B’Twin Triban 100 Road Bike

KoenM wrote:

Again the muddyfox and the other bikes u linked to ARE NOT the same bike, they have skinny tires, bad brakes, old frame design, old geometry and no mudguard/rack mounts. The Triban is made for gravel/commuting and a bit of road, while the bikes u linked are meant as purely beginner roadbikes and they look horrible! Btw if the frames were that bad they wouldn't have passed the test in flanders (trust me I live there) and it would be in big letter on the website. The pdf u linked to is just a general file about all the bikes, again I wouldn't be worried at all! Btw how many frames and components have u ever seen break because of weight, because I haven't seen any or read any. 

They are clearly not the same bike obviously but many of your criticisms of them clearly aren't true. Certainly the geometry on some of them is as valid and usable as the Triban 100. The Triban 100 has passed it's tests and at the end of them it is rated to a 100kg total load much less than competing bikes. 

People seem to be working hard to defend or ignore actual parts of the Triban 100 spec. I think it's one of those things where we will just have to agree to disagree. The Triban 100 looks total junk to me and absolutely no way would I pay £250 for that with its garbage drivetrain and I just can't see it any other way. Semi-plastic tourney derailleurs and junk freewheels are rubbish on £70 bikes and even more appalling on £250 bikes. I honestly don't think if a low end brand came up with the same spec and same low weight limits and £250 pricing it would get a 4/5 review it would likely be 1 or 2 out of 5. That's just the way I see it but then I have absolutely no brand loyalty I look at bikes indivdually. based on their components and specification.

bonzobanana wrote:

ly not the same bike obviously but many of your criticisms of them clearly aren't true. Certainly the geometry on some of them is as valid and usable as the Triban 100. The Triban 100 has passed it's tests and at the end of them it is rated to a 100kg total load much less than competing bikes. 

People seem to be working hard to defend or ignore actual parts of the Triban 100 spec. I think it's one of those things where we will just have to agree to disagree. The Triban 100 looks total junk to me and absolutely no way would I pay £250 for that with its garbage drivetrain and I just can't see it any other way. Semi-plastic tourney derailleurs and junk freewheels are rubbish on £70 bikes and even more appalling on £250 bikes. I honestly don't think if a low end brand came up with the same spec and same low weight limits and £250 pricing it would get a 4/5 review it would likely be 1 or 2 out of 5. That's just the way I see it but then. based on their components and specification.

No the specs aren't that bad, and the bikes u showed aren't that much cheaper, and some of those were only cheaper because of a discount! 
Like I said, stop worrying about that load, no bike part has ever been broken because of someone weighted to much! And on most of the other cheap bikes u don't even get told the maximum load, and here it's about every triban, so not this bike specific. 
The Tourney derailleurs aren't that bad as u think, really, I do have experience with it and not a bad one! If there was a bike like this (the same specs and be able to put bigger tires and mudguards/racks) on it people would buy it and review it to, but that's the thing there aren't any like it! 
Also maybe read the review once, the reviewer clearly states that it's a very fun bike to ride and that the specs aren't a compromise. 
" I have absolutely no brand loyalty I look at bikes indivdually" well clearly u do have something against BTwin?
And last but not least, TRY IT BEFORE U GIVE YOUR OWN REVIEW! That's what this reviewer did instead of giving an opinion without the knowledge. 

KoenM wrote:

[

No the specs aren't that bad, and the bikes u showed aren't that much cheaper, and some of those were only cheaper because of a discount! 
Like I said, stop worrying about that load, no bike part has ever been broken because of someone weighted to much! And on most of the other cheap bikes u don't even get told the maximum load, and here it's about every triban, so not this bike specific. 
The Tourney derailleurs aren't that bad as u think, really, I do have experience with it and not a bad one! If there was a bike like this (the same specs and be able to put bigger tires and mudguards/racks) on it people would buy it and review it to, but that's the thing there aren't any like it! 
Also maybe read the review once, the reviewer clearly states that it's a very fun bike to ride and that the specs aren't a compromise. 
" I have absolutely no brand loyalty I look at bikes indivdually" well clearly u do have something against BTwin?
And last but not least, TRY IT BEFORE U GIVE YOUR OWN REVIEW! That's what this reviewer did instead of giving an opinion without the knowledge. 

