SoruAdami

(I know some regulars must hate these X vs Y questions, but I'll try to make it more sensible by giving it context. Hopefully at least some folks can look past that, and my noob badge, and help me with some ideas)


Summary: I'm torn b/w 2 similarly priced bikes: 1) Scott CR1 Team which I test rode personally and liked, 2) a Titanium Motobecane Le Champ which has more of the specs I'm looking for but which I haven't had a chance to try.

https://www.bikesale.com/scott-cr1-te...bike-2011.aspx
https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...hamp_ti_10.htm

Details:
Scott Advantages:
- sold by LBS (local economy yay! )
- personally tested the fit
- more established brand (not that I care about name recognition on the road, but I may need to sell it later)

Moto Advantages:
- NOT Carbon
- Better components (except minor things like brakes)
- Ti => better response
- Less flashy
- did I mention Ti?


As you see I'm tempted to go with the Moto...

My current main bike is older steel frame w/ Campy Veloce components. Compared to that I really liked the feel of the Scott, a but I'm a bit skeptical about CF (never owned one, just scared of a frame failure and having to handle it with more care than steel). OTOH, my short experience with Ti bikes (rode a friend's Litespeed) was very pleasant, so I concluded Ti is the thing for me. (Forum: This is where you come in to rescue me from any potentially wrong conclusions)

Regarding the fit issue: I'm hoping to address that by using my existing steel frame bike as a ref and diffing based on published Moto dimensions.

I've read mostly good things about the Moto Le Champ on these forums and others. Although I understand there's some prejudice against Moto in general (haven't followed the reasons, but it doesn't seem to be specific to this model). Also I understand people are quite happy with BD.com, although they are occasionally accused of less than ideal advertising behavior online.

My riding style:
I'm not very competitive. I do mid to long rides (40-60 miles) as a fitness activity, sometimes commute to work (13 mi). Love to ride hills (used to be my nightmare, but after doing barbell squats I started conquering them and now it's a masochistic addiction). My first ride with the new bike will be a 100+ mile event w/ 6-7K elevation gain.


Anyway, I've written too much. Thanks advance for any insight.

Triode

I'm new to biking.

But I would give a good bit of extra weight to having personally checked the bike out.

I've never owned a titanium bike.

But I think titanium is not a perfect solution, any more than carbon. I have used titanium in other fields.

Maybe I'm prejudiced, but I bought Carbon.

Look at is this way - what % of new models are Ti? Doesn't that limit your market resale value also? How many people are buying titanium? How many Carbon?

If titanium was the greatest thing since grits you would see a lot more of them out there.

Since you asked

SoruAdami

Agreed 100%. It's just that I liked titanium's feel better (could be a function of the specific bike I tried), and the idea that it's more durable and strong is very appealing. That's why I lean that way.

OTOH, as you said there aren't many of them out there. Probably because Ti bikes are *really* expensive. Hence the question: is there anything seriously wrong with Motobecane? It's so cheap, but why aren't there more of them, or Habaneros (sp?), on the trails? Am I taking a risk not going mainstream etc.

As for resale... I'm not really that concerned about that. I've had my current road bike for 11+ years, and I'm anticipating a long use time for the new one too (if it turns out to be a good fit, andI should know that in a short time).

kabex

Ti has insane resale value and it will hold value like nothing else in or outside the market.

10-15 year old Ti frames are being sold very close to their original price. Brand doesn't matter that much, it's titanium tubes. They aren't THAT different(unlike carbon).

Also, raw titanium just looks bad ass and will last you forever looking exactly the same. Other frames will look used & abused; you can always wipe titanium and make it look like new.

patentcad

'Insane resale value'?









Get a grip. It's cycling, not collectible guitars Fredly.

catonec 

Ive never owned a titanium bike but I have ridden one (litespeed mtb). I felt alittle flex when pedaling under load that I didnt feel on my aluminium mtb. when I switched over to road biking I bought alum and it felt like it was nice and solid... untill I bought my carbon. now when I ride the alum frame I can feel the flex on almost every pedal stroke (maybe its all in my mind). I do not compete (yet) but I can appreciate the %100 power transfer from my feet directly to the wheels. By time Im finishing my ride Im glad I didnt waste any energy by bouncing the frame along for 50+ miles. And yes carbon frames can break if you get hit by a car or throw it down the stairs but most damage is repairable for a few hundred bucks. Aluminium frames not so much, ti im not sure (repairable-ity). a carbon frame is not going to shatter into pieces so long as its not grossly abused.

