Gege-Bubu

Any thoughts? Is it a good deal for $549?

https://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product_10053_10052_543482_-1___202337

Gege-Bubu

Just chatted with Nashbar customer service. No weight information yet, no geometry either.

ultraman6970

Looks pretty generic, like the fork tho. A good paint job like the boosberg to make it look fancy and this thing would be sold for a lot more

canam73

There is a link to the chart on the nashbar page: https://media.nashbar.com/images/nash...CRF-SIZING.gif

punk1979

Looks the same as a Pedal Force CG2, built this last year.

Gluteus

I assume you have it. Can you comment on the quality/weight?

Bostic

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.

milkbaby

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.

canam73

Kind of an odd sizing jump from M to L.

Hiro11

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.

iamtim

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.

ultraman6970

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

grolby

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.

bbattle

+1 to what grolby wrote.

period3

In other words, it's all about the bling...

Dave Mayer

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.

ahsposo 

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?

ahsposo 

Not even close. The Nashbar's seat cluster is much different.

ahsposo 

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.

wphamilton

You bet! You'll have people like me pestering the forum with questions about clamping my stout aluminum stem on carbon steering tubes. We may not care about carbon that much but for $350 or so, what the beck just buy one.

RollCNY

Wow. There is alot here.

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.

escarpment

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.

grolby

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.

Hiro11

First of all, I should preface this by saying that I don't buy that "complicated layups" or esoteric "65 ton" carbon materials make any discernable difference in real world performance. I also don't buy that 200g in frame weight is in any way important in driving real world performance. I base this opinion on the fact that I own a 2010 5 series Madone and a 2012 Miracle Trade MC053. I have found the humdrum $500 T700 MC053 to be superior in every way (weight, performance, stiffness etc) to the Madone. Geometry and tube shape is what matters, and both cost nothing. These are my opinions based on my experiences, YMMV.

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.

To be clear, I agree that there will always be a market for high end carbon: some people honestly want to have a Pinarello or C59 and are willing to pay top dollar to get them. My point is that justifying this as a practical or performance driven decision will be increasingly difficult to do when 1Kg frames with reasonable (or even excellent) performance are availabel for a fraction of the price at a local store. The Nashbar frame is just the beginning of this trend, better and more "sexy" options (with actual paintjobs) from mainstream sellers are either here already or coming soon.

As I said above, you're probably correct for the (tiny number of) Pinarello / Colnago buyers of the world. Again, in my mind, this has more to do with people's brand conciousness and conspicuous consumption than actual real world performance. You may disagree based on your interpretation. More importantly, what about the much, much bigger number of potential Trek/Specialized/Cannondale/Focus buyers? The risk for all of these manufacturers is that people stop believing their hype. The Nashbar frame, which I'm sure is fine, is only going to make that more difficult.

canam73

That sounds like a Hyundai ad.