Market Research

What is a reasonable price for a frame like this?

  • less than ¥70,000

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • between ¥70,000 and ¥100,000

    Votes: 2 25.0%
  • between ¥100,000 and ¥150,000

    Votes: 5 62.5%
  • between ¥150,000 and ¥180,000

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • over ¥180,000

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • Total voters
    8

stanc

Maximum Pace
Sep 4, 2011
255
41
58
Brighton
I thought Enigma had closed

Now I see they just moved. Still only 15 miles from where I live tho. If you ever want someone to go in & ask questions just let me know. Always nice to have an excuse to visit a bike shop/company :)
 

Wolfman

Speeding Up
Jul 31, 2007
631
18
38
Suginamiku
I have a Ti bike, and I strongly recommend it. I think you will enjoy it very much, both aesthetically and for riding.

As to the graphics, less is always more. Ti has its own characteristics and appeal, to cover it in paint is really to do it a disservice in my opinion. The simplicity should be allowed to speak for itself. Even brand logo's can sometimes be too much. I think that you should thoroughly research other brands as well just to see what is on offer. Remember that Ti lasts forever, there is no point in falling for gimmicks or flashy designs that will look tired in 5 or 10 years. It is somewhat akin to buying some Crockett and Jones or Edward Green shoes. Somewhat conservative, but classicly apportioned and well styled. You know that you can wear them for many years.

There are a variety of providers as mentioned throughout this thread. I have a Van Nicholas, Steve has an Enigma, Thomas a Merlin, Todor a Merlin. I think Todor was even selling his bike at one stage.
 

TOM

Maximum Pace
In addition to the price ranges in the poll, I would also like to know:

What is your general opinion of Titanium bikes?
If yes, how so?
きりんさんがすきですでもぞうさんのほうがもっとすきです:confused:
I like ti but I like steel even better :D

How so? ...steel is real ! (even more "alive" than Ti)
 

Ludwig

Speeding Up
Oct 9, 2008
871
0
36
Setagaya-ku, Tokyo
Tom was kind enough to reply to a private e-mail about the merits of titanium based on his long and broad experience, and has given me permission to quote him here as follows.

"Don't want to educate or appear to be patronizing but Ti is a bit over-hyped. The only real big advantage I can see is its rust-resistance and of course also the cool looks of bare, unpolished Ti.

"My own Ti frame was custom-made after I had my measurements made by an ex-pro but after a year or so and having tried other bikes with different geometries, I began to realize my Ti frame is a bit on the small side (toe overlap can get annoying as one tires on long rides). I was madly in love with my Ti frame for about one year though (before I started to have clandestine affairs!)

"Yes, alu is just a little bit stiffer compared to Ti (at least double-butted Ti like mine) - not much difference though. Mid-ride, non-impact breakage for any normal material including steel and carbon is extremely rare and not something to be worried about of course. Budget-wise, a high-grade alu frame makes more sense than Ti. Both alu and Ti are not really comfortable for long distance rides.

"Ti frames are nice for (more mature?) people who value "lifetime products" and are not really into competitive riding.

"My future bikes (if any) for long distance rides will be made of either carbon or steel (or a combination of the two). Carbon is obviously lighter and better suited for prolonged climbwork PLUS - depending on the weave - it absorbs road shock extremely well whereas steel is the least tiring when it comes to flatter and longer rides but this is all relative of course.

"Were you perhaps looking into Ti for your next bike? For you, IMO and since you have so little bodymass, the best material is carbon but with a softish weave - one with some whip/springiness in it that allows you to pick up a nice rhythm when climbing. Your CANYON is probably very good although I cannot judge its springiness. Steel might be worth considering as well but I'm afraid you will be descending even faster!"
 

FarEast

Maximum Pace
May 25, 2009
5,528
538
193
Yokohama
In regards to climbing and carbon I have ridden Norikura 5 times in the last month on several different bikes, the latest being the Neil Pryde Diablo. this has to be the stiffest bike I have ever ridden so much so that it hurt on the decent, however the climbing was incredible though, pure power output with little or no wattage lost in frame flex. (edit, this sunday I decended on GS Astuto T500 500mm wheels and a shorter stem and the ride was perfect)

If you are a climber then I would recommend the stiffest frame you can find, for long rides 100km plus then something with spring involved. Pinarello has recently released the ROKH specifically designed for century rides (160km) with both front and rear ONDA fork and stay designs being very different to the previous models in the Pina range and the design features the spring effect for poor road quality and a flat nosed profile to the ONDA fork for climbing.

In regards to the Ti frame argument I can only comment from a MTB side, we used Kona Hie Hei frames for a year and then switched to the AA custom as many of us preferred the ride quality.

I think is at the end of the day everyone is different. If Carbon, Titanium, Alu or steel is your thing then great many people love the materials for many different reasons and I think each group has its own elitist. For me unless a better material than carbon hits the markets I can’t see myself riding a personal bike made from any other material.

