Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well, what's your opinion?

I'm looking for opinions on great carbon options for the bigger guys, and just for the record, please chime in with your experience (new roadie, professional wrench of 10 years, bike shop owner, Cat 2 racer, etc. . .) The Ridley Excalibur has been given good reviews by another poster, are there more?

For me, I'm a 200 lb recreational rider for 22 years who puts about 2,500-3,000 miles on my road bike a year, raced briefly when I was 19, and has about six months working in a shop when I was a kid.

Thanks, I'll take my answer off the air.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Parlee Cycles

Parlee cycles builds a carbon bike for big guys. In fact they will custom build you one. When I was looking at them they were just working out the molds/tubing for big guys and I was going to get one ahead of time. Instead I bought a Seven. Try a ti bike.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
look is good

I suspect, as was noted, just about any good carbon frame will do you well. If there's a concern, it may be in the wheels. I just replaced some Ritchey WCS's because the rear rim was cracking apart. I weigh 190 now, down from 210 and shooting for 180. I ride a 60 cm Look KG 381 Jalabert (love writing that!) and it's been a great bike. I'm replacing the Ritchey rims and hubs with Mavic Open Pro and Chris King hubs. N ot so bling on the wheels, but they're gonna keep going, and going . . .
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
That's what all these bean stick guys riding bikes does to perception. They are small. You arent big. I lost more than 100 pounds riding a bike in a year, still over 230 and have a Giant TCRc1. Very stiff, very responsive ride with Mavic Elites....not a problem. Not one.

When the bike industry begins to figure out that not everyone wants to be 6'3 and weigh 160 pounds, nor are people like that the majority, someone willl make lots of money catering to average to large sized men who are by far the most in number.

Why tell people to lose weight riding a bike and not have the equipment or clothes for them to do it.

.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
walleyeangler said:
That's what all these bean stick guys riding bikes does to perception. They are small. You arent big. I lost more than 100 pounds riding a bike in a year, still over 230 and have a Giant TCRc1. Very stiff, very responsive ride with Mavic Elites....not a problem. Not one.

When the bike industry begins to figure out that not everyone wants to be 6'3 and weigh 160 pounds, nor are people like that the majority, someone willl make lots of money catering to average to large sized men who are by far the most in number.

Why tell people to lose weight riding a bike and not have the equipment or clothes for them to do it.

.
Well said walleyeangler. But as with anything average doesn't sell. We're all supposed to be envious of the 6'3" 160 lb guy. I've been reading the posts here for a month or so now and have seen a lot of people saying that CF isn't great for big guys but, as I suspected that seems like a bunch of BS. I have trouble believing that a material that is used to make race cars can't support a 250+ pound man, IF MANUFACTERED PROPERLY!

Matt
 

· Unrepentant Mountainbiker
Joined
·
624 Posts
walleyeangler said:
When the bike industry begins to figure out that not everyone wants to be 6'3 and weigh 160 pounds, nor are people like that the majority, someone willl make lots of money catering to average to large sized men who are by far the most in number.

Why tell people to lose weight riding a bike and not have the equipment or clothes for them to do it.

.
They do make the equipment. You said in your post how you didn't have a single problem while riding at well over 200lbs. No bike that is advertised as "a great bike for big (fat) guys" is going to be a success in the world of quality bikes. Mainly because by purchasing the "big guy" bike, you admitting that you are fat and out of shape. None of us wants to admit that.

Oh, and to the OP. The Specialized Roubaix is a pretty strong bike. I don't own one, but the owner of my LBS does. He is easily 200lbs and rides the thing into work every day that he can. No problems in over 2 seasons of riding and he still loves the bike.
 

· Unlabeled
Joined
·
3,729 Posts
Why carbon?

indianabob said:
Well, what's your opinion?

I'm looking for opinions on great carbon options for the bigger guys, and just for the record, please chime in with your experience (new roadie, professional wrench of 10 years, bike shop owner, Cat 2 racer, etc. . .) The Ridley Excalibur has been given good reviews by another poster, are there more?

For me, I'm a 200 lb recreational rider for 22 years who puts about 2,500-3,000 miles on my road bike a year, raced briefly when I was 19, and has about six months working in a shop when I was a kid.

