General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 2
 
 
2012-06-08 5:16 AM

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

I really want a tri bike for my first Ironman, Texas 2013.  And I can get one for $2000 by the end of December, giving me four full months to learn it (is this enough to get acquainted with one?).  The Felt B16 2011 fits this price range.  Right now I have a Royal Windsor 2011 Road bike with aerobars and can hold aero for just under a mile before I almost crash ha.  Is that a solid first bike?  I was riding 12 MPH at the beginning of the year and right now I'm around 15 MPH with a highest recorded ride 25 miles at 16.99 MPH.  I have a compact crank and a cassette that has wider jumps but a high range.  If I don't get a tri bike I will switch back my standard crank after my HIM (Pumpkinman, here in Vegas in late October) and a cassette with a smaller range and smaller jumps.

Pros and cons between staying with the road bike vs. the tri bike?  Good, solid choice?  Thanks!



2012-06-08 5:25 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
Assuming the Felt fits you and the way you plan to ride, it is a great bike. However, simply having a tribike is not necessarily going to fix things like inability to stay aero and may actually make that problem worse.

The biggest question I would have from your post is why are you thinking of replacing your compact with a standard?

Shane
2012-06-08 5:28 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
Fit is the key to a tri bike. Get that first.

While you're waiting for it, go take a look at the Felt Mafia thread and see if people think the B16 is a good tri bike

2012-06-08 5:30 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

Well, I JUST started with the aerobars, so I should be good to go in 3-4 months of practice. 

I have the compact with the wider jumps because I live in Vegas with lots of steep up and downhills and I'm starting out this year.  The HIM will be hilly.  After the HIM I should have enough fitness to go to a standard and smaller jumps (which I already have the crank and cassette, it's the one that came with the bike that I've kept) and Texas is flat, so no need for compact/wide.

2012-06-08 6:04 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Champion
19812
50005000500020002000500100100100
MA
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

Stay with compact even if you race IMTX because you will still be living and training in Vegas, right? Only about the top 10% of bike splits or less in tris should be on a standard crank.

Like everyone has said get a fit first.

Felt brand tri bikes are long and low which means they have longer top tube and front end is low.  If you are able to ride in your aero bars for just a mile, doubt a long and lean tri bike would be ideal. They tend to fit folks with longer torso relative to legs. I had a Felt set up for me with a highly reputable fitter when I looked for my new bike. I was on the edge of it fitting and no room to make adjustments as it was to long for me.

2012-06-08 6:29 AM
in reply to: #4251187

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
GatorDeb - 2012-06-08 7:30 AM

I have the compact with the wider jumps because I live in Vegas with lots of steep up and downhills and I'm starting out this year.  The HIM will be hilly.  After the HIM I should have enough fitness to go to a standard and smaller jumps (which I already have the crank and cassette, it's the one that came with the bike that I've kept) and Texas is flat, so no need for compact/wide.



Unless you are planning to go from an average of 16mph to >25mph in four months, stick with the compact. Most triathletes (and many cyclists) would be best served with a compact as opposed to a standard. If you find that there are too many jumps in the cassette for a flatter race, then instead of switching the chainrings, just switch the cassette. Something like an 11-28 for hilly/wind routes and a 12-23 for flatter courses (or 11-21 if it is really flat).

Shane


2012-06-08 6:51 AM
in reply to: #4251186

Expert
1099
1000252525
Broadlands
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

DanielG - 2012-06-08 6:28 AM Fit is the key to a tri bike. Get that first. While you're waiting for it, go take a look at the Felt Mafia thread and see if people think the B16 is a good tri bike

you know...I don't think anyone mentioned the B16 in that thread

2012-06-08 7:03 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Expert
2192
2000100252525
Greenville, SC
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
i picked up a B16 as my first tri bike and i love it; can't beat the features for the price.  however, i would get more comfortable in aero before dropping the $$$ on the tri bike.  
2012-06-08 8:23 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

The only reason I would go to standard would be because I view the crank and the cassette as pairs, so I'll leave the compact crank in and just switch back to my narrower cassette.  I do want it for the narrower jumps, I like to have lower jumps but I need the wider range in this type of terrain, so since the HIM is here I'll leave this cassette for here and switch over the cassette for texas.

I have a VERY short torso and long legs, most of my height (5'4") is legs.  Someone shorter than me will actually be taller if we're sitting down, that's how long my legs are and how short my torso is.

I can post my bike size when I get home, but I replaced the stem with a longer one.  It's not perfect, but serviceable.  I will definitely get a fit first, and I'm sure I'll get comfortable in aero by December

2012-06-08 8:29 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Extreme Veteran
486
100100100100252525
Syracuse, NY
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
also check out the Trek Speed concept 2.5... same price range
2012-06-08 9:23 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Veteran
258
1001002525
South dakota
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
Felt makes excellent bikes, b16 would do nicely if it fits. I have a b14 and love it

Edited by Sdboy2 2012-06-08 9:24 AM


2012-06-08 10:14 AM
in reply to: #4251418

User image

Veteran
503
500
Bedford, NH
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
GatorDeb - 2012-06-08 9:23 AM

I have a VERY short torso and long legs, most of my height (5'4") is legs.  Someone shorter than me will actually be taller if we're sitting down, that's how long my legs are and how short my torso is.