Many of the bikes I've shown are a lot cheaper and that discount level is pretty much always available. Aluminium bike frames don't break immediately if overloaded, it accelerates fatigue and can mean the number of years that frame is safe is dramatically reduced. The frame could fail catastrophically 4 years from now in the middle of busy traffic. Decathlon seem to be promoting it as some sort of light duty gravel bike and so could have even more fatigue issues. While I haven't ridden a Triban 100 I have used the components on it on other bikes and they are pure junk in my opinion and not justified at £250.  I don't need to ride a cheap dual suspension steel mountain bike to know its terrible I can work that out by the low end components fitted. There is no pixie dust that magically transforms the Triban 100 into a great bike despite its appalling components and weak frame. The same $3 factory door price Shimano freewheel may be ok on a £40 child's bike which never leaves the garden and will last the lifespan of the bike but I don't expect to see it on a £250 road bike especially as the bike has a simplified drivetrain anyway with no front derailler, front shifter and only needs a single chainring crankset so has already cut down on costs considerably. The light duty weak pretty much Chinese market spec frame will be lower cost too. With all these savings surely a freehub equipped rear wheel was possible with cassette at the very least even if the cassette was 7 speed. On one of their sub £200 hybrid models they fit a freehub based drivetrain. 

As I say we will have to agree to disagree we are poles apart with regard this bike. I'm not just talking about how it rides today, it's simplified drivetrain is probably ideal for such low end components especially with freewheel wobble etc. My point is about it's reliability, increased levels of maintenance and long term safety issues. The only positive thing about it is the low enc components at least will be very cheap to replace. 

bonzobanana wrote:

With all these savings surely a freehub equipped rear wheel was possible with cassette at the very least even if the cassette was 7 speed. On one of their sub £200 hybrid models they fit a freehub based drivetrain. 

I actually think that the main problem of this bike comes from its use of a freehub. There aren't many 7 speed freehub configurations available, actually we can say that the offer is limited to a 14-28 (very small range) or a 14-34 (awfully spaced in the bigger cogs). The 14t smallest cog also kind of forces the use of a relatively big single ring in 1x configurations (such as this 48t) in order to have some gears for descending and riding in the flats.

If Decathlon had specced a cassette, they could have gone for a 7 speed 11-28 with a (let's say) 39t single ring. This would give a range of 7.0 to 2.8 gear inches, similar to the current range (6.8 to 2.8 gear inches) but with a better spacing and IMHO much more usable. And I really doubt it should be THAT much more expensive.

javi_polo wrote:

bonzobanana wrote:

With all these savings surely a freehub equipped rear wheel was possible with cassette at the very least even if the cassette was 7 speed. On one of their sub £200 hybrid models they fit a freehub based drivetrain. 

I actually think that the main problem of this bike comes from its use of a freehub. There aren't many 7 speed freehub configurations available, actually we can say that the offer is limited to a 14-28 (very small range) or a 14-34 (awfully spaced in the bigger cogs). The 14t smallest cog also kind of forces the use of a relatively big single ring in 1x configurations (such as this 48t) in order to have some gears for descending and riding in the flats.

If Decathlon had specced a cassette, they could have gone for a 7 speed 11-28 with a (let's say) 39t single ring. This would give a range of 7.0 to 2.8 gear inches, similar to the current range (6.8 to 2.8 gear inches) but with a better spacing and IMHO much more usable. And I really doubt it should be THAT much more expensive.

There is no freehub on this bike. It uses a freewheel and threaded rear hub. When you see 14T as the minimum cog size that is indicative on a freewheel, the weaker pawl mechanism, lower grade metal means it's sensible to keep to 14T although I think in Asian markets where people are a bit lighter and weaker 13T is more common on freewheels. When you have a cassette though and a much stronger freehub 11T and 12T is fine. You can have a freehub with a 7 speed cassette and still use the basic Shimano single shifter like the Triban 100. This would have made the bike much stronger, crisper shifting and of course potentially much faster with a 11T small cog. To me that would have been an acceptable option for a £250 road bike and decent value and an interesting configuration that would have suited many  people I think. 

bonzobanana wrote:

