carbon bikes

[hotsocks3]

do you think carbon bikes are worth the extra money? life of bike compared to alloy bikes? damage prone?

just wondering of peoples thought with carbon bikes and traveling with them (hard or soft cases?)

cheers,

 

[justme]

Carbon bikes can be great, but they can also be crap. It's tough to generalize a bike based on it's material.

You can get good and bad bikes that are carbon and you can get the same from aluminum.

In the end it comes down to your needs in a bike. Think about the aspects that matter the most to you, weight, stiffness, durability, fit, impact resistance, price, handling, etc.... Once you know the 2 or 3 most important aspects you'll know where to start.

Ride as many of each as you can, and don't go into a test ride with any preconceived notions. You may be surprised what you end up on.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Also take into consideration what you're going to be using the bike for. A general rule of thumb is that unless you race on a regular basis, there really is no need for a carbon bike. justme is absolutely right when he said "It's tough to generalize a bike based on it's material", and more often than not, for people who do very little or no racing that take the time to test ride many materials (carbon, steel, Ti, scandium, aluminum), usually end up on a locally fabricated steel or Ti bike for superior ride quality attributes.

Take note that most carbon frames are made in Taiwan and China, and the manufacturing processes of carbon is really, really dirty. In these Asian countries, there is very little regulation on industrial waste, and carbon fiber dust is really nasty if not disposed of properly. Many of these carbon manufacturers' workers are suffering from black lung disease, the same ailment what coal miners get. They either vent it out in the street for the general population to breathe in, or they re-constitute it into the water system that flushes out into the ocean. Not all Asian factories operate in this manner, some are very current with industry standards, but unfortunately most still pollute to no end.

So, with that being said, I say if you're not racing much, or not at all, you're much better off with a handcrafted steel or Ti bike made locally by a master craftsman. And if you travel a lot, an S&S coupling system a very nice option that most builders offer now.

 

[Pietro]

do you think carbon bikes are worth the extra money? life of bike compared to alloy bikes? damage prone?

just wondering of peoples thought with carbon bikes and traveling with them (hard or soft cases?)

cheers,

'Worth' is personal. For some a $8000 carbon frame is 'worth' it, for others a $1000 carbon frame isn't 'worth' it.

They are generally NOT lifetime frames like some steel and titanium frames. Steel and ti break 'JRA' from crappy welding/design, but not 'because' of the materials of the frame. If made well with appropriate tubing, they can last decades. I've never seen a decades old Kestrel or Trek.

Carbon frames do not have the crashworthy-ness of metal frames either. If you are going to travel with them, probably a metal frame is a better idea.

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

As for comparing the strenghth of frame building materieals, Scot Nicol of Strong Frames has written a very comprehensive analysis.

Check it: http://www.strongframes.com/material_tech/

 

[LugHugger]

'Worth' is personal. For some a $8000 carbon frame is 'worth' it, for others a $1000 carbon frame isn't 'worth' it.

They are generally NOT lifetime frames like some steel and titanium frames. Steel and ti break 'JRA' from crappy welding/design, but not 'because' of the materials of the frame. If made well with appropriate tubing, they can last decades. I've never seen a decades old Kestrel or Trek.

Carbon frames do not have the crashworthy-ness of metal frames either. If you are going to travel with them, probably a metal frame is a better idea.

+1

I've raced aluminium in cross for a few years now and swapped out the tires in the summer and ridden my cross bike on the road. coming from a MTB background, I didn't have anything to measure road feel against until recently...

but, at the start of the year I was lucky enough to be in a position to pay for a dedicated road frame and after testing frames in every available common material, plumped for custom brazed Columbus steel. there were many reasons for going down this route a few of which are: relative cost (c. £1000 for custom frame and forks), ride feel, support for local craftsmen, visual appeal and bike fit. I'm not a racer on the road, so the minimal weight supplement is of no issue to me.

this is a purely personal decision. my only recommendation is to get out and ride as many different materials and geometries as possible. good luck.

 

[Jacques Tati]

Dont get carried away with the fads of the industry....I have a 20 year old steel Colnago it still looks great and rides like a dream. I also have a carbon C40 which equally is excellent...if I listened to all the hype the industry pumps out these days both would have be sent to the dump years ago. Buy what you like, what suits your pocket.

