Carbon Frame vs better components
 

Hoping to get some advice on what bike to get. I'm torn between Specialized Vita/Sirrus Sport Carbon ($1300) and the Spec Vita/Sirrus Elite ($1000). Let me start with I'm a newbie, just starting to ride, but I'm certain I'm down for the long run.
I've done a lot of research, but I was told something to think about. Hoping for verification on this. I was told, it may be better to go with this entry level carbon bike, for the carbon frame and just upgrade components down the line. Was told this is better than going with the Elite, without carbon frame, but with better components. When I upgrade down the line, and I know I will, I would be going with carbon anyways.
I'm using this bike for fitness, working up to long distance rides. I would love any feedback and/or advice.

It's been my experience that "entry-level" carbon bikes will have low-end (but still decent) 10-speed or lower cassette specs.
The aluminum bikes with 105 or higher specs will obviously have the new 11-speed cassette.

So it could just boil down to the question: Do you mind having less than an 11-speed?

Personally, I'm a sucker for aluminum bikes with 105 or better specs (so far, only 105, though - gotta watch the budget).

Deciding you need to "upgrade" components is a quick way to turn a $1000 bike into a $2000 bike. Buy the bike with the better components. You may never notice the difference between an alloy frame and an aluminum one. But you will absolutely appreciate better shifts.

You aren't going to be able to tell much of a difference either way. Buy whichever one you like better, based on cost or whatever else is your priority. Ride it and enjoy. Because the riding is the thing, not the bike.

If you really are down for the long run, you'll be buying a second bike soon enough, irrespective of which one you choose now.

Both are flat bar bikes. If you are in it for the long haul I suspect in the not-so-distant future you'll be wanting a drop bar bike. I'd choose the $1000 bike and save the $300 for that future purchase. When you're ready to upgrade (to a dropbar) you'll likely just buy a new bike rather than upgrading or converting the old bike.

I'd go for better componants as well. Carbon is nice but aluminum with really good tires/tubes is not far off. I doubt you'd notice and appreciable difference but you can definitely notice a difference in the group it comes with.

Skip the flat bar bike, and look at drop bar bikes. If you start riding longer rides, maybe 2 hours or more, you'll like the drop bars. Just test ride one, you'll see that it's easy to ride, and comfortable too.

For upgrades, just get a saddle that fits you, and decent tires (like Continental GP4000S). The rest of the bike will be fine as-is. By the time you want to do a major upgrade, there will be lots of changes, so that you might want a new frame to handle the new stuff anyway.

I don't think that lower end carbon frames are all that much better than today's aluminum frames, anyway.

Hi AngieD750,

When I'm looking for a bike to keep, I always start with the frame. And by "keep" I mean that I'd like it to last long enough to pass down to my kids So I would choose the bike with the best frame I can afford with the plan to upgrade the components in the future as I'm able. This also means choosing a frame with a bottom bracket shell that I like because this can have a great bearing on what bottom brackets and cranks you can use with the frame without resorting to adapters. Personally, I still prefer frames with the venerable English threaded bottom bracket shell so I can use my favorite: GXP.

The material the frame is made with is not necessarily an indication of quality and there are way too many half-truths and falsehoods circulating around the net about them. If I were buying a frame to last a long time I would choose a well-made composite frame that is purpose-built for the use I intend---if I can afford it. My second choice would be either steel if my budget is tight or titanium if it's not. There are some good aluminum alloy bikes now but aluminum is a flawed material because of the way it accumulates stress---even minor stress will add up over time to failure. There's a very good reason why many "good" alloy frames come with composite forks instead of alloy.

But all frame materials have been used to make good and bad bikes. So don't get stuck on any one material. The quality of design and construction can trump the best material.

Kind regards, RoadLight

Yes...been reading about the 105 group of components. Unfortunately, the Specialized with 105 starts at $2000. I'm not ready for that price range...just yet. I do appreciate the advice though. If I go with the Elite ($1000), I could always upgrade those components

This seems to be the idea I'm considering. I never thought of a road bike, just because I was considering the terrain I "may" ride...just figured the fitness hybrid was more suitable. I may just go with Elite, then in the near future, buy a road bike. Thanks for the advice

Thanks guys for all the info...pretty much helped me to decide to save $300, go with the Spec Elite and enjoy that for a while. The components may not be the 105 group quality,but with my experience, I'd probably wouldn't notice, much less benefit from top of the line components. However, the Elite will be perfect to learn on and enjoy...then in the future (near), I'll be ready to drop $$ on something different...most likely a road bike with some great components. I'm just happy to start enjoy riding!! Thanks!!!