Grasschopper

Well i can't comment much on the bikes...I would typically opt for the one you rode but I have owned BD bikes and they are of good quality, if you KNOW it will fit properly then go for it. That said the above seems like a bad idea...buy the bike...dial in the fit over a couple of rides...then do the century.

thehammerdog

I rode Ti before getting my carbon. Ride is very different....Buttery smooth was my ti bike. The carbon is also great at smoothing out the road but stiffer....my bike is no a racer so it is made to be that way..
Depends on style of riding. I did luv my Ti bike alot.....bombproof

Trucker Dan

Apples or Oranges.
If you are going to race get the scott.
If you don't care about bling bike names, and know how to completely tear down a bike and reassemble it get the moto.

brundle_fly

Scott no contest

markwebb

I have ridden Ti, steel, Al, and now carbon. I just bought a carbon Litespeed M1 at the incredible price of $1,449 equipped with SRAM Rival from Competitive Cyclist. I've only ridden it twice but there are some immdeidate ride characteristics that I noticed. Carbon feel different than everything else. It's a smoother ride. It's hard to describe - you just have to try it yourself and feel the difference. It's not bombproof but heck they make mountain bikes outta the stuff now so it is tougher that urban legends would have us believe. I mean look at all the carbon forks and stays now. It's hard to find an aluminum bike nowdays without a carbon fork. So carbon - to me - has arrived and is a mainstay. There is some more risk to it and you can't torque away when tightening things, but it seems to be less risk than perceived. And IMHO it's the best ride of any frame material.

Ti is close. It's also the most bombproof and won't rust. But it does not ride as well as carbon based on my very limited initial carbon riding foray this week. It does ride well. And it's genearlly light. Not too much heavier than carbon at same price point.

My biggest hesitation would be a BD purchase. You can't ride right out of the box. You need to wrench it or have an LBS put it together and tune it so it shifts and brakes appropriately. At the LBS that is not an issue. And support after sale should be considered.

If it were me I'd go the carbon Scott route. But why limit to that frame? Check out Competitive Cyclist and their Litespeed M1 with SRAM Rival. Better bike better parts. Or the Neuvation carbon with Apex and great wheels (the wheels on that Moto are low grade and you'll need to upgrade them). Or the sales right now on a Fuji carbon with M1 around $1,400 complete. Heck I'd recommend the carbon Performance bikes before I'd go BD. At least with those it will arrive assembled tuned and ready to go once you put stem on and seat on and a solid warranty with a big company.

About resale - you'll take a hit on the carbon. The Ti you'll be able to sell close to purchase with not much loss (if any). Ti is highly sought after and well regarded. You don't see much of it because it's expensive material and hard to work with. It takes skill. They can mass produce carbon and Al all day. Steel done well takes some craftsmanship as does Ti.

sced

No problem racing the Moto as well. The steel bike w/ Veloce already sounds pretty nice, so to distance yourself from it a racy CF might be the answer, but if you want long-term durability I'd go with the ti bike. If you're a bit of a conformer, get a name brand. If you're not mechanical and don't want to be, buy from a local shop. Know yourself. There are a lot of nice bikes in your price range, so unless you're in a hurry you might want to shop around a bit more.

Pay no attention to anecdotes about the "feel" of Cf versus ti or whatever. Ride characteristics are highly dependent on design and the feel of bikes of the same material can vary greatly. Things like the type of tires and the pressures you run, and the stiffness of your wheels can also have a significant effect.

Campag4life

I am a Moto Ti owner...a Ti Fly 29er and it has been an outstanding bike. That said, for a road bike, for me its carbon. Plus although I have nothing against a Motobecane as an owner....heads up, give me a name brand bike every time for not only warranty support but resale....really the only thing against Motobecane...though warranties can be contentious no matter who makes the bike.
No doubt the Moto Ti is a great road bike...Moto's are terrific bikes for the money and I have loved mine but Scott makes great carbon bikes and carbon is a great material for a road bike. Off road, carbon is a bit more dodgy and Ti makes a lot of sense.

