Which audax bike??

[TheBoyBilly]

Can you configure a Condor Fratello for Ride2Work money? I am looking at a Sportive bike for weekends that will also do commute, light touring and winter duties.

Bill

 

[yello]

When you say Audax do you mean the 100k ones or the serious stuff that only leg-ends ride?

"Leg ends" !!!! Hmph

It's interesting to me how what people consider (or even the definition of) an audax bike has changed even in my short experience of the audax world. Or is it that manufacturers once only associated with race bikes are expanding their ranges? I guess the difference can be summed up as 'an audax bike' v 'a bike to ride audax on'. Clearly, you can ride an audax on anything. Even jimbo's 20" shopper. But when I began riding audax not so many years ago, an 'audax bike' was almost by definition steel, relaxed geometry, had mudguards, and you carried stuff on it. Maybe that's the 'leg-end' definition!

I personally wouldn't have gone for Giant Defy as a audax bike. I would have been looking at something like a Fratello for instance. (I wouldn't look at a Fratello for sportives however!). But that's because my definition of audax includes the likelihood of riding more than 100km events, so comfort is a major factor. I've ridden 100km events on my alu framed Bianchi but it's a bit buzzy for riding much further than that. Longer distances, I'm riding my steel framed Aravis.

So I guess, in short, I'm agreeing with WindyRob... but without the throwaway remark! Equally, Vorsprung sums it up quite nicely.

 

[TheBoyBilly]

Yello, I'm a little bit confused (no change there ) by your opinion that you wouldn't consider a Fratello for a Sportive. I realise that it is Condor's marketing pitch that 'if you only have room for one bike it has to be the Fratello', but I would have thought that the relaxed geometry, comfortable steel frame and ability to take 'guards etc would make it good choice (though not necessarily as good in some ways as say, the venerable Secteur - but good all the same)
I think I am going to have to limit my little fleet of bikes and therefore a Fratello could well be that 'do it all' bike. I'm still undecided though, and have until spring to make a decision. That said, on looks alone. I am lusting after a Basso Laguna, so maybe I may get away with a straight swap by selling my Langster and still have three bikes to do all things.

Bill

 

[zigzag]

Yello, I'm a little bit confused (no change there ) by your opinion that you wouldn't consider a Fratello for a Sportive.
Bill

if you are fast enough to be the 1st, then you should get a proper race bike for a sportive. if not, it doesn't matter if you come 53rd or 67th - be it fratello, defy, secteur or any other

 

[yello]

Just as you can ride anything on an audax, I guess you could equally ride a sportive on anything! I made the mistake of riding my (steel framed, dyno-hubed, mudguarded) audax bike on a small local event a few weekends ago. I thought it was going to be a randonnée but it turned out to be a sportive style event. I hung in there for an hour (around 30km) before common sense prevailed and I dropped to a more comfortable pace. My bike probably weighed a good 5kg more than everyone else's!

So I think we'd best agree on what a sportive is first, since I think we might not be talking of the same thing. To my mind, it's something you ride as quickly as you can. You have a timing chip, and go as hard as you are able to get the best time you can. Pretty much a race. If you want to ride like that sort of event, as it's designed to be ridden, you really don't want to be on a heavy bike. I'm speaking generally here but you're probably looking at an aluminium or carbon fibre frame, probably compact geometry, bars lower than the saddle; designed for efficiency and power rather than comfort. Something like the Basso you mention for instance. But your not positioned on the bike with a mind to all day comfort.

An audax bike on the other hand (like the Fratelli imo) is a more relaxed frame, designed more for comfort and distance. It's all those things you mention. Weight is less relevant.

I think you have to ask yourself about these weekend sportives that your thinking of, and how they fit into your mix of wants and needs. The Fratello seems to suit your other needs adequately but it'd certainly not be my 1st choice for a sportive!

 

[zigzag]

if it's 5kg(!) difference as yello said, then i agree - not the best bike for sportive. fratello or any other good quality steel bike would weigh ~1kg more than alu or carbon bike. you may feel that tiny difference going uphill, and more flex if you sprint out of saddle but this should not slow you down much. frame flex and not weight was the main reason i switched from steel to alloy.

 

[jimboalee]

windyrob is right

For the 100k or 200k rides then any bike is ok. It doesn't matter how comfortable it is, if it can carry lots of "stuff", how indestructible the wheels are, how wide the gear ratios are, if it has mudguards and tri bars or if it is made from steel, carbon, aluminium or Titianium.

Over 200k there is some agreement that the bike should be comfortable. This implies "wider" tyres, a good "bike fit" to your body, a relaxed geometry and a flexible rather than stiff frame.

Luggage carrying should be enough for a night time set of clothes, emergency food and a few tools/spares.

The wheels should be able to take a few pot hole hits and it's probably a good idea to have 36 spoke hand made wheels that will work fine with a couple of spokes missing. 20 spoke super light wheels are not good in this context.

Wide gear ratios are necessary. You need a big gear for speeding over those miles. Or you will never get there. Tiny gears are for the 2nd day of a 600 when you have 80km left, you can barely stay conscious, you are climbing a mile of 1:6 and your legs feel like old rope.

A good bike fit makes for more comfort than the frame material, how much padding is on the handle bars and a lot of other factors. And comfort is key

Mudguards are good as they keep the rain off. Fit a mudflap and you can be in a group following wheels in the rain.