Yes carbon is nice.....but I personally dont think any cycle frame is worth £3000+. Even more worrying is looking on e-bay and seeing the makers of these frames selling them direct from their factories for £500 minus decals and even Colnago do factory resprays for £250.

My next frame....probably a custom made steel Brian Rourke...I'll know who's made it, I will have chosen every part and colour of it.

I also recall reading an article some months ago asking leading people in the industry what we could expect in the future....several saw the future with steel.

 

[Sheltowee]

do you think carbon bikes are worth the extra money? life of bike compared to alloy bikes? damage prone?

just wondering of peoples thought with carbon bikes and traveling with them (hard or soft cases?)

cheers,

The short answer is No.

 

[Sheltowee]

Dont get carried away with the fads of the industry....I have a 20 year old steel Colnago it still looks great and rides like a dream. I also have a carbon C40 which equally is excellent...if I listened to all the hype the industry pumps out these days both would have be sent to the dump years ago. Buy what you like, what suits your pocket.

Yes carbon is nice.....but I personally dont think any cycle frame is worth £3000+. Even more worrying is looking on e-bay and seeing the makers of these frames selling them direct from their factories for £500 minus decals and even Colnago do factory resprays for £250.

My next frame....probably a custom made steel Brian Rourke...I'll know who's made it, I will have chosen every part and colour of it.

I also recall reading an article some months ago asking leading people in the industry what we could expect in the future....several saw the future with steel.

I think pretty soon the green movement is going to kick in pro ranks and we will see a movement back to alloy frames in the peleton. All it will take is one successful team saying "hey, look at us! We ride steel. Our bikes are recyclable. We care about the enviroment." It will all be down hill for carbon after that because the sponsors will want to be associated with a green team etc.

 

[Black Dog]

Durability

Steel and Titanium have very long life spans, Carbon has a theoretical infinite life span (must be flawless and well designed) but is very fragile to damage. Aluminum has a finite life span as it gets brittle with repetitive use. All have pluses and minuses as a base material but it is engineering more than materials that determines the ride quality. Don't obsess over weight and you will end up with a good bike that lasts a long time, rides like a dream and does not cost a fortune.

 

[hotsocks3]

intersting, i did end up with an entery level carbon, and it is better then my standard, but the look of it and feel, was great. the simaler priced steel were not a nice. Just wanted to know peoples opions on carbon as i have had a few comments from people. The only concern i have is traveling if it as i want to get into some road racing (club level to start with)

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

do you think carbon bikes are worth the extra money? life of bike compared to alloy bikes? damage prone?

just wondering of peoples thought with carbon bikes and traveling with them (hard or soft cases?)

cheers,

intersting, i did end up with an entery level carbon, and it is better then my standard, but the look of it and feel, was great. the simaler priced steel were not a nice. Just wanted to know peoples opions on carbon as i have had a few comments from people. The only concern i have is traveling if it as i want to get into some road racing (club level to start with)

Well you kind of threw us for a loop with your opening comment now that you're telling us you already have one the very next day..

The price of an entry level carbon bike is not going to get you into a very nice steel bike anyway, so you can't really compare the two in that regard. Most high end steel is priced just below high end carbon. And with this traveling comment, I'm sure most of us assumed you were flying with it, at least I did. Sounds like you just need advice about padding it up in a car for the trip to the local race

Throw a towel over it like we all did before we bought racks.

 

[hotsocks3]

sorry if i lead you astray, but when people here you have a carbon, most people think you are a great rider or a tos***. just wanted to know what people thoughts were, and what i need to do to travel with it.

thanks

 

[Bishfactor]

'Worth' is personal. For some a $8000 carbon frame is 'worth' it, for others a $1000 carbon frame isn't 'worth' it."

is it safe to say that any of the cheaper carbon frames are rubbish? eg there's much hype of the Specialized Roubaix at the high end of the range, but their entry level bikes are like GBP1,000 or something with 105 kit (not 105 brakes tho). in this price range, should somebody just look at alu or steel?