Thanks, I'll take my answer off the air.
Why do limit your question to the best carbon fiber option and not consider all options? Frankly, any decent roadbike (about $1000) will be great for a 200 lb recreational rider who puts in 3000 miles a year. Anything beyond this is for show, which is fine, but it won't make any difference to your performance.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Reynolds531 said:
Why do limit your question to the best carbon fiber option and not consider all options? Frankly, any decent roadbike (about $1000) will be great for a 200 lb recreational rider who puts in 3000 miles a year. Anything beyond this is for show, which is fine, but it won't make any difference to your performance.
Hmmm, ok. Maybe my landshark is all show, but I can sure tell the difference between its' frame, D/A 9speed, and the Am. Classic wheels I run and the 1000 dollar Bianchi I used to ride. Do I ride 300 percent faster on the 3,000 buck landshark rig I'm on? No. But I'm sure glad I spent the cash, as everything is easier, feels smoother, and I have more fun.

And, why is it that some folks scorn 3,000 mile a year recreational riders on nice rigs? Trust me, I've riden enough years and done enough reading to know what's show and what's not (ok, I've got carbon stem spacers, but THAT'S IT I SWEAR!)

Anyways, from what I've read, there seems to be more concern in the literature and among internet posters about rider weight concerns with carbon frames and various parts like forks vs. those of Al, Ti, or steel, which is why I'm asking.

No, I'm not a really big guy, just looking for good successes with carbon for myself and folks heavier (nod to walleyeangler).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
BMC is a great frame

I am in the 210-220 range, and I just got the BMC Team SLT 01 last summer. I can't say enough about this frame. There isn't a weight limit on the frame, but its still really light, and boy is it STIFF laterally. I get out of the saddle on a hill, and it goes, with nary a bit of BB sway.

I am directly comparing this to my Cannondale 2.8 frame, which the BB sway is noticeable to me, on a frame reputed to be one of the stiffest ones made.

The new BMC Team SLC 01 is supposed to be even stiffer, though that's hard to imagine given what I feel on the SLT. But also a little bit more vertically compliant, i.e. more comfy on long rides. Mind you the SLT isn't the most damp carbon frame, but is still more comfy and isolating than the 'dale, which I never found to be that bad anyway.

Of course the SLT is a carbon tubes with aluminum lugs, but not your conventional lugs or tubes. Radically shaped tubes, high modulus carbon, with CNC'd lugs in the same radical shapes. The SLC is full carbon all the way through, with metal inserts in the BB.

Pez Cycling has reviews on both frames. I have to say they were pretty right on about the SLT in my opinion, so I am assuming they were pretty accurate on the SLC as well.

Like everything your mileage may vary, but its also a damn unique frame, you won't see many other people on this.
 

· MING
Joined
·
419 Posts
look

another vote for look, I'm not a big guy, but not a small guy- 6'3 and 190ish. If you take a view of the 'big guys weigh in' thread you'll see alot of Looks, I ride a 461, it is stiff, responsive and comfortable for a non-racer century rider. However, like someone above me said, wheels as much as frame. I ride some Kings laces to open pros by a good builder, they're not the lightest set around, but they're bombproof. I took a tumble yesterday (4 stitches below my belly button) and I looked at the bike this morning- torn tape, scratched saddle, but the wheels are still perfect.
 

· Not Banned
Joined
·
49,249 Posts
I tend to agree

from certain posts about CF frames getting damaged and being unrepairable if I was just 'recreational' I may avoid as dropping multi K on a frame that could die way too young is not a good investment.
But if ya have to have CF
Ridleys are stiff and seem to be overbuilt as are Merckx's. Belgian bikes just seem to be built for abuse.
I'm Big (not Fat) ride 7K plus a year, race cx and track and cheap. I don't own a Carbon bike and am doing fine. If I had mad money I'd buy a Merckx.
 

· Scary Teddy Bear
Joined
·
14,801 Posts
Scott

atpjunkie said:
from certain posts about CF frames getting damaged and being unrepairable if I was just 'recreational' I may avoid as dropping multi K on a frame that could die way too young is not a good investment.
But if ya have to have CF
Ridleys are stiff and seem to be overbuilt as are Merckx's. Belgian bikes just seem to be built for abuse.
I'm Big (not Fat) ride 7K plus a year, race cx and track and cheap. I don't own a Carbon bike and am doing fine. If I had mad money I'd buy a Merckx.