My bike I ride is a mutt. 105 brakes, Ultegra RD, Dura-Ace (older) cranks. What matters is the frame and the wheels. The other stuff matters too , but so much less I don't bother installing it, although I own it.

Alloy frames now come with cf forks to help dampen road "chatter", not because of fear of "stress failure".
Seems like you're reaching there. :foo:

And you don't think that ride quality is important? It's no "reach" at all.

In the past alloy frames have a well-deserved reputation for poor ride quality (bad mixture of stiffness and vibration damping). And aluminum alloys have a generally bad reputation in all industries regarding stress and fatigue.

A few bike manufacturers have continued to develop their alloy frame design and manufacturing processes and have found ways to mitigate much of the ride quality issues. But such frames are still in the minority and the majority of alloy frames have an undesirable ride quality. Manufacturers have realized this for a long time and the higher-priced alloy frames are typically mated to composite forks to improve the ride quality.

But, short of some amazing metallurgical breakthrough, nothing can be done to improve the fatigue problems of aluminum. This is why alloy frame designers are forced design alloy frames with much higher safety margins than steel or titanium. And this robs alloy frames of much of their potential weight savings since tubes must be so much thicker owing to fatigue and the fact that aluminum is a relatively "soft" metal.

Composite forks are used to overcome the "harsh" ride quality of alloy frames. This has nothing to do with stress failure or fatigue. And most cyclists---including many who "think" they know a lot" are ignorant of composites, what they can do and how they are used. Composites made with carbon and other materials typically suffer from near-zero stress accumulation. Simply put: they do not fatigue! When they are pushed beyond their "breaking" point, they break. But you can push them just short of their breaking point over and over and over again with no weakening of the material. This is untrue for all metals but the levels vary dramatically from one metal to another. This is where aluminum alloys are their weakest because aluminum begins to fatigue at very small stress levels and this fatigue gradually grows over the years even when the stress is very mild. Steel, for example, has no cumulative fatigue at low stress levels---you can push it much harder before stresses begin to accumulate. The same for titanium.

But the unique thing about the composites is that engineers can control the breaking points based on direction and kind. Metals are uniform. Since the composites are not, crafty designers have tried to make the lightest frames possible for racing by designing them with good strength only in the directions needed. They intentionally allowed them to be weak in areas where they would not receive much stress. This is why you cannot use a strong circumferential compressive force on most composite bike tubes---they simply were not designed for it.

But the thing is, if frame designers wanted to make a composite frame that can handle a wider variety of stresses, they could at the expense of weight. This is what they should be doing for consumer frames---but they aren't because many cyclists get it into their head to buy what they see the pros riding without considering that those frames are purpose-built for racing---not general cycling. And another reason they don't is because the high amount of manual labor required to construct a composite frame, keeps their price high and most buyers looking to spend top dollar on a bike want it to be as light as the pro bikes they see being raced.

So, if some enterprising manufacturer wanted to design a composite frame for touring that would have great durability for most situations, they could and it would last longer than any metal frame because there is no practical lifespan limit for most composite materials.

In the future after manufacturers figure out how to fully automate composite frame making, I expect cyclists to be able to order a custom-built composite frame based on their personal design criteria. They'll be able to specify how much strength any part of the frame can handle from a variety of vectors. Composites are the future. But we're still in the stone age of manual labor regarding their manufacture today.

Kind regards, RoadLight

Good lord. The OP is just looking for advice on a starter bike.

When/if you decide to move to a road bike, I'd suggest that you look at a something in the gravel/adventure category - drop bar but with the ability to accommodate fatter tires. If I could only have one bike, it would be something along these lines (and then I'd slap some skinny, slick tires on it for rides when I plan to keep it on the pavement).

edited to add: I found my DB Haanjo (with 105) well on sale well under $1k.

Agree with most.

I'd look for a frame that fits me best. Material is less important. Especially if you can test ride a bike and see how you like it.

The reason carbon forks are used on alu frames is mostly because of marketing. Well built, quality alu frame will last long.

Components are all good - "upgrade" is also mostly marketing IMO. From 9 speeds you have enough gears for both tightly spaced gearing and a decent gearing range for climbs and flats. You won't go faster with 11 vs 9 speeds.

Having said this, I must add that Shimano 10 speed, except the newest 4700 Tiagra, has the most sensitive shifting - tightly spaced sprockets with very little cable movement per gear change is very sensitive to any play or friction in cables, housing. New 4700 10 speed, as well as all the 11 speed has that fixed, using significantly more cable movement per each gear change. Also, going over 8 speeds at the back, also because of a tighter gear spacing, systems are more sensitive to RD misalignment and play in RD pivots, but that is a worry in case of some damage (falling down on the RD, then aligning it back, or a worn RD).

