Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Fact or fiction about carbon and clydesdales?

I'm sure this has been covered once or twice but has there been a definitive answer? Will I crack a carbon frame from regular, non-racing use? I'm 220 lb, 5'8" of chub and muscle...mostly the former. I was looking at a carbon bike but the sales guy says I might conisder sticking to aluminum or going titanium because carbons can crack under load. I didn't know if I was being insulted for being heavy or conned for having been naive about frame materials. I'm looking to fellow clydes for their experience.

What say you about carbon? Is one manufacturer's carbon better than the rest? Would you buy a used carbon bike from a fellow clyde? TIA.

I rode an old cannondale AL hybrid for 1500 miles then got a full carbon road bike @ 275lbs, have ridden 1200 miles on it, so far no problems, I did replace the carbon seat post with a Thomson seat post since I don't trust carbon seat posts for heavy weights. I ride between 120-180 miles per week currently at 250lbs, any name brand should be ok.

And let me guess the salesman was like 140lbs. In reality it's a fact same as any material have you ever heard of an aluminum frame failing while leaning against a wall duhhhhh, all material breaks while under load. Another thing a carbon frame is likely easier to have repaired than aluminum unless you know of a real good aluminum welder. Buy the carbon if that's the bike you want and it feels good to you. I ride carbon and at 225lbs have had no issues with almost 4000k on mine since May. Any carbon bike in a giving price range is no better or worse IMHO I would however steer clear of a used carbon frame unless you can be sure it has no issues or crash history.

i got in on the BF group buy of the Pedal Force's RS all-CF frameset:

http://pedalforce.com/online/product_info.php?products_id=3028

4,200+miles later it's still a sweet ride - and no cracks

and i weigh more than you (now more muscle than chub, thanks to this bike)

i have steel and titanium in my stable of bikes, but CF gives a great ride,
especially with a Brooks saddle and 700x25s!

IMHO of course, YMMV

IMHO: Fiction. I'm 250 ish and ride carbon. Find a new LBS.

Fiction man, total bull.

I wouldn't recommend buying a used carbon bike from anyone to tell you the truth. I wouldn't be afraid of a used bike with a carbon fork, they are easily replaced should it fail. If you are looking at a used carbon bike then check it over very carefully for any nicks, gouges, or chips that made it below the paint. Any damage to the fiber weave can seriously compromise the structural integrity of the frame. Remember, carbon fiber = fancy plastic.

Another thing a carbon frame is likely easier to have repaired than aluminum unless you know of a real good aluminum welder.

When carbon needs repair, you throw it away. Aluminum welding is tricky, but there are plenty of people qualified to do it. Carbon, on the other hand, is almost impossible to repair. Craig Calfee is the only person I know who's willing to attempt it... and he usually has a substantial backlog of work.

Just piling on, but I can tell you that a good carbon frame will hold much, much more than you weigh. Just be careful tightening components onto that frame (use a torque wrench) and pay attention to any cracks that may show up. I can vouch for trek and Bontrager components in general being very well designed/built in the carbon area. I love my carbon bikes!

Aluminum frame I was riding at 220 lbs. Snapped on a climb after 12,000 miles, 2.5 years. My buddy has a $4000 STEEL DeRosa that snapped too after a couple of years. Everything is subject to an "oh snap" here and there.

I myself would never buy a used carbon frame. You don't know if the guy crashed it and if it has a risk of failure.:eek:

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/gulpxtreme/broke.jpg
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/gulpxtreme/broke2.jpg

I'm sure this has been covered once or twice but has there been a definitive answer? Will I crack a carbon frame from regular, non-racing use? I'm 220 lb, 5'8" of chub and muscle...mostly the former. I was looking at a carbon bike but the sales guy says I might conisder sticking to aluminum or going titanium because carbons can crack under load. I didn't know if I was being insulted for being heavy or conned for having been naive about frame materials. I'm looking to fellow clydes for their experience.

What say you about carbon? Is one manufacturer's carbon better than the rest? Would you buy a used carbon bike from a fellow clyde? TIA.

