After riding more than 7000 miles in two years, I appear to have dropped my riding position to the point that I no longer am comfortable with my Specialized Roubaix Elite (too high). I intially got it for comfort but almost from the very start, I have ridden as hard and fast as I can.

I am now trying my son's 2005 Trek 1500 with my Shimano wheels (and Michelin Race Tires) from the Specialized and have found that it seems faster and responsive. It definitely is much more solid descending. I did a 60 mile ride on Saturday for a direct A-B comparison and I was 100% comfortable on the bike.

But here's my questions. I had hoped to advance to an all-carbon bike the next time around, but to be honest, this bike is pretty nice as it now stands.

A) Is the Trek 1500 frame worth upgrading? B) is an aluminum frame still a viable option in today's biking world? and C) If I had $500 to upgrade it, what should I get? (An Ultegra RD is already on the bike).

found that it seems faster and responsive....... It definitely is much more solid descending. ...... I was 100% comfortable on the bike......
but to be honest, this bike is pretty nice as it now stands.

A) Is the Trek 1500 frame worth upgrading? B) is an aluminum frame still a viable option in today's biking world? and C) If I had $500 to upgrade it, what should I get? (An Ultegra RD is already on the bike).


You answered yourself.

If it is nice as it stands, wtf are the upgrades for?
Question B is silly. Aluminum is very viable.

wait! with so much carbon around these days, how on earth can aluminium still be viable??? the only things it's still useful for are BB threads and rear dropouts, and even then only on cheap frames when it's used instead of titanium...:rolleyes:

wait! with so much carbon around these days, how on earth can aluminium still be viable???


Cannondale.

Aluminum will continue to dominate the sub-$1000 road bike market, and even have a share of the high-end racing market, for some time. It can be built light, stiff, and strong at a reasonable cost, and recent spikes in the cost of raw materials for CF bikes are bound to play a factor.

Don't upgrade anything until stuff is worn out... there's not enough bang-for-the-buck to justify it, IMO. Most folks will tell you that the best "one off" upgrade is getting swanky wheels, but even then I personally don't see it. I've got a set of Mavic OP rims with D/A hubs and don't ever get tempted to go high-zoot. On my old bike, the only difference was hubs (Ultegra instead of D/A).

Put another few thousand miles on that Trek and then see where your upgrade lust and spending tolerance leave you.

AL is my PAL

quoted from alien

I still ride steel...

But really, why would something start sucking just because there was another option available?

The argument really should be meant for steel though, as it definitely has aquired the "old school" / "retro" label now.

"But really, why would something start sucking just because there was another option available?"

Why? Because in the shops the next step up incorporates carbon fiber. "It's both stiff and compliant."

I agree with the "other option" theory. It shouldn't.

My question is rhetorical and meant to gather support for a decision to stay with what I have. I was not beaten to death over 60 miles. If I want cushion, I'll ride my full suspension mountain bike.

BTW I am simply trading my bike for my son's. His cost $1100; mine $1800. Thus the upgrade question.

I ride a 1500 from 2005, but no ultegra like some others. Are you telling me the 1500 is fast? Heck, now I have no more excuse except to say that I'm not fast!

PS. I'd upgrade the wheels with 500 USD, probably ksyrium elites or bontager race lites if you had the stock bontagers, but since you don't wait and save for the next breakdown/upgrade opportunity. I almost beat my self to death yesterday on our chip seal roads on the 1500. I still would like a carbon or titanium one day.

The best AL designs deliver decent ride quality & great handling at reasonable cost- albeit without the BLING-factor of CF or Ti.

This past weekend I did a killer (for me) century with 7000+ft climbing & multiple grades >10% (inc one 20% hill). Road quality was fair- 20+yr old Midwest asphalt. Bike frame was an all AL Cannondale (CAAD5), and wheels were basic 32-spoke Ultegra/OP's. Bike felt very responsive on the climbs & rock solid on the descents. My principle 'discomfort' at the finish was my sore & cramping legs- not the "road buzz" that CF is touted to help with.

Is AL still viable? It sure is to me!!!

I ride a 1500 from 2005, but no ultegra like some others. Are you telling me the 1500 is fast? Heck, now I have no more excuse except to say that I'm not fast!