 

[Pietro]

Steel and Titanium have very long life spans, Carbon has a theoretical infinite life span (must be flawless and well designed) but is very fragile to damage. Aluminum has a finite life span as it gets brittle with repetitive use. All have pluses and minuses as a base material but it is engineering more than materials that determines the ride quality. Don't obsess over weight and you will end up with a good bike that lasts a long time, rides like a dream and does not cost a fortune.

Agree but one small point that relates to design. Yes, carbon fiber does have an almost infinite lifetime but all carbon fiber frames are glued together somehow and that glue, epoxy, whatever does not have an infinite lifetime.

 

[Black Dog]

Agree but one small point that relates to design. Yes, carbon fiber does have an almost infinite lifetime but all carbon fiber frames are glued together somehow and that glue, epoxy, whatever does not have an infinite lifetime.

Point taken. Infinite is not infinite but will outlast the others under equal duty cycles.

 

[BroDeal]

It seems to me that carbon is the businessman's dream. Not only can you charge more for the perceived benefits but in many cases it reduces cost. You do not get that combination very often.

I remember reading that one of the reasons why aluminum with carbon back ends were being pushed is that the pre-fabbed carbon rear triangles could be bought from Taiwan for ridiculously low prices and installing them in a AL frame was overall cheaper than welding an AL rear triangle. On top of the cheaper manufacturing cost, a few C notes could be added to the price by telling the buyer fantasies about vibration absorbtion.

I would guess that carbon will eventually become a very low cost material. Maybe it has already happened. There are lots of very cheap asian carbon frames.

 

[tashimi76]

I personally think the best quality material (and preferrably lighter) for your price range is more important than what it is. I have both steel and carbon, both are great. Both are very stiff and give a similar amount of comfort. The carbon is used primarily for racing the steel now used mainly for training and commuting as it's about 3kg heavier (which is the difference between riding in a slower grade that doesn't exist!). I could have got lighter steel frame but it would have cost more than I wanted to pay, but it isn't exactly a cheap carbon frame. And there's no way I'd consider travelling in a plane with it. I'd love to get a Ti frame in the future (but don't have that kind of $).

As for how you're perceived on carbon, I think it depends on who you hang out with. The racing crowd where I like take you less seriously if you ride anything other than carbon, whereas the commuter types laugh at me for 'wasting' my money on something so expensive. Personally I think if you are riding a lot having an expensive bike isn't an issue, might as well spend more on it than my car, my bike does at least 4 times more kms on a weekly basis! I just put a tarpaulin over my bike in the back of my car and have had no problems.

 

[Ovidius]

Agree but one small point that relates to design. Yes, carbon fiber does have an almost infinite lifetime but all carbon fiber frames are glued together somehow and that glue, epoxy, whatever does not have an infinite lifetime.

Glue? What? Have you not heard of Monocoque?

I would guess that carbon will eventually become a very low cost material. Maybe it has already happened. There are lots of very cheap asian carbon frames.

This misses a vital point. Aluminium is easy to design and copy. So for instance, I can design a frame in my Garage, take it to a company and they can make a lot of them very cheaply.

Carbon, on the other hand, is very difficult to design because you have to mould it. Making the moulds for multiple sizes, to match perhaps different designs for testing etc, overall this process is where the expense is. If you get an off the shelf carbon frame or make a lot of frames for a mass market - so the lower end carbon frames (4.5 treks, low roubaix, cheaper own brands etc) - these will have the volume and are effectively very cheap, except for swapping moulds frequently.

However, with lower volume frames - so lighter bikes or ones you expect not to sell very many of, are actually expensive because of the processes required to design and make them.

As for Carbon - i'm never confident that it will last forever. My super-dupa exepnsive carbon bike has just snapped rather critically after only 2months of training (no races!!). Maybe just a faulty frame... time will only tell.

That said, my other carbon road bike rides like a dream and has been hammered over a year and is still going strong.

 

[Ovidius]

I think pretty soon the green movement is going to kick in pro ranks and we will see a movement back to alloy frames in the peleton. All it will take is one successful team saying "hey, look at us! We ride steel. Our bikes are recyclable. We care about the enviroment." It will all be down hill for carbon after that because the sponsors will want to be associated with a green team etc.