With a good Carbon frame I think you would be fine. Stick with the reputable brands and you'll be fine. Get one with a good warranty. For me I had carbon but recently switched to Ti because of three reasons:
1) I've always wanted a Ti bike and a sale came along for a frame I could not pass by
2) Ti is strong; can last a life time (knock on wood)
3) Bikes in my garage get whacked occasionally (kids, etc.). With carbon if something hits it and creates a deep nick in the frame then the entire frame could be damaged. I was always paranoid of the bike falling over, etc. when leaned up on something. Bugged me to no end.

Issue is Ti can be super expensive. My bike costs, with all components & frame, about $1600 total. It compares with bikes that cost $2400 on up easily.

-b

When carbon needs repair, you throw it away. Aluminum welding is tricky, but there are plenty of people qualified to do it. Carbon, on the other hand, is almost impossible to repair. Craig Calfee is the only person I know who's willing to attempt it... and he usually has a substantial backlog of work.

Calfee is who I mean yes there is qualified people to weld aluminum I have two friends who are qualified and neither of them will, reason too much risk involved. And you shouls also consider most comanies will back up their frames within reason, some even have crash replacement policies.

At 220# you are exceedingly average. I wouldn't worry about it. If you like carbon, buy it...at a different shop.

With a good Carbon frame I think you would be fine. Stick with the reputable brands and you'll be fine. Get one with a good warranty. For me I had carbon but recently switched to Ti because of three reasons:
1) I've always wanted a Ti bike and a sale came along for a frame I could not pass by
2) Ti is strong; can last a life time (knock on wood)
3) Bikes in my garage get whacked occasionally (kids, etc.). With carbon if something hits it and creates a deep nick in the frame then the entire frame could be damaged. I was always paranoid of the bike falling over, etc. when leaned up on something. Bugged me to no end.

Issue is Ti can be super expensive. My bike costs, with all components & frame, about $1600 total. It compares with bikes that cost $2400 on up easily.

-b

Could you please fill me in on where you found a frame for so little. I have been considering building a Ti bike myself and am finding frames starting at over $1500. I am in the same boat as you, I have a mostly carbon bike that has a few nicks in it, my LBS checked them out and said that they were not an issue. I am sure that it fine, but it bugs me too. Plus as you noted, I would like to have a Ti bike, just because it would be fun.

i started riding carbon when i was almost 300 pounds. this year i did a significant amount of weight training and went from 265 to 283 while losing at least an inch around the gut. My cf frame holds me just fine and i am anything but nice to it when i ride. i have not done a ton of racing with it, but i race and ride enough to not worry to much about the frame. i will always worry about the frame cause its shiny and Cf, but not from riding. i will say the piece of mind i have when riding my steel bike is great. i just don't give a $h!t and i love it.

When carbon needs repair, you throw it away. Aluminum welding is tricky, but there are plenty of people qualified to do it. Carbon, on the other hand, is almost impossible to repair. Craig Calfee is the only person I know who's willing to attempt it... and he usually has a substantial backlog of work.

odd there aren't more people who do this. I sail an all carbon AClass catamaran, carnage is a fairly normal thing in the class and repairing hulls, masts, foils and various stearing bits is a normal thing.

I suppose it may just be cheaper and lower liability to just replace with bikes.

I agree: Complete BS
I also agree: Find you another LBS.

I am currently 260lbs and have had my 2006 Specialized Roubaix Elete for the past year and a half with no problems what so ever. When I bought it I was 292 and just starting my weight loss program. My low was 240 back in may of this year and I have been on a yo-yo because of my work schedule not giving me enough time for riding right now. Still the bikes frame has held up very well and I have had no issues aside from having to replace the stock Alex wheels and the stock seat post with a Thompson to accomidate the saddle I currently use. I went over the bike very close before buying it and had my LBS go over it as well. Almost 2500 miles later and still going...................

6'6" 225-230 mostly Walrus blubber here. So far no problems with my carbon frame over roads with the occasional pothole/cobbles. Being my weight only smaller, I bet you will have no problems with a carbon frame either.

I would buy from another shop. I would buy a quality brand bike and take care of it. Anything can be damaged by poor care while good care can make things last almost forever.

Then I would return and rub their noses in it (but that's just me).

