# Ribble cycles



## derrick (29 Jan 2015)

Is this the Cheapest bike with Di2 on it?
http://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/?type=RIBMO


----------



## Smokin Joe (29 Jan 2015)

I was looking at that, I've never seen one cheaper. The price of electronic shift systems is bound to plummet after the manufacturers recoup their R&D costs and gradually up production. Mechanical brifters were out of most people's reach for the first few years now only BSOs come without them.


----------



## Globalti (29 Jan 2015)

Blimey. Is that Ribble's loss-leader?


----------



## Drago (29 Jan 2015)

I'm not particularly a Wibble fan, but that's an undisputed huge amount of spec for the money.


----------



## wam68 (29 Jan 2015)

That's a deal by far . Top spec bike


----------



## shadow master (29 Jan 2015)

How else could they sell out of date frames from open carbon generic moulds?


----------



## Drago (29 Jan 2015)

You mean past its Eat By date?


----------



## shadow master (29 Jan 2015)

Drago said:


> You mean past its Eat By date?


I mean carbon moulds that are 7-8 years out of date,old technology!


----------



## ColinJ (29 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> I mean carbon moulds that are 7-8 years out of date,old technology!


It may be old tech. but that doesn't necessarily mean it is bad!

My Cannondale CAAD 5 with its 10 speed Chorus groupset is very old tech, but it is still a fine bike.


----------



## TheDoctor (29 Jan 2015)

failing to see how a shape that's 8 years old is out of date.
Bikes have barely changed shape for a century, and carbon is still changing and evolving.
The Ribble winter frame is still the same shape it was 12 years ago, and that's why I bought another one!


----------



## AndyRM (30 Jan 2015)

Beaten by @TheDoctor!

You'd be looking at another £500 easy from one of the big players for that quality of frame and groupset.

If I could get away with it, I'd buy one now.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

TheDoctor said:


> failing to see how a shape that's 8 years old is out of date.
> Bikes have barely changed shape for a century, and carbon is still changing and evolving.
> The Ribble winter frame is still the same shape it was 12 years ago, and that's why I bought another one!


???I think you've just answered your own question....."carbon is still changing and evolving"but something 8 years old cant be out of date??you think frame shapes haven't changed in a century!what colours the sky in your world?modern headstock's are huge on up to date carbon frames,bottom bracket shells are bigger,wider,in modern carbon bikes,flax fibres for dampening,dual chamber for strength,internal cable routing, full carbon dropouts,lifetime guaratee,etc...I could go on forever!


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

ColinJ said:


> It may be old tech. but that doesn't necessarily mean it is bad!
> 
> My Cannondale CAAD 5 with its 10 speed Chorus groupset is very old tech, but it is still a fine bike.


But that's aluminium?The leaps in carbon and aluminium production in the last 5 years are not really comparable,and plus your caad5 was cutting edge technology at the time....not a 8 year old design


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> ???I think you've just answered your own question....."carbon is still changing and evolving"but something 8 years old cant be out of date??you think frame shapes haven't changed in a century!what colours the sky in your world?modern headstock's are huge on up to date carbon frames,bottom bracket shells are bigger,wider,in modern carbon bikes,flax fibres for dampening,dual chamber for strength,internal cable routing, full carbon dropouts,lifetime guaratee,etc...I could go on forever!





TheDoctor said:


> failing to see how a shape that's 8 years old is out of date.
> Bikes have barely changed shape for a century, and carbon is still changing and evolving.
> The Ribble winter frame is still the same shape it was 12 years ago, and that's why I bought another one!


Well of course the bike is the same as 12 years ago its the same mould!!but now the production cost is less than one dollar!


----------



## AndyRM (30 Jan 2015)

I'm vaguely curious why you think the age of a design has any bearing over its quality. Manufacturers don't make radical changes regularly as the bicycle frame is a conservative and simple thing (unless you're Mike Burrows or Graeme Obree).

Ribble have found a winning design with the Gran Fondo (and their winter frame, which wouldn't have looked out of place 30 years ago and certainly isn't moulded), so why hack about changing it? It's not like it's going to be ridden in the pro peloton, where chat about the latest aero improvements or whatever is largely marketing gubbins designed to flog expensive bikes to the easily impressed.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

AndyRM said:


> I'm vaguely curious why you think the age of a design has any bearing over its quality. Manufacturers don't make radical changes regularly as the bicycle frame is a conservative and simple thing (unless you're Mike Burrows or Graeme Obree).
> 
> Ribble have found a winning design with the Gran Fondo (and their winter frame, which wouldn't have looked out of place 30 years ago and certainly isn't moulded), so why hack about changing it? It's not like it's going to be ridden in the pro peloton, where chat about the latest aero improvements or whatever is largely marketing gubbins designed to flog expensive bikes to the easily impressed.


Define "quality" build quality there OK,is the ride performance quality as good and efficient as a modern carbon frame with the latest technology,no way.all monocoque frames come from moulds,the small list of changes to frames I've listed above,make the argument frames haven't changed absolutely ridiculous....early carbon frames were aluminium proportions bb,headstock,etc,now the alloy ones have followed carbon proportions! I'm glad I've had the benefit of visiting the factories in the far east,I can tell many people haven't!


----------



## AndyRM (30 Jan 2015)

The Gran Fondo has pretty much all of the attributes you listed, oversized tubing, heft BB shell and head-tube, it's not one of the skinny lugged efforts from the 90s.

I'm really not sure what your point is to be honest.


----------



## shep (30 Jan 2015)

In simple terms, as a 'weekend warrior' looking for an upgrade would this be a worthwhile purchase?
Cheers.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

AndyRM said:


> The Gran Fondo has pretty much all of the attributes you listed, oversized tubing, heft BB shell and head-tube, it's not one of the skinny lugged efforts from the 90s.
> 
> I'm really not sure what your point is to be honest.


