Calibre Gravel bike at Gooutdoors reduced to £555
294°Expired

Calibre Gravel bike at Gooutdoors reduced to £555

15
Found 18th Dec 2017
Including membership at a fiver, I've put it down as £555, but a penny under £550 if you are already a member. A very decent bike as a fast commuter or all-rounder. This would be good enough for 95% percent of peoples riding I reckon, unless you want to take it on the very fastest chaingang club riding, in which case you might want something a bit light, but its not bad at 11 Kilos and could be upgraded with lighter wheels and better brakes in years to come. Looks like people have manage to fit pretty wide 40mm tyres on. 32mm would be pretty perfect for commmuting, and a nice balance between speed, and "jumping off kerbs" ability for rubbish road surfaces.
Community Updates

Groups

15 Comments
Nice bike for the money. Heat.
Not bad spec with 2 x 10 Tiagra groupset, carbon fork, disc brakes. Could have used an 11-32T cassette instead of the 12-28T for wider range and maybe mud guard mounts for commuting, I've yet to work out where the 3rd water bottle mount is.
Babboon2 m ago

Not bad spec with 2 x 10 Tiagra groupset, carbon fork, disc brakes. Could …Not bad spec with 2 x 10 Tiagra groupset, carbon fork, disc brakes. Could have used an 11-32T cassette instead of the 12-28T for wider range and maybe mud guard mounts for commuting, I've yet to work out where the 3rd water bottle mount is.


its on the underside
Old tiagra and not the full groupset, not the best wheels, mechanical disc brakes are not great.

Not sure I'd want to pay any more for this really, its ok but about the right price.
chrisbass2 h, 8 m ago

Old tiagra and not the full groupset, not the best wheels, mechanical disc …Old tiagra and not the full groupset, not the best wheels, mechanical disc brakes are not great.Not sure I'd want to pay any more for this really, its ok but about the right price.



+1 Some of the components aren't the greatest - but OK at that price.
Brilliant for the money. Most this price are poor, brakes I'd upgrade that's all
great value, breakes fitted with crosstop levers too.
If the bike is meant to have the option to go off road at least light off roading why has it got a carbon fork? Seems vulnerable to impacts drops etc. I would of thought for cyclocross and gravel bikes a strong chromoly fork would be better.

Hard to find any information on the go outdoors site about bike warranty and much of the specification for bikes is very vague. Difficult to consider one of their bikes with so little information on the site. No idea what the bike is rated to weight wise and how long the guarantee is. The full specification is missing lots of information. I've heard many of their bikes are good especially the boss nut and beast nut but their web site does not inspire confidence at all seems quite amateur.
bonzobanana2 h, 58 m ago

If the bike is meant to have the option to go off road at least light off …If the bike is meant to have the option to go off road at least light off roading why has it got a carbon fork? Seems vulnerable to impacts drops etc. I would of thought for cyclocross and gravel bikes a strong chromoly fork would be better. Hard to find any information on the go outdoors site about bike warranty and much of the specification for bikes is very vague. Difficult to consider one of their bikes with so little information on the site. No idea what the bike is rated to weight wise and how long the guarantee is. The full specification is missing lots of information. I've heard many of their bikes are good especially the boss nut and beast nut but their web site does not inspire confidence at all seems quite amateur.


Carbon is lighter and stronger material than steel - the point of failure is the dramatic bit on carbon as it is complete failure whereas with the metals they contiously fatigue during use (more than likely beyond your lifetime in context of steel).

google.co.uk/amp…rue.

Also some debates with both steel and carbon on reducing buzz but tbh more in tyres and pressures - all agree fixed aluminium forks are pants.

However with drop handles I can't imagine most aren't wanting to do 6 foot drops on this - I say most as one individual springs to mind that woukd accept the challenge.

There is a review of this bike on bike radar - 3 out of 5 when priced at £699.
Bertz997 h, 4 m ago

Carbon is lighter and stronger material than steel - the point of …Carbon is lighter and stronger material than steel - the point of failure is the dramatic bit on carbon as it is complete failure whereas with the metals they contiously fatigue during use (more than likely beyond your lifetime in context of steel).https://www.google.co.uk/amp/digg.com/video/how-much-stronger-carbon-fibre-is-than-steel?amp=true.Also some debates with both steel and carbon on reducing buzz but tbh more in tyres and pressures - all agree fixed aluminium forks are pants. However with drop handles I can't imagine most aren't wanting to do 6 foot drops on this - I say most as one individual springs to mind that woukd accept the challenge.There is a review of this bike on bike radar - 3 out of 5 when priced at £699.


Wouldn't want carbon forks or aluminium forks on such a bike. Chromoly or even standard high tensile steel would by my preference. Often carbon forks only have 1 or 2 year warranty even if the frame is 10, 15, 25 year or even lifetime guarantee. It seems a weak point. I'm not suggesting 6 foot or even 3 foot drops but any sort of drop could be significant considering people have had carbon forks fail while just riding normally on the road hence why the warranties are so short. I might feel different if the Calibre had a long warranty on the forks but I have no idea what the warranty is.