PS. I'd upgrade the wheels with 500 USD, probably ksyrium elites or bontager race lites if you had the stock bontagers, but since you don't wait and save for the next breakdown/upgrade opportunity. I almost beat my self to death yesterday on our chip seal roads on the 1500. I still would like a carbon or titanium one day.

The Shimano wheels and Michelin tires made a world of difference over the Bontager's, so a wheelset is probably the way to go. My rides on the Trek have been pretty much on paved trails. I have a road route from my house I need to test it out on.

Thanks for the 2 cents.

Never get that near where I live (with the exception of San Antonio, FL). The only steep grades are overpasses! You're right the legs go for reasons other that vibrations.

I'm more concerned with your position on the roubaix, rather than what material you should be riding. Is the bike too big? You should be able to get low on the bike if you take out all the spacers and ride in the drops. The front end is higher than most other bikes, but most other bikes have more spacers. The higher end model roubaix is still raced on the pro tour. One pro rider prefers it for most of his races (Scarponi I think).

As to your other questions:

A) Yes
B) Yes
C) A nice pair of Bib shorts (Assos). If your comfy, you WILL go faster.

...but I sense most everything would have to be shortened up and lowered. I've got a 52 and the stem is flipped for more elevation. I switched it and I was too stretched out at the hoods. The way it is, I ride in the drops all the time with no comfortable relief elsewhere. Too cramped. I just got on the Trek 52cm one day and rode and it was pretty much perfect, and I can place my hands in three different positions without discomfort. I was surprised. A trusted bike shop owner simply said my back adapted to the leaned over position with all the miles.

I think that the best $500 upgrade would be to get a personal trainer. Putting more money into my bike would not increase my speed, but having someone to push me harder and to get me on a good training plan would.

"Aluminum Still OK??

Of course alumiinum is still ok. It's fine for rims, handlebars, stems, and other components. It's also just perfect for beer cans, soda cans, airplane body pieces, etc.

Aluminum has fantastic ride qualities if done right. Bianchi, Lemond, Cannondale and Merckx all make great frames from this material. I favor my Bianchi Freccia Celeste and XL EV3 Bianchi's over my Cervello carbon. The Aluminum has a "direct transfer of power" that is hard to explain.

I remember reading an article in Cycle Sport Magazine where Eddy Merckx stated that he prefered working with Aluminum, which had outstanding characteristics, but "Everyone wants carbon", do in large part to Lance and his string of tour wins.

Face it guys, Lance has had a lot to do with what people buy in the bike world. If he had been riding a bike made from toilet plungers everyone would be tauting it the greatest thing in bike materials.

Pantanni won on Aluminum and Ullrichs only Tour victory was on it, as well as a very close 2nd in 2003.

Regards,

I've owned 2 aluminum bikes. One was a Cannondale, the other was a Trek. Too stiff & punishing for me. I've had a lot of stiff bikes, having raced for 30 years, but nothing like aluminum.

I can say with significant confidence that I will never own another aluminum bike.

Letseee....I think I'll take one of those steel ones please.

Alum is fine, the very big factor in a bikes ride is tire pressure and wheel build the only real lumber wagon i ever road was a 3.0 cannondale with steel fork and cheap 105 7sp wheels. its true that the ride of frames have become more refined over the years but a whole lot of bike feal is subjective. ie "i spent 3k on this blah bee de blah blah carbon frame so it "MUST" ride better then good alum or steel" but is the ride really that much better.. well.. perhaps. a little road feedback"buzz" is not a bad thing who ever said that we ride for 100% comfort? just mho.

To the OP, have you removed your spacers to drop the bar down, and flipped the stem to the down position? I'm sure you can change the riding position dramatically from the innitial set up. You didn't mention that you had alreay done this.
Also, find some deeper drop bars and ride in the down position rather than on the hoods.
If you want a stiffer bike, mount some stiffer wheels, and some higher pressure tires.

By the way I love aluminum bikes, and I've owned several. They all have had different ride characteristics based on the geometry and fit.

I know a few people who perfer Al over CF. I would probably take a high-end Al bike (Caad8, ZR9000, of Scott S20) over a lower end CF that costs more. I ride Scandium, I think its the best of both worlds.