Many of the bikes I've shown are a lot cheaper and that discount level is pretty much always available. Aluminium bike frames don't break immediately if overloaded, it accelerates fatigue and can mean the number of years that frame is safe is dramatically reduced. The frame could fail catastrophically 4 years from now in the middle of busy traffic. Decathlon seem to be promoting it as some sort of light duty gravel bike and so could have even more fatigue issues. While I haven't ridden a Triban 100 I have used the components on it on other bikes and they are pure junk in my opinion and not justified at £250.  I don't need to ride a cheap dual suspension steel mountain bike to know its terrible I can work that out by the low end components fitted. There is no pixie dust that magically transforms the Triban 100 into a great bike despite its appalling components and weak frame. The same $3 factory door price Shimano freewheel may be ok on a £40 child's bike which never leaves the garden and will last the lifespan of the bike but I don't expect to see it on a £250 road bike especially as the bike has a simplified drivetrain anyway with no front derailler, front shifter and only needs a single chainring crankset so has already cut down on costs considerably. The light duty weak pretty much Chinese market spec frame will be lower cost too. With all these savings surely a freehub equipped rear wheel was possible with cassette at the very least even if the cassette was 7 speed. On one of their sub £200 hybrid models they fit a freehub based drivetrain. 

 

As I say we will have to agree to disagree we are poles apart with regard this bike. I'm not just talking about how it rides today, it's simplified drivetrain is probably ideal for such low end components especially with freewheel wobble etc. My point is about it's reliability, increased levels of maintenance and long term safety issues. The only positive thing about it is the low enc components at least will be very cheap to replace. 

1) Well it's still a discount and no they wont stay that way. And are again not that same bike they are pure roadbike.
2) U keep talking about that 100kg while I repeatedly said that the 100kg is for all there bikes, it's in a OLD pdf so no those specs aren't up to date. Also again, I never have seen or heared of a bike product failing because of weight. 
3) About the components, it's not because they are cheap that they are bad. And u speak without experience while I have alot of experience with it (more than 4000km). And so NO they are reliable as most Shimano components are, and again in my experience (what U don't have) they don't need to be more maintained than my Ultegra Di2 bike. 
4) €260 is NOT alot of money for a bike so no the components are NOT bad for the bike. U keep telling about much cheaper bikes with better components but there aren't alot and if there are it's mostly 1 size, or old bikes that will be sold out. 
5) The frame isn't made in China
 

The freewheel (as I said before) isn't great, but it wont break sooner than a cassette.

The thing is U speak without experience about the bike or the components and that does make me mad a bit, I do speak with experience so I do know what i'm talking about.
Really try it before speaking bad about it, that's what the reviewer did.

As for the Triban 100, I've been riding it for a week now and it rides so much smoother than the bike it replaced (a €500 bike with Tourney to). The breaks are great to, much better than the V-brakes u get on most cheap bikes. 

KoenM wrote:

 

1) Well it's still a discount and no they wont stay that way. And are again not that same bike they are pure roadbike.
2) U keep talking about that 100kg while I repeatedly said that the 100kg is for all there bikes, it's in a OLD pdf so no those specs aren't up to date. Also again, I never have seen or heared of a bike product failing because of weight. 
3) About the components, it's not because they are cheap that they are bad. And u speak without experience while I have alot of experience with it (more than 4000km). And so NO they are reliable as most Shimano components are, and again in my experience (what U don't have) they don't need to be more maintained than my Ultegra Di2 bike. 
4) €260 is NOT alot of money for a bike so no the components are NOT bad for the bike. U keep telling about much cheaper bikes with better components but there aren't alot and if there are it's mostly 1 size, or old bikes that will be sold out. 
5) The frame isn't made in China
 

The freewheel (as I said before) isn't great, but it wont break sooner than a cassette.

The thing is U speak without experience about the bike or the components and that does make me mad a bit, I do speak with experience so I do know what i'm talking about.
Really try it before speaking bad about it, that's what the reviewer did.

As for the Triban 100, I've been riding it for a week now and it rides so much smoother than the bike it replaced (a €500 bike with Tourney to). The breaks are great to, much better than the V-brakes u get on most cheap bikes. 

That is the standard btwin manual available now on their webiste and their weight limits and what their bikes are certified to cope with. Manuals like that don't get updated daily they are often years old. I think the one on the Giant site dates back to 2012 when I downloaded it a few months back. Of course freewheels don't last as long as freehubs and cassettes. They are light duty occasional use components which even Shimano admit to in their groupset text.

