Nashbar Carbon Frameset?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Nashbar Carbon Frameset?
Any thoughts? Is it a good deal for $549?
https://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product_10053_10052_543482_-1___202337
https://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product_10053_10052_543482_-1___202337
#4
Senior Member
Last edited by canam73; 01-09-13 at 11:16 AM.
#6
Maximus
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,846
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
I have a Pedal Force CG2 52cm. It's geometry is close but does differ from the Nashbar 53cm when I compare the two. Also the Nashbar has a standard threaded bottom bracket and already drilled for electric shifting.
My Pedal Force is a nice bike. Frame is plenty stiff, fairly light (somewhere around 1050g). It doesn't accelerate or carve like my Tarmac SL2 Comp and is much harsher than my Volagi. For the price I paid it was a good deal.
My Pedal Force is a nice bike. Frame is plenty stiff, fairly light (somewhere around 1050g). It doesn't accelerate or carve like my Tarmac SL2 Comp and is much harsher than my Volagi. For the price I paid it was a good deal.
#8
blah blah blah
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't have one but mentioned it before as thinking it might be a pretty good deal. If I had a spare groupset sitting around, I'd buy it to build up just for fun (I do have a spare wheelset but that's a minor cost). I'm thinking you might get it for about $450-500 direct from a chinese company, but if you go through Nashbar you have their warranty and return service which seems pretty good. I'd definitely pay an extra $100 or more to deal domestically.
#10
Senior Member
I think this frame is further evidence that the mainstream commoditization of carbon has begun in earnest. Having a reasonable ~1Kg (I assume) carbon frame available from a giant domestic source like Nashbar for $550 full retail is something of a milestone, I think. Over the next year, high end brands are increasingly going to be forced to resort to even more esoteric and/or questionable claims on their frames to justify charging 4+ times this amount for their wares. Once there are more offerings available, the Chinese direct route will also make less sense.
Once these frames start to go on sale at Nashbar for $350-400 (which they definitely will) things are going to be really interesting.
Once these frames start to go on sale at Nashbar for $350-400 (which they definitely will) things are going to be really interesting.
#11
Senior Member
I bought my son one of the Nashbar aluminum frames with carbon seat- and chain-stays, and it was a nice frame. If that's any indication, the all carbon frame should be nice as well.
__________________
https://www.pedalroom.com/members/iamtim
https://www.pedalroom.com/members/iamtim
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,848
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
It depends of what are you looking for aswell, ifits only to ride during the weekends probably even a 50 bucks from CL will do just fine. But all depends of what you are looking for in a bike or frame. Not saying this carbon bike or all the generic stuff is bad because i doubt are bad but generally speaking like for 80% of the cycling community are just ok for their type of riding. Have to agree that the jump from 53.5 to 56 is too big
Have to agree with HIRO aswell, things will get interesting everywhere. Many manufacturers are getting stuck with old stock and those between dec and march are put to discount prices in the market and that makes things interesting for the used and new unknown brand market.
Put a nice paint job and that will rock big time, no idea how it rides but with the right paint job the guys will look at it for sure
Have to agree with HIRO aswell, things will get interesting everywhere. Many manufacturers are getting stuck with old stock and those between dec and march are put to discount prices in the market and that makes things interesting for the used and new unknown brand market.
Put a nice paint job and that will rock big time, no idea how it rides but with the right paint job the guys will look at it for sure
#13
Senior Member
I think this frame is further evidence that the mainstream commoditization of carbon has begun in earnest. Having a reasonable ~1Kg (I assume) carbon frame available from a giant domestic source like Nashbar for $550 full retail is something of a milestone, I think. Over the next year, high end brands are increasingly going to be forced to resort to even more esoteric and/or questionable claims on their frames to justify charging 4+ times this amount for their wares. Once there are more offerings available, the Chinese direct route will also make less sense.
Once these frames start to go on sale at Nashbar for $350-400 (which they definitely will) things are going to be really interesting.