PhotoJoe 

Does CC send their bikes ready to ride?

PhotoJoe 

If you're willing to do a mail order, I would check out Lynskey and their promo on the R230. Also, I'd call Don there and ask about a Cooper. You may be pleasantly surprised, and I'd take a Lynskey over the Moto, but I haven't ridden either and have no great reason why, other than their awesome customer service and it's American way.

Brew1 

For the most part. You'll need to put on the handle bars and mount the wheels and maybe make some minor adjustments but should be good to go.

markwebb

Yes they do. Incredible packaging. Derailleurs and brakes tuned and functioning flawlessly. Wheel trued. You just cut the zip ties holding frame to cardboard insert, put wheels on, put bars on stem (stem already attached to steerer tube) and insert seat post in seat tube (seat already on post) and tighten binder. About 5 minutes. Not much different than when I'm transporting a bike to a ride or race. The cool thing is they have really good mechanics that assemble the bikes and test them and they're the one's you talk to personally before or after the sale. So yes they're ready to ride. With mine - a new Litespeed - the Rival group performed flawlessly literraly right out of the box. I was climbing an 8% grade a few miles from my house 60 minutes after UPS delivered my bike and the Rival group rocked as built by CC.

markwebb

$2,500 for a Ti Lynsky with Rival is pretty darn good ! Wheels are lower grade and an upgrade would put you in the $2900 approaching $3K area. A bit more $$$ than the others being considered, but still a good deal.

SoruAdami

Damn! you really stirred things up for me PhotoJoe. This does sound like a great deal, and I actually like the Lynskey frame geometry better because of the non-parallel top tube. Actually that was one misgiving I had about the Moto. However unfortunately $2500 is really getting outside my budget at this point. (even the $2K Moto model is a stretch).

kissTheApex

QuestioningMan, if you like the feel of the carbon bike, get a carbon bike. I think you'll find that care or handling of a carbon bike is not at all different from any other bike (provided that you're not throwing your steel bike around). If you've never been fitted to your current bike, I recommend getting the Scott from your LBS or at least checking competitive cyclist fit calculator so you don't make the mistake of buying frame too big/small for you.

ThinLine

Scott. And by the way, don't look at brakes so minor like, they may just save your butt sometime. Always buy the best brakes you can. DON'T buy Cane creek sr3's though....they are horrible.

Me like Dura Ace or SRAM Force (2010 or latter).

PhotoJoe 

Good to know. I've always wondered.

PhotoJoe 

Not trying to cause trouble, simply give you options. If you're leaning toward the Moto (which is on my "short-list" as well), are you set on the Ultegra? Would the $1599 Rival option work for you? Take the difference and buy some nice wheels.

SoruAdami

Oh noes! My cover is exposed! Now they all know.

Seriously though, thanks everyone for the responses. There has been some very good arguments both ways. Now I started taking Scott a bit more seriously than I was before. But at same time I understand there are no big issues with Moto either (which was one of the main things I was hoping to find out). I've been offered 2 very good alternatives in both categories: Lynsky (which is slightly more expensive), and Litespeed M1 carbon (which I would prefer to Scott based on thes advertised spec. I wish I could see one close by, though. There don't seem to be dealers in Seattle ).

To respond to some other points:

I'm not a competitive rider (here's a common scene: I'm riding 19-20mph on the trail and feeling good about it. Then comes a group of riders draped in Italian flags and riding effortlessly at what I guess to be 25mph. They zip past me, and I'm left wondering whether it's the bikes, the drafting or the "Cusina Fresca" they appear to be feasting on.). That said I do strive to improve my performance (esp. climbing capacity, and to a lesser degree my percentile in crowded events)

I have no issues doing some mechanical work, as long as it doesn't involve putting apart the whole thing (for which I lack some crucial tools)

RT

This is precisely my BD experience. I also got a Nashbar bike with almost exact packaging. There is a standard in the industry for mailing bikes, methinks.