Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Dogma

  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    225

    Dogma

    I've been riding a 2003 Trek 5500 since 2003 and was thinking of getting a 2011 Dogma 60.1 frame & fork that Excel has on sale for $1198.00. I can only assume that the Pinarello would be a much stiffer and better ride than the Trek. I'l probably put 11 speed DA on it and my current HED-WI wheels. Just wondering any thoughts on this.

  2. #2
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Stew View Post
    I've been riding a 2003 Trek 5500 since 2003 and was thinking of getting a 2011 Dogma 60.1 frame & fork that Excel has on sale for $1198.00. I can only assume that the Pinarello would be a much stiffer and better ride than the Trek. I'l probably put 11 speed DA on it and my current HED-WI wheels. Just wondering any thoughts on this.
    How do you figure?
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Stew View Post
    I've been riding a 2003 Trek 5500 since 2003 and was thinking of getting a 2011 Dogma 60.1 frame & fork that Excel has on sale for $1198.00. I can only assume that the Pinarello would be a much stiffer and better ride than the Trek. I'l probably put 11 speed DA on it and my current HED-WI wheels. Just wondering any thoughts on this.
    What makes you say this?
    "With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important."-- DCGriz, RBR.

    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein



  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    20,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Stew View Post
    I've been riding a 2003 Trek 5500 since 2003 and was thinking of getting a 2011 Dogma 60.1 frame & fork that Excel has on sale for $1198.00. I can only assume that the Pinarello would be a much stiffer and better ride than the Trek. I'l probably put 11 speed DA on it and my current HED-WI wheels. Just wondering any thoughts on this.
    You should not let the marketing hype confuse you. Stiffer is not necessarily a better ride, or even a more efficient bike.

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerry Irons View Post
    You should not let the marketing hype confuse you. Stiffer is not necessarily a better ride, or even a more efficient bike.
    I would have to say to this, it depends on the type of flex. IMO, lateral frame flex is never a nice feeling, especially when going fast.
    "With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important."-- DCGriz, RBR.

    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein



  6. #6
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    Guys and gals rode 'flexy' bikes for years and years...decades. Races were won on nothing but flexy steel and aluminum bikes forever. I never heard Sean Kelly complaining his Vitus frame was not stiff enough and he won tons of sprints and raced well over 100 days a year. I'd rather have a frame w/ some 'give' than a super still plank when going downhill fast on a rough road.

    Don't confuse this w/ 'ride quality' or 'efficiency'.
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    225

    Dogma

    Quote Originally Posted by Kerry Irons View Post
    You should not let the marketing hype confuse you. Stiffer is not necessarily a better ride, or even a more efficient bike.
    Kerry,

    I assume that the Dogma isn't everything I might have expected.
    I'd really like a Tarmac, so for now I'm going to stay with my Trek.
    Thanks for the input!

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,658
    Quote Originally Posted by cxwrench View Post
    Guys and gals rode 'flexy' bikes for years and years...decades. Races were won on nothing but flexy steel and aluminum bikes forever. I never heard Sean Kelly complaining his Vitus frame was not stiff enough and he won tons of sprints and raced well over 100 days a year. I'd rather have a frame w/ some 'give' than a super still plank when going downhill fast on a rough road.

    Don't confuse this w/ 'ride quality' or 'efficiency'.
    I'm not sure what you define as "flexy", CX. I just know that my Trek Pilot 5.0 has an annoying amount of lateral flex in the frame that leads to a feeling of fragility. My Cannondale Synapse Carbon however does not have this lateral flex, but is just as comfortable (we've already had the discussion of tires being the main contributor in comfort). The Synapse inspires confidence on the bike that isn't possible with the Pilot.
    "With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important."-- DCGriz, RBR.

    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein



  9. #9
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    I'm not sure what you define as "flexy", CX. I just know that my Trek Pilot 5.0 has an annoying amount of lateral flex in the frame that leads to a feeling of fragility. My Cannondale Synapse Carbon however does not have this lateral flex, but is just as comfortable (we've already had the discussion of tires being the main contributor in comfort). The Synapse inspires confidence on the bike that isn't possible with the Pilot.
    Ever ridden a Vitus 979?
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,658
    Quote Originally Posted by cxwrench View Post
    Ever ridden a Vitus 979?
    I can't say that I have. Do tell.
    "With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important."-- DCGriz, RBR.

    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein



  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6,039
    Honestly, when people talk bad about "lateral flex", I don't believe they have really experienced what lateral flex is. For example, mtb bikes, when compared to a roadie, have a much greater amount of later flex, and yet mtb have descend on these things down mtb no problem. In fact, lateral flex is necessary for an mtb if it's to absorb bumps when the bike is leaned sideway. Without later flex, there would be no lateral compliance when leaned. Another example, a while years back in Motogp, Ducati first experiment with a carbon fiber swingarm (this is where the rear tire mounts), and it was too stiff that it did not give enough flex thus traction was lost. So they switched back to aluminum where there was more flex.