He doesn't either.



shadow master said:


> I mean carbon moulds that are 7-8 years out of date,old technology!


A carbon mould is an inanimate object, and last I checked if you stored one for 30 years (let say Pinarello F8 mould) then brought it out, it would still produce the same frame with up to date weaves/layup.

That to me, is a rather cool thought. Id love a now retro shape/new tech F8 as a retirement pressie somewhere around 2050


----------



## MickeyBlueEyes (30 Jan 2015)

I'm not saying it's not an ok deal but it's not the bike in the picture that you are buying. The one in the picture is just over £2k. For £1400 you get a trimmed down version of this.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

I considered a Ribble when looking fir my first bike. I didn't buy for exactly the reason @MickeyBlueEyes states. I fancied the look and spec of the bike pictures on their main page at the time, which had no correlation to the price stated next to it. When I got to the real price, I compared and bought something else.


----------



## Cuchilo (30 Jan 2015)

Ive gone through the list of components and built up the bike you actually get for your £1399

















Di2 included !


----------



## Drago (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> I mean carbon moulds that are 7-8 years out of date,old technology!



Eh? Current carbon moulding technology is pretty much the same as GRP moulding technology. The only real improvements in the last 30 years is the understanding of how laying the weave gives different characteristics, and the varying methods for forming the cavities within the frame, oh, and techniques that improve production time and cost rather than the frame itself. The only thing "old" about the frame is its style, and even that's highly debatable.

Stand in a carbon fibre workshop and you couldnt even point to the autoclave, much less operate it, yet you feel able to lecture to us about carbon technology?

I'm glad I worked in a CF workshop (my brother in-laws business, worked OR for him a few years back) and not just visited a factory. I visited a pet shop the other day and by your reasoning I'm now a Vet.


----------



## outlash (30 Jan 2015)

Looks like I should embarrassed buying a Genesis Day One with it's steel frame and hub gears.....

Anyway, yes that is an awful lot of bike for the money!


Tony.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> He doesn't either.
> 
> 
> A carbon mould is an inanimate object, and last I checked if you stored one for 30 years (let say Pinarello F8 mould) then brought it out, it would still produce the same frame with up to date weaves/layup.
> ...


No that's incorrect!The mould can't automatically change shape to increase head stock and bb shell size and to include internal cables,yes you could use a later carbon weave,but in an old shape mould what's the point?


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

Cuchilo said:


> Ive gone through the list of components and built up the bike you actually get for your £1399
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Indeed the marketing is a bit questionable as well!


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> No that's incorrect!The mould can't automatically change shape to increase head stock and bb shell size and to include internal cables,yes you could use a later carbon weave,but in an old shape mould what's the point?


Why would you change the mould?


----------



## Drago (30 Jan 2015)

Quality = fitness for meeting the customers needs.

If you want carbon and electronic shifting but oly have £1400 it it fits your needs admirably.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

outlash said:


> Looks like I should embarrassed buying a Genesis Day One with it's steel frame and hub gears.....
> 
> Anyway, yes that is an awful lot of bike for the money!
> 
> ...


Not at all its not the material that's in question,The genesis brand use a high quality steel frame,are they the same as a halfords Apollo steel frame?they must be according to people on here,all carbon frames are the same apparently,nothing has changed in 100 years apparently,you can store a mould for 30 years,and when you reuse it,a frame pops out that's bang up to date????must be the Houdini factory!


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Why would you change the mould?


I refer the gentleman to the answer I gave previously


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

Do you really think most people buying the Ribble would notice, they may never have ridden any other sort of carbon frame. As long as it fits, they'll enjoy their bike because it's new, shiny, has good components, has a good paint job

I'm sure my Pave is an old frame but that doesn't make it any less enjoyable to ride, as I've never ridden anything else in carbon and I know nothing about materials, engineering - I like something that appeals to me aesthetically and is comfortable for me

And I'd much rather own it, than any new Specialized/Trek/Giant which are everywhere, generally dully styled or coloured, and importantly, I am supporting a UK-based company (wherever the parts are made)

I don't do Shimano groupsets, and few manufacturers provide SRAM on stock bikes, so have to build from the frame


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

vickster said:


> Do you really think most people buying the Ribble would notice, they may never have ridden any other sort of carbon frame. As long as it fits, they'll enjoy their bike because it's new, shiny, has good components, has a good paint job
> 
> I'm sure my Pave is an old frame but that doesn't make it any less enjoyable to ride, as I've never ridden anything else in carbon and I know nothing about materials, engineering - I like something that appeals to me aesthetically and is comfortable for me
> 
> And I'd much rather own it, than any new Specialized/Trek/Giant which are everywhere, generally dully styled or coloured, and importantly, I am supporting a UK-based company (wherever the parts are made)


No, if you haven't ridden anything else how would you know?I thought my ford escort was good....but I hadn't driven a BMW....yes ignorance is bliss! Lots of people buy things that are pleasing to the eye,but that doesn't mean it performs well,or it was the best thing to buy at the time.


----------



## Drago (30 Jan 2015)

You'll know pretty quick if you're riding one of the bottom BB standards because you'll be replacing bearings where previously most riders probably never had . Not all technology is good, beneficial, or provides an actual improvement.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> No, if you haven't ridden anything else how would you know?I thought my ford escort was good....but I hadn't driven a BMW....yes ignorance is bliss! Lots of people buy things that are pleasing to the eye,but that doesn't mean it performs well,or it was the best thing to buy at the time.