That is so unbelievably nieve. Riding steel bikes is not especially Green in the first place and whether they are recyclable is questionable at best - especially with the amount of steel required for a performance road bike.

The impact on racing would also be too big. The impact on the Cycle industry would be bigger. The impact of changing back to mass producing steel bikes - would be exceptionally big - enviromentally and financially.

So it is not pretty soon that alloy frames will return, nor is anything pointing toward a move away from Carbon.

 

[LugHugger]

That is so unbelievably nieve. Riding steel bikes is not especially Green in the first place and whether they are recyclable is questionable at best - especially with the amount of steel required for a performance road bike.

The impact on racing would also be too big. The impact on the Cycle industry would be bigger. The impact of changing back to mass producing steel bikes - would be exceptionally big - enviromentally and financially.

So it is not pretty soon that alloy frames will return, nor is anything pointing toward a move away from Carbon.

Perhaps not racing but evidence the recognition and growth in steel custom framebuilding in N America over the last 5 years. This is also mirrored in the UK and Italy. In fact, steel never went away in the traditional European markets. As you rightly say, the major builders have too much margin invested in carbon to turn back to steel. It's a nice thought though.

 

[Ovidius]

Perhaps not racing but evidence the recognition and growth in steel custom framebuilding in N America over the last 5 years. This is also mirrored in the UK and Italy. In fact, steel never went away in the traditional European markets. As you rightly say, the major builders have too much margin invested in carbon to turn back to steel. It's a nice thought though.

I absolutely agree, Steel has found its place, definately. Infact, I actually prefer steel as a niche product. I think Single speeds have really seen the biggest growth of steel bike production! In London, I have seen Single speeds go from totally niche to approximately 1/3 of all road bike sales - of which 60/70% are steel.

Nahbs really shows how cool steel can be and I love my Steel MTB!

 

[BroDeal]

This misses a vital point. Aluminium is easy to design and copy. So for instance, I can design a frame in my Garage, take it to a company and they can make a lot of them very cheaply.

Carbon, on the other hand, is very difficult to design because you have to mould it. Making the moulds for multiple sizes, to match perhaps different designs for testing etc, overall this process is where the expense is. If you get an off the shelf carbon frame or make a lot of frames for a mass market - so the lower end carbon frames (4.5 treks, low roubaix, cheaper own brands etc) - these will have the volume and are effectively very cheap, except for swapping moulds frequently.

However, with lower volume frames - so lighter bikes or ones you expect not to sell very many of, are actually expensive because of the processes required to design and make them.

Bringing up the capital outlay required to begin manufacture is a good point.

So here is a question: What is the cost to make five molds. Heck, some of these compact frames have fewer sizes than that. If you are selling frames for $5K a piece, how many do you have to sell to cover your initial expenses?

 

[BrandonT]

Greg Lemond's big blow up with Trek last year is a good reference of how much molds can cost a company. In 2007 Trek created all new molds for the Lemond Carbon lineup. They were supposed to last at least 3-5 years for Trek to make enough profit off them. They were used in production for only 1 full season. Trek took a huge loss on that line up. You may have noticed that Gary Fisher now has road bikes. You will see in the next few season's a carbon road bike. Now I assume they will be the old Lemond molds to try to make some of their money back.

I own steel, alloy and carbon road/cross bikes and they each have a their niche. I do think my next big purchase will be a Ti frame though. I have never had the pleasure.

Another point: The Kelly Benefits team has been riding on aluminum frames this season and are competitive in my opinion. I am not sure if they still are.

 

[Ovidius]

Bringing up the capital outlay required to begin manufacture is a good point.

So here is a question: What is the cost to make five molds. Heck, some of these compact frames have fewer sizes than that. If you are selling frames for $5K a piece, how many do you have to sell to cover your initial expenses?

All I can say is that it is a lot. Obviously, it differs between teqhniques. Smaller companies that are still making lugged carbon bikes are making a profit fairly quickly. Monocoque frames are difficult one. From my experience (I work for a large cycle retailer, with its own brand), we found that carbon road bikes were unprofitable - especially on low volumes (500 Bikes or so). That was for an in house designed road bike, manufactured in the far east - with a fairly good manufacturing deal.

Unfortunately, the Cycle industry as a whole keeps its financial data and costing secret.