Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Clydes on Carbon?

Folks,

I want to get a new bike and am considering the Cervelo S1 (Aluminum with carbon fork and seat post). I went to my LBS and was talking this over with them and they think I am crazy for not going to a full Carbon bike. I don't have any scientific reason for not wanting carbon, I just don't have enough data to support using it. Their argument is that everyone is using it and all the pros ride carbon therefore it must be good. My thoughts are that I don't know how many miles the pros put on their carbon bikes before they are replaced. I don't think the pros are loading their bikes in the trunk of a Saturn 3 or 4 times a week. I think I prefer aluminum because it is proven. I know many people that have 10K + miles on aluminum frames and they take some abuse. What do you think? I like change and usually embrace technology, but this one doesn't sit particularly well with me.

chevy57

Wo says all the pros are using carbon? A pro rider picks his bikes, specs and personal geo he wants tweaked his way, including the frame material. Often times a team looks to be riding all the same team bikes. Not true, some may appear to be what what they are not! If Lance said he want ti,he gets ti. But the labels say Trek for the sponsorship!;)

I have a slip of Jan Ulrrich swithcing bikes at the top of a climb. One bike was for climbing (lighter bike) and the other was for the dh. Both bikes are labeled the same but the tubes are noticeably different!

I had pretty much same reasons for buying a steel bike, b/c i don't trust aluminum. LBS let me try full carbon and I ended up buying (well it was bday present from my wife) Specialized full carbon. I am still sure it was the best choice.

I am 6'2", 230 pounds BTW

Yeah...your LBS is wrong on this one. The pro's ride what they want wihtin sponsorship limits.

But...I started at 320-lbs on an all-carbon bike (Kuota Kharma, btw). Now, 2-years and 15,000 miles later, I'm at 255-lbs and it's holding up fine. I still go through wheels, though (spokes, hubs, rims--you name it--and all on 32h, Ultegra hubbed Mavic Open Pro's).

I origianlly looked into Carbon because of the promise of comfort AND stiffness. I got it. Steel/Titanium--not stiff enough. Aluminum--not comfortable enough. At least, that's the info I had at the time. :D

not comfortable enough. At least, that's the info I had at the time. :D

Your Kuota, $3000? My Cannondale $1000. All of a sudden my Canni isn't so uncomfortable:D

I just switched to a Tarmac Expert all carbon bike from a aluminum with carbon stays and forks and the ride is way better and it feels much stiffer to me. I weigh 245 or so and dropping. From what I can tell the only thing I need to worry about is wheels.

Your Kuota, $3000? My Cannondale $1000. All of a sudden my Canni isn't so uncomfortable:D

:lol: Game, set & match...Beanz! :lol:

I'm 5'10 & 240# and ride an '06 Giant OCR Carbon Frame :love: No problems to date.

Just remember that carbon can't handle trauma like Ti, Al, or steel.

Just remember that carbon can't handle trauma like Ti, Al, or steel.

That's not entirely true. There are some types of trauma that carbon handles well, and other types that it handles poorly. Abrasion and cuts to the carbon fibers are generally a problem. Impacts at the wrong angle may also be a problem, though most bikes these days use multiple layers of CF fabric oriented in different directions to help mitigate this problem. Of course, thin-wall titanium, aluminum, and steel also have their vulnerabilities. Think 'beer can' and you'll get the picture.

Personally, I know too much about aluminum to ever trust an aluminum bike frame. The next frame I buy will be carbon fiber. The next frame I weld for myself will be steel (True Temper OX Platinum) or Titanium.

Abrasion and cuts to the carbon fibers are generally a problem.

That's the point I was trying to make but didn't say it well/go into the details. Any trauma that cuts or abrades the fibers is not good. Granted, I'm not a materials engineer, but I believe that carbon can be damaged much easier than other materials in this respect. I had a friend who nearly destroyed a carbon frame transporting it in the back of his vehicle. The top tube chafed against the the seat back (split rear seats in an SUV). It was thru the clearcoat an fortunately, it only "nicked" a few fibers. If it would have continued and damaged more fibers, the frame would have been a total loss.

That's the point I was trying to make but didn't say it well/go into the details. Any trauma that cuts or abrades the fibers is not good. Granted, I'm not a materials engineer, but I believe that carbon can be damaged much easier than other materials in this respect. I had a friend who nearly destroyed a carbon frame transporting it in the back of his vehicle. The top tube chafed against the the seat back (split rear seats in an SUV). It was thru the clearcoat an fortunately, it only "nicked" a few fibers. If it would have continued and damaged more fibers, the frame would have been a total loss.

