hueyhoolihan

i pretty much agree here. 105 is about as nice as it needs to be for me. looks good, works good. i imagine it's better all around than the best shimano had in the 80s. and i'm a fan of 80's shimano 600 and dura-ace stuff.

rbloem

Thanks for all the input guys! This site is so good for this sport we all enjoy. Off topic - I was riding my flat bar road bike and looked to my left at some birds in the grass, then I looked forward and came to an inch of smashing my head into a sign. True story. I laugh now when I think of it. Cheers.

weaver

Hmmm some interesting responses in here. I'm the opposite of what most seem to be saying. I'd go for the better components first and upgrade the frame later. I've never had a straight frame that shifted terribly, threw chains, required constant fiddling and braked poorly. Sure some frames have some different riding characteristics than others but from the manufacturers you're choosing from, regardless of the frame material either will ride great.

Low end mechanicals on the other hand versus high end components can suck the joy out of riding.

I loled multiple times at the "road bike racing clubs" commentary, give me a break. Pros are paid to use what they're told to use as it showcases the products the sponsors are trying to advertise and sell.

I see far more carbon bikes in the charity rides around here than in the crits and legitimate races. I just don't get the negativity and condescending attitudes that get directed towards aluminum frames these days. I guess that's a sign of effective marketing by the cycling industry.

AddictedToMusic

For the frame material discussions.

VA_Esquire

I actually prefer aluminum for racing and carbon for fun rides. Why? My specialized Allez frame brand new costs me $300. The tarmac? not so much.

DropDeadFred

So you're saying the pros would choose 105 or di2. Or rival over red?

weaver

Not many people, pro or not would. Which is kind of the point of my whole post, spend money on the components first as that's where you'll really notice the difference. I was referring to pros all riding carbon. I'm sure you'll get more variance there in material preference over variance in component preference.

I think the point of bringing back the pro comparison mentioned by SlimRider though was the complete irrelevance of it to this thread. Pros get their equipment for free and their selection is limited to their sponsors. We little folk actually have a wide selection to chose from. Thinking that a carbon frame is the way to go just because that's what the people paid to ride them ride, is crazy.

DropDeadFred

Yeah I'd ride a light alu with good components first. But then again I could save and wait and get both a carbon bike with good parts

alexaschwanden

Go with what you want, the handling for aluminum to carbon is quite different.

RJM

Steel and good components, then aluminum with good components, then carbon and good components, then carbon and not so good components. That is order that I would decide a new bike purchase.

ColinL

the decision usually isn't like that. the vast majority of posters in the 41 ride bikes that cost $3200 and less.

it costs a lot more to get di2, even ultegra, and more for red. (cheapest red bike, major brand name... $4200-4500ish?)

so I find myself agreeing with weaver more than not. my bike proves it; for the $1850 I paid, I got a cheap carbon frame that I actually like riding, sram rival, and good ($500ish) wheels. I would've had to pay more for apex in a LBS with junk wheels.

my litespeed m1 frame and fork was $599. it's basically an open mould frame but I have CC's solid rep behind it. and like I said, I rode other bikes and I like this one just fine.

david58

I have to be very economy minded, with a couple of college tuitions to be paying on these days. So I look to the best value in a bicycle to meet my needs. At this point, I find that Al with 105 is solid. Once can get a nice Al frame with 105's for a decent price - I dunno about a good CF frame with similar components. I do know that unless I do something stupid, or someone does something stupid to me, or a freak accident happens, my Al bike will last me well until the point I can afford a CF framed bike. But my Bride wants CF more than I, so she will probably get that CF bike first - and if it makes her enjoy the ride more (placebo or not) it will be more than worth it. And part of it is pride for me - as fat as I am, I have no biz on a sexy CF frame.

Get the bike that fits, and be sure the components are good. No misery like finicky component misery - no matter how nice your frame is, if your mechanics don't work right, you will be miserable.

RecceDG

Oh brother.

There was a guy in my group who always had the latest Liquidgas/Cannondale kit - bike and clothing. If anything changed on the Pro team, he matched it as soon as he could.

We all thought he was a ******nozzle and mocked him constantly for his posertude.

DG

BarracksSi

Pretty perceptive for a BF noob.

Don't worry, you'll learn to ignore most of his posts like the rest of us.

a1penguin

What do you plan on using the bike for? Racing or fitness? I test rode a Supersix and Synapse last weekend and the streets around the LBS are crap. I felt every bump in the road with the Supersix. The buzz through the bars was pretty awful. It would probably be a great, light racing bike. But the Synapse geometry wasn't that much different and I felt almost none of the road. If you are going to race, the lighter, stiffer Supersix might be a better choice than Aluminum. In three of four years, both component levels and frame design will have changed. I don't think you'll have any problems with modern 105. Buy which ever bike meets your riding requirements.

tomng1989

I'm going with aluminum and good components. I have a CAAD10 project in progress and it will have some amazing components spec'd out (e.g. DA 7900, Hollowgrams, full 3T LTD cockpit, a few Tune components). I wouldn't have any problems throwing all of those components on a $8,000 frame in the future. The CAAD10 isn't as good as many carbon frames I've ridden before, but with some good components and wheels it can be a great contender for comfort and stiffness. Even considering the high-end components in my build, it still comes in quite a bit less than the retail price of the CAAD10-1.