To me the Voodoo Limba at Halfords is a better bike, yes it's heavier but much stronger frame and forks plus a faster cassette and you often see it go close to £300 when an offer is on. Most important fit for purpose as a cyclocross bike that will take abuse. I'm a little confused about the difference between cyclocross and gravel bikes assume looking at the Calibre gravel bikes are not expected to handle such rough ground and appear weaker with a lower to the ground crankset so have less clearance. In which case with it looking to be only a marginal improvement in strength over a standard road bike I'd definitely want a cyclocross bike. Not only is it much cheaper but will probably last much longer and gives you the freedom to travel on more varied terrain and a fantastically strong commuting bike. Almost seems like any road bike fitted with larger profile tyres can be a gravel bike.
My own preference would be the other way - my Croix De Fer 20 came with a chomoly forks and in all the forums the first upgrade people go for is the carbon to improve both weight and strength.

The individual that sprang to mind above has the same bike, has upgraded to carbon and takes it into situations I would only consider with my hard tail (2 weeks off roading in finland with it was last it me I saw him grinning at me about it).
Edited by: "Bertz99" 19th Dec 2017
bonzobanana2 h, 46 m ago

Wouldn't want carbon forks or aluminium forks on such a bike. Chromoly or …Wouldn't want carbon forks or aluminium forks on such a bike. Chromoly or even standard high tensile steel would by my preference. Often carbon forks only have 1 or 2 year warranty even if the frame is 10, 15, 25 year or even lifetime guarantee. It seems a weak point. I'm not suggesting 6 foot or even 3 foot drops but any sort of drop could be significant considering people have had carbon forks fail while just riding normally on the road hence why the warranties are so short. I might feel different if the Calibre had a long warranty on the forks but I have no idea what the warranty is. To me the Voodoo Limba at Halfords is a better bike, yes it's heavier but much stronger frame and forks plus a faster cassette and you often see it go close to £300 when an offer is on. Most important fit for purpose as a cyclocross bike that will take abuse. I'm a little confused about the difference between cyclocross and gravel bikes assume looking at the Calibre gravel bikes are not expected to handle such rough ground and appear weaker with a lower to the ground crankset so have less clearance. In which case with it looking to be only a marginal improvement in strength over a standard road bike I'd definitely want a cyclocross bike. Not only is it much cheaper but will probably last much longer and gives you the freedom to travel on more varied terrain and a fantastically strong commuting bike. Almost seems like any road bike fitted with larger profile tyres can be a gravel bike.


Claris gears on the Limba are far inferior to the Tiagra on this and, at the current price of £450, isn't exactly much cheaper. I take your point about offer prices because Halfords will probably reduce the price on the Limba at some point but surely you need to look at the prevailing prices if a person is looking to buy now.
Edited by: "stephenashforth" 19th Dec 2017
Bertz9911 h, 12 m ago

My own preference would be the other way - my Croix De Fer 20 came with a …My own preference would be the other way - my Croix De Fer 20 came with a chomoly forks and in all the forums the first upgrade people go for is the carbon to improve both weight and strength.The individual that sprang to mind above has the same bike, has upgraded to carbon and takes it into situations I would only consider with my hard tail (2 weeks off roading in finland with it was last it me I saw him grinning at me about it).


I understand the weight upgrade but surely with chromoly forks often having up to lifetime guarantees and carbon forks mostly having short guarantees it can hardly be described as a strength upgrade. It's pretty clear many carbon forks fail.

Just look at Decathlon and their bikes which is typical of many suppliers. Lifetime warranty on steel forks, 2 year warranty on carbon. Why would a stronger more durable product have a short guarantee compared to lifetime for a weaker product. It's clear Decathlon know the steel forks won't fail. No one offers a lifetime warranty on something unless they are pretty sure it is almost unbreakable under most situations. Same with carbon frames vs steel, lifetime on steel/aluminium but 5 years on the main frame for a carbon frame. So even the carbon frame warranty is much longer than the forks. Also Decathlon have very low weight limits compared to competitors. They set it at 100kg minus the weight of the bike, accessories etc. For a 15kg bike that is 85kg or less which is 50kg less than the full recommended 136kg/300lb weight limit of the bicycle safety standard for non-performance bikes. Their warranty is voided anyway if you ride above their weight limits. You'd think Decathlon having such low weight limits they could extend the warranty on their carbon forks if such forks were stronger. Also remember with carbon its far easier to show abuse and prevent warranty claims too due to the way carbon breaks or shows damage. Steel can hide abuse much more easily. I'm not saying that a carbon fork can't be stronger than a steel fork but there is a huge amount of evidence on the side of steel especially with people still riding steel bikes 70-80 years old, many post ww2 bikes still on the road.

decathlon.co.uk/tri…tml

decathlon.co.uk/tri…tml

Lastly saw this about a Saracen bike;

bikeradar.com/for…820

Same stable as Genesis both from Madison. The older Saracen frames before they went to the wall were made by Merida but don't know who makes the Madison Saracen bikes but that looks really dodgy the way the frame has fractured. Prefer good old over-engineering myself. The Carrera and Voodoo range at Halfords may not be the lightest frames but they rarely break where as the more performance focused and lighter Boardman range has had some frame failures and recalls.
bonzobanana11 h, 24 m ago