Angie, what exactly do you mean by this:

if you are picturing yourself riding some unpaved goodness, you should think about this:


you seem to be leaning towards Specialized... if so, have a look at the Dolce Evo.

if you are in it for the long haul, your "beginner" bike doesn't have to be a throw-away. good advice, i think, is to get a bike for the rider you aim to become, not the rider you are now; start out with a keeper that you can enjoy for many years to come.

if it's versatile, like this Dolce Evo (or Diamondback HannJenn, etc), you may defer your second bike for a long time, as you explore its many uses. i have a similar machine: an alloy "road" bike with tiagra and mechanical disc brakes, purchased in 2010. it was not my first bike, it is not my only bike, it is not my most expensive bike. but it is so versatile, i ride more often than any other. i use it to commute, run errands, the occasional joy ride. it does better than it should on mtn bike trails, so i've changed from 28mm to 40mm tires to get onto the dirt more often. i will soon have to try bikepacking with this thing.

Dolce Evo looks like a similar machine. think about it. :thumb:

now thinking of my fiancé, found this. hth!

This is good advice, particularly about the versatility, but there's middle ground between spending more on your first bike and having it be a throw away. My first bike was/is a $600 (2009 dollars) steel framed touring bike. It's not a great bike at all, but i rode it 1500 miles before I upgraded. The best bike I ride now (which was not the second bike either) cost nearly 10 times more when you add in the wheels. But I've ridden the "first" bike thousands of miles since my first upgrade and I still like it very much. After it was no longer my "best" bike, it's been (at different times) my spare, my commuter, my trail bike, my rain bike, and my winter bike. I commuted with it last summer, it has sat in my basement for a few months, but starting in December it's again going to be my winter bike. It's true that its somewhat versatile in that it takes quite different tire sizes, but my chief point is that your first bike doesn't have to be super in order for it to remain useful and appreciated

agreed, MinnMan. good thing about the Dolce Evo (no, i do not work for Spesh. why do you ask? ;) ) is the price is only $50 more than the carbon option above. Angie, it seems like with the other bikes you are planning to outgrow before you buy. probably not hard to do with flatbar road machines. why dip your toe in the water? just go ahead and cannonball.

Tiagra is solid. i have two other bikes with Ultegra, but do not feel deprived when riding with Tiagra. that said, the Dolce frame is nice and worthy up eventual upgrades, the first of which could be wheels. if you decide that you do, indeed, enjoy dropbars on dirt (so wrong, it's gotta be right) then you could get a second wheelset mounted with wider/knobbier tires (tubeless) for dirt/gravel and keep the original slicks on the original wheels for the street. hydraulic brakes would be a nice down-the-line upgrade, as well.



additional thoughts, since i'm here... relative to a gravel bike:

road bikes are lighter and faster up hills, but require a more aggro riding position and are sketchy on the unpavement... also can be unstable if loaded for touring... great for charity rides, and such.

mountain bikes are obviously better on dirt, especially more rugged trails, but are usually heavier and slower on pavement... most can be set up for touring, but best if that happens on dirt... you should get one eventually, nothing is better than riding singletrack, imho. :)

flatbar roadbikes are better... umm... for people who aren't sure what they want to do with a bike... people who are put off by dropbars... can't think of any way that they are functionally superior to a gravel bike.

gravel bikes can't hang with mtn bikes in the rough/sandy/muddy stuff, but they can do most xc trails and all of these other things and make you smile broadly while doing it.

You may want to also look at some of the Liv Bikes options (these are part of Giant's organization).. eg. the Liv Thrive and Liv Thrive CoMax line would probably be similar to the Spesh bikes you mentioned. These seem to be specced with better groupsets than the Spesh (Tiagra vs. Sora)..
https://www.liv-cycling.com/us/bikes/on-road/city

This. If you stick with it and want to ride longer rides, you will want a drop bar road bike sooner than later.

Invest small now, invest better on the road bike.

Ok, this is some new information. Being a newbie, these are things that I really didn't know of. However, as I'm researching and learning more about proper cycling and gear/bikes, etc, I have more to base my decision on.
I wouldn't say that my current riding is anything major...flat paved trails. However, as I ride more and my riding patterns become more demanding, I will def take this info into consideration. The bikes I was considering have 9 speeds in back and I was told I probably don't need much right now. Thanks again!!!