For no other reason than at some point I keep saying I'm going to get myself one (but that point never seems to come around...), what's about?
I see Genesis do the Equilibrium Disc, but it's not particularly light, and of course their 953 stuff which is eye-wateringly expensive (and the current crop of Genesis paintjobs are 'orrible). Any others I can wistfully consider?
does the new 18bikes come in on price?
Yeah, probably, but not on looks...
what do you want it too look like??? would a another colour be fine?
that frame is well expensive - is it £1100 with a fork?
I think you are looking at a very small niche within a small niche. There aren't many disc road bikes around yet.
Come back in two or three years and I suspect you will see a few more. As it is IMO Shimano have only just announced a disc brake worth considering.
I want it to look 'classy', which I know isn't terribly helpful.
The 18 bikes one looks a bit utilitarian, which is fine as that's what's it's designed to be. The fork especially is ugly though.
Sounds like something Shand could knock out for you (for a price)
that frame is well expensive - is it £1100 with a fork?
It is a handmade in the UK frame with a high end carbon fork. Pretty realistic price IMHO
Shand cycles?
They offer some beautiful paint schemes too
Rourke could build you something in 853, or stainless if the budget allows.
I want one too (with a threaded bb and tapered headtube in blue) you are not alone!
Edit: ideally less than a grand but a bit posher then the latest cotic offering
Time to head to the bespoke show & have a chat with some builders
IHN - the Monsal is one of our off-the-peg options. If you've a particular look that you're after, then another £200 puts you into custom build options with us- which includes colours etc. Forks are one you can choose too- we've put the Whisky (which I love!) as the option at £1100, but we can offer Enve etc instead.
If you're able to, as RD says - Bespoked would be a great opportunity to chat with some builders!
The problem you'll find is you are in moon on a stick territory. No steel bike will be that light.
If you want light with discs, then go Colnago they are awesome.
How about throwing in an eccentric bottom bracket and a split seat-stay for running a belt. Then you're really setting a challenge for a frame under £1k!
Cheers, Rich
[i]No steel bike will be that light.
[/i]
I realise that, but I'm talking 853 light rather than 651 light. And a skinny fork.
Basically I want the Equilibrium disc but lighter and with a nicer paintjob...
Read the reviews on the Cannondale Synapse then consider the ali 105 version of that bike with the new Shimano RS685 hydraulic discs. It would make a nice winter bike.
I'm just about to start building myself a frame exactly as you describe. Going to use Columbus Life tubing to get a frame weight around the 1700g mark and then pair with some full carbon Columbus forks. Will have 44mm head tube to fit tapered forks, threaded BB and 135mm dropouts so its easier to get disc wheels. I'm looking at around £650 + fork
I can always build you a frame with any spec that you want, bosses, paint colour, etc
If your interested drop me an email (in profile) and I can give you some more info and tell you where I am at, photos of previous frames, etc
I realise that, but I'm talking 853 light rather than 651 light. And a skinny fork.
Moving to 853 will not make much of a difference weight wise. A skinny lightweight fork with discs is a terrible idea due to the forces going through it from the breaking action. If you really must have a steel frame, then get the weight down by sticking a carbon fork on it, and getting light wheels and light finishing kit.
IHN - MemberBasically I want the Equilibrium disc but lighter and with a nicer paintjob...
realistically, replacing the main-tubes with thinner 853 might save a whopping 300g, probably less if you to keep a similar stiff-but-springy ride.
my non-disc equilibrium weighs 2050g, if we guesstimate that the disc-ready frame weighs 2100g, would 1800g be 'light enough'?
would you be able to tell the difference? - or is it a case of: you'd 'know' and that's reason enough...?
(i'm like that with handlebars)
Does 853 weigh much less than 631?
How light do steel frames go anyway? I remember a Sintesi and that Salsa claiming 1400gm.
Usually 1700gm or so tho.
cynic-al - MemberDoes 853 weigh much less than 631?
it weighs exactly the same, er, or were you being sarcastic?
it's a bit stronger, so you can use a bit less, but it's difficult to do that without reducing stiffness, and it's difficult to to do that without changing a frame's nature, and the thing about equilibrium* frames is that they ride beautifully.