It performs perfectly well enough for me, I'm not a professional cyclist. I typically ride no more than 50 miles at about 12-14mph. A good looking bike that I want to ride is much preferred by me to some ugly matt black thing from Specialized even if it is meant to be the best bike ever made.

Let people buy what they want, by all means give advice based on your knowledge and experience but respect their decision
(maybe try to modify the high almighty, condescending tone  )

I've driven a 3L Alpina, I still prefer my Skoda


----------



## e-rider (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> Is this the Cheapest bike with Di2 on it?
> http://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/?type=RIBMO


look at the spec, it's very (completely) different to the pictured bike - it does have Di2 though if that's what you are after! Canyon and Cube make good quality 'cheap' bikes - might be worth a look at their Di2 offerings.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

Drago said:


> You'll know pretty quick if you're riding one of the bottom BB standards because you'll be replacing bearings where previously most riders probably never had . Not all technology is good, beneficial, or provides an actual improvement.





vickster said:


> It performs perfectly well enough for me, I'm not a professional cyclist. I typically ride no more than 50 miles at about 12-14mph. A good looking bike that I want to ride is much preferred by me to some ugly matt black thing from Specialized even if it is meant to be the best bike ever made.
> 
> Let people buy what they want, by all means give advice based on your knowledge and experience but respect their decision
> (maybe try to modify the high almighty, condescending tone  )
> ...


I don't think my tone is high and mighty....but I'm utterly flabbergasted by people who give there opinions on a bike that have only had one bike!and think bikes haven't changed in a century...I think my standpoint gives a more balanced overview..The Ribble range is relatively good value,some savings due to no dealer network etc...but not all carbon frames are the same, the frames are not the latest stiffest etc..and are from generic open moulds from the far east on tooling that was paid for years ago....hence the prices... But they are not the be all and end all of bikes.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

e-rider said:


> look at the spec, it's very (completely) different to the pictured bike - it does have Di2 though if that's what you are after! Canyon and Cube make good quality 'cheap' bikes - might be worth a look at their Di2 offerings.


Very ugly wheels in the picture though 

I have specced the bike as I'd be happy with it (without the ugly wheels) and it is £1,402.49 (+£2.50 for a 100mm stem)...however I wouldn't buy it as I can't have a 38cm bar! And I don't need anymore bikes I'm not allowed to ride!


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> I don't think my tone is high and mighty....but I'm utterly flabbergasted by people who give there opinions on a bike that have only had one bike!and think bikes haven't changed in a century...I think my standpoint gives a more balanced overview..The Ribble range is relatively good value,some savings due to no dealer network etc...but not all carbon frames are the same, the frames are not the latest stiffest etc..and are from generic open moulds from the far east on tooling that was paid for years ago....hence the prices... But they are not the be all and end all of bikes.


I have 4 bikes and had quite a few more before. They are all very different but enjoy riding each depending on what I want on that day


----------



## Drago (30 Jan 2015)

I'm currently at 7 bikes, plus one under construction.

As aforementioned, I've also first hand experience of CF construction.

Oh, and I've got a 15 year old pick up with 33" muds a 2" lift and wouldn't touch a BMW with yours.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> I refer the gentleman to the answer I gave previously


Doesnt answer the question.

Why could the mould for the F8 not be used in 30 years time to produce a frame using the tech/carbon weaves of 2045


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

Drago said:


> You'll know pretty quick if you're riding one of the bottom BB standards because you'll be replacing bearings where previously most riders probably never had . Not all technology is good, beneficial, or provides an actual improvement.


Yes I can appreciate what your saying,the bb 30,wide shell types etc...are certainly stiffer utilising the bigger axles.....but the old type bb and outboard type seem to last better and with no creaking!some people would say its a trade off....performance vs durability./


----------



## Globalti (30 Jan 2015)

Out of interest I recently test rode an LBS brand bike that I think is an "open mould" frame painted up with fancy colours. It was very light indeed and handled well but no better than my Roubaix SL4. However the big problem for me was that my heels kept striking the chainstays, which were quite straight from BB to dropout rather than curved in to accommodate folk like me with turned-out feet. When I mentioned this to the shopkeeper he retorted: "Oh, that's because you've got your pedals set up wrong." 

Well, s'cuse me... I've spent about five years getting my pedals set up and enjoying them so I'm more inclined to think that the frame could do with a small redesign. It just underlines the importance of test-riding a bike before you splash the cash.


----------



## Drago (30 Jan 2015)

If indeed it brings any performance gain. The ally framed wibble I tried last year flexed visibly at the frame, and the Octalink BB and cranks were comfortably stiffer than the surrounding frame structure.

It's as much about fashion and parting the gullible "must-have-the-latest" crew from their money as it is about actually going any quicker. After all, if performance improvements were what we genuinely desired we'd all be on diets and taking our training a lot more seriously, as that's where the gains are made.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Doesnt answer the question.
> 
> Why could the mould for the F8 not be used in 30 years time to produce a frame using the tech of 2045


Let's say the tech of 2045 has resulted in the bb shell being 80mm x 120mm as the optimum size,and the bottom head stock needing to be 2.5", all completley new dimensions because of lower resin carbons being used.The 30 year old mould can't change shape,yes you could use the the new carbon in the old mould but its not suitable,carbon is not carbon,I know its a material people don't tend to question,the word carbon means quality doesn't it????developers of frames 30 years ago didn't see what was coming,and I don't believe we can now!


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> Let's say the tech of 2045 has resulted in the bb shell being 80mm x 120mm as the optimum size,and the bottom head stock needing to be 2.5", all completley new dimensions because of lower resin carbons being used.The 30 year old mould can't change shape,yes you could use the the new carbon in the old mould but its not suitable,carbon is not carbon,I know its a material people don't tend to question,the word carbon means quality doesn't it????developers of frames 30 years ago didn't see what was coming,and I don't believe we can now!