Where is the frame made out of interest. Bear in mind there is what they call tariff engineering because of EU anti-dumping duties so the country the bike was assembled in may have no connection to where the components were made. Many bikes are merely assembled in Europe or Cambodia, Bangledesh, India, Eastern Europe etc but the frames and components are mainly chinese. Many decent brands of bikes have Chinese manufactured frames but get 'Made in Taiwan' stickers as Taiwan is perceived and is a high quality manufacturing nation so adds perceived value to the bike by assembling in Taiwan. I think the only high volume aluminium bicycle frame factories in Europe are Portugal and Turkey and from what I've read the Portugeuse frames can be very poor compared to far eastern frames. Don't know anything about the Turkish frame quality. It's possible the reasons the bike weight limits are so low is to allow for Portugeuse frame quality but I thought only the higher end frames were made in Europe and the entry level frames were Chinese.

Again though the weight limits are clearly stated in their manual for a reason. This debate gets into farce territory when you start making claims that somehow btwin's own documents are wrong. At that point you have clearly lost the plot and you lose all credibility. If btwin state 100kg total load they do that for the obvious reason they have to and that is what the bike is designed to cope with. Surely there is no debate there. Are you just going to make up random numbers about how strong btwin bikes are to support your own biased view? If you own the bike you obviously cannot be impartial and are likely to be defensive of your purchase, pride etc. I don't have any such bias and have a lot of experience of the components fitted to the bike and know they are terrible. We don't have to debate the frame is weaker than competitors because that is what btwin claim themselves according to their weight limits so no debate there. A weak frame, terrible components and a simplified drivetrain making hills more difficult and a slow bike on the flats. £250 is a truly awful price in my opinion.

bikezero wrote:

The Apollo Paradox has an “approx” overall weight listed as 12.1kg (it doesn’t mention which size, but the bike only seems to be made in frame sizes up to 54cm) whereas the Triban has overall weight listed as 11,3kg in size M (I believe Btwin’s size medium would be about 54cm) so therefore for that £70 extra you are getting a bike near a full kg lighter. If the Triban 100 is the exact same frame as the 500 (as people say) then i can attest that it would seem solid as I have heavily riden 500 for 14 months with zero issues despite often throwing it off tall kerbs like it were a mountain bike. With the max weight tolerances mentioned, I would imagine BTWIN are being highly conservative. These are after all largely marketed as touring bikes with mention of the ability to fit extensive luggage supports (It even has mountain bike type road tires which suggests towards rougher use). If the frames were going to break or otherwise fail with heavy-ish loads, or moderately hard impacts I doubt Btwin would bother manufacturing and selling such alledgedly weak frames. I myself said I don’t think this bike is quite the great value for money than the Triban 500 is (only £100 more in the UK and a full kg lighter with more extensive Microshift gears system and carbon fork) but i still think 100 seems to be decent value. Limited gears and budget chainwheel aside, all I do not much like about the 100 is the gear lever being on the top of the handlebars and totally unreachable from any hand position in which you are in reach of the brakes- an annoyance and not good from a safety point of view. I have not heard a single report of a Btwin road bike frame ever breaking, nor of a Btwin road bike ever being recalled. It is true that certain entry models of their Rockrider mountain bikes were recalled a couple of years ago (depending on serial number) with the recall notice still present at the Decathlon website but I've not heard of any other bike recalls in Btwin’s history.

Over 4 years prodution of these bikes were recalled.

https://www.bike-eu.com/laws-regulations/nieuws/2017/03/decathlon-recall...

I really don't get this seems strong enough to me approach to bike's safety. The weight limits are dictated by the manufacturer and should be followed. They are often a design or engineering choice due to cost or performance and would normally be calculated by the certification product tests. Seems madness to me to just gloss over such critical safety information. Overloaded frames to fail immediately you fatigue the frame at a much faster rate and years down the line the frame is much more likely to fail when you don't expect it. 

As for someone else's comment that they are manufactured in Romania. I've not heard that for the frames I would expect that was actual bike assembly or even wheel assembly not the frames. I believe some production of frames has started in Portugal likely high end models only.

There may be limited frame sizes or some other issues on those bikes I listed my point was really about the poor pricing and low spec components. Clearly some people disagree but I certainly feel £250 is far too much for a bike of that spec.

Just to explain another comment the reason those alternative bikes are faster and easier up hills is because of the double chainring. However the Muddyfox bike listed and shown in the video is much faster as it has a freehub and cassette based gearing with a 11 or 12 tooth small cog not the low grade 14 tooth small cog of freewheels present on the Triban 100 and the very low cost road bikes. Hence why while beaten by the carbon aero bike it does actually give a respectable speed result close to it. I suspect the Triban 100 would be considerably slower as well as being a much weaker bike assuming the engineers who certified and tested the Triban 100 were competent.

bonzobanana wrote:

 

Over 4 years prodution of these bikes were recalled.

https://www.bike-eu.com/laws-regulations/nieuws/2017/03/decathlon-recall...

