De acordo com o prometido, aqui fica a última mensagem feita pelo meu amigo P., sobre a Rose XEON RS 5000.
Na próxima quinta-feira, publicarei uma mensagem sobre um outro livro de cicloturismo e, na subsequente, uma mensagem sobre uma rota de cicloturismo mundialmente famosa: a Coast to Coast, no Reino Unido, feita por um outro amigo meu!
Boas leituras!
**** **** ****
Before getting into the actual review, I mention that Rose make all types of bikes and use a wide range of materials. Road bikes come in either aluminium or carbon fibre. The XEON RS range is a ‘cousin’ to the CRS range which, as suggested by the letter ‘C’, is made of carbon fibre. All reviews suggest that the XEON CRS and Rose’s other carbon fibre bicycles are also seriously worth considering.
Na próxima quinta-feira, publicarei uma mensagem sobre um outro livro de cicloturismo e, na subsequente, uma mensagem sobre uma rota de cicloturismo mundialmente famosa: a Coast to Coast, no Reino Unido, feita por um outro amigo meu!
Boas leituras!
**** **** ****
Before getting into the actual review, I mention that Rose make all types of bikes and use a wide range of materials. Road bikes come in either aluminium or carbon fibre. The XEON RS range is a ‘cousin’ to the CRS range which, as suggested by the letter ‘C’, is made of carbon fibre. All reviews suggest that the XEON CRS and Rose’s other carbon fibre bicycles are also seriously worth considering.
It may be of interest to list the spec
of my bike. This follows some customisation, notably the wheels:
Frames
|
7005
T6 Ultralight Aluminium, triple-butted, anodized black, 57cm
|
|
Fork
|
XEON
Modulus Fullcarbon 11/8"-1.5", UD-carbon
|
|
Wheels
|
Mavic
Cosmic Carbone SLS WTS
|
|
Chainset
|
Campagnolo
Chorus 36/52, 11-speed, carbon, 175mm
|
|
Rear Derailleur
|
Campagnolo
Chorus 11-speed
|
|
Sprocket
|
Campagnolo
Chorus, standard, 12-27
|
|
Shift Brake Levers
|
Campagnolo
Chorus 2-/11-speed, black
|
|
Chain
|
Campagnolo
Chorus 11-speed
|
|
Front Derailleur
|
Campagnolo
Chorus Chorus 2-/11-speed
|
|
Rim Brake
|
Campagnolo
Chorus D-Skeleton
|
|
Seat Post
|
Ritchey
WCS Carbon Monolink FlexLogic, black, 27,2mm
|
|
Saddle
|
Selle
Italia SLS Kit Carbonio Monolink, black matt/middle stripe black matt,
Standard
|
|
Handlebar Tape
|
fi´zi:k
Microtex, black + fizik logo
|
|
Stem
|
Ritchey
WCS 4 Axis, black/matt, 110mm
|
|
Spacers
|
Xtreme
Carbon Spacer 15mm(1x5mm+1x10mm)
|
I mentioned in ‘Part 1’ that the Xeon RS
is a modern aluminium bike. This essentially means some thought and design has
gone into it. It is not simply the lower end of the range that Rose Versand
make. My understanding is that the intention behind the RS range was to offer a
non-carbon fibre alternative to those who want to race. As such, and being a
modern aluminium bike, it borrows some features of carbon fibre frame design.
Therefore, expect not only a fairly wide down tube but also a fairly ‘beefy’ bottom
bracket shell, suitable to house an integrated BB86 unit. Of course ultimately
the aim is to provide stiffness in the area. Not too long ago ‘beefy’ bottom
bracket and aluminium frame implied a lot of extra weight. Modern alloys,
welding and butted tubes means that this is not the case.
The XEON RS range is made of aluminium in Taiwan. Up until 2014 (i.e. including the bike I am riding) 7005 / 7051 aluminium was used. [I believe the 2015 range is made of 6066 aluminium which allows for thinner tube walls and therefore lighter frames]. This resulted in my 57cm frame weighing 1,205g (my own measurement), light and competitive with some similarly priced carbon fibre frames. Rose claim that the 2015 6066 version is very close to 1 kg for the frame; that is impressive! My opinion is that bikes made in the Far East should not be dismissed. It is true that you can get some crap, but it must also be kept in mind that the Far East, particularly Taiwan (courtesy of Giant bikes) has decades of experience is mass bike production.
The fork is Rose’s own design and is shared with the CRS range. It is a very light, full carbon steerer, 330g fork. As is standard these days (and f**ck you very much bicycle industry for forever changing fork steerer widths etc and other component sizes ) 1.1/8 inch (28.6 mm) at the top and 1.1/2 inch (38.1 mm) at the bottom. Badmouthing the cycling industry aside, I actually like this head tube sizing. I ride 1 inch and 1 1/8 inch bicycles. I do feel that the thinner at the top and lower at the bottom head tube offers that little bit extra in stability. Of course this also assumes that everything is assembled solidly and competently. This is the case on the RS.