Those who refurb/rebuild 80s frames seem to do ok now, whats the real difference?


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

Globalti said:


> Out of interest I recently test rode an LBS brand bike that I think is an "open mould" frame painted up with fancy colours. It was very light indeed and handled well but no better than my Roubaix SL4. However the big problem for me was that my heels kept striking the chainstays, which were quite straight from BB to dropout rather than curved in to accommodate folk like me with turned-out feet. When I mentioned this to the shopkeeper he retorted: "Oh, that's because you've got your pedals set up wrong." Well, s'cuse me... I've spent about five years getting my pedals set up and enjoying them so I'm more inclined to think that the frame could do with a small redesign.
> 
> It just underlines the importance of test-riding a bike before you splash the cash.


Yep,the Forme range of road bikes had kicked out stays with the gear cable stop welded on the outside!your foot catches on the heel,stupid design,,,but the cycle comic's never picked it up!


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Those who refurb/rebuild 80s frames seem to do ok now, whats the real difference?


Oh my god!!.....off the point....lots of those frame on the pro tour last year....I'm talking about the latest designs for performance not bored people doing up retro bikes.


----------



## Drago (30 Jan 2015)

There are no Ford RS 200's in this year's WRC, doesn't mean they're not stupidly fast.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> Oh my god!!.....off the point....lots of those frame on the pro tour last year....I'm talking about the latest designs for performance not bored people doing up retro bikes.


The bikes of the 80's being refurbed/rebuilt not don't seem to run into much trouble. Neither will the bikes of 2015 in 30 years time.

You're trying to claim that tech will move on (refer to your own bottom bracket/headtube post) and once it does everything else stops working, it doesn't... The "performance" of today is tomorrows retro....


----------



## Kestevan (30 Jan 2015)

I have a sneaking suspicion that "some" people view anything that doesn't come with a triple A+ brand name on the side as being crap.

These people are a marketing departments wet dream... they will happily hand over a small fortune for the latest, greatest thing, as long as the logo is this years colour....You could probably get a significant proportion to buy sugar coated shoot as long as it had the right label. 

Personally I suspect the Ribble is probably a fine bike, more than enough for 99.9% of riders needs, and looks a bargain. I wouldn't personally buy one though, as I've been bitten before by Ribbles idea of "service".


----------



## youngoldbloke (30 Jan 2015)

I do think Ribble should show the the bike actually offered. Bit naughty really. As it stands the offer's a good one at that price. but those are heavy wheels.


----------



## MickeyBlueEyes (30 Jan 2015)

vickster said:


> Very ugly wheels in the picture though


 Are you talking about he Cosmic's? They are beautiful, especially on my bike


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

youngoldbloke said:


> I do think Ribble should show the the bike actually offered. Bit naughty really. As it stands the offer's a good one at that price. but those are heavy wheels.


They should, I'd rather have the Rodi Airline whatever they are wheels over the fugly Cosmic SL


----------



## Smokin Joe (30 Jan 2015)

Lets get a sense of perspective here. The bike isn't aimed at potential TdF winners or Premier calendar contenders, but Ordinary Bloke who rides for leisure, races at club level or does a few long distance sportives. As such it represents very good value for money, it doesn't claim to be cutting edge but if you want cutting edge you're looking north of three times the price. Some of the finishing kit is low rent, but you'll find plenty of bikes at two grand plus that are like that.


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

e-rider said:


> look at the spec, it's very (completely) different to the pictured bike - it does have Di2 though if that's what you are after! Canyon and Cube make good quality 'cheap' bikes - might be worth a look at their Di2 offerings.


Yes i have looked at the spec, I am just saying it's the cheapest bike i have seen with Di2 on it, If you have seen cheaper put up a link.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

MickeyBlueEyes said:


> Are you talking about he Cosmic's? They are beautiful, especially on my bike


I can't stand those deep rim things


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

vickster said:


> I can't stand those deep rim things


Oh behave Vickster i have just bought a set,


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

If you like them, so be it (there's no accounting for [lack of] taste)


----------



## Globalti (30 Jan 2015)

I'm sure the Ribble rides beautifully and makes ordinary people feel like cycling gods. Cycling must be one of the few sports where an amateur can derive as much pleasure from the equipment and the activity as a professional does.

Kestevan's right though... selling consumer goods is all about getting the brand right and above all, the price. If Pinarellos were cheap and plentiful, nobody would believe they were any good so there'd be no demand for them and no cachet attached to the name. Conversely people shop at supermarkets where goods are displayed in huge profusion because that makes them think they must be getting value for money.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

I think the point being missed is that the Ribble is being compared to other big brands and the difference in price attributed to it being solely down to the label on it and the associated marketing.

The argument being made above, is that the cost saving is down to using older tech frames that no longer carry any development costs, along with blatantly selling the top spec in the picture, next to the bottom spec price!

You can buy a new old stock big brand bike for a fraction of the 2015 model, and it's still newer tech than the Ribble frames.

Don't get me wrong, the Ribble bikes are no doubt very good and many will enjoy them, but let's not be fooled into thinking that they compare.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> You can buy a new old stock big brand bike for a fraction of the 2015 model, and it's still newer tech than the Ribble frames.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, the Ribble bikes are no doubt very good and many will enjoy them, but let's not be fooled into thinking that they compare.


Yes but does it really matter to the average punter? Ribbles primary customer base!


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

Can you actually get a 2015 big brand bike with DI2 for £1400? Most will think about the components before the age of the frame design, the fancy whizz bang electronic stuff probably appeals to a certain customer type which is their target here. 
Not the materials scientist who wants the latest carbon weave and lay up (whatever that might be) but doesn't give a monkey's about the moving parts


----------



## Hacienda71 (30 Jan 2015)

A 2015 big brand frame is 9 times out of 10 the same as the 2014 and the 2013 frame just with a different paint scheme to make it appear "new" to the consumer. The biggest change in recent years has been the increasing number of aero frames coming to the market as roadbikes not just TT specific bikes. Specialized have been making the Venge for a few years and the basics of the frame have hardly altered during this time.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

Hacienda71 said:


> Specialized have been making the Venge for a few years and the basics of the frame have hardly altered during this time.


Nor the aesthetics in any sort of positive way, still fugly


----------



## Kestevan (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> You can buy a new old stock big brand bike for a fraction of the 2015 model, and it's still newer tech than the Ribble frames.



Really? I'd be somewhat surprised if you could find a new "big brand bike" of any vintage with a Di2 groupset for the same price as the Ribble. I'd be even more suprised if it was offered in any "normal" size, judging by the stores selling last years "bargains" the only sizes available are either extremely small or extremely large.....


----------



## Hacienda71 (30 Jan 2015)

vickster said:


> Nor the aesthetics in any sort of positive way, still fugly









You know you want one really.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

Why on earth would you want a frame with the names of parts of an animal's body...including tail (or worse the same word is a colloquialism for penis, which is what you would look riding one  )


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Yes but does it really matter to the average punter? Ribbles primary customer base!


Exactly. That's my point. They will love it and why shouldn't they.

What I am saying is that it is being compared as equal to other "big brand" bikes in this thread, for people who are not necessarily Ribble's primary customer base.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> Exactly. That's my point. They will love it and why shouldn't they.
> 
> What I am saying is that it is being compared as equal to other "big brand" bikes in this thread, for people who are not necessarily Ribble's primary customer base.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

What makes me chuckle more, is that when you spec the wheels in the sales picture, you cant spec it with tyres as they only allow a single tyre choice that are incompatible. The price is with Alu seatpost, as the carbon is a further price hike, and you physically cant even spec it with the White saddle and post in the picture either. If you spec the white bars and stem, carbon spacers and carbon post, it totals at £2,026.49. Add a further £100 for a pair of Continental Tubulars and your up to £2,126.49.

Tell me it compares...

http://www.evanscycles.com/products/fuji/transonic-21-2015-road-bike-ec067762

That's the first bike I found from a Google with the Di2 criteria at this price area. There are plenty more to find too.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (30 Jan 2015)

while i agree about the questionable marketing tactics of showing a fully pimped-up version of a bike that, for the price, comes with shimano sora groupset and rodi airline wheels, i think it's worth bearing one thing in mind:
ribble have been around a while, and their primary customers prior to the post '08 cycling boom were club cyclists, who will probably own more than one bike. getting a carbon frame with d12 for that money certainly makes sense if you've already got a decent set of wheels to put on, using the rodis for the winter hack.

their bike builder is also perfect if you're building to a budget; compromise on bits you already have/aren't fussed about, rather than trying to find an off-the-peg solution that isn't a compromise in areas you'd rather it wasn't...


----------



## youngoldbloke (30 Jan 2015)

If you want to order online IMO Rose is actually better value (and I own 2 Ribbles). They also have a vast range of bikes - not just road.


----------



## gbb (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> I think the point being missed is that the Ribble is being compared to other big brands and the difference in price attributed to it being solely down to the label on it and the associated marketing.
> 
> The argument being made above, is that the cost saving is down to using older tech frames that no longer carry any development costs, along with blatantly selling the top spec in the picture, next to the bottom spec price!
> 
> ...


 
Thats where OP goes wrong IMO. The ribble will probably be a perfectly fine bike for the money and represent excellent VFM (i have a Sportive Racing, i'm VERY happy with it, stiff, comfortable, good looking IMO, what more do i need ?)
But OP complaining they're old technology and comparing them with more expensive bikes is just ridiculous....if the buyer wants latest technology, he's going to pay a lot more for a different brand. If buyer wants Ribble to use the latest technology...he's going to pay a lot more.
Basic mistake,,,he complains its not latest technology...but chooses to ignore the fact its cheap.

C'mon, 90% of road bike purchasers are weekend warriors....the Ribble will in all probability give them the best bang for buck they'll ever get. The fact it isnt latest tech doesnt matter one iota.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

gbb said:


> Thats where OP goes wrong IMO. The ribble will probably be a perfectly fine bike for the money and represent excellent VFM (i have a Sportive Racing, i'm VERY happy with it, stiff, comfortable, good looking IMO, what more do i need ?)
> But OP complaining they're old technology and comparing them with more expensive bikes is just ridiculous....if the buyer wants latest technology, he's going to pay a lot more for a different brand. If buyer wants Ribble to use the latest technology...he's going to pay a lot more.
> Basic mistake,,,he complains its not latest technology...but chooses to ignore the fact its cheap.
> 
> C'mon, 90% of road bike purchasers are weekend warriors....the Ribble will in all probability give them the best bang for buck they'll ever get. The fact it isnt latest tech doesnt matter one iota.


I think the point is that it mates an older frame design with Di2. Anyone buying Di2 would surely want the rest of the components to match. If we were looking at the Ultegra model, then opinion would be completely different, mine included.

My argument is not against Ribble specifically, as applies to a couple of other similar brand setups.

In fact, I am chuffed that they buy components in such great bulk, otherwise I wouldn't be able to buy from them at such a great deal. A guy in Tredz said that the price Ribble sell at is often cheaper than the wholesale price that Tredz buy in at. Believe that or not, who knows, but interesting.