I am certainly not a fitter, but if this is the case, Felt is probably not the best choice for you.  They are generally best for people with longer torsos.  Cannondale, Scott of Blue might be better choices.

I would also recommend a compact crank.  You will not be able to swap cassettes to get the same lower end range that a Compact will give you (unless you are also looking at bikes with 650 wheels).  You can play around with Mike Sherman's Gear Calc to see the differences.

2012-06-08 11:21 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Expert
972
5001001001001002525
Falls Church
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

I have a Felt B16.  Really like it.  I did have to switch out the saddle.

I've not had any experiences with any other tri bikes other than what I tested.  

Might want to look around at prices.  You should be able to pick up a 2011 for less than $2000 if you decide to go that way.

2012-06-08 3:57 PM
in reply to: #4251433

Expert
1099
1000252525
Broadlands
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

BooTri - 2012-06-08 9:29 AM also check out the Trek Speed concept 2.5... same price range

same price range but IMO not a comparable frame/drive train etc. Alu (I know it's a great Alu frame) vs. Carbon and Apex vs Ultegra

The Speed Concept 2.5 is however, very comparable to the S22 from Felt ($1699)

Both Speed Concept and S22 have superb Alu frames and Apex drive train.

Back to OP, from the further discussion since I last viewed I would have to agree Felt may not be the best fit if you are all leg :-

A friend rides a QR, the top tube seems shorter, and I think the Kilo is in the ball park money wise.

2012-06-08 4:05 PM
in reply to: #4251224

User image

Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

gsmacleod - 2012-06-08 1:29 AM
GatorDeb - 2012-06-08 7:30 AM I have the compact with the wider jumps because I live in Vegas with lots of steep up and downhills and I'm starting out this year.  The HIM will be hilly.  After the HIM I should have enough fitness to go to a standard and smaller jumps (which I already have the crank and cassette, it's the one that came with the bike that I've kept) and Texas is flat, so no need for compact/wide.
Unless you are planning to go from an average of 16mph to >25mph in four months, stick with the compact. Most triathletes (and many cyclists) would be best served with a compact as opposed to a standard. If you find that there are too many jumps in the cassette for a flatter race, then instead of switching the chainrings, just switch the cassette. Something like an 11-28 for hilly/wind routes and a 12-23 for flatter courses (or 11-21 if it is really flat). Shane

x2.  Deb, your logic is actually wrong.  Given the same cassette, compact actually has smaller jumps.  Standard provides a higher top end (as well as a higher low end), which for most mere mortals, is outside of our fitness ability.

If it was more available, I would actually suggest that more triathletes go to even smaller chainrings...like 47/32.  People have too big of an ego to accept it though.

2012-06-08 5:38 PM
in reply to: #4252413

User image

Expert
1618
1000500100
Temple, TX
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
I ride a 2011 B16 and love it... but I have short legs and a long torso... so it fits me well.  I had it set up a bit more agressively in aero, took a long while before my neck felt comfie.  The 2011 comes with a standard crank, the 2012 comes with a compact.  I had a different cassette put on to help with the small hills in Texas and so far I'm happy with it.  I definitely would have opted for a compact if it had been offered!  And x2 on getting it for less than $2000, I believe it was $2400 new.  I think it's a great bike for the money....


2012-06-08 6:12 PM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
Ok, so what exactly is a fitting, you go in, pay them a bunch of money, and they measure everything, and then I go to the Internet or here with those numbers and select first the best brand and then the best model under $2000 for me?

Edited by GatorDeb 2012-06-08 6:13 PM
2012-06-08 6:34 PM
in reply to: #4251179

Expert
1099
1000252525
Broadlands
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

A fit can take a couple of forms, some stores have fit machines, or fit bikes of varying varieties that they will use to establish the correct setup. 

Bikes obviously have a range of body dimensions within the size, so a 58 Felt will fit more than my reach/torso/leg etc with the adjustability.  But there are limits to that, so you will have an initial assessment where you will no doubt be given an idea of what frame size/dimensions can be adjusted to your size/shape/weight.  

Once you purchase the bike, you can then have the shop do a true fit, they will optimize the bike set up for you, make it as optimal for racing while listening to you for optimum ride comfort.  Then any decent fitter should let you come back after a ride in period to adjust the setup with your feedback.

Different fit systems exist, if you google F.I.S.T fit system it will explain on the site that shall not be named all about that Tri specific fit system.