I've heard RAVING reviews about the Scott CR1 from a friend who is 225# and owns one. He loves it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
If in doubt

Contact the company directly. That is what I have done in the past. Again I am 265 or so and really wanted an Orbea or Trek CF. Both of them said that they would not reccomend me getting one. I got mixed info on the Trek. I was told that it is not meant to go over 180 lbs for max benefit while another rep told me 220 or so. Yet my LBS says there is not limit and a lot of big guys ride them. Orbea was straight with me and a couple of people were in agreement and said the same thing. As far as other companies I have no idea. If you have doubts or concerns you can always contact the company and then read what other peoples experiences are.
 

· Unlabeled
Joined
·
3,729 Posts
No scorn

indianabob said:
Hmmm, ok. Maybe my landshark is all show, but I can sure tell the difference between its' frame, D/A 9speed, and the Am. Classic wheels I run and the 1000 dollar Bianchi I used to ride. Do I ride 300 percent faster on the 3,000 buck landshark rig I'm on? No. But I'm sure glad I spent the cash, as everything is easier, feels smoother, and I have more fun.

And, why is it that some folks scorn 3,000 mile a year recreational riders on nice rigs? Trust me, I've riden enough years and done enough reading to know what's show and what's not (ok, I've got carbon stem spacers, but THAT'S IT I SWEAR!)

Anyways, from what I've read, there seems to be more concern in the literature and among internet posters about rider weight concerns with carbon frames and various parts like forks vs. those of Al, Ti, or steel, which is why I'm asking.

No, I'm not a really big guy, just looking for good successes with carbon for myself and folks heavier (nod to walleyeangler).
I like seeing very nice bikes being ridden and I appreciate the technology. 3000 miles a year is a respectable amount of riding for those of us with tight time constraints and other interests, and I have no scorn or disrespect for people riding a very expensive bikes. I do see humour in 200 lb people jumping on the latest fad (carbon fiber) to save a couple of hundred grams .

In practicality, I don't think that you can do significantly better than a steel bike with Ultegra or Chorus level components. and 105 or Centaur is great

Anyways, you only need to ride 200% faster on a $3000 bike than on a $1000 to have performance be proportional to price.
 

· Not Banned
Joined
·
49,249 Posts
and like I said

which increases with rider size IMHO. you put a chip in a CF frame and it's toast, you either send for expensive repair or hope for crash repacement that even at 50% still runs well over a grand.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Agree/Disagree

As stated before I am much larger than probabally most riders and I agree with most of the issues regarding CF. I think there are some other factors to consider.

1) Frame Fit (most important)
2) Quality of ride (aluminum, steel, CF, Ti) All steel may not be good for a large person as it flexes etc.
3) Injuries/Physical limitations (one material maybe more fogiving on the body than another) this could also depend on riding distance, typ of riding etc.
4) Components - the degree to which they perform ( I ride 105 for my commuter and better ones for my main bike) I can tell a big difference as my better ones are not as frustrating and more forgiving.
I agree that the best way to get faster and efficient is to lose weight and get in better shape but until then I can enjoy my ride.

Anyway at 200 lbs any CF bike or any bike for that matter will do.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,964 Posts
I tried to ride the Trek Pilots. Too flexible for my tastes and for me, to flex is to break.

I rode other frames. I really liked the LeMond Buenos Aires, a carbon/steel mariage. But, when I rode the Giant TCRc1, I was in love. It didn't flex and it felt like it wanted to go faster and faster. I'm not in agreement who think that people who spoend big bucks are only buying it for show. My bike is way better than the $1,500 bikes I rode in terms of feel and enjoyable ride. If you enjoy it, you ride more. I'm over 2,300 miles for the year, my first year with a road bike.

I'm sure there are many great bikes out there for less money. The key is to get what fits, what you like. I have a smile on my face every time I ride, no kidding. That's worth the money. It's why I ride.

Ice Man.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top