.

https://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

Weight is one of the variables that help determine how fast you can go, or how much energy you use to achieve a desired results (speed over distance).

Bicycle Quarterly has written a lot of detailed, experiment-based articles on what makes bikes go faster for long-distance riders (specifically randonneers, not racers). Their conclusions tend to be (and I'm simplifying here):

- all weight matters; that's physics.
- minute differences in weight don't matter as much as other things you might do to change your performances, such as -- adopting a more aerodynamic riding style or finding tires with lower rolling resistance.
- changes in the bike that make you more comfortable might actually contribute more to overall speed because if you're comfortable you can spend more time in the saddle and lest time resting.

And, of course, losing 5 pounds from the engine is more worthwhile than buying a bike that's 2 pounds lighter.