With all the publicity surrounding Norman Stadler’s sensatonal Ironman ride and win and the recent threads related to the Kalibur I wanted to throw my .2 cents in.
Full disclosure: We sell Kuota framesets at Bikesport, the bike shop I own.
In working today with jk_allen13 from England and in a brief ride on the bike (admittedly a very bad means of evaluation) and also working with several other customers including local fast guy John Sotir who is joining me in Thailand for Laguna Phuket I have found the following:
This IS one of the best riding and proportioned triathlon frames I have ever tried. shock absorption with a Renn disk rear clincher and a Nimble front clincher on Continental TPS Attack/Force tires at 115psi is excellent.
Drivetrain performance of this frame is also very good with rear shifting beiing repeatable and responsive to shift lever input. No mush. Front shifting is sketchy on this bike due to a custom 54tooth chainring made without pick-up rivets or shift gates. I emphasize this has nothing to do with the frame. Matter of fact, I wager the stiffness of the front derailleur mounting point probably enhances the shift performance up front. It would probably be worse on another frame.
The front is low- this is a small and the head tube is only 90 mm. The geometry chart claims the top tube is 51.5 cm lonf. Ignore it. It is wrong. By even the most conservative or “short” interpretation of center to center the top tube measures no less than 52.5 cm with it being more realistically a full 53 cm long. This also contribute to the stability of the bike but you do have to have the torso length for this frame. Julian is a little short on the torso department and long in the legs so we are down to a 90 mm stem with the elbow pads of his new Hed aerobars at the most rearward orientation.
So far, so good. There are more headset spacers than I prefer by far and we are working on this. If you want a low “Stadleresque” position you will have no problems with the Kalibur.
Overall, I am impressed enough to want one for myself. Another huge benefit of the Kalibur: They exist. I can deliver one to you today as can any Kuota dealer.
If they look at the product empiraclly and pragmatically, I think most people would find that it is a very, very nice bike. Certainly among the very best available.
Tom, thanks for the write up. It surprises me how easy you dismiss the incorrect top tube measurement. Would it have been a different story if you weren’t able to achieve a good fit for jk_allen13? In fitting a 5’2" little friend of mine I would have had to find another frame if her bike had come with a 53cm tt rather than a 51cm as needed. Do you think Kuota will be correcting their website? This is one sexy bike, but a ill-fitting sexy bike is no fun.
And what is the actual weight on the frame? (ps: I’m still waiting for the weight of the P3SL you wrote about the other day) I know, weight is not everything, but it is real.
I’ll see what Julian is at seat tube angle wise right now. It is reefed all the way forward but we have enough front center to make the bike stable in this orientation.
I’m ot surprised at all by the discrepancy in the geometry charts. It is because “center to center” menas something different to everyone. There is no “standard” for bike gemoetry measurements.
We find that few manufactures charts are anywhere near accurate.
The reason a person may need a custom chainring is to accomodate a specific bolt circle, tooth count, or drivetrain peculiarity.
We frequently modify existing chainrings to work with a drivetrain. John Cobb was the guy who told us how to do it. On the FSA lenticular 54 and 55 tooth time trial chainrings we machine approximately .010" from the rear tooth surface on a lathe to make the chainring compatible with Shimano Dura-Ace 10 speed.
I don’t know about any of jerks erlier postings, but he was on the right track on the one i think you’re refering to.
I’m sure the kuota is a beautiful looking bike. I’m sure it even rides well. That has nothing to do with the quality of construction and engineering that went into it’s making.
Even zipp, a company known by many for making high quality rims in the usa, has several design/manufacturing flaws. Crack one open and look for yourself; the rim bed is uneven as hell (causing rims to become wavy, spoke nipples to improperly seat, and for the rim itself to crack, the internal layups of carbon are uneven due to a poor moulding/bladder process; on the sidewalls of the rim in the brake-tire bed transition, the fibers are drawn up, pinched, and then sanded off (a big no no with carbon) resulting in JRA cracks that zipp rarely warranties (if they have even figured out that is the reason they see this problem so much).
Contrast that with reynolds rims who eventually will likely end up making most of its carbon in the orient (working with carbon is simple, but labor intensive nonetheless, so a lot of money is saved moving overseas). While the idea of a full carbon clincher (or a carbon clincher period) is stupid, they do much higher quality and better thought out work than zipp does.
Are you also planning on carrying the GURU crono when available? I have seen some of the pictures from Interbike and am quite impressed. I would be curious on your thoughts when comparing the Kuoto Kalibur, GURU crono, and P3 carbon when you have them all in your shop.
We are talking about the same post by jerk. I was actually being somewhat tongue in cheek. And, I pretty much agree with what the jerk had to say, in theory anyway. But, jerk is also an unknown commodity on this forum whereas Tom D is a known and trusted poster. Could be the jerk knows exactly what s/he is talking about, could be otherwise.
It seems like a minority of serious cyclists only accept the absolute ‘best’ with respect to frame quality and materials. If the carbon isn’t the same stuff used in F1 racing or space exploration, it isn’t good enough. Witness a Parlee Z1 or Serotta Ottrott.
I think that just because a material may not be good enough for F1 racing by no means disqualifies it for use as a framebuilding material. The demands are distinctly different.
I think jerks ultimate point is well founded: just because it’s carbon, doesn’t mean it’s better or even good.
The Kuota I saw at Interbike looked awesome … a very pretty bike. I have no idea about ride quality or what the guts of the frame looked like. Ditto Zipp.
I totally agree with you about the stupidity of a carbon clincher? Why bother?