Once these frames start to go on sale at Nashbar for $350-400 (which they definitely will) things are going to be really interesting.
You may that this is partly explained by the use of higher-quality alloys in name-brand and custom steel/aluminum bikes. But this is, if anything, a more significant factor in the cost of carbon frames than it is in steel or aluminum. You are presuming that carbon is carbon ("even more esoteric and/or questionable claims..."), but this is emphatically NOT the case. Higher-end carbon and more complicated layups increase costs dramatically.
All that this shows us is that carbon fiber is moving downmarket, as more basic carbon fiber materials and layups become more cost-effective to produce and distribute. High-end carbon fiber isn't going to see a pricing collapse.
EDIT: Just to add the crucial fact that you're missing here: low-end carbon fiber and high-end carbon fiber are bought by totally different people for totally different reasons. These are not identical markets. A burgeoning low-end CF market has few implications for the high-end market.
Last edited by grolby; 01-09-13 at 03:42 PM.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
bling
What's your justification for this? This has been true of commodity steel and aluminum frames for a long time now, yet the market for high-end steel and aluminum frames has not collapsed; in fact, 2013 is seeing a resurgence in high-end aluminum bike models from the big names. That's to say nothing of the custom market.
You may that this is partly explained by the use of higher-quality alloys in name-brand and custom steel/aluminum bikes. But this is, if anything, a more significant factor in the cost of carbon frames than it is in steel or aluminum. You are presuming that carbon is carbon ("even more esoteric and/or questionable claims..."), but this is emphatically NOT the case. Higher-end carbon and more complicated layups increase costs dramatically.
All that this shows us is that carbon fiber is moving downmarket, as more basic carbon fiber materials and layups become more cost-effective to produce and distribute. High-end carbon fiber isn't going to see a pricing collapse.
EDIT: Just to add the crucial fact that you're missing here: low-end carbon fiber and high-end carbon fiber are bought by totally different people for totally different reasons. These are not identical markets. A burgeoning low-end CF market has few implications for the high-end market.
You may that this is partly explained by the use of higher-quality alloys in name-brand and custom steel/aluminum bikes. But this is, if anything, a more significant factor in the cost of carbon frames than it is in steel or aluminum. You are presuming that carbon is carbon ("even more esoteric and/or questionable claims..."), but this is emphatically NOT the case. Higher-end carbon and more complicated layups increase costs dramatically.
All that this shows us is that carbon fiber is moving downmarket, as more basic carbon fiber materials and layups become more cost-effective to produce and distribute. High-end carbon fiber isn't going to see a pricing collapse.
EDIT: Just to add the crucial fact that you're missing here: low-end carbon fiber and high-end carbon fiber are bought by totally different people for totally different reasons. These are not identical markets. A burgeoning low-end CF market has few implications for the high-end market.
#16
Senior Member
All that this shows us is that carbon fiber is moving downmarket, as more basic carbon fiber materials and layups become more cost-effective to produce and distribute. High-end carbon fiber isn't going to see a pricing collapse.
EDIT: Just to add the crucial fact that you're missing here: low-end carbon fiber and high-end carbon fiber are bought by totally different people for totally different reasons. These are not identical markets. A burgeoning low-end CF market has few implications for the high-end market.
EDIT: Just to add the crucial fact that you're missing here: low-end carbon fiber and high-end carbon fiber are bought by totally different people for totally different reasons. These are not identical markets. A burgeoning low-end CF market has few implications for the high-end market.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
#17
Artificial Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 7,158
Bikes: Retrospec Judd, Dahon Boardwalk, Specialized Langster
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6760 Post(s)
Liked 5,466 Times
in
3,215 Posts
I bought a AL touring frame from Nashbar recently and am very pleased with the merchandise.
The specs they provide are inadequate as others have noted.
I have a question about the frame as pictured. Are the 2 extra bolt-on provisions for an electronic shifting system or what?
The specs they provide are inadequate as others have noted.