(*other lovely frames are available)
I just built a Columbus Life road frame in a medium size and this came up as 1650g and thats with a 44mm head tube. Tube weights for something like Columbus Spirit are around 950g where as Zona is around 1450g.
it weighs exactly the same, er, or were you being sarcastic?
a 1kg lump of 853 may have the same volume as a 525 lump, but once the tubes are formed and manipulated to the limit of the material 853 will have the potential to be lighter.
Not even that much, even if you go risky-thin on the walls. 853 on road bikes is of limited use in some respects if you want to keep some stiffness (dia) and don't want really thin walls that become dent-prone (appreciated that dent resistance is hard to quantify in use, drop it and it may dent whatever the tube). Basically by the time you get a reasonable (imo/ime) stiffness the durability is there with good old cr-mo, never mind 853. So you're into wall thickness tuning for 100-200g really, or custom bikes where the spring/stiffness/weight can be more finely tuned for you if you're a lighter rider - skinnier tubes and thin walls.replacing the main-tubes with thinner 853 might save a whopping 300g,
Steel with discs won't ever be light but it should be within a 500ml water bottle's worth of a fair-weight non disc bike, and a steel fork offsets some weight gain over carbon (350g?) by not needing a 44mm ID head tube.
So what's the likely weight difference between a steel discy roady and a carbon discy roady?
Well take something like the Planet X XLS Shimano 105 Cyclocross Bike which they say has a frame weight of 1223g and forks of 769g so lets call that 2000g
Im planning on using a Columbus Mud Disc fork which is 450g and hopefully the frame should be around 1800g - 1900g so all in 2350g. These are estimated weights but should know in a couple of weeks when the forks are back in stock.
To be fair I am using forks that are loads lighter then the planet x ones so its not a totally fair comparison.
and a steel fork offsets some weight gain over carbon (350g?) by not needing a 44mm ID head tube.
May I ask WTF are you making the carbon fork out of? and what you are making you headtube out of?
http://enve.com/products/components/road-disc-forkrdd/
435grams
http://enve.com/products/components/road-2-0-forkrd2/
350grams
So you gain 85grams to gain disc mounts on a carbon fork.
If you can find a steel fork and they are very rare they are up in the 700+ gram range if you can find them. going from a 1 1/8th headtube to 44mm doesn't add that much weight. Will also point out you don't need a 44mm headset for a carbon fork, they do make them in 1 1/8th as well.
Disc will weigh more than non disc, but realistically you'll be using a carbon fork regardless. you will gain about a 1/2lb to a 1lb overall to get the discs.
I was weighing up an Equilibrium a few weeks ago, but I've got to let the CC cool off a bit.
I was surprized at how external cup headsets have almost disappeared when I was looking for a road frame that was disc brake compatible. I don't want an intergrated HS, but it looks as if my choices are dwindling fast.
I ended up looking at Genesis, but for over half a bag O'sand, the equilibrium aint cheap.
mrmo- Maybe you mis-read or I wasn't clear, 350g is a typical difference between an average carbon road disc fork and a steel road disc fork - say 450-500 vs 800-850g.
Head tubes, 50mm OD vs 37mm OD steel. +/- 80-90g on a typical HT stack height. Not a lot but potentially more than wall thickness step down gained between grades of tube.
The comparison was that typically people look for a taper-carbon modern fork compatible head tube to save weight on the fork. Availability aside, there's loads of custom builders making steel forks.
Agreed, ie sod all imo. If the riding you do means discs are a good feature than a few 100g isn't an issue really. I'd chose them on function and the weight is just an end result of that.you will gain about a 1/2lb to a 1lb overall to get the discs.
[i]I don't want an intergrated HS[/i]
You can get internal headsets which have all of the advantages of external without adding stack height?
The problem is that more and more forks are coming in tapered variety and especially when they have a carbon steerer. Therefore you need to have a larger head tube to take the 1.5" steerer bottom. So that the frame still looks good and the front end isn't too high people are using 44mm head tubes so you can have an integrated head cup.