Certain life changes means that I'll be riding a lot less and I can't justify spending $4,000 on an aero frame again.

roadwarrior

Frame, wheels components, in that order are what you buy...good advce.

From my experience, the CAAD10 rides so unbelievably well (very very close to my Super Six HM and EVO frames) that I'd go with the 10 if it was me in this position. The average rider is not gong to tell a discernable difference between the 10 and the Super Six, the 10 is that good.

roadwarrior

The reason you don't generally want to do that it you cannot overcome the feel of an entry level frame. This is the reaosn why you don't find Ultegra on a Trek 1.2 level frame. It still rides like a Trek 1.2...which is fine,but the ride will not be a good as a higher end frame.

If you look at the lineups of the manufacturers you will find an entry frame with a couple of component groups usually maybe maxing at 105, then a 105 starter with the nover frame and Rival and or Ultegra...you get the drift.

I cannot overcome the ride quality of an entry level frame with snappy components.

Debusama

+1
That's what always cracks me up about most of these "which bike should I buy" type posts; they often haven't figured out if they are a racer or long distance rider, but threads will go on for pages debating frame material and component levels, which are pretty insignificant details comparison to getting a bike that has the kind of geometry that the poster's riding habits demand.

revchuck 

OP - First,we need to know what you plan to do with the bike. Race? Rides with friends? Endurance events, like centuries? Be advised that "I don't know" is an appropriate answer.

Next, as has been pointed out, you need to compare apples to apples. Road bikes are broken down generally (there's some grey area here) into "endurance" bikes and "race" bikes. Endurance bikes tend to provide a more upright seating position, while race bikes tend to have a lower position. Cannondale, for example, offers three aluminum bikes - the CAAD10 race bike, the Synapse endurance bike, and the CAAD8, which is in between. Specialized offers two - the Secteur endurance bike, and the Allez race bike. Giant has two different aluminum bikes as well.

Within the aluminum frames, you sometimes have two different quality levels, "good" and "really good". The CAAD10 and Allez E5 frames fall into the "really good" bracket. Their prices will overlap the lower end carbon bikes in their brands. You can actually get a pretty good carbon bike for the price of a CAAD10-1, but CAAD10-1s don't last long on showroom floors. MSRP on the Allez Evo is $2150; the "cheap" Allez E5 (w/105) is $1750. Specialized also sells the Allez E5s as framesets, and I've read that some sizes of the 2012 framesets are already sold out for the year. In April.

Test ride the different styles of bikes and see which one suits you. Since it looks like you're planning on about $2k, take a real hard look at the higher-end aluminum frames before you make a final decision. And whichever bike you end up with, do your best to wear it out.

Nachoman

That's as good a theory as any.

v70cat

If I was buying a new bike it would have 105, Red or D12.

The Caad 10 105 for $1,250+/- is a great bike for the money, it probably the best bike at that price point. The other Caad 10 I would consider is Rival. I would not spend the money on Ultegria , Dura-Ace or Red.

When you get into the $2,500+/- (and over)price range you have many options and no clear winner. I would probably spend $4,500 or more on a Carbon bike with Di2.

Igo

Amen. No Koolaid there.
And until I loose 10 more pounds around the middle I'm not spending $1000 to loose a pound underneith. I'd like to have a carbon but I don't need one.

Spiduhman

First, fit and function; this has been covered fairly well.

The OPs question is rather wide open, also fairly well covered - wide open in that the function of new machine isn't clear.

I have two road bikes, a "classic" mid level steel lugged, which I don't ride much because it doesn't fit well, and a comtemporary al framed which I spec'd and assembled meself.

Spec'd meself mainly on account of No Way am I paying for crap wheels. No Way am I paying for stem, bars, saddle, and tires that I do not want.

I believe the frame is perfect for ME.

I'll admit that how my #1 road ride looks and is regarded by others does count for something.

That it is accepted and approved by members of my club? ...not so much.

"Now days, aluminum is considered as the next best thing, if you can't afford carbon. That's exactly what all of your roadie friends will assume, if you're allowed to join their club, sporting an aluminum framed road bike."

Noot so much, for me, especially the "...if you're allowed..." part, heh, heh-heh, hahahaHa!

...me did get a good laugh outta that one!

Spiduhman

...heh-heh

If you won't ride with me on account o' my bike's frame material, your drop me then, please! Or, I drop you all, else, I stop and wait for you to just riiide on, or....