I have a question about the frame as pictured. Are the 2 extra bolt-on provisions for an electronic shifting system or what?
#18
Artificial Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 7,158
Bikes: Retrospec Judd, Dahon Boardwalk, Specialized Langster
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6760 Post(s)
Liked 5,466 Times
in
3,215 Posts
#19
Artificial Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 7,158
Bikes: Retrospec Judd, Dahon Boardwalk, Specialized Langster
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6760 Post(s)
Liked 5,466 Times
in
3,215 Posts
That's not what I read.
What I read is bike frame manufacturing is in a positively brilliant state of development and market penetration. Low end generic mass produced frames can have the R&D benefits without the cost of new Development. New development can need a LOT of 'bling' to be sold out into a 'testing' market and that has costs for a business that must be recouped. Selling 'bling' to wanna be's is an ancient business model.
A real athlete rises above the equipment.
What I read is bike frame manufacturing is in a positively brilliant state of development and market penetration. Low end generic mass produced frames can have the R&D benefits without the cost of new Development. New development can need a LOT of 'bling' to be sold out into a 'testing' market and that has costs for a business that must be recouped. Selling 'bling' to wanna be's is an ancient business model.
A real athlete rises above the equipment.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
I think this frame is further evidence that the mainstream commoditization of carbon has begun in earnest. Having a reasonable ~1Kg (I assume) carbon frame available from a giant domestic source like Nashbar for $550 full retail is something of a milestone, I think. Over the next year, high end brands are increasingly going to be forced to resort to even more esoteric and/or questionable claims on their frames to justify charging 4+ times this amount for their wares. Once there are more offerings available, the Chinese direct route will also make less sense.
Once these frames start to go on sale at Nashbar for $350-400 (which they definitely will) things are going to be really interesting.
Once these frames start to go on sale at Nashbar for $350-400 (which they definitely will) things are going to be really interesting.
#21
Speechless
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Central NY
Posts: 8,842
Bikes: Felt Brougham, Lotus Prestige, Cinelli Xperience,
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 39 Times
in
16 Posts
If you are a attached to a nominally 'high-end' brand, as either a wholesaler or a retailer, you can only hope. But I think these markets will collapse.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
When he said high end, I guess I thought he was talking the Toray T800's and the like, not the name on the downtube.
The Nashbar frame being "within 200 grams of the very lightest on the planet" means that this frame is sub-1100 grams. Do you know the weight? It would surprise me.
I am a big fan of the Nashbar aluminum, and aluminum/carbon frames. They apparently pressurized my tubes, because in a 58cm, my alu/carbon is 230 grams heavier than yours. And my build was also $850, with the al steerer Nashbar carbon fork, Easton EA 50 wheels, and a mostly 105 group, and it was pushing 20 lbs.
The geometry on the alum Nashbar stuff is weird, as is the geo on this carbon thing. With a 72 deg HTA, good luck finding a carbon fork with 52mm rake to get to neutral steering (if you believe 5.5 cm is neutral, I personally am still experimenting).
But I am very thankful that you decided that this is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: chicago
Posts: 781
Bikes: cannondale crit 3.0, specialized allez, old giant mtb/hybrid
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
If you are a attached to a nominally 'high-end' brand, as either a wholesaler or a retailer, you can only hope. But I think these markets will collapse.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
What you are saying is a big stretch. The frames are just mass produced frames that remain unbranded. They are the on par with the lower level carbon echelon . Great frames none the less, I have a similar carbon frame myself. There are a lot of companies that produce vastly superior frames. Not like it makes a difference to you or me. Good frames but nothing THAT special.
#23
Senior Member
No, it's about who buys high-end bike frames versus who buys low-end frames. In general, not the same people.
All of this was just as true ten years ago, but with aluminum. Did the high-end market collapse? No. Yes, aluminum frames disappeared from the high-end, but what's to blame for that? The emergence of carbon fiber as a mainstream frame material.
