How's the AL frame?

Just got an email from BD... new Gravity Attacks are due in August.

:(

I like it a lot... but as it's been said already... it isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea.

If there's anything I have to say that I really don't like about the frame is that the chainstays are a bit beefy and I'm not sure if a much bigger chainring would fit. Although... this doesn't really matter to me as I don't plan on changing it any time soon.

Wait, you want to go bigger than 46 x 13 ?

People mention it's resemblance to the Langster, but the similarities are in appearance alone. The Langster is lighter and the tubing is more sophisticated while the Gravity Attack seems to use regular tubes. I dig the fact that the Gravity Attack has a relaxed geometry and comes with a carbon fork for $300 shipped, but I had a chance to look at a buddy's and I was overall unimpressed. It seems mediocre in the two aspects that an aluminum frame is supposed to excel at: weight and responsiveness. It is definitely on the heavier side, heavier than the Kilo TT and Dawes SST AL. Some of the weight could be due to the componentry differences but I expected less weight from the Gravity Attack. As for responsiveness, it just didn't have the "zip" that I had come to expect (in comparison, I've found the Langster and Dawes SST AL both to be quite responsive). This could be due to the tubing used (e.g., non-shaped downtube on the Gravity Attack) as well as the geometry (although I've ridden frames with compact geometry that were still quite responsive). Still, the Gravity Attack seems like a good bike to cruise around town on. I actually don't mind taking an aluminum frame through rough streets, as I could easily pop on some 28's (the carbon fork is a plus in this aspect as well). Ultimately, I decided against purchasing it as a commuter mostly due to its lack of rear eyelets for rack mounting.

Thanks, tFUnK. I just ordered a polished SST AL, since I can't really wait until August. Sounds like it's probably for the best.

Being able to choose between 46x18,17,16,15,14,13 is plenty for me. I'm saying that someone looking at this bike may dislike that their ridiculous 70t chainring isn't going to fit and they won't be able to run their 70x12 gearing @ >150gi. BTW, I got the cogs as a set of 6 from bikeisland for $30... I think some of this forum's members have paid that much for just one.

On a side note: a 51x17 for 78.78gi would be marginally better suited for riding with roadies than 46x15 for 80.53gi. I've also seen roadies with top gears as high as 55x11 (131.3gi)...

We must have gotten different frames... Mine isn't terribly heavy and it does have rear braze-ons for rack mounting.

It's pretty difficult to compare this bike with the Langster imo considering the Langster sells for more than double the price of the Gravity and obviously should be expected to associate with a higher level of quality.

I'd be willing to say my bike weighs roughly the same as the 2011 Langster Pro hanging up in my local lbs collecting dust with its $1100 price tag.

To be honest, I considered buying the sst al instead of the Gravity Attack but ultimately shied away when I noticed the sst al was $70 more and doesn't even come with a fixed cog or lockring...

Aside from those two points, the sst al is a clear winner in this debate.

Put it on a scale and find out. One measurement is worth a thousand opinions. I'm still waiting for someone to weigh one of these...

(sorry I keep bringing it up..)

lol, I would have long ago if I had a scale laying around...

My major complaint is the BD pictures. What's with the angle of the bars? Looks stupid to not have the drops level.

My take on it is a hybrid between a comfort bike and racier geometry like the SST AL. It's definitely a more relaxed posture with a taller headtube. That's probably a good thing for the majority of potential riders.

Can't wait to see one of these with some ridiculous slammed negative rise stem.

If these are anywhere near as stiff as my SST AL a carbon seat post is practically a mandatory purchase.

My SST AL ran much smaller than listed size but it worked out ok. Had to run a long stem that slowed down the twitchy steering some and having all that extra seatpost exposed really helped dull the road vibration once I stuck a carbon post in.

I need to start saving up to get a proper road bike... or at least to restore an old one. The advantages of multiple gears are beginning to present themselves. I can't argue that a single fixed gear is still some of the most fun you can have on two wheels though. It's also pretty ego boosting when the roadies you drop notice you only have one speed...

I could be mistaken, but from the pictures on BD and on this page, it looks like there are no mount holes on the track ends for a rack.

I agree, that it's definitely a lot of bike for $300. But folks specifically wanting that lightness/stiffness typical of an aluminum frame might be disappointed.

I misunderstood you. The frame does have braize-ons on the seatstays for rack mounting, but does not have holes or bosses etc on the track ends.

It isn't going to be the go-to bike for everyone, but it's quite a piece of gear for the money I think.

I went on another 40-miler today with the same guys as last time and this time switched to the ss side of the hub. The freewheel on this bike is either installed incorrectly or is some horrible piece of crap garbage. I was in fear for my life the entire ride thinking my rear wheel was pending explosion while listening to the freewheel going buzzthumpthumpbuckthumpcrack etc etc as I was peddling. I doubt I'll be using that side of the wheel again.

I'm 5'6" with 30" inseam, do you guys recommend the 49 or 52cm frame?

Looks like the Gravity Attack has been replaced with the Swift 2: http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...track.htm#size

This is tempting. I'm torn between 49cm vs 52cm. I'm pretty fall right in between...

Looks like the only change is a $10 increase in price. :lol:

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...rack_bikes.htm

Exactly...

About the sizing, if I order from BD, I get to choose from 49 or 52CM. But on the manufacture site, they go by a different medium of measurement (http://gravitybikes.com/specialty/attack.html). Based on the manufacture site, the XS has a standover of 29" but set tube is only 43", is that correct? http://gravitybikes.com/specialty/attack.html

Forget about the seat tube length and standover. It's the top tube length that matters most. In your case, I'd go with the 49cm (XS), because you have relatively long legs relative to your torso, and the TT length on the 52cm (S) frame is a relatively long 53cm. Also, these bikes have very long head tubes, and if you get the 52cm, you may have to live with a lot of bar rise.

Thanks for the reply! That helps a lot and pretty much backed up my own thoughts. I spent a lot of time measuring yesterday and top tube length for the XS fits me better, but everything else seemed just a tad too small.

Different and lighter crank, brakes, rims, plus something about the aluminum being better in some way. I picked one up. Should be here Wednesday.

I don't think so. The 2011 and 2012 specs look identical to me:

2011 >>> http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...rack_bikes.htm

2012 >>> http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...track.htm#size

Gravity Attack + $10 = Gravity Swift2

I emailed BD to find out what the differences were. If they've upgraded the tubeset, I might be tempted.

Got an email from BD saying they'll update the spec page soon.

From the BD page: "Forks are now higher tech Straight Blade Carbon"

Read the page carefully, it lists whats new. As someone else said the specs page will be updated soon to show the differences.

I did read it carefully. Those changes were not there when I made my post.

the recent changes were just new colors and the cro-mo fork. The other stuff was there before, but no worries.

cromo fork ? Are we looking at the same bike ?