Tribars give an extra hand position and are good for riding into the wind

Steel vs Al vs Ti vs Carbon for audax bikes? Usually the answer is steel or Ti. But carbon has it's fans too. And an Alu bike that fits properly beats a Ti bike that's just wrong

DIY Audax from Solihull to Burton upon Trent and back via Drayton Manor Park. 104 km, but ended up being 109. 5 hrs 43 mins.
Seeing a 200 has a max time of 14 hours, bring it on.

 

[mcshroom]

So you agree it should be steel then

 

[jimboalee]

So you agree it should be steel then

Having to buy a feather light carbon something to ride an Audax is merely a 'Band aid' over inability.

 

[jimboalee]

The BSA has a Sturmey AW3. Gears of 32, 42 and 56 inches. I 'twiddled' along at 13.5 mphish, spinning the cranks round at 80 rpm, which was 'dead comfortable', even against the 15 mph headwind straight up the A38 between Lichfield and Burton.

The only time I needed 42 inches was on the short hill out of Sutton Coldfield toward the college and fire station. I didn't want to knacker myself so early in the trip.

Finishing 109 km in 5 hrs 45 mins gave an average power output of 90 Watts. That's about 60% MHR for me and not 'labour intensive'. In fact, its well within the 'fat burning' region.

I took 10 minute stops at the Tesco stores to have a stretch, can of Coke and load up the next section on my Garmin.

I set myself a target of 17.5 kmh, but ended up doing 18 kmh.

 

[yello]

if it's 5kg(!) difference as yello said, then i agree

And the rider, a good *mumble* kilo heavier than these French whippets!

I personally don't know how the Fratello rides compared to, say, the aforementioned Basso but google tells me that the Basso Laguno weights in at 8kg whilst the Fratello is 11kg.

PS the google also showed me that the Fratello has changed a bit since I looked at it 6-ish years ago. It is much more sporty looking nowadays... perhaps I'd better take back all I said about it!!

 

[jimboalee]

"Leg ends" !!!! Hmph

It's interesting to me how what people consider (or even the definition of) an audax bike has changed even in my short experience of the audax world. Or is it that manufacturers once only associated with race bikes are expanding their ranges? I guess the difference can be summed up as 'an audax bike' v 'a bike to ride audax on'. Clearly, you can ride an audax on anything. Even jimbo's 20" shopper. But when I began riding audax not so many years ago, an 'audax bike' was almost by definition steel, relaxed geometry, had mudguards, and you carried stuff on it. Maybe that's the 'leg-end' definition!

I personally wouldn't have gone for Giant Defy as a audax bike. I would have been looking at something like a Fratello for instance. (I wouldn't look at a Fratello for sportives however!). But that's because my definition of audax includes the likelihood of riding more than 100km events, so comfort is a major factor. I've ridden 100km events on my alu framed Bianchi but it's a bit buzzy for riding much further than that. Longer distances, I'm riding my steel framed Aravis.

So I guess, in short, I'm agreeing with WindyRob... but without the throwaway remark! Equally, Vorsprung sums it up quite nicely.

Would that be a Dawes Gal, Raleigh Randonneur or a CB Dalesman?

Or a "Full kit" Revell Romany?
Note the third chainring.

PS, NOT my bike. I do remember 'Bar sponge'....

 

[jimboalee]

The BSA has a Sturmey AW3. Gears of 32, 42 and 56 inches. I 'twiddled' along at 13.5 mphish, spinning the cranks round at 80 rpm, which was 'dead comfortable', even against the 15 mph headwind straight up the A38 between Lichfield and Burton.

The only time I needed 42 inches was on the short hill out of Sutton Coldfield toward the college and fire station. I didn't want to knacker myself so early in the trip.

Finishing 109 km in 5 hrs 45 mins gave an average power output of 90 Watts. That's about 60% MHR for me and not 'labour intensive'. In fact, its well within the 'fat burning' region.

I took 10 minute stops at the Tesco stores to have a stretch, can of Coke and load up the next section on my Garmin.

I set myself a target of 17.5 kmh, but ended up doing 18 kmh.

Its 12% for 120 m.

 

[jimboalee]

And the rider, a good *mumble* kilo heavier than these French whippets!

I personally don't know how the Fratello rides compared to, say, the aforementioned Basso but google tells me that the Basso Laguno weights in at 8kg whilst the Fratello is 11kg.

PS the google also showed me that the Fratello has changed a bit since I looked at it 6-ish years ago. It is much more sporty looking nowadays... perhaps I'd better take back all I said about it!!

The Beeza is 16.5 kg.

I also have a Dawes Giro 500 weighing in at 11 kg, which has done a dozen or so 200s and a handfull of 300s.
Its aluminium. Aluminium forks. Alesi rims with Conti Ultra Gatorskins 23mm pumped up to 110 psi. Brooks B17 retro fit. Full mudguards. That bike gets round a 300 at 19 - 19.5 kmh average.
There is also a Spesh SWorks at 7.5 kg with Shimano RS Eighty wheels. 53/39 rings to 12 to 25 cassette. That's done a few 200s and one 300.

Audax Smuadax. Ride what you like.

 

[TheBoyBilly]

I think Yello has highlighted how little I know of the 'organised' cycling scene. Throwing Randonneurs in the mix has got me thinking. I can't ever see me doing a 200km event somehow. I was thinking of starting fun Sportives next spring working up to 50km and then, a 100km or 100 miler in the summer. All things considered, I think I should join a club, do a few rides and see where that takes me. I will have a better chance of not buying the 'wrong' bike that way too I feel.
My heart is still set on a Basso though, a thing of beauty in my eyes, but my wooden head says Fratello.

Thanks for the thought provoking advice, excellent as usual,

Bill