Don't get a bike "for" your Ironman. Get a bike you love to ride. Nobody here can tell you what that will be. As to being torn between hardware-based comfort or speed for your planned relatively leisurely (no offense) IM bike ride, those things aren't mutually exclusive. Bikes aren't fast in and of themselves, people are fast. But, bikes can be comfortable, or not, mostly a result of how they fit and are set up rather than how the frame is built. And running a marathon after 7 hours of relative comfort is surely likely to be more fun than running after 7 hours on a torture device.

Seriously, if you can afford the bikes you are talking about, you can afford to take the time to thoroughly test ride those and more, at which time the truth will be revealed to you by your own body and mind, and you'll be completely stoked with your choice. Which will lead to enjoying your training. Which will lead to an improved chance of enjoying your Ironman. Which will in turn lead to an increased likelihood that you might do another one someday!

Ride on!

I absolutely loved what you said, and that's what I've planned on doing.....

Unfortunately, at this edge of the galaxy, I can't do any test rides on any of those bikes. I'll have to to order the frameset from the nearest distributor of which ever frame I select, and love whatever I end up with for a couple of years. (I have an older bike whose components I'll be moving to the new frameset, that's why I only need the frame.)

Lucky for me, the framesets of these bikes have been priced exactly the same. I guess they're competing for market share in this side of the world, where the tri community is still very small, and so bike options and availability are also very limited.

So, yes, it's pretty much a gamble based on the advice of any and all ST'ers who's willing to shed some light on this dilemma.

Thanks!

You should also look at the Cervelo P2C, all carbon and the price just got lowered.

---

It's not how you start, it's how you finish

Yup! Actually, if I had more cash, I'd probably be asking about the P2C, Kalibur, Plasma, DA, etc., and wouldn't mind having to ship them over here, and pay about 50% of the price tag for customs and taxes.

But as it is, with my current budget, the frames I mentioned are really the only ready options I have.

Unless someone argues that waiting several more months to get the funds to "upgrade" is all worth it. But then that sounds like something for a different discussion....

I had a Cervelo Dual - did an IM on it, in fact. I traded up to a Litespeed. For me and my 39 year old bones it is like night and day.

Seriously consider titanium!

Based on your situation then I would go with what the reveiws say and go with the P2 SL, results speak the loudest.

---

It's not how you start, it's how you finish

Oh, the sweet Saber would be one of my top choices had it been available and affordable here. Maybe next year or something....

But maybe you can help me by giving a review of the bike you have? I've always wondered how Carbon and Ti compare against each other. But I guess that too has been a long-time discussion with pages of posts somewhere in STs archives...

Those 3 bikes have different fitting philosophies, you need to know how you want to sit on a bike then order the frame that best fills in the gap. Is there a fitter in your part of the world who could set you up on a fit bike and help you decide which frame would suit you best.

There are other components that make more of a difference to comfort than the frame material - don't let that aspect concern you over much.

I was in the same position last year, but I decided to buy a road bike and change the handle bar for a tri-handle bar. I LOVE MY BIKE: Argon 18, Krypton model, the red one. Affordable, comfortable and VERY nice.

Argon 18 have a new tri-bike (Element). Did you consider it?

I realized that they do have different geometries, with the P2SL being the most attractive to me at 78 degrees. However, I'm thinking that I could always just throw in a forward seatpost or move my saddle forward to make the other two's 76 get to 78. At least that's what I've read from Dan's articles.

And yes, there's the headtube length, too, which I believe could also be remedied with spacers. I'm not looking to get too low, so I'll probably not complain that the headtube is too long for any of the bikes.

No, unforunately, there aren't any FIST fitters here. There are a couple who would give you their $0.02 after looking at you on your setup, but that would necessitate having a bike they can do adjustments with... and just small adjustments at that.

What I would really be interested in is too hear how much frame material affects comfort, particular between an aluminum and a hybrid carbon, assuming all other components are the same.

Also, if I got carbon wheels on an aluminum frame, would that be as comfortable as having non-carbon wheels on a hybrid carbon frame?

The difference is about 66/100ths of 1% (regardless of whether you are measuring in ICUs - Imperial Comfort Units, or MSP - Metric Subjective Perceptimeters). Approximately.

OK yes I'm being a smartass. I'm probably just jealous because I did all my Ironmans on a crap straight gauge Ti road bike with a spongy bottom bracket and clipons, bought when carbon was pretty much just used for forks and parts of stupid-light ocean racing maxiboats. But really, as has been pointed out, there are many aspects to "comfort" which will have a far greater effect than the material your frame is made of, assuming it's a properly designed bike frame to begin with, which should be a given for the level of bike you're looking at. Tires, saddle, shoes, bar tape, even your clothing. Never mind your position which is oh so critical to your comfort on a 180K ride...I don't care what your frame is made of, if you start squirming around and have to sit up out of the aero position 20% of the time because your bike is not set up properly for you, the bike might as well have been made of completely weightless unobtanium, wrapped in tempurpedic foam and coated in the hand-combed belly fur of virgin baby sheeps for all the relative good the comfort of the frame material will do for your bike split (or run split).

OK back to being serious...Given your constraints in terms of your location preventing any test riding, and that you're only replacing your frame, here's a crazy thought that may fit into your budget...you might truly be better off hooking up with a small builder and getting a steel bike custom designed and built for your exact dimensions and desires. I know that's heresy when there's so much space age stuff on offer, but really, can you imagine how fast you'd feel mentally on a bike custom built and painted just for you? So sweet. And, if the builder knows what they are doing, a pretty good chance you'll enjoy riding it and be....comfortable :-)

Just remember I called first dibs on your P2SL in the McDonald's parking lot the day after you got it.
HAHAHAHA!!!

:D

I doubt there's much of a difference in comfort between well made bikes of alum/carbon/titanium/steel....people will swear up and down that they could feel the difference but I doubt it. Some alum bikes ride nicer than some carbon bikes. How the bike is made and how it fits is key. I have a carbon road bike and an alum tri bike. I've ridden a lot of bikes and I think saddles/tires/air pressure in tires/wheels make a much bigger difference than frame material.

Consider delaying your purchase until you can travel somewhere and test ride bikes. I went to LA/San Diego to test ride.

Don't buy a bike unless its the bike you want. Ride what you have/save up/wait and buy what you want.

Bike fit: top tube length is key. You can compensate a bit with stems but its hard to compare and get a good bike fit without really knowing where you want to ride (saddle vs. BB) and actually checking the bikes. They all measure differently and its hard to compare numbers. A top tube thats 2-3 cm too long can really ruin a fit. Head tube is key if you need to go low so you should be fine there.

I love my all alum. P3SL.

Dave

Thanks for the insights! Actually, I've tried the P2SL for a few hours, and I enjoyed the ride. Unfortunately, there's really just no way for me to do other test rides with other bikes, so I really couldn't compare. I'd love to travel to do test rides, but it's just not happening within the next few months.

However, having read a lot about how a lot of other things make bigger differences than frame material; and that maybe a hybrid carbon won't make THAT much difference from aluminum in terms of comfort; and that the P2SL is built around 78 degrees as opposed to the other two which are built around 76 degrees; then I guess the choice for me should be clear as day.....

Many thanks!!

If you don't plan on getting low in front, do you really want to ride steep (78 degrees)? I don't know the answer to this question, but you might want to consider it. As I've understood, one reason to get steep is to allow you to get low in front. If you don't get low, would you have more power and be more comfortable at 76 degrees?

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

If you don't plan on getting low in front, do you really want to ride steep (78 degrees)? I don't know the answer to this question, but you might want to consider it. As I've understood, one reason to get steep is to allow you to get low in front. If you don't get low, would you have more power and be more comfortable at 76 degrees?[/reply]
In general, yes. Notwithstanding that there are people who are more comfortable at 76 degrees, this is a very, very small minority. the 78 degrees is more comfortable for the majority of people, whether they are low in the front or not. In fact, the less flexible you are, the more important it becomes to ride steep. Slowman does an interesting spiel for people from time to time, where he puts them on the fit bikt at 75, then 76, 77, 78, 79 degrees. Nobody going through that exercise prefers 75 degrees, very few prefer 76, almost everybody opts for the steeper angles.

Power differences for properly fitted people are zilch, see Kyle et al which shows an overal difference in power over a 180 degree!!! seattube angle range (suspine to prone) of only 6%. So if that whole range only gives you variation of 6%, the 2 degree difference between 76 and 78 won't give you anything. And on top of that, they found that most of the 6% difference was due to the restrictions caused by the harnass the rider was hanging in in the prone position.

---

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

Gerard, thank you very much for your informative reply. I ride steep but not very low, but have been getting lower. I started wondering whether I should ride more slack. However, now that I think about it, I've always been more comfortable steeper, even when higher.

Turtleman, nevermind my question, we have an authoritative answer. Go steep!

HH

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

gerard, do you know how i can find more info about the study you mention where they Kyle and others tested power output over a 180 degree seat tube range? i looked around on the net, but i could find no links or sources for it. thanks.

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

That's a pretty old study, I would think it was published in Cycling Science 15 years ago or so. I have moved too often to still know where I have my copy, but maybe Andrew Coggan has it?

---

Gerard Vroomen
3T.bike
OPEN cycle

"1. P2SL - great reviews, great geometry, aero, but all alumi"

What's wrong with aluminum?

Some aluminum will beat you up on long rides like an IM, depending on the surface you're on. If it's smooth road the whole way though, I don't think there is anything to worry about. However, even with aluminum as well built as a Principia, I notice a distinct "body ache" on rides over ~60 miles compared to my Aegis (which admittedly is probably significantly more comfortable than your average carbon bike as well).

N = 1 and all of that. I've had several aluminum frames previous to the Aegis, and each one was sold after a few 50+ rides that left me unable to function for many hours afterward. Aerodynamically I would prefer something like the original Cervelo P2, but once again, I have little faith in being able to ride it for more than an olympic distance.

Chris

Of those choices, I would go with the P2SL. I have found that the fit, seat, handlerbars and pads, and tire pressure make a bigger impace on comfort than just about anything...unless you are riding a seat tube-less kestrel or a beam bike (which I have not ridden).

The Cervelo will likely give you a better selection of geometry with fewer modifications than either of the other two bikes. It's probably almost as aero as the P3, and is probably very reasonably priced. In the past, there were some who said that the Mercury could not be used with any other tires than a 20mm tire so that might be an issue. I have no experience with the KFactor.

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

if comfort is your concern race on michelin krylion carbons. I have a p2sl and love it but i haven't owned any of the other bikes you listed. I wouldn't get a 76 degree seat tube bike. Have you looked at the QR seduzza? I also know that QR had a round tube ti bike that was cheaper. You may be able to get one of those. Good luck!

Dan
www.aiatriathlon.com

---

http://www.aiatriathlon.com

Check out Tom D's review of the K-factor www.bikesportmichigan.com