£1500 bike??

[NRS13]

A freind has about £1500 to spend on a road/tri bike. She is very keen on the Kuota Kharma. Anyone got one? and what is it like? She seems to want a carbon frame over alloy at this price is that wise. Thanks in advance.

[itsnotarace]

19.7 lbs is not exactly light

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/tech/bikes/1013/2/g...

For road and tri why not go for a Cervelo S1? Slightly over budget but you get Ultegra, they would do you a 105 build for less.

http://www.thetristore.com/view_product.asp?produc...

[Nick_F]

How tall is she? Much under 5'8" and she should perhaps be looking at one with 650C wheels and women-specific geometry: not many to choose from.

[matty_doh]

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/p/cycle/7/Quintana_Roo_Spl... if a 55cm frame is ok.

Other ones I'd look at are Planet X's offerings and the Boardman Pro and a couple of upgrades.

[NRS13]

She is already thinking of updating the Kharma to ultegra so it will push the price up. I will let her know all of your thoughts.

[okgo]

It's clearly pony why does she want it?

from the review " Bear in mind the Boardman, for the same money is 4lb lighter"

[Raven Flyer]

The Kharma isn't in the same class as the Boardman Pro. Not just the weight (25% lighter and most of it from the frame) but SRAM Force is as good as you will ever need short of international competition.

[jodypress]

Raven Flyer said:

The Kharma isn't in the same class as the Boardman Pro. Not just the weight (25% lighter and most of it from the frame) but SRAM Force is as good as you will ever need short of international competition.

You're kinda right but in reverse. I was looking at both these bikes last year. The Kharma's frame quality is leagues ahead of the Boardman. I was looking at £1700 with Ultegra. In the end I got a Scott CR1 Pro (with only 300miles on it for £700) which blows them both out the water

I don't think either of these bikes are great for tri.

Edited by jodypress on Sunday 25th July 17:11

[NRS13]

Thanks all. She went for the Kharma and got ultegra gearing and easton wheels for not much over the 105 spec price.

[Raven Flyer]

jodypress said:

You're kinda right but in reverse. I was looking at both these bikes last year. The Kharma's frame quality is leagues ahead of the Boardman. I was looking at £1700 with Ultegra. In the end I got a Scott CR1 Pro

The Kharma frame looks good because it has a cosmetic carbon layer over the base carbon frame. This hides the core frame construction and is why it's so heavy. It may look pretty but it's no guide to the construction of the structure.

A friend has a CR1 Pro. That's an amazing bike. Nice find at the money you paid.

[jodypress]

Raven Flyer said:

jodypress said:

You're kinda right but in reverse. I was looking at both these bikes last year. The Kharma's frame quality is leagues ahead of the Boardman. I was looking at £1700 with Ultegra. In the end I got a Scott CR1 Pro

The Kharma frame looks good because it has a cosmetic carbon layer over the base carbon frame. This hides the core frame construction and is why it's so heavy. It may look pretty but it's no guide to the construction of the structure.

A friend has a CR1 Pro. That's an amazing bike. Nice find at the money you paid.

tbh at the time I was looking, was after my bike fitting session at Mosquito bikes. They supply Kutoa's. Does indeed look lovely, they advised me that the frame construction was much better than say the Boardman.

I'm more than happy with the CR1 Pro. Was a fantastic ride to Paris with it.

[itsnotarace]

Raven Flyer said:

The Kharma frame looks good because it has a cosmetic carbon layer over the base carbon frame. This hides the core frame construction and is why it's so heavy.

Actually if you checked the frame spec the Medium size frame is 1260 grams which is no porker by any means. The rest of the weight comes from the other component choice / wheels

http://www.kuota.it/bike.php?IDCategoria=1&IDB...

Upgrading to Ultegra 6700 from 105 5600 should save 855g (2301g vs 3156g) but when the overall bike weight with 105 is 19.7Lbs / 8935.7g , upgrading to Ultegra will drop it to 17.8lbs so still not exactly light.

The fork/seat/seatpost/stem/bars/wheels must weigh a fair bit and would be good to upgrade.

[HundredthIdiot]

On a £1500 bike weight should not be a deciding factor, unless all other things are equal. It makes almost no difference to anything.

[itsnotarace]

HundredthIdiot said:

It makes almost no difference to anything.

Apart from having an extra 3 or 4 lbs in weight that you have to pedal up all the hills.

1 lb is equivalent to a bag of sugar, so you are effectively strapping 3 or 4 bags of sugar to the bike which you then have to expend extra effort to propel forwards

Good old power to weight ratio lol

[HundredthIdiot]

itsnotarace said:

HundredthIdiot said:

It makes almost no difference to anything.

Apart from having an extra 3 or 4 lbs in weight that you have to pedal up all the hills.

1 lb is equivalent to a bag of sugar, so you are effectively strapping 3 or 4 bags of sugar to the bike which you then have to expend extra effort to propel forwards

Good old power to weight ratio lol

Right, but even putting aside that 3 or 4 lbs is only about 2% total weight, the difference between the heavier and lighter bikes at the £1500 price point is not 3 or 4 lbs.

My bike weighs 6.8kg but I don't kid myself that the lack of weight makes any measurable difference.

Edited by HundredthIdiot on Monday 26th July 10:12

[Raven Flyer]

I find bike weight is a percentage of bike plus rider when you are seated but the equation is different when you are out of the saddle. Then its weight is more of an issue.

Replacing cog sets, bars, posts and wheels to get the weight down will put the budget into a completely different class.

Are there any mag group tests at this price break?

[okgo]

Who cares?

She's bought a bike now, irs all irelevant.

[spinningman]

itsnotarace said:

HundredthIdiot said:

It makes almost no difference to anything.

Apart from having an extra 3 or 4 lbs in weight that you have to pedal up all the hills.

1 lb is equivalent to a bag of sugar, so you are effectively strapping 3 or 4 bags of sugar to the bike which you then have to expend extra effort to propel forwards

Good old power to weight ratio lol

A bag of sugar is 1kg or 2.2 lbs.

[itsnotarace]

spinningman said:

A bag of sugar is 1kg or 2.2 lbs.

Um, well.... no. Depends on the size of the bag doesn't it?

http://www.ocado.com/webshop/product/Tate--Lyle-Fa...

[HundredthIdiot]

itsnotarace said:

Um, well.... no. Depends on the size of the bag doesn't it?

What's undeniable is that if you eat the bags of sugar you'll go faster. For a while.