Trvshfish

Hello,
i just recently bought a SOMA pescadero frame. This is my first time building my own set up (used to riding SS and Fixed) and I'm having difficulty choosing between two groupsets (SRAM Apex 1 and Shimano Tiagra)
I live in a mostly flat area with some sketchy alleyways and cobblestone streets. My intention for the bike is an all around endurance bike with attention to road and I am a pretty active rider.

A good friend has been really into gravel riding and has recommended the Apex 1. I know this is know a versatile groupset however I am worried about a couple things.

I am more interested in a road set up than gravel set up, is the Apex 1 more ideal for gravel than road? Would I be better off with a 2x road set up?

I am not on a budget necessarily but would like to keep the price on the lower end which is also a plus for the Apex 1.

Thanks for the help.

RiceAWay

If you don't mind my saying - that frame and fork are FAR too good to put a Tiagra group on it. Get 105 which is made in Japan rather than China. If you want more gears that 105 is available with the long arm rear derailleur and can take up to a 34 tooth. The problem with that much gearing is that you get used to small gears and very low climbing speeds. You end up just as tired as if you used a 28, developed more leg strength and made it to the top of the hill more rapidly. This is why Campagnolo Chorus and Record only have short arm derailleurs and the largest gear they can handle is a 28 (actually you can get them to work with a 29).

But I don't know what the area around your rides are. But I can say that I commonly do 38 mile rides with 3500 feet of climbing with a lowest gear of 34/28. And it took me several years to develop the leg strength for that by riding those gears quite slowly. About a year ago I had a bike with a 39/25 and did a local 1,000 foot climb but I had to really concentrate on going as slowly as I could. There are a few 12% stretches though they aren't long. At 75 I'm not the strongest rider in the pack anymore. For that matter I can't stand riding in packs anymore

delbiker1 

IMO, there is nothing wrong with Tiagra groupset. If you were to ride the same bike with each groupset, not knowing which is which, I doubt you would notice much difference if any. I have a Soma Smoothie, brand new, that I have not started building yet. I wound up going with the 105 7000 just because I wanted to go 11 speed and had the funds for it. I really thought about it hard for a couple of days. I have a Tiagra 4400 from 2006 that has been no problem since I bought it. It has a lot of miles on it. I did have to replace the right side, rear, shifter after breaking it in a fall 1 1/2 years ago. Also, I replaced the rear derailleur to a mid-cage, Deore, length so I could use a cassette with a wider spread of cogs. Another thing to consider, the Tiagra 4700 groupset is compatible with the newer Shimano 11 speed, but not with any of the older groupsets of 8/9/10 speed.

Steve B.

I'm not a fan of 1X for road use. In order to get any range in the gearing for hills, you end up with a cassette that sucks for flat riding. It's not like 2X shifting sucks, a 105 front shift and derailer is dead on perfect, IMO. I agree with the others that a 105 group is the best bang for the buck. Note though that this frame uses the long reach side pull road rim brakes, maybe get them from Soma, you can't use 105 rim brakes. I also agree to get the GS rear derailer to get the range you want to run an 11-34 cassette. Also think maybe about an FSA crank 46/30 or 48/32. A little pricier than a 105 but you get some gear range.

RiceAWay

I have ridden almost identical bikes with the Tiagra and the 105 groups and could IMMEDIATELY feel the difference in shifting. But aside from that it is a bad idea to take a 2nd level frame and put a 5th level group on it. It is probable that he will upgrade bikes in the not so distant future and that small savings in money now will equal a large loss later. I have been trading up every year until right now when I've finally hit the top with a Madone and an Emonda from a racing team. Di2 will go on both of them. 6870 group on one and 9070 on the other. I figure these will last the remainder of my lifetime since I'm 75 now.

I intend to keep the Colnago CLX 3.0 and the two Treks and sell all the rest off. Two CX bikes and 2 road bikes.

Seattle Forrest

Shimano, without a doubt. Also, 2x is better for road, including gravel roads.

Darth Lefty 

I'm not going to bla bla about Tiagra or Apex... I just think that if you are buying a bike for center pulls give it some polished or satin, not painted parts.

Kapusta

I think some folks in this thread must have Soma confused with some other company.

Putting Tiagra on a Soma is not like Catsup on great steak. More like Catsup on a good burger.

Tiagra is perfectly appropriate for a Soma. Nothing wring with going higher it you want to - I have a mix of 105 and old Ultegra on mine with a high end wheelset, but I do feel like my parts are a ways ahead of the frame.

Soma makes well-designed budget frames along the lines of Surly.

Don’t get me wrong, I think highly of Soma and Surly. No-nonsense, no-frills steel frames for a good price. And Soma does a great job with their style... the frames are good looking (love my Fog Cutter).

All that said, I think if you look at the price differential between Tiagra and 105, it is not that much. But I guess it depends on your budget if it is worth it.

For a road bike (or even a bike for pavement/gravel mix) I think 2x is the way to go. IMO, for road, 1x is still too much of a compromise on either range or spacing.

mstateglfr 

Yeah...its a perfectly fine frame made with modern(meaning heavier) Range Prestige tubing. Its not top range XCR and its not a Surly tank.

Tiara would be great. Its a road frame and you will have smaller jumps when shifting while having plenty of range. I have no idea why 1x is appealing for anything but MTB, but it is for some, so those who love it can stump for it.

RiceAWay

I have no idea where you're coming from. A SOMA is a well made steel bike that is about 2nd level as far as steel bikes go. It has all of the modern sizes and will last forever or nearly so. They cannot advance components out from under it and the only thing that separates it from the top of the line is some small difference in weight and rather plain finishes. SOMA is used for "South Of MArket" or the south end of San Francisco.

