I bought a 51 San Marcos for my girlfriend, and she loves it. The ES and San Marcos are functionally similar. They're both steel, and have sport-touring geometry.
But, there are several important differences: SM frame is lugged Prestige (really nice Riv lugs), ES is welded Prestige (main triangle) Cro-mo rear end. SM frame has the double top tube in your size. SM top tube(s) are sloped more than the ES SM has more frame reach and stack, so the front end is longer and taller SM has 10 cm longer chainstays and 1 degree slacker head tube, so probably a tad more stable handling than the ES SM fork has mid-fork braze-on mounts for a front rack SM has a pump peg and a kickstand plate Clearance: SM uses long-reach brakes (55-75 mm), the ES uses mid-reach (45-55 mm). So, even though they are listed as having roughly the same tire clearance, the SM will have more room for fenders. By my reading the ES says 32c plus fenders, and the SM says 35c plus fenders. I fit 38b plus SKS P45's on my girlfriend's 650b 51 cm SM. It's up to you if those differences are important, and if so, if they're worth $125. In your situation, I'd pick the San Marcos over the ES any day. The only reason I'd pick the ES is if the 63 cm SM is too small and you'd need the 64 cm ES. Tim Gavin Cedar Rapids, IA On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 6:56 AM, a3inverter <smis...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings all, > > I've been interested in the San Marcos (in 63cm) for a year or so now and > a combination of some aggressive pricing and available fundage has me very > close to buying one, however, would like to hear from the bunch regarding > any comparisons to the Soma ES. The ES is a bit cheaper ($125) and might > fit slightly bigger tires. > > My priorities are: > A comfortable, well-fitting ride - 94cm PBH here and the 25.5in steel > Treks that I ride today (460,560,400) have plenty of Technomic showing to > get to level saddle and bars > Room for bigger tires - Room for 38c should do. I had 29x2's on my 62cm > LHT and while the tires could handle anything, the geometry really didn't > work for the rough stuff. > Light-ish - While the LHT did fit, it felt dead and heavy. > > Interested in your feedback...Thanks! > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