I also think the love affair Tom had with his Ti bike ended probably due to bad fit rather than ride quality and the constant annoyance of the toe over lap and the fact that he had probably paid a lot of money for something he felt was too small would make anyone bitter.
 

kiwisimon

Maximum Pace
Dec 14, 2006
3,173
1,154
133
Japan
Material vs Material.

Doesn't matter what the frame material is in regards to ride quality as any frame maker ( custom) can alter tube lengths, tube thickness, lay up of carbon to give whatever ride is desirable. For off the shelf it is more about what the designer was after. Choosing a bike based solely on material is as shallow as choosing a life partner based on his or her looks alone. Ride heaps and when you know what you really want drop some serious coin on a lifelong frame, or at least till your body breaks down.
 

andywood

Maximum Pace
Apr 8, 2008
2,439
2,306
133
Niigata
Like James, I've had the luxury of riding different bikes of my own and different bikes of friends. I always preferred my aluminium frame over my carbon ones. Despite being heavier, it seemed to give me my best results in races even in hillclimbs.

I'd never even thought of titanium till I climbed on a Lightspeed Vortex. Despite being like a child's bike to me in terms of size, the power transfer and acceleration were evident straight away.

In the few months I've ridden my own titanium bike, the biggest difference I notice is in power transfer. On climbs where I was stuck in the easiest gear before, now I can shift into heavier gears and keep the cadence up.

Like James said, everyone is probably different, so if you have the chance, jump on as many different bikes as you can to see what you like...

Andy

www.jyonnobitime.com/time
 

Ludwig

Speeding Up
Oct 9, 2008
871
0
36
Setagaya-ku, Tokyo
Ar risk of stating the obvious, but the more you weigh, the stiffer the material should be, all other things being equal. At my weight, I cannot feel stiffness to make any noticeable difference for hill climbing. I can see the difference going downhill: the stiffer the more stable the bike on the road, but also the less forgiving when you go over bumps at 70km/h or faster. And at my weight this again means I feel most comfortable on my exceptionally well constructed carbon bike (but I'm also pretty sure I would not say this for any carbon bike).
 

FarEast

Maximum Pace
May 25, 2009
5,528
538
193
Yokohama
Ludwig, Weight and wattage output make a huge difference in the way the frame reacts so you have it spot on.

Kiwisimon is also spot on.
 

ikedawilliams

Speeding Up
Oct 15, 2010
669
11
38
This is great information. I always heard comments about my cheap aluminum frame (7005)... about how stiff it must be, or how low-tech it was. I had nothing to compare it to, and it had very thick/over-sided tubes and it always felt fine to me, even on 200+ km rides. There was a lot of flex in it I felt, but it was comfortable for me. The only thing I was worried about was how thin the triple butted tubes sounded when I tapped on them with my finger. After the recent corrosion issue, I don't thick I can ever go back to aluminum.

The them of this thread now seems to be ''to each, their own''. Also, it seems, that steel is still a contender for some. Just stumbled across XCR steel. Does anyone have any experience with it? I saw that 958, or something close was supposed to be corrosion resistant, but I never see any bikes made out of it.
 

Half-Fast Mike

Lanterne Rouge-et-vert
May 22, 2007
4,111
2,603
143
Kawasaki
halffastcycling.com
The theme of this thread now seems to be ''to each, their own''. Also, it seems, that steel is still a contender for some.
Amen to that. My steel frame is (still) great. But I love my Ti bike even more.

One of the huge advantages of steel for the international cyclist is that frame problems can be repaired almost anywhere in the world by a bloke with a simple arc welder. Meanwhile the frame lines are sleek, and the lugwork on some of the better-designed frames is beautiful.

But steel is heavy. If you're planning on winning any hill climb races it's probably not the best choice.

Corrosion needn't be a problem. It just requires a bit more TLC than other materials.
 

kpykc

Speeding Up
Jun 13, 2007
804
4
38
40
Tokyo
I have a steel frame&fork bike and love the feel and look of it! You can't go wrong with a steel bike, and if you do - buy another :)

As for XCR steel - here's what you might be interested in:
http://cinelli.it/scripts/prodotti.php?Id=1&lang=EN&IdBici=556

This is great information. I always heard comments about my cheap aluminum frame (7005)... about how stiff it must be, or how low-tech it was. I had nothing to compare it to, and it had very thick/over-sided tubes and it always felt fine to me, even on 200+ km rides. There was a lot of flex in it I felt, but it was comfortable for me. The only thing I was worried about was how thin the triple butted tubes sounded when I tapped on them with my finger. After the recent corrosion issue, I don't thick I can ever go back to aluminum.

The them of this thread now seems to be ''to each, their own''. Also, it seems, that steel is still a contender for some. Just stumbled across XCR steel. Does anyone have any experience with it? I saw that 958, or something close was supposed to be corrosion resistant, but I never see any bikes made out of it.
 

TOM

Maximum Pace
Sergey knows what he is talking about and Mike is right about corrosion not being a real issue :).
Cinelli XCR looks nice but IMO a bit too fat (due to thinner walls).

Why not stay local?

"Made in Japan Steel" RNC7 Neocot ...highly recommended :cool: ! Frame can be yours for a mere 16-man, plus very wide color choice!