The riding experience is much improved if the front end of the
bicycle is solid and responsive. To explain this is less jargonistic terms,
imagine moving at speed on a long descend with bends. The narrower diameter
head tubes often add a sense that the handlebars and fork are too bouncy, not a
good feeling when going fast. Additionally, the extra tube width helps to make
steering more responsive. On the RS you definitely get the feel that as soon as
you turn the handlebars there is a response. Whatever the scientifically
measurable advantages the RS’ head tube adds to the ride, it surely adds a
confidence boost associated to steering which is invaluable.
The RS has very thin seat stays. This is
nothing new in the bicycle industry and is widely used by a variety of
manufactures, particularly on carbon fibre frames. See, for example, various
Cervelo and BMC models. I find it optically pleasing. More importantly, it is a
good way to add – that bastard of a word – compliance. Real bicycle science
shows that some flexibility in the seat stays does not measurably affect the
efficiency of the power transfer which makes your bike move forward. I am not
sure how this works, and I won’t pretend too much that I do.
However, make the rear end of the bicycle too stiff and the machine will bounce on the road. The more time spent bouncing, the less time the rubber on the tyres is in contact with the road surface propelling your forward. Long story short, and before I get lost in my own pseudo-scientific explanations about bicycles, the RS is a very comfortable ride. No doubt in my mind that the seat stays add to this experience. I can confidently compare the ride to good quality carbon fibre frames and equally confidently say that it is more comfortable than my old aluminium Bianchi.
However, make the rear end of the bicycle too stiff and the machine will bounce on the road. The more time spent bouncing, the less time the rubber on the tyres is in contact with the road surface propelling your forward. Long story short, and before I get lost in my own pseudo-scientific explanations about bicycles, the RS is a very comfortable ride. No doubt in my mind that the seat stays add to this experience. I can confidently compare the ride to good quality carbon fibre frames and equally confidently say that it is more comfortable than my old aluminium Bianchi.
Another important contributor to the RS’
comfort is the 27.2mm seat post. The bicycle industry has gone up and down with
the diameter of this part of a bicycle. Different diameters have different
merits or are necessary depending on the rest of the structure, and / or
intended use of the bike. However, the easiest way to put some ‘compliance’
under your backside is to have a smaller diameter seat post. Wider diameters
tend to be stiffer, in an area where too much stiffness is not helpful.
The Campgnolo Chorus 11 is an excellent groupset and certainly a well-matched companion to the RS frame. With the Chorus you get all the functionality of the more expensive Record / Super Record groupsets. The only tangible difference is the weight. There are about 220g difference between the Super Record and Chorus. The weight saving will cost you an extra EUR 1000. You decide if that is necessary. The great thing about the top three groupsets offered by Campgnolo are that you can shift-up three gears and shift-down three gears if you need it. I went for a 52/36 crankset, however, 53/39 and 50/36 were available. All my other bikes had 53/39. Pushing past the middle part of my 30s, and starting to possibly lose that extra spring in my legs, I thought that a 52/36 would be an appropriate ‘step-down’.
Coupled with the 12-27 eleven speed cassette this provides me with
ample options for all kinds of terrain. In an ideal world I would have a 53/36
or I would own a 53/39 and a 50/36 crankset and swap as needed. The latter is
possible, but not a cost I want to bear at this time. The former has been
tried, but achieving a 53/36 ratio is technically challenging. I prefer to go
riding rather than spend (more) time on fiddling with my front derailleur. (PS: Shimano’s and Campagnolo’s new four-arm
cranksets now mean that you no longer have to swap the entire 53/39 for a
compact crankset. The BCD of the four-arm cranksets allows one to swap standard,
semi-compact and compact ratios on the same cranks simply by changing
chainrings. Much cheaper, assuming you already have a four-arm crank).
However, let us not forget the
all-important (if not most important) contribution the wheels have. As indicated
in the bike spec listed earlier, I got my bicycle with an upgrade of Mavic Cosmic Carbone SLS WTS,
compared to Campagnolo Zondas which come with the RS 5000 as standard. This pair
of Mavics is a deep rim (52mm)/ aero
rim. It is the lowest priced Mavic aero wheelset but still retails at around
EUR 850 to UER 1,000. As the name suggests, these wheels have some carbon fibre
on them, but are not entirely made of this; alloy plays the most vital
structural role. I will not dwell on the Mavic SLS WTS in this review. I will
say that they noticeable add speed, particularly on flat ground. The down side,
is that they are stiff and also add a fair amount of bounce when the road
surface is not very smooth. This has an effect mostly on the comfort of the
ride. Unless these wheels are used on endless kilometres of very rough and
badly maintained tarmac, the net speed gain will be much greater than the loss
of speed caused by bouncing around.