What is the relevance of a recall of an open frame electric bike to this model? I'm sure all major brands have recalled models at times and indeed it's a sign of their responsability and commitment to quality that they do so

bonzobanana wrote:

I don't get the pricing on this bike. It has a very low end freewheel despite cassette being mentioned in the review with very limited gearing both slow on the flats and hard up hills. It is relatively heavy especially with the low weight drivetrain with no front derailleur or shifter and a single chainring yet only has a total load capacity of 100kg which minus the bike weight, accessories, luggage and riders clothes surely brings it down to a paltry 80kg approx maximum rider weight. Many people criticise Tourney drivetrain's on sub £100 bikes and call the bikes BSO's but it's ok here on a £250 btwin bike? The old Triban 500SE was great at £299 although still had the low weight limits but this looks pure junk at £250 yet gets four stars. Surely a bike of this spec is only worth about £150. I don't get why btwin gets a favourable review with such poor components. Seems like there is a weird bias in favour of the Btwin brand and that a fair critical approach hasn't been applied with this review. I accept the weak frame might have a nice feel, maybe a more springy nature hence the low weight limits to avoid early fatigue damage caused by a lack of strengthening. Admittedly anything with a freewheel I consider pretty much junk and entry level. Too much time adjusting and a relatively short life. Always needs to be kept clean and lubricated to work reasonably well. I would always advise pay more but here there are actually competing bikes for similar money or less with freehub based drivetrains with much better gearing. This is like a child's road bike scaled up to adult sizes.

Sub €100 bikes generally don't have tourney gearing, heck even my €500 bike had tourney, but that's because it was from a real bikeshop. About the weight limit it isn't stated anywhere on the website, so where did u get that info? About the 34, they do say that's it a bit hard  to get up steep hills in this review, but honestly don't think that bike is made for climbing. Yeah the freewheel is bad when u want to upgrade BUT I never problems with mine and it stands out in the rain and wheater most of the day and in 3 years only lubed it 3 times, and i'm ashamed to say that I never cleaned it. 
Also who says the frame is weak? The reviewer says it isn't as stiff as some bikes but he didn't say it's weak. Maybe read the review before commenting first? Also maybe ride the bike before u yourself write bad information about it?

KoenM wrote:

 

Sub €100 bikes generally don't have tourney gearing, heck even my €500 bike had tourney, but that's because it was from a real bikeshop. About the weight limit it isn't stated anywhere on the website, so where did u get that info? About the 34, they do say that's it a bit hard  to get up steep hills in this review, but honestly don't think that bike is made for climbing. Yeah the freewheel is bad when u want to upgrade BUT I never problems with mine and it stands out in the rain and wheater most of the day and in 3 years only lubed it 3 times, and i'm ashamed to say that I never cleaned it. 
Also who says the frame is weak? The reviewer says it isn't as stiff as some bikes but he didn't say it's weak. Maybe read the review before commenting first? Also maybe ride the bike before u yourself write bad information about it?

Just about every low end bike has Shimano Tourney gearing same as this bike with an identical quality freewheeel. There is no debate on that surely. Some very low end bikes might use a generic lower brand than Shimano but perhaps 95% of cheap bikes have tourney gearing and freewheels. Some even have triple chainsets to give a wider range of gearing.

As for weight limits this is clearly stated in their manual, they have by far the lowest weight limits of any brand of bicycle. For light riders this can give a good feel frame but for those who need a stronger frame, touring etc they are often best avoided.

https://www.decathlon.co.uk/ecuk/static/bikes/btwin-instructions.pdf

Not forgetting there has been a wide range of recalls of btwin frames. I don't think it would be unfair to call them low strength chinese market quality frames.

It just seems a lot to me to charge £250 for a junk frame and components. It's an ok beater bike for lightweight people but surely never worth £250 that is ridiculously high for a low quality frame and tourney components.

I'm heavier than 80kg so could never ride it with accessories fitted to the frame, my clothes and a small amount of luggage. Admittedly it wouldn't fail immediately but I would be compromising the long term strength of the frame and it could fail within 3 years through fatigue and create a dangerous situation amongst traffic and I would have no recourse legally as I would be over the weight limits of the frame.

Just seems madness to me to give 4/5 for this bike. I personally would struggle to give it 1/5 however I totally accept if your a light rider and doesn't care it's a weak, very slow bike with low quality gearing then it may be ok for you. However not just difficult up hills but very slow on the flats and downhill due to the '14' tooth smallest cog and single chainring at the front.

I totally accept tourney has been ok for you but that isn't the experience of many but even if tourney is ok for you is it a fair price for a minimalist road bike made of junk components for £250. There are many far superior bikes for far less than £250.

There are entry level road bikes as low as £140. Often they have high tensile steel frames but don't appear to be much heavier. They have triple chainsets and the same low end tourney derailleur and freewheel on the rear. They probably allow for 40kg heavier riders or loads etc and actually much easier to climb hills and go fast on the flats thanks to their triple or double chainsets. Also more comfortable with a frame with greater long term strength and resistance to fatigue. So much better off road taking abuse etc and much of a gravel/cyclocross type bike. I can't think of a single role this bike is ideal for, in every use I can think of it seems exceptionally poor yet gets 4/5.

Just don't get the high review for this appallingly bad value bike. Don't get me wrong some of the btwin bikes are great value although the low weight limits is always disappointing but I'm scratching my head with this one how it got a positive review.

bonzobanana wrote:

I don't think it would be unfair to call them low strength chinese market quality frames.

Except they're made in Romania.

Quote:

Just about every low end bike has Shimano Tourney gearing same as this bike with an identical quality freewheeel. There is no debate on that surely. Some very low end bikes might use a generic lower brand than Shimano but perhaps 95% of cheap bikes have tourney gearing and freewheels. Some even have triple chainsets to give a wider range of gearing.

As for weight limits this is clearly stated in their manual, they have by far the lowest weight limits of any brand of bicycle. For light riders this can give a good feel frame but for those who need a stronger frame, touring etc they are often best avoided.

https://www.decathlon.co.uk/ecuk/static/bikes/btwin-instructions.pdf

Not forgetting there has been a wide range of recalls of btwin frames. I don't think it would be unfair to call them low strength chinese market quality frames.

It just seems a lot to me to charge £250 for a junk frame and components. It's an ok beater bike for lightweight people but surely never worth £250 that is ridiculously high for a low quality frame and tourney components.

I'm heavier than 80kg so could never ride it with accessories fitted to the frame, my clothes and a small amount of luggage. Admittedly it wouldn't fail immediately but I would be compromising the long term strength of the frame and it could fail within 3 years through fatigue and create a dangerous situation amongst traffic and I would have no recourse legally as I would be over the weight limits of the frame.

Just seems madness to me to give 4/5 for this bike. I personally would struggle to give it 1/5 however I totally accept if your a light rider and doesn't care it's a weak, very slow bike with low quality gearing then it may be ok for you. However not just difficult up hills but very slow on the flats and downhill due to the '14' tooth smallest cog and single chainring at the front.

I totally accept tourney has been ok for you but that isn't the experience of many but even if tourney is ok for you is it a fair price for a minimalist road bike made of junk components for £250. There are many far superior bikes for far less than £250.

There are entry level road bikes as low as £140. Often they have high tensile steel frames but don't appear to be much heavier. They have triple chainsets and the same low end tourney derailleur and freewheel on the rear. They probably allow for 40kg heavier riders or loads etc and actually much easier to climb hills and go fast on the flats thanks to their triple or double chainsets. Also more comfortable with a frame with greater long term strength and resistance to fatigue. So much better off road taking abuse etc and much of a gravel/cyclocross type bike. I can't think of a single role this bike is ideal for, in every use I can think of it seems exceptionally poor yet gets 4/5.

Just don't get the high review for this appallingly bad value bike. Don't get me wrong some of the btwin bikes are great value although the low weight limits is always disappointing but I'm scratching my head with this one how it got a positive review.

Well where I live I can't find any cheaper bikes with Tourney (or better) and a better quality frame for commuting. Because unlike u, I don't judge before I try, and I do believe the reviewers on this website.  Also people will comment/complain when something is wrong more than when something is good, that's why u only see bad things about it. But there are probably 100000's of bikes in this world with Tourney, don't think there are even a 1000 complains about it on the internet so that's not even 1%. And about the low weight limit, I wouldn't worry about it to much, those numbers are generally alot lower (I've seen a test on a weight limit wheel from shimano and it could support almost 3x the weight). 

KoenM wrote:

 

 

Well where I live I can't find any cheaper bikes with Tourney (or better) and a better quality frame for commuting. Because unlike u, I don't judge before I try, and I do believe the reviewers on this website.  Also people will comment/complain when something is wrong more than when something is good, that's why u only see bad things about it. But there are probably 100000's of bikes in this world with Tourney, don't think there are even a 1000 complains about it on the internet so that's not even 1%. And about the low weight limit, I wouldn't worry about it to much, those numbers are generally alot lower (I've seen a test on a weight limit wheel from shimano and it could support almost 3x the weight). 

Loads of complaints about tourney gearing giving problems across many forums and a very popular drivetrain on bikes thrown away at recycling centres. It's an entry level drivetrain that can give many problems with part plastic derailleurs, weak springs and many issues. It's entry level and common on sub £100 bikes. It seems to me a double standard when many cyclists complain about the rubbish drivetrain of entry level bikes and how they throw up problems but stick exactly the same components on a more respected brand and somehow despite the components being identical it is somehow ok. It isn't ok it's rubbish on sub £100 bikes and even more rubbish on a £250 bike. 

A quick look on halfords shows a £180 aluminium road bike with the same crap tourney drivetrain but with a double chainset. The bike has a rider weight capacity of 120kg compared to about 80-85kg on the btwin but admittedly we are comparing 2 very poor road bikes but if anything the apollo is higher spec with a much stronger frame and yet £70 cheaper. It's faster on the flat's easier up hills and your £70 better off. Not that I'd recommend the Apollo. 

https://www.halfords.com/cycling/bikes/road-bikes/apollo-paradox-mens-ro...

For me the minimum spec for a road bike would be something like Shimano Claris with a freehub or maybe something microshift based. I honestly don't see why this bike didn't have the far superior microshift based drivetrain with a freehub like the earlier Triban 500SE. They could have lost the carbon fork, simplified the drivetrain with a single chainring like the existing Triban 100 but at least kept a solid drivetrain on it with long term reliability. 

Again you don't have to try this specific bike to know the components fitted to it are rubbish. That's not how it works. No magic pixie dust will transform the garbage components into great ones.

It comes to something when a cheap Halford's Apollo bike is vastly superior to a btwin bike. Apollo bikes are best avoided normally but here it will just about do everything better and safer.

Cheaper high tensile steel road bike here. Same junk drivetrain but easier up hills and faster on the flats that the btwin.

https://outlet.e-bikesdirect.co.uk/bikes/adult-bikes/road-bikes/barracud...

Sub £200 bike here with older groupset but decent freehub based drivetrain.

https://www.sportsdirect.com/muddyfox-race-200-road-bike-933090?colcode=...

That seems like the best option for a decent entry level spec currently although the Carrera Virtuoso does come down to £250 approx regularly and seems the best entry level bike at that price.

Comparison of the muddyfox bike and a aero carbon bike.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow7MdsSVQuw

No reason to spend out £250 for the btwin for a dangerously weak, slow heavy bike with a dire drivetrain.

bikezero wrote:

Yeh, I clearly read that in your OP. I too have a technically better bike than the Triban 500 as i briefly mentioned in my post (not sure if it's ALOT better, but better). Congratulations on your bikes. My simple point was that the Triban 500 (a cheap bike) is, at least in my opinion, an even better value for the money deal than the good value 100. You say you want a faster "beater type" bike commuter and I was just saying that the 500 might be a bit faster and more comfortable than the 100 with it's carbon fork, weighing a full Kg less, having more gears (perhaps useful if you work in a town or city) and costing only a mere £100 more. Would seem a particularly relevant point to put to you when you explicity said you want to change the gear shifting system on the 100 if you buy it (and the wheels for that matter, whatever you intend to put in their place). The frame after all of the two bikes is aopparently identical. I'm certainly not knocking the 100. If it's what you have your heart and budget set upon go ahead and enjoy. Cheers

Problems is where I live the 500 is almost  2x the price (€260 vs €450), the STI is €50 (don't wanne change the whole shifting system) and a wheelset is about €100 so even with those it's still cheaper. Also the 1x is alot less hassle to maintain and are enough for me. Honestly I just want to pay the least I have to, when the bike gets stolen I want to pay the least amount to replace it.