stomponafrog wrote:
It's a great bike. I had one that was a great ride for me. Two things that I would take into consideration...
1: The 2010 model year has the seat mast vs a regular seat post. That means the seat mast needs to be cut to fit. The height adjustment is then limited given the amount of movement the ritchey post top will allow; which isn't much. You can always go lower by cutting away more of the seat mast. But once cut, you get the drift. Even it the bike is the perfect fit, the seat mast could become a resale issue due to that limiting factor. I do believe you can purchase an alternate ritchey post top that has more height to it if necessary.
2: The rear chain stays are quite narrow. I tried running 25mm tires and they would rub the frame when peddling hard. No issue with the 23mm tires. With that same note, the narrow chain stays are on the no-no list for the Wheelbuilder disc cover. I used SRAM 60/80 with no problem. But the aero cover wouldn't be advised as it could rub the frame.
Those 2 things are the only considerations I offer. Again, i had the same model and it was an awesome bike. The "skeg" under the BB was a neat touch. Not sure how much benefit it offers. The regular rear brake is "better" than the hidden brakes under the bike in a sense that they are easier to work on for the regular person.
Point 1 alone is ample reason to stay away. I've fit 4 or so of these bikes from that era - 3 of the 4 were cut too short. The Ritchey clamp adds 2 cm or so, but most of these bikes that I saw already had the "taller" option.
These bikes had geometries that are still relevant (although the biggest bike didn't get very big), but the integrated seat post is a catastrophic flaw if you're looking for one used.
Trent Nix
Owned and operated Tri Shop
F.I.S.T. Advanced Certified Fitter | Retul Master Certified Fitter (back when those were things)