If you intend to purchase the bike at the shop you get the fit done you can often pay for the fit and have the price taken off the bike price.  I did on mine, and I know a lot of others do, so you perhaps don't have to worry about the fit cost being over the bike cost.

It's a very good investment, if you're dropping $2k on a bike, trust me you want to enjoy time in the saddle.

2012-06-08 6:40 PM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

I've seen the Felt B16 2001 as cheap as $1300, though, I think a fit + online order would still be cheaper than buying it at the store.  Now if I can find a store that services it for free ha (do they do that like with cars?).

I'm still a ways off and dropping weight, I'll do it around end of October and spend November and December looking at bikes.

 

Thanks!

2012-06-11 3:10 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

I'm so bummed the Felt is not a good fit   It was a great carbon-based tri bike for the money.  Recommendations for us leggy folks?  The QR Kilo is aluminum-based.  So is the Speed Concept.

Compact crank, narrower cassette, thanks   Since I replaced them both they stayed a combo in my head.  I won't switch it until after my HIM which is here in the hills, I think a narrower cassette would fit Texas better than Vegas.

I wonder if I can't comfortably get in aero because of the short torso, I know the fit is not perfect with just grabbing the handlebars even with the longer stem.



Edited by GatorDeb 2012-06-11 3:13 AM
2012-06-11 6:37 AM
in reply to: #4254717


51
2525
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
GatorDeb - 2012-06-11 9:10 AM

I'm so bummed the Felt is not a good fit   It was a great carbon-based tri bike for the money.  Recommendations for us leggy folks?  The QR Kilo is aluminum-based.  So is the Speed Concept.

Compact crank, narrower cassette, thanks   Since I replaced them both they stayed a combo in my head.  I won't switch it until after my HIM which is here in the hills, I think a narrower cassette would fit Texas better than Vegas.

I wonder if I can't comfortably get in aero because of the short torso, I know the fit is not perfect with just grabbing the handlebars even with the longer stem.

How much difference would there be between a higher end aluminum based frame make against a low end carbon frame??  I would assume the components would be traded off against each other too fit into the price bracket??

Personally I would rather an ally frame with more solid components.  The difference in weight could be more than made up by getting lighter wheels further down the line.



2012-06-11 6:54 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Veteran
660
5001002525
Northern Illinois
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?

Take a look at the Speed Concept 2.5 as someone earlier suggested. Yes, it's an alum frame, but that frame has the same aero design as the much more expensive versions of the Speed Concepts. For a fraction of the $$ you get the benefits of a lot of the research and design that was spent by Trek. If the geometry fits you then you will have an excellent bike for less than $2,000.

2012-06-11 7:10 AM
in reply to: #4254717

User image

Veteran
503
500
Bedford, NH
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
There is nothing wrong with Aluminum frames. Bike weight is also not that important on a tri bike, especially if your races are flat. If you have trouble getting into an aero position because of flexibility or weight issues, you may be better off with a road bike for now. A good fitter should be able to help you with this decision. Canondale and Blue also make bikes with a taller stack.
2012-06-11 11:47 AM
in reply to: #4251179

User image

Regular
1893
1000500100100100252525
Las Vegas, NV
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
Well, I'm 5'4" and 124 lbs, so I don't think I'm THAT heavy lol  And I've been told by massagists (yeah I know masseuses but I like massagists better lol) that I'm very flexible!  I did lose 106 lbs so have a bit of skin left that's not getting operated on for the time being so I don't know if that's what keeps me from aero.
2012-06-11 12:31 PM
in reply to: #4254770

User image

Master
9705
500020002000500100100
Raleigh, NC area
Subject: RE: Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike?
mjsark - 2012-06-11 7:37 AM
GatorDeb - 2012-06-11 9:10 AM

I'm so bummed the Felt is not a good fit   It was a great carbon-based tri bike for the money.  Recommendations for us leggy folks?  The QR Kilo is aluminum-based.  So is the Speed Concept.

Compact crank, narrower cassette, thanks   Since I replaced them both they stayed a combo in my head.  I won't switch it until after my HIM which is here in the hills, I think a narrower cassette would fit Texas better than Vegas.

I wonder if I can't comfortably get in aero because of the short torso, I know the fit is not perfect with just grabbing the handlebars even with the longer stem.

How much difference would there be between a higher end aluminum based frame make against a low end carbon frame??  I would assume the components would be traded off against each other too fit into the price bracket??

Personally I would rather an ally frame with more solid components.  The difference in weight could be more than made up by getting lighter wheels further down the line.

In the event itself, the carbon or aluminum frame won't make a difference for most people asking this question.  During the high volume training for an IM, the carbon frame may be easier on you requiring less recovery time.  In the end, it's probably just a matter of preference.

Regarding swapping out crank and cassette, my local tri store did this for me for free.  I was given credit for the saddle.

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Felt B16 2011 good first tri-bike? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 2