Cotic have some info on it here: [url= http://www.cotic.co.uk/geek/44mm ]http://www.cotic.co.uk/geek/44mm[/url]
It's worth remembering that saving weight by using a carbon fork on a steel frame, will make the ride more harsh - possibly in excess of 350g worth of weight (if you follow my analogy!).
Also, disc setups are mostly quite a bit heavier than normal road set-ups (unless you go uber-expensive). Mainly because the wheelsets available for discs with 135mm hubs are at least 1800g+ for reasonable money, whereas you can go much lighter non-disc for similar or less money, quite easily. The frame and forks also need a bit of extra beef to cope with the brake forces, so you'll always be carrying more weight than equivalent non-disc bike (unless you spend). For light steel, you quickly hit the law of diminishing returns...
@jameso, maybe I misread... now you have clarified it makes sense....
My take, I am meh about disc brakes on road bikes, but I know it is happening so no point worrying about it. They will weigh a bit more, no real way round that, the frame and the fork will gain some weight, 200grams as a realistic minimum. The nature of road bikes means there really aren't many places to loose weight and offset the gains that discs will impose on frame design. there will also be a weight gain by having two discss, the calipers/disc calipers/tubing/wires/fluids all pretty much cancel out IMO. So a further 200grams?
I think the weight gain is worth it for all-round, all-weather braking performance. I have a disc road bike, and happy to compromise a bit of weight for it. Nice to know my rims won't ever wear out, and certainly gave me a bit more confidence tearing down l'Alpe d'Huez!..and avoiding hitting people/cars/dogs on the commute.
I have seriously considered ringing Jim up at Enigma and seeing if he can do a disc version of the Ethos.
They already do the Ti Evoke as a disc road bike.
they posted some pics up of an Evoke today. Very nice it looks too;
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[url= https://www.facebook.com/enigmabikes ]https://www.facebook.com/enigmabikes[/url]
mrmo, I was pretty neutral about them too, and visually still not a big fan but after riding them a while and trying the new Shimanos I'm a lot more open to it. BB7 SLs, Spyres and Shimano hydros are good brakes, they're starting to look good and it'll improve.
On 'beef' added to frames and forks to cope with discs, it's not a lot (well, to me as a non-weenie). You'll lose the ability to spec really springy fork blades that some like, that most brands don't use anyway (I'm not a fan of more than a subtle amount of fork flex especially on a loaded bike, if I want the comfort I'd rather have bigger tyres), Reynolds blades for example go from 1.0-0.6 wall to 1.1 PG to be disc-ready. % wise that's adding a fair bit, but ~100-120g for a pair of blades is not something I'm too worried about.
General theme here .. if the bike functions well, is stiff enough but not jarring, is durable and has gained 500g to do so, that's ok. Weight is easily measured but over-rated as a method of evaluating a bike's real-world performance.
And that Enigma looks great.
[i]You can get internal headsets which have all of the advantages of external without adding stack height?[/i]
They are semi integrated HSs, I had one on my 2001 TCR. However, the fully integrated HSs usually loose mount the bearings directly into the head tube and as a result, stuff moves about.
Quick and cheap for the manuf's, but not preferred by me.
Ah, yes, just remembered, I was also looking at the disc road rat. But I think I'll, hang back until Shimano release the hydraulic brake, cable operated gears, STi lever they are reported to be developing. rs685 ? I think
sorry, yes - I thought you were saying that it was external or internal with nothing in between like integrated that allows bearings to run in 'hidden' cups.
Salsa Colossal with enve forks was under £500 at Billys recently. No idea if it's "light" however.
Something I'm weighing up at the moment also, some interesting point's raised in this thread, particularly with regard to the suitability of lighter steel's in this application...
The Equilibrium Disc will have carbon forks from next year according to [url= http://road.cc/content/news/112227-genesis-go-carbon-just-forks-now-and-28mm-tyres-2015 ]this article[/url] but the standard bike with more tyre clearance is also tempting... and the new 105 dual pivots are designed to accommodate this size so should provide more than enough power.
Of course none of that helps if you want something this side of summer.