    So to say that lateral flex is bad is not a right way to ascribe flexing, IMO.

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,658
    Quote Originally Posted by aclinjury View Post
    Honestly, when people talk bad about "lateral flex", I don't believe they have really experienced what lateral flex is. For example, mtb bikes, when compared to a roadie, have a much greater amount of later flex, and yet mtb have descend on these things down mtb no problem. In fact, lateral flex is necessary for an mtb if it's to absorb bumps when the bike is leaned sideway. Without later flex, there would be no lateral compliance when leaned. Another example, a while years back in Motogp, Ducati first experiment with a carbon fiber swingarm (this is where the rear tire mounts), and it was too stiff that it did not give enough flex thus traction was lost. So they switched back to aluminum where there was more flex.

    So to say that lateral flex is bad is not a right way to ascribe flexing, IMO.
    Perhaps I am describing the feeling wrong. If I'm ridng my Trek Pilot and need to swerve suddently, the whole bike frame feels like it's bending. I don't get this feeling on any of my other 6 bikes including my two aluminum mountain bikes and two steel bikes. This is what I am referring to as lateral flex. It's not a nice feeling.
    "With bicycles in particular, you need to separate between what's merely true and what's important."-- DCGriz, RBR.

    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein



  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    6,039
    Quote Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    Perhaps I am describing the feeling wrong. If I'm ridng my Trek Pilot and need to swerve suddently, the whole bike frame feels like it's bending. I don't get this feeling on any of my other 6 bikes including my two aluminum mountain bikes and two steel bikes. This is what I am referring to as lateral flex. It's not a nice feeling.
    ah I get what you're saying. Here's the thing though. Flicking a bike quickly side to side involves a lot of factors, from steering geometry to rider's body position, tire rubber, tire pressure, cockpit adjustment, road surfaces, frame flexing, there are simply too many factors that can influence bike maneuverability. Maybe it's flexing, but maybe it's a combination of other factors.

    There are some high-def super slowmo vids of motogp riders leaning 60+ degrees in tight turn, motorcycle basically leaned on its side almost, and it shows the frame and suspension flexing (like they're supposed to), and yet the rider's body position remains constant. Sometimes you just need to get a little used to the frame moving underneath you. And as long as the bike is not a complete wet noodle, then I think you're ok and just need to get used to the bike's behavior.

  14. #14
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    Quote Originally Posted by aclinjury View Post
    ah I get what you're saying. Here's the thing though. Flicking a bike quickly side to side involves a lot of factors, from steering geometry to rider's body position, tire rubber, tire pressure, cockpit adjustment, road surfaces, frame flexing, there are simply too many factors that can influence bike maneuverability. Maybe it's flexing, but maybe it's a combination of other factors.

    There are some high-def super slowmo vids of motogp riders leaning 60+ degrees in tight turn, motorcycle basically leaned on its side almost, and it shows the frame and suspension flexing (like they're supposed to), and yet the rider's body position remains constant. Sometimes you just need to get a little used to the frame moving underneath you. And as long as the bike is not a complete wet noodle, then I think you're ok and just need to get used to the bike's behavior.
    Pretty sure Honda went through the same issues as Ducati, there may have been others. It's subtle and it seems like every rider is different in the feelings about how much things 'flex'.
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  15. #15
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Yangpei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    216
    I have a 2010 Dogma 60.1 and I love it. I've had several bikes over the years (Wilier Cento1, Moots Vamoots, Seven Elium, Seven V-II), and the Dogma 60.1 is definitely the most responsive and stable at speed. The Dogma is plenty stiff / responsive, but definitely not punishing. When descending, it gives the rider a lot of confidence because it's so stable.

    I have not ridden the newer Dogmas (65.1, F8, F10), so I can't compare. But, it looks like Pinarello kept the geometry the same and have incrementally made improvements in performance / weight.
    Kokopelli Racing

  16. #16
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Stew View Post
    I've been riding a 2003 Trek 5500 since 2003 and was thinking of getting a 2011 Dogma 60.1 frame & fork that Excel has on sale for $1198.00. I can only assume that the Pinarello would be a much stiffer and better ride than the Trek. I'l probably put 11 speed DA on it and my current HED-WI wheels. Just wondering any thoughts on this.
    Having ridden both extensively and owning one (a Dogma). You WILL enjoy the ride/performance of a Dogma better than your Trek. That is all.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion man. - The Dude

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

roadbikereview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.