The Tiagra group is a 10 speed with heavy components. The 105 is made in Japan and not China, is 11 speed and the components are easier to get and are lighter than Tiagra and 11 speeds actually wear less than 10 speeds.

This is hardly a "hamburger" and Tiagra is a pickle. Also the cost difference is a meager $100 for the group so it is hardly a reach.

Kapusta

I am coming from being an owner of a SOMA.

I would hardly consider SOMA a 2nd tier bike. I consider Salsa a second tier company in terms of frames. And even Salsa offers builds with Tiagra and Sora level components. SOMA is a level down. Again, they are on par with Surly, regardless of what SOMA stands for.

Finish, weight, and ride quality are all perfectly OK, but nothing special..... like Surly.... or All City (steel frames).... or Tiagra.

I say this as someone who owns SOMA Surly, and Salsa bikes. My SOMA frame (Fog Cutter) had a few QC issues, and the ride quality is not as good as my old Salsa Casseroll.

The OPs frameset sells for $500. That's pretty affordable. Again, on par with similar offerings from Surly.

I have to ask, if SOMA is a 2nd level frame, what do you consider a 3rd level steel frame?

BritishV8

Build it for you, and try to avoid settling for "less" than what you think you'll really enjoy riding.

Obviously, you can mix-and-match components. On a Pescadaro, your brakes probably aren't going to match your drivetrain anyhow. So, I'd recommend you consider mixing-in some higher-quality but older components. Sometimes that's an easy way to save money. (There's an amazing variety of new-old-stock parts available cheap on eBay, for example.) Personally, I'd certainly prefer older 105 over brand new Tiagra.

No cobbles, thank goodness, but I occasionally ride on gravel and dirt roads. Maybe ten percent of the 3000 miles I rode last year. We do have some nice hills - and I've fallen in love with them. Last year I climbed over 160,000 feet. This year, I'll be way beyond that.

I built up my Soma Smoothie with 105 drivetrain (w/ 36-32 lowest gear), Tektro levers and calipers, wonderful vintage SunTour Command shifters, and Fulcrum Racing 3 wheels with 32mm wide Conti Grand Prix 4-Season tires. If I were running 10-speed or 11-speed and riding off-pavement more, I'd splurge and use Gevenalle shifters. I don't care for Shimano brifters.



(BTW, I don't know why Surly has been mentioned in this thread. They've got nothing on Soma. I put Soma more on the level of Ritchey and Gunnar in terms of build quality, but with a more diverse range.)

Kapusta

I mentioned Surly because it is in fact a very apt comparison. Just look at the prices. They are the same pricepoint. Surly does not have any thing ON Soma, it is the equivalent. That's not a dig, Surlys are good bikes (and include some of the most important bike models put out in the past 15 years). Like Surly, Soma is a house brand of a distribution company. QBP for Surly, Merry Cycling for Soma. Nothing wrong with that, just pointing it out.

Soma is definitely NOT Gunnar or Ritchey. Comparable steel frames from them are well over double the price of the frame the OP has (and Gunnars can go a LOT higher). Gunnar uses 853 tubing, and whatever exactly Ritchey Logic Tubing is, it is triple butted, light, and highly regarded still.. Soma uses some mystery metal that they slapped the "Tange Prestige" name on. This is not the Tange Prestige of old. Surly is upfront that they use 4130 which is perfectly fine. I have seen nothing to indicate that the new "Tange Prestige" is anything better (probably the same thing)..

A few things about build quality. Here are the seatstay rack/fender mounts on my Fog Cutter:




The drive side was welded on very crooked. Two other nit-pics are that the frame came with a very bent hangar (box showed no sign of damage at the store), and the first head-tube that I have needed to reface since 2005 (few frames these days need this).

So I am curious what exactly you think makes Soma a higher end bike than Surly. The paint job? (admittedly, they do look great). The hipster vibe? What?

Again, I think Somas (like Surlys) are wonderful, well-thought out bikes for the price. But I am not fooling myself about what they are and are not. They are not Salsas, and they sure and heck are not Gunnars.

Tiagra is a perfectly solid groupset. Just a little heavier than the better stuff. Like a Soma.or Surly.

I just think the idea that a $500 frameset is too good for Tiagra is a bit silly.

mstateglfr 

You may put Soma on par with those for build quality, but not many others will.
Modern Prestige used for Soma frames is perfectly fine, but not as thin as the old Prestife which is called 'Japanese Prestige' by Tange. The butting for this modern Prestige is the same butting as Black Mountain frames(not sure of the butting profile though) and matches the butting for some Surly frames(again, not sure of the butting profile).

A Soma Smoothie frame is heavier than a Ritchie road frame with both using a carbon fork(Soma's has an aluminum steerer, so there is that).
Gunnar frames are built to spec so even if the weight is the same as a comparable Soma, the finish will be personalized and meant for the rider, which isn't even an option for Soma.


None of this is knocking Soma or the tier of quality its in. I own a Black Mountain frame and love it. I've looked at Soma frames probably 40 times over the last 5 years and considered one for 3 different builds in that time.
Each time though, the concern of quality has kept me away due to horror stories on the internet(really isn't found for Black Mountain frames or Gunnar either) combined with the difficulty of getting Soma to respond and care.


Steel frames that are contract manufactured and cost from $400-1200 almost always have little difference when it comes to weight. The differences are found in geometry(which is subjective so you can't hate on that), features(brake ons etc), and finish quality(which you can hate on).
200g of frame weight one way or the other doesn't actually make a difference. Misaligned rear triangles, poor paint quality, wonky rack or fender mounts, etc absolutely make a difference. I don't see Ritchey and Gunnar frames having these issues.
...I'm guessing a hunt thru the internet may start because of this!