I understand the weight upgrade but surely with chromoly forks often …I understand the weight upgrade but surely with chromoly forks often having up to lifetime guarantees and carbon forks mostly having short guarantees it can hardly be described as a strength upgrade. It's pretty clear many carbon forks fail.Just look at Decathlon and their bikes which is typical of many suppliers. Lifetime warranty on steel forks, 2 year warranty on carbon. Why would a stronger more durable product have a short guarantee compared to lifetime for a weaker product. It's clear Decathlon know the steel forks won't fail. No one offers a lifetime warranty on something unless they are pretty sure it is almost unbreakable under most situations. Same with carbon frames vs steel, lifetime on steel/aluminium but 5 years on the main frame for a carbon frame. So even the carbon frame warranty is much longer than the forks. Also Decathlon have very low weight limits compared to competitors. They set it at 100kg minus the weight of the bike, accessories etc. For a 15kg bike that is 85kg or less which is 50kg less than the full recommended 136kg/300lb weight limit of the bicycle safety standard for non-performance bikes. Their warranty is voided anyway if you ride above their weight limits. You'd think Decathlon having such low weight limits they could extend the warranty on their carbon forks if such forks were stronger. Also remember with carbon its far easier to show abuse and prevent warranty claims too due to the way carbon breaks or shows damage. Steel can hide abuse much more easily. I'm not saying that a carbon fork can't be stronger than a steel fork but there is a huge amount of evidence on the side of steel especially with people still riding steel bikes 70-80 years old, many post ww2 bikes still on the road.https://www.decathlon.co.uk/triban-100-road-bike-id_8377732.htmlhttps://www.decathlon.co.uk/triban-500-se-road-bike-id_8306187.htmlLastly saw this about a Saracen bike;http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40012&t=13086820Same stable as Genesis both from Madison. The older Saracen frames before they went to the wall were made by Merida but don't know who makes the Madison Saracen bikes but that looks really dodgy the way the frame has fractured. Prefer good old over-engineering myself. The Carrera and Voodoo range at Halfords may not be the lightest frames but they rarely break where as the more performance focused and lighter Boardman range has had some frame failures and recalls.



Beg to differ on manufacturers offering lifetime warranty on products they know will not fail - prime example is Cannondale who had the nickname for a while of crack and fail - mainly as they put their tolerances to the limit a decade ago - all original purchasers still with those frames have their lifetime warranty (25 years if I remember correctly).

Second what is lifetime - different manufacturers will use this term differently - under consumer protection if not explicitly stated it is 6 years - Giant, for example, give 10 years on all rigid forks regardless of material and plenty of others out there that quote. The interesting bit is which quote Framesets or just frames (Cervelo for e.g.).

In decathlons case it could be quite easily they are looking at weight with carbon and therefore engineering to more fine tolerances for that. Whereas their demographic for steel they know weight is less of a factor. This bike on the other hand is on the heavier side.

As to strength - feel free to look it up - the term is tensile strength - gave you the prop shaft above with Hammond - that only survived 3 fold to its steel counterpart- the difference in tensile strength between the two materials is closer to 8 fold but less material is also used in that prop example to still hit the projected tolerances.

Of course prop shafts, airplanes (got to love the new wing designs not possible with alloys fatigue), F1, top end cranks on bikes all use carbon for very good reasons and as I have stated would, imo, would be a positive in this bikes example - albeit if you want a pre war design feel free to fill your boots, you will certainly get plenty of exercise going that route. Suspect the hub and wheels will be your biggest issues using those off-road.

As to a known material and 70/80 years - now come on how do you propose carbon hitting that requirement? Apparently there are some examples out there at 20 years but how carbon is being utilised has also evolved.

Feel free to browse the forums on those who have had hidden rust and fatigue that have failed with steel, plenty of examples out there. Reality though, the probability of fork failure is still slim plenty of other things are far more common in failures (getting away from carbon's first introduction that is).

The fork manufacturers themselves state the inspection for all types should still be the same - the difference is in a crash under carbon on failure is that it is a catastrophic event. The important bit to note there though is you are already in a crash situation.

Also not too sure why you are bringing up a Saracen Tenant 3 with a alloy frame failure when the Croix de Fer is a steel frame with some noted pedigree, like having the record for circumnavigating the globe for a short period. Although you seem happy with alloy frames but dubious on the carbon fork!

Anyway bored now so bobbing on - the only summary I have if anyone looking at this deal is it seems fair albeit not overly exciting - will make some a fair bike if it suits their requirements although some other examples out there on wiggle that are comparable (including a tiagra groupset with a steel fork for bonzo).
Edited by: "Bertz99" 20th Dec 2017
As ever in internet debates we will agree to differ but will look again when carbon forks start getting long warranties to match steel and forum posts about carbon forks failing become a rarity.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text