----------



## Kestevan (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> What makes me chuckle more, is that when you spec the wheels in the sales picture, you cant spec it with tyres as they only allow a single tyre choice that are incompatible. The price is with Alu seatpost, as the carbon is a further price hike, and you physically cant even spec it with the White saddle and post in the picture either. If you spec the white bars and stem, carbon spacers and carbon post, it totals at £2,026.49. Add a further £100 for a pair of Continental Tubulars and your up to £2,126.49.
> 
> Tell me it compares...
> 
> ...



Admittedly the bike in the Ribble picture is not what you get for £1400 (Ribble are notorious for this, both on the website and in magazine adds, and in my view it should be stopped). 

However, the fact remains Ribble *will* sell you a Di2 equipped carbon road bike for £1399.
The bike you linked to is almost a £1000 more expensive.... for many people that will put it well out of reach,


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

gbb said:


> Thats where OP goes wrong IMO. The ribble will probably be a perfectly fine bike for the money and represent excellent VFM (i have a Sportive Racing, i'm VERY happy with it, stiff, comfortable, good looking IMO, what more do i need ?)
> But OP complaining they're old technology and comparing them with more expensive bikes is just ridiculous....if the buyer wants latest technology, he's going to pay a lot more for a different brand. If buyer wants Ribble to use the latest technology...he's going to pay a lot more.
> Basic mistake,,,he complains its not latest technology...but chooses to ignore the fact its cheap.
> 
> C'mon, 90% of road bike purchasers are weekend warriors....the Ribble will in all probability give them the best bang for buck they'll ever get. The fact it isnt latest tech doesnt matter one iota.


The OP is making no claims, All i said it's the cheapest bike i have seen with Di2, Show me one cheaper, or read the thread properly.


----------



## youngoldbloke (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> What makes me chuckle more, is that when you spec the wheels in the sales picture, you cant spec it with tyres as they only allow a single tyre choice that are incompatible. The price is with Alu seatpost, as the carbon is a further price hike, and you physically cant even spec it with the White saddle and post in the picture either. If you spec the white bars and stem, carbon spacers and carbon post, it totals at £2,026.49. Add a further £100 for a pair of Continental Tubulars and your up to £2,126.49.
> 
> Tell me it compares...
> 
> ...


Tyres are Yksion Pros with the Cosmics and they are clinchers aren't they? Mavic have been doing this for a while haven't they? - if you buy their wheels they come with their tyres.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

Kestevan said:


> Admittedly the bike in the Ribble picture is not what you get for £1400 (Ribble are notorious for this, both on the website and in magazine adds, and in my view it should be stopped).
> 
> However, the fact remains Ribble *will* sell you a Di2 equipped carbon road bike for £1399.
> The bike you linked to is almost a £1000 more expensive.... for many people that will put it well out of reach,



They do say clearly in red that the picture does not reflect the priced spec...maybe they've been pulled up on this in the past and have mended the error of their ways

I have an ex colleague who has had two gran fondos (he killed the first, ooops) and more than happy for both commuting and weekending. I think another also bought the same bike


----------



## MickeyBlueEyes (30 Jan 2015)

vickster said:


> Nor the aesthetics in any sort of positive way, still fugly


S-Works Venge with deep carbon rims... my kinda bike


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

Each to their own and that's fine if you race, that's what it's meant for  
(but for me ...now give me a gloss red shimmery Parlee and  )

The Ribble Gran Fondo is as said for weekend warriors on a sportive or club run


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

Kestevan said:


> Admittedly the bike in the Ribble picture is not what you get for £1400 (Ribble are notorious for this, both on the website and in magazine adds, and in my view it should be stopped).
> 
> However, the fact remains Ribble *will* sell you a Di2 equipped carbon road bike for £1399.
> The bike you linked to is almost a £1000 more expensive.... for many people that will put it well out of reach,


Not quite £1,000, but that's fair, no question there. My point is solely on the basis of comparing the bike, pictured on the website and in magazines, to what the same money gets you.

The Ultegra equipped basic bike is amazing VFM and is shadowed by the above argument.


----------



## Mugshot (30 Jan 2015)

I'm glad the bike brand and the wheel model have been mentioned in the thread, I wasn't sure when I looked at the advert.


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

So is anyone going to buy one.


----------



## NeilT21 (30 Jan 2015)

I did look at this bike (without the DI2), but in the end I bought the Planet X RT-58 Ultegra which arrived this week. I don't think there is much to choose between the two, but I was put off by the ever increasing price of the Ribble when I specc'd it up, and I much prefer the understated matt black finish of the Planet X rather than the "bling" Ribble - just personal taste that of course ;o)


----------



## Smokin Joe (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> So is anyone going to buy one.


I would if I was in the market for a bike. The tyres are crap but you have to go well up on price with a new bike if you want decent rubber as standard, they nearly all skimp on that and I've never bought a bike where I haven't quickly upgraded what is only a short life item anyway. Alloy seatpost? When all's said and done, it's only a stick to hold the saddle up and if there's any difference to performance between that and a bling carbon one I've never found it, apart from a minor overall weight saving.

You can spend more and get better, but we haven't all got unlimited hobby budgets.


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

For a starter bike it ain't bad, bit's can always be upgraded later, i can't think of a bike i have had which i have not upgraded, i even upgrades the upgrades .


----------



## Hacienda71 (30 Jan 2015)

Half of the "high end" bikes come with crap wheels unless you spend a fortune and even then you will get a mid range wheelset. A mate of mine who was buying a Cervelo S5 phoned and asked me what I thought of the spec. Nice frame  Ultegra good  Shimano r500 wheels  wtf, on a bike he was about to spend over two grand on. Told to him to insist on better wheels and the shop stuck a set of Fulcrum Racing 5's on. Hardly outstanding wheels but better than a sub £100 set of Shimanos.


