Fred Smedley

I have a 89 Kestrel 200 SC I love, but I can not keep from wondering if the new carbon frames https://www.kestrelbicycles.com/Road/RT-900SL.aspx are any better riding or handling. I realize they are lighter but that is of no consequence to me.

Hirohsima

I have had 2 Kestrel 500sci's (remember that the 500sci is a 650c wheel) for over 10 years. I moved over to a 2010 Scott CR1.

Impressions:
Sorry to begin with lighter, but you would think that with a 650c wheelset the bike would be plenty light... it wasnt. New bike is a full 3 pounds lighter. (old bike had 9sp DA, new bike Ultegra 6700)
WAY stiffer BB. Like night and day. Power transfer is nuts by comparison. I feel like my old bike was like pushing around a wet noodle.
New frames, esp coming from an 80's race-frame will have a much shorter top-tube.
The rear compliance (even coming from a frame with no seat tube, which you would think would be vertically compliant) is greatly improved. Road-buzz, rear end compliance on my particular bike kicks my old Kestrel to the curb.
Steering, on then new bike is like night and day again. I can track a perfect line with the new bike, but the old bike, with arguably stiffer wheels did not inspire a ton of confidence and I always had to do minor adjustments during fast sweepers. New bike, I just hold a line and pedal strongly out of the turn.

I realize our old bikes are a bit different, but honestly, the new BB stiffness ALONE about made the upgrade worth it. Seriously, its nuts. I could see my BB sway back and fourth when looking down and pedaling hard. New bike. Rock solid, just forward momentum.

New carbon. TOTALLY different than old carbon. Don't testride a new bike unless you are willing to spend the money. You won't like your old bike anymore.

Fred Smedley

My 200sc does not sound anything like the 500 in stiffness, handling or compliance. a totally different design and intended use. Anybody familiar with the 200 sc and the modern Kestrels?

hobkirk

Hirohsima is completely right about the myriad ways the new bike is profoundly better. But the old bikes still work. There's something admirable about an older bike. On my last group ride, 64 miles, the leader was riding a bike with shifters on the down tube.

Hirohsima

I should clarify, I thought my old bike was great before I got my new bike. Thought it put the power down just fine, steered just fine, was compliant.... but after I got my new bike... my old bike literally felt like a POS. No joke. It was not components nor state of tune that made the difference.... I was a paid wrench for years, I can turn a screw, and am good at it.

Yes the two bikes (500sci and 2oosci) are different, but I have also put in quite a few miles on a 200EMS (a later variant to your 200sci) and did not feel a ton of difference between my old 500sci and the 200EMS.

Sorry I could not give you your apples to apples comparison.

bradtx

F S, Just go out and ride the model(s) you wish to compare. If specifically keeping with Kestral there is bound to be some evolutionary engineering, manufacturing and/or design difference. Whether or not that difference is enough to entice you to remove your wallet is strictly up to you.

Brad

StanSeven

I totally agree with this. Old CF was described on forums like this as "dead." The ride feel was dull and almost sluggish. Frames felt soft. New CF has a lively sensation with lots of snap under sprints and hard acceleration. Frames now are still and compliant but still comfortable.

Fred Smedley

I do not doubt Carbon has probably gotten better but my Kestrel is not dead and gets excellent reviews on RBR unlike other Carbon frames of that era, i.e. Trek . Have you actually ridden a 200sc? I can only compare to my 96 Bianchi Reparto C Columbus tubed TSXUL frameset and a 89 Miyata team both stiff lively frames. The Kestrel is not lacking in comparison. The TSX is considered a stiff frame with a oversized and manipulated down-tube BB interface and I have only heard praises the Team Miyata's. If the new Kestrels are better than the 200 series they have achieved something IMO.


The transontinential world record was set on a 200SC in 1990 and still stands; https://cgi.ebay.com/Mike-Secrests-Bi...?pt=Road_Bikes

So does anybody have actual sat time on both frames, if not don't bother commenting.

Hirohsima

We get that you like your old 200sci. People are trying to be helpful. This is BF.... I am supprised you have gotten this much helpful information. I have ZERO doubt the new Kestrels are better in every respect than your 200sci. But if you want someone who has ridden both bikes, I would suggest you be that someone and go ride a new Kestrel. The likelyhood that you find someone who has ridden extensively both bikes is going to be slim since the 200sci is a 20yo bike and their carbon market share ever since the late 80's has shrunk drastically. (meaning not many people have the current Kestrels)