For
the sake of comparison, I have also extensively ridden the RS with a pair of
Campagnolo Neutron Ultra (usually retail between EUR 600 and EUR 700. I bought
these in late 2013 and, ever confusingly, are the 2014 model. These wheels are
the best I have ever had. They are shallow rim (23mm deep), lightweight (less
than 1,500g without tyres and inner tubes) and bomb-proof. They have a carbon
fibre hub while the rest of the construction is alloy. Most importantly, you
can effortlessly get them to start rolling and similarly effortlessly get them
to continue spinning. The Mavic SLS WTS will keep help me to move fast on the
flatter parts. However, when you have proper mixed terrain (for those in the
local area in Portugal, throw Montejunto in the mix) the Neutron Ultra will
spin fast uphill as well as on the flat. Additionally, the Neutron Ultra
strikes a good balance between stiff and comfortable. Descend as fast as you
can or accelerate off the saddle without feeling the front wheel flexing
excessively (the stiff part). When I added the Neutron Ultra’s to the RS the
bicycle was able to eat-up and smoothen out those rougher roads, the ones which
years of neglect have left full on holes, cracks and bumps.
I
should point out that the reason I did not go with the Campgnolo Zonda offered
with the RS 5000 at no extra price was the fact I already own a pair which I
use on the Bianchi. Again, this is not the place to review the Zonda’s but for
the price of EUR 300 to EUR 350 for which they usually retail for, you could
not ask for a better wheelset.
Other
small bits and pieces that I like on the RS include:
-
A bridge between the chainstays, close to the bottom bracket: This is not a new trick but one
which carbon fibre has rendered unnecessary. You tend to see such bridges on
older steel bikes. In older bikes this added piece of metal also served as an
anchoring point for mudguards. As mentioned earlier, the RS is designed for
racing and is not designed to take mudguards. Those who don’t like having a wet
arse will be disappointed.
-
Internal cable routing: From a maintenance point of view, external cabling is much easier to
deal with. However, the ‘clean’ look of internal cabling is vastly cooler. I
could also say more aerodynamic but that 0.5 seconds per 50km you save it
probably will matter to whoever is reading this (disclaimer: these figures were
not obtained in a wind tunnel!). Also, the internal cabling on the RS is
designed to take both Shimano and Campagnolo electronic groupsets, should you
like to swing that way.
-
For Weight Weenies: If you like spending money on getting less (weight), a light pair of
wheels, and carbon stem / handlebars will easily take the weight of the whole
bike to closer to 6kg. However, and this applies to most bikes the majority of
us buy, the super-light wheels alone may cost close to or more than the bike
itself.
So
what are the bad parts of the RS and specifically the RS 5000? Some, but none
too important in my opinion. I list them below:
-
The Monolink saddle system: This is the option I went for; you can get the normal two-rail saddle
if you want. The Monolink is easy to adjust, easier than the traditional seat
post / saddle system. It is also, allegedly, more aero. This is a dubious claim
and not often repeated by wiser people. Too much happens to the air before it
reaches the seat post / saddle joint to make a measurable difference to the
aerodynamics. My gripe is that the Monolink system is more uncomfortable. I
think that the traditional way a seat attaches to a seat post (i.e. using two
rails) allows for more flex and hence a more comfortable ride. Also, as the
market is now, should I break the seat post and or saddle, replacements will
come at a significantly higher cost and difficulty to source. Not to mention
that if you are the happy owner of many bikes, you cannot simply swap-in your favourite
two-rail saddle.
-
It is not carbon fibre: I know that this will be a sticking point for
some. Get over it!
So how does it ride after almost 5,500km?
Amazingly, thanks for asking. I think
describing ‘the feel’ of any bike is highly objective. However, I have never
had a bad moment on the RS. I’m a tall
(1.89m / 72kg) rider and ‘relax’ when I feel that I’m riding aggressively. No
problem for the RS. Fast descends, steep climbs, flat roads, bad roads, good
roads, wet roads etc. all handled aptly. A good bike gives the rider a robust
base and solid feeling; which allows one to push their limits. The RS does this
more than capably. For example, if I am riding a steep uphill, out-of-the-saddle
and full power, I know that as much power as I can hope for is being used to
push the bike forward, and not twisting the rear end, resulting in the brake
pads rubbing on the wheels or even the
wheels touching the seat stays. Going downhill also feels solid; no wobbles and,
as indicated before, the steering is responsive and predictable. Going for flat
road speed? My experience is that on a Sunday morning, before you know it, you
will be overtaking a bunch of fellow cyclists who will be hanging on to your
rear wheel. Assuming that you are physically up for it, the RS will ensure that
none of them will be able to take a turn at the front. Of course that might be
seen as a bad thing; who does not like drafting? But I take infinite pleasure
in having unwanted rear-wheel guests - riding carbon fibre worth as much as
small cars or big motorbikes – who are barely holding on and huffing/puffing
for dear life. (Note to all local
riders: If you want to draft behind someone at least offer a friendly ‘ola’;
it’s a Sunday ride in the Oeste, not the TdF. Leave you silent ‘game-on’ faces
for another time! And please take a turn in the front!)
I’m sure that the RS would also perform
well as a grandfondo / sportive bike. The comfort is there and you can adjust it
to a less race-prone position fairly easily. However, I would say that there
are more directly applicable choices in the market (some from Rose Versand
even) for those wishing to enjoy less furious, long rides.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário