Loading…
Grade was one of the first attempts at a gravel bike – last time I looked it didn’t have great tire clearance. For me that was a deal stopper.
I love Aluminum. It is light, responsive, fast, and fun. The carbon version of that specific bike is a lot smoother riding though. I found one for $1500 (returned to the store) – probably should have bought it, but I do love having 40mm+ tires.
Steel is nice. I have a couple of steel bikes. But my aluminum bikes are lighter and more responsive. A good seat, seat post and tires more than make up the difference in ride quality on my bikes.
Fikeman wrote:
Is a bike that's a bike with 105 components worth a couple extra hundred bucks vs Sram or Tiagra ? Thanks!!
I’ve typically gone for 105 or better as there isn’t much functional difference between 105 and the top two tiers (mostly a little weight and materials). I would pay a couple hundred for 105.
Certainly, nothing wrong with Sram Rival – well if you are not too hooked on the mechanics of shifting the Shimano way.
Like greg said – there is more than just the name on the derailer. I would pay a lot more for good wheels, because I don’t want to sell bad stock wheels for only $100 (although ( like having two sets of wheels on my gravel bike).
I have a lot of bikes from the ‘90s (they don’t make them like they used to, lol). Steel is just now coming back into favor, and it aint cheap. But for my new bike I didn’t want to upgrade (the single biggest reason I didn’t get a Roker). I wanted to have it perfect out of the box as I’ve dinked around with maintaining bikes enough. There is something to be said for a well thought out complete package.
(P.S. – if it has good tires and wheels, they probably haven’t skimped on anything).
Sign in to reply — or claim your old account if you posted here before.