----------



## Smokin Joe (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> For a starter bike it ain't bad, bit's can always be upgraded later, i can't think of a bike i have had which i have not upgraded, i even upgrades the upgrades .


That's not a phrase I like, "Starter bike". It implies a sub standard machine which has to be upgraded at some point in the future whereas anything above what we term as a BSO is more than capable of taking you from one end of the country to the other, will not put you at a disadvantage in any fish& chipper organised by one of the local clubs that a bit of extra training wouldn't overcome and is all you need for even the most demanding sportive. Sure, an extra two grand spend will get you a gain, but the law of diminishing returns being what it is only a marginal one. If you're a snail on the climbs you'll still be one no matter how light the bike is and if you are struggling to break evens in a 25 a top end TT bike won't put you under the hour.

All this entry level nonsense is a media invented thing in the wake of the "New Golf" boom, when middle aged fashionistas with high disposable income are willing and able to splash out four or five grand on an ego trip. Good luck to anyone who can do that, but it skews the perceptions of what you actually need to compete in and enjoy the sport. As someone once said, it's not about the bike. Something brought home to me last year when a lady on a Tiagra equipped Moda with unbranded wheels and tyres blew me apart on a climb.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> For a starter bike it ain't bad, bit's can always be upgraded later, i can't think of a bike i have had which i have not upgraded, i even upgrades the upgrades .


Totally agree. Except I do it the other way around. I look for a bike with the best frame that I can afford, with smaller items that I can upgrade over time.

Buying with Di2 from the start, leaves you with a frame that's the weakest link...


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> Totally agree. Except I do it the other way around. I look for a bike with the best frame that I can afford, with smaller items that I can upgrade over time.
> 
> Buying with Di2 from the start, leaves you with a frame that's the weakest link...


At the end of the day the frame is good enough for what most people on here do.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

Smokin Joe said:


> That's not a phrase I like, "Starter bike". It implies a sub standard machine which has to be upgraded at some point in the future whereas anything above what we term as a BSO is more than capable of taking you from one end of the country to the other, will not put you at a disadvantage in any fish& chipper organised by one of the local clubs that a bit of extra training wouldn't overcome and is all you need for even the most demanding sportive. Sure, an extra two grand spend will get you a gain, but the law of diminishing returns being what it is only a marginal one. If you're a snail on the climbs you'll still be one no matter how light the bike is and if you are struggling to break evens in a 25 a top end TT bike won't put you under the hour.
> 
> All this entry level nonsense is a media invented thing in the wake of the "New Golf" boom, when middle aged fashionistas with high disposable income are willing and able to splash out four or five grand on an ego trip. Good luck to anyone who can do that, but it skews the perceptions of what you actually need to compete in and enjoy the sport. As someone once said, it's not about the bike. Something brought home to me last year when a lady on a Tiagra equipped Moda with unbranded wheels and tyres blew me apart on a climb.


Some good points, Comparing 2 different bikes with 2 different riders is one thing, but it falls down when you properly compare 2 different bikes with the same rider.

I am noticably faster and more comfortable on my new bike than my first bike. No question about it.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> At the end of the day the frame is good enough for what most people on here do.


I agree. I am replying in relation to people talking about upgrades though. Never said that they bike wouldn't be suitable without upgrades. That was somebody else, you will notice.


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> I agree. I am replying in relation to people talking about upgrades though. Never said that they bike wouldn't be suitable without upgrades. That was somebody else, you will notice.


Sorry was not aimed at you, just a general remark.


----------



## bpsmith (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> Sorry was not aimed at you, just a general remark.


No apology needed. 

I am stepping out of this one now, as could appear that I have something against Ribble or their bikes, and that's simply not the case. I also was just replying to the other general remarks too.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

bpsmith said:


> I think the point being missed is that the Ribble is being compared to other big brands and the difference in price attributed to it being solely down to the label on it and the associated marketing.
> 
> The argument being made above, is that the cost saving is down to using older tech frames that no longer carry any development costs, along with blatantly selling the top spec in the picture, next to the bottom spec price!
> 
> ...


Well said!


----------



## e-rider (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> Yes i have looked at the spec, I am just saying it's the cheapest bike i have seen with Di2 on it, If you have seen cheaper put up a link.


you are missing the point - you get Di2 gears and a whole load of cheap shite to go with it to make a complete bike!


----------



## derrick (30 Jan 2015)

e-rider said:


> you are missing the point - you get Di2 gears and a whole load of cheap shite to go with it to make a complete bike!


There is no point to miss, I am just saying it's the cheapest bike i have seen with Di2 on it.


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

But it's not actually a bad frame I believe, nor are the other components


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (30 Jan 2015)

The Vitus I'm riding <<<< came from pretty much(if not the same) the same moulding as the Carrera Virago yet wasn't much dearer when I bought it, even though it's considerably better specced..

That doesn't make the Carrera bad nor the Vitus expensive, in fact I don't really know what it shows other than perhaps how different brands spec the base frame once their colour scheme has been applied.

I'm sure out there somewhere, the frames/bikes bought from Ribble Dolan Vitus Planet X amongst others are being happily ridden branded as something else again.


----------



## gbb (30 Jan 2015)

derrick said:


> The OP is making no claims, All i said it's the cheapest bike i have seen with Di2, Show me one cheaper, or read the thread properly.


Sorry Derrick, my mistake...i'd been reading every post and lforgot who actually was OP 
The point was made for shadow masters 'benefit'...who seems hell bent on telling everyone what they probably already know, that the Ribble isn't the peak of technological excellence...its like complaining you brought a Ford when a Rolls is quite obviously so much better. Surprisingly, I think we all can work that one out for ourselves.