You're entirely missing the point. First of all, 200 grams is a LOT these days,when comparing frames. Second, there's more to the value of a frame than what it weighs. But more than all of that: very simply, what constitutes "enough" bike (or computer... Or car... or fishing rod... Or kitchen knife...) is entirely irrelevant to consumer behavior. How people convince themselves otherwise is beyond all reason. The availability of low-end carbon will do absolutely nothing to alter the behavior of high-end consumers. Period. The market for high-end CF will go away when a better material comes along. Until then, it's here to stay, and any prognostication to the contrary is just so much empty noise.
If you are a attached to a nominally 'high-end' brand, as either a wholesaler or a retailer, you can only hope. But I think these markets will collapse.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
The Nashbar frame is within 200 grams of the very lightest and most expensive frames on the planet, and because it is sold by a reputable vendor with a good return policy, I assume it is plenty strong enough and reliable. So even though I have enough disposable income to afford a frame at 10 x the price, I would be crazy to do so.
I have experience with Nashbar's alu/carbon frameset. It cost less than $200 delivered to my door. I built up this 1,300g frame and a Nashbar full carbon fork into a 17 pound bike for about $850. This setup is comparable to any frame at any price up to the period (around 2000?) where full-carbon monocoque frames became available.
This is more than enough bike for 99% of the enthusiast market.
You're entirely missing the point. First of all, 200 grams is a LOT these days,when comparing frames. Second, there's more to the value of a frame than what it weighs. But more than all of that: very simply, what constitutes "enough" bike (or computer... Or car... or fishing rod... Or kitchen knife...) is entirely irrelevant to consumer behavior. How people convince themselves otherwise is beyond all reason. The availability of low-end carbon will do absolutely nothing to alter the behavior of high-end consumers. Period. The market for high-end CF will go away when a better material comes along. Until then, it's here to stay, and any prognostication to the contrary is just so much empty noise.
#24
Senior Member
What's your justification for this? This has been true of commodity steel and aluminum frames for a long time now, yet the market for high-end steel and aluminum frames has not collapsed; in fact, 2013 is seeing a resurgence in high-end aluminum bike models from the big names. That's to say nothing of the custom market.
You may that this is partly explained by the use of higher-quality alloys in name-brand and custom steel/aluminum bikes. But this is, if anything, a more significant factor in the cost of carbon frames than it is in steel or aluminum. You are presuming that carbon is carbon ("even more esoteric and/or questionable claims..."), but this is emphatically NOT the case. Higher-end carbon and more complicated layups increase costs dramatically.
You may that this is partly explained by the use of higher-quality alloys in name-brand and custom steel/aluminum bikes. But this is, if anything, a more significant factor in the cost of carbon frames than it is in steel or aluminum. You are presuming that carbon is carbon ("even more esoteric and/or questionable claims..."), but this is emphatically NOT the case. Higher-end carbon and more complicated layups increase costs dramatically.
Secondly, metallic and carbon frames are different in that manufacturing high end metallic frames involves the romance of the bearded torchman slaving away in his dank workshops turning out works of art, custom designed to the customers needs. Carbon frames don't have this romantic vision, the manufacturing process is pretty basic manual labor and involves lots of automated heavy machinery. Also, custom is not possible for monocoque carbon manufacturing. Because of this lack of romance, high end carbon sellers must rely upon selling the virtues of their technology and performance characteristics of their wares and less on the romantic craftsmanship. As I've indicated, I personally don't buy these arguments from a real world performance perspective. Frame design and geometry are the drivers of performance, not layup schedules or hype.
All that this shows us is that carbon fiber is moving downmarket, as more basic carbon fiber materials and layups become more cost-effective to produce and distribute. High-end carbon fiber isn't going to see a pricing collapse.
EDIT: Just to add the crucial fact that you're missing here: low-end carbon fiber and high-end carbon fiber are bought by totally different people for totally different reasons. These are not identical markets. A burgeoning low-end CF market has few implications for the high-end market.
Last edited by Hiro11; 01-10-13 at 10:36 AM.