Sounds very difficult to believe... In any event, I own a carbon fiber Trek bike that's 13-15 years old and I've never had a problem with it. And I don't especially baby it. I'm not a materials engineer either, but I know more than most about carbon fiber, steel, and aluminum and I wouldn't hesitate to buy a carbon fiber road bike made by a well-known manufacturer. Carbon fiber MTB, I might think twice. I've never had a problem with an aluminum bike, but knowing what I do about aluminum's fatigue limits I'm hesitant to trust it...

Sounds very difficult to believe...

I also own & ride a carbon frame bike.

You're right, ......I just made it all up........

my roadies are steel and full cf. if i come across more disposable income, next one will be ti.

Folks,

I want to get a new bike and am considering the Cervelo S1 (Aluminum with carbon fork and seat post). I went to my LBS and was talking this over with them and they think I am crazy for not going to a full Carbon bike. I don't have any scientific reason for not wanting carbon, I just don't have enough data to support using it. Their argument is that everyone is using it and all the pros ride carbon therefore it must be good. My thoughts are that I don't know how many miles the pros put on their carbon bikes before they are replaced. I don't think the pros are loading their bikes in the trunk of a Saturn 3 or 4 times a week. I think I prefer aluminum because it is proven. I know many people that have 10K + miles on aluminum frames and they take some abuse. What do you think? I like change and usually embrace technology, but this one doesn't sit particularly well with me.

chevy57

I'm not a materials expert, but I would think, your likely to have more problems with a frame that uses dissimilar materials, then one that doesn't. Any issues with a CF frame are going to be issues for an AL/CF frame just as well. Obviously if your going to spend some serious cash on a CF bike, then adding a little extra for a bike rack is probably a good idea, personally I like the ones that are trunk or hitch mounted, as it uses the car to shield the bike, some, from airborne debris. Of course best is to find an area near home to ride, so you don't need to drive to ride, in the first place. :D

When Aluminum is flexed, it fatigues, just slightly, after years of flexing, it will crack, and then tear. A 150lb rider will flex a frame less then a 200lb rider, and considerably less then a 250 or 300lb rider, so just because your 150lb friends never had a problem, doesn't mean you will not. While it's possible to be careful with a CF frame, even the most careful rider will eventually have an AL failure, if they ride the same bike long enough. Yes I know that aircraft are usually Aluminum, and AL failures have happened in aircraft as well.

Personally, I would never buy an AL or CF frame, used unless I knew the owner and bike very well. New, I don't see a problem with it, it doesn't break like Aluminum, it doesn't rust like steel. It's light, it's being used in rougher and rougher conditions all the time, including some mountain bike frames....

Just ride what feels right to you. I have been riding full carbon frames since '92 and the only failure I have had so far is a cracked seat tube on a 11yr old Giant MCM all though the head tube was Alu. These days all my carbon bikes are roadies as I do not want to fork out $$$$$ for a frame that that I know I will beat the hell out of.

Why do I ride carbon, the real reason for me, I like the looks :thumb:

I did not ride easy on the carbon mtb either, here is a pic of me at 240lbs on the frame that lasted 11yrs and this was back when just about everyone was skeptical about the "new" frame material.

http://www.socaltrailriders.org/gallery/data/1202/mattjump.jpg

Dirtbike dude, I love your sig line!

Cheers Tom, I see yer Boilers did not make it to boiling point yesterday. :innocent:

:beer:

Pros don't use bikes for their longevity. They use them because they are fast. They wear them out quickly and replace them. So don't buy a bike that you want to ride for the next 10 years because the salesman says "that's what the PROS use". Buy it because that's what you really want.

Pros don't use bikes for their longevity. They use them because they are fast. They wear them out quickly and replace them. So don't buy a bike that you want to ride for the next 10 years because the salesman says "that's what the PROS use". Buy it because that's what you really want.

I second that. Bike shops are in the market to sell bikes. Pro riders are markting tools to sell products. That's why they are plastered from head to toe in company names. Even their bikes are used in the same fashion. Just because a pro uses it doesn't always mean that you should. The pro is paid to use the products they use these days- bikes and all.