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

gbb said:


> Sorry Derrick, my mistake...i'd been reading every post and lforgot who actually was OP
> The point was made for shadow masters 'benefit'...who seems hell bent on telling everyone what they probably already know, that the Ribble isn't the peak of technological excellence...its like complaining you brought a Ford when a Rolls is quite obviously so much better. Surprisingly, I think we all can work that one out for ourselves.


Obviously,Not all people can work it out,they tell me bike frames haven't change in the last century!!lol


----------



## gbb (30 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> Obviously,Not all people can work it out,they tell me bike frames haven't change in the last century!!lol


 your sentiments are right but you did come across a bit 'evangelical' ...


----------



## shadow master (30 Jan 2015)

gbb said:


> your sentiments are right but you did come across a bit 'evangelical' ...


Praise the lord...Touch the screen....Touch the screen!


----------



## vickster (30 Jan 2015)

gbb said:


> your sentiments are right but you did come across a bit 'evangelical' ...


That's one word for it...I can think of a few more lol


----------



## Leodis (31 Jan 2015)

When I was buying a Ribble I found this forum post very helpful.

I bought the R872 a couple of years ago, I love it. I had a £1500 budget for my first road bike and for £1600 I got campagnolo centaur red, 2 way Zonda wheelset with a decent ITM finishing kit, I searched the market for a big corporation bike for the spec and failed. All the market leaders failed to get anywhere near within £1k for a similar spec. It seems odd spending 2 or 3k on a bike then have to upgrade the wheelset and tyres on off the shelf bikes.

I love the fact some still think buying a market leader bike they are getting the latest tech, the tech is their higher end of a few years ago and is the same pass down tech as Ribble but at a higher cost. 

I have been in the market with the thought of using cycle scheme, the bikes for the price in this range have been very poor with the exception of Dolan but I want hydr discs so coughed up a bit more and i am ordering a Rose pro dx cross-3000 Hydr.


----------



## e-rider (3 Feb 2015)

Hacienda71 said:


> Half of the "high end" bikes come with crap wheels unless you spend a fortune and even then you will get a mid range wheelset. A mate of mine who was buying a Cervelo S5 phoned and asked me what I thought of the spec. Nice frame  Ultegra good  Shimano r500 wheels  wtf, on a bike he was about to spend over two grand on. Told to him to insist on better wheels and the shop stuck a set of Fulcrum Racing 5's on. Hardly outstanding wheels but better than a sub £100 set of Shimanos.


I discovered cracks around the spoke holes in the rear rim of my R501s today - contacted Ribble where I bought them and they asked if the rim wear indicators were still visible - the rear rim has already gone past the indicator so I'm not expecting a good response even though the wheels are 12 months old and they have a 2 year warranty. Buy cheap buy twice!


----------



## shadow master (3 Feb 2015)

e-rider said:


> I discovered cracks around the spoke holes in the rear rim of my R501s today - contacted Ribble where I bought them and they asked if the rim wear indicators were still visible - the rear rim has already gone past the indicator so I'm not expecting a good response even though the wheels are 12 months old and they have a 2 year warranty. Buy cheap buy twice!


Seen loads of those like that,its very common to see cracks like a spider's web,creeping from nipples,beware when they let go they let go!!


----------



## e-rider (3 Feb 2015)

shadow master said:


> Seen loads of those like that,its very common to see cracks like a spider's web,creeping from nipples,beware when they let go they let go!!


I had intended to use them for longer and keep an eye on it - are you saying to bin the wheel right now before it kills me?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (3 Feb 2015)

e-rider said:


> I had intended to use them for longer and keep an eye on it - are you saying to bin the wheel right now before it kills me?


OTOH I did thousands of miles on a set of R501s and I'm assuming the now owner of the bike they were on did so.

shadow master, if you haven't realised is the forums new know it all doombringer. He's seen and done it all..


----------



## shadow master (3 Feb 2015)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> OTOH I did thousands of miles on a set of R501s and I'm assuming the now owner of the bike they were on did so.
> 
> shadow master, if you haven't realised is the forums new know it all doombringer. He's seen and done it all..


Just because you had one set that done thousands of miles,your opinion is that they just don't crack!I see a lot more wheels than the ones I ride,I'm surrounded by them all day,so believe I'm in a better position than some to give an overview of the products in the real world,and I have seen at least 6 of these wheels cracked all over in the last couple of months,one rear only 2 days ago that had split like a banana between the nipples....try telling that rider they just never split,he was seriously injured when the back wheel jammed.
I have seen at least 6 pair in the last 6 months cracked all over


----------



## Drago (3 Feb 2015)

I've never won the lottery.

Therefore, by my experience no one has ever won the lottery ever.


----------



## shadow master (3 Feb 2015)

Drago said:


> I've never won the lottery.
> 
> Therefore, by my experience no one has ever won the lottery ever.


My thoughts exactly...ignorance is bliss lol


----------



## 400bhp (3 Feb 2015)

Wow, this is a real middle class discussion.

Ribble make good bikes. Good enough for most of us on here.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (4 Feb 2015)

shadow master said:


> Just because you had one set that done thousands of miles,your opinion is that they just don't crack!I see a lot more wheels than the ones I ride,I'm surrounded by them all day,so believe I'm in a better position than some to give an overview of the products in the real world,and I have seen at least 6 of these wheels cracked all over in the last couple of months,one rear only 2 days ago that had split like a banana between the nipples....try telling that rider they just never split,he was seriously injured when the back wheel jammed.
> I have seen at least 6 pair in the last 6 months cracked all over


I never said they don't crack, I said the set I had was fine for thousands of miles. That to me is enough to form the opinion that the set I had, did not crack. 

How dare someone have a positive experience with a product while you're doombringing again? The audacity!


----------