I researched carbon "weight limits" ~ mostly contacted the tech departments for popular/reputable manufacturers, Cannondale, Trek , etc. ~ and basically asked them what the weight limit was for a specific frame (in my case all petite sizes). They all came back with 275 lbs. I do realize they are trying to sell something but I also know they have warranty/replacement policies and I don't think they'd be inaccurate about this.

285lb Trek 5.2 Madone. About 3 years of road biking. No problems.

I'm 6'1" and mostly 235-240 range and have 6,000+ miles on my Madone 5.2 (carbon) and about the same on my 1200 (aluminum) Both Treks. No problems so far. (with the bikes, motor is not so good)

odd they make 61/62 cm frames if it is expected all riders will be under 220#. Your LBS guy must want to sell you something else for some other reason.

I weighed 220 when I bought my Specialized Roubaix. LBS said the frame would have no issues. They indicated you'll have to pay more attention to wheels than the frame at weight

People used to buy a bike and keep it for the rest of their lives. Some people
are very careful, never crash, and never run across a dumb wrench monkey in a bike shop.

I am not that person. I lean my bike against boulders in the mountains, sometimes find terrible mechanics, crash, you name it. It's why there are no carbon touring bikes. They will only take so much abuse.

Nothing against carbon, it just doesn't work for me.

Could you please fill me in on where you found a frame for so little. I have been considering building a Ti bike myself and am finding frames starting at over $1500. I am in the same boat as you, I have a mostly carbon bike that has a few nicks in it, my LBS checked them out and said that they were not an issue. I am sure that it fine, but it bugs me too. Plus as you noted, I would like to have a Ti bike, just because it would be fun.

I got in on the Performance Bike/Lynskey deal that occurred about 2? months ago now- $629. With regards to the components I shop around for deals on ebay, online stores and craigslist. This is how I keep it so low but have decent components- Ultegra. I also do all of the work myself with the exception of BB which I'm planning to do within the next couple weeks.

The frame performance is selling was welded by the folks @ Lynskey...came in their box + Mark Lynskey acknowledges they put it together. Is it better than my old Carbon? It's a wash.

b

Total Crapola.

I am also about 5'8' and 250. Have a Specialized Roubaix that I purchased in 2006. Love going downhill with it. Hit 47.6 mph today.:D

5'9 and 235 here, just bought a 2008 Specialized Roubaix Elite today at my LBS, gonna take it on a 25-30 mile ride tomorrow, but so far I love it, feels great and rides great.

Big people on super light bikes are of equal practicality as a Yugo motor in a lambo body.

It's also a fairly unsafe material when it fails, more so then aluminum. Heavy rides break things far quicker then 140lbers.

Sure they may hold up well, for awhile, but what gains will you get? 5%? Worth the risk? If it is, you've got more balls then me.

I rather enjoy my relative safety and ability to live. Call me a wimp, crazy, or whatever. I feel I'm thinking rather sanely.

Aluminum or Steel, unless your priorities and/or view of what is practical and safe is on par with random people on the internet. I'd vote steel though, you'll be flexing the hell out of a frame, aluminum doesn't like that. Steel also tends to bend more then snap, from what I've read. Again though, I'm just some random know-it-all from the interwebs.

I got in on the Performance Bike/Lynskey deal that occurred about 2? months ago now- $629. With regards to the components I shop around for deals on ebay, online stores and craigslist. This is how I keep it so low but have decent components- Ultegra. I also do all of the work myself with the exception of BB which I'm planning to do within the next couple weeks.

The frame performance is selling was welded by the folks @ Lynskey...came in their box + Mark Lynskey acknowledges they put it together. Is it better than my old Carbon? It's a wash.

b

THANK for the info. I am a ways from building my next bike, but at least I now know of a lower cost option if that is the way a want to go!!!!:thumb:

Big people on super light bikes are of equal practicality as a Yugo motor in a lambo body.

It's also a fairly unsafe material when it fails, more so then aluminum. Heavy rides break things far quicker then 140lbers.

Sure they may hold up well, for awhile, but what gains will you get? 5%? Worth the risk? If it is, you've got more balls then me.

I rather enjoy my relative safety and ability to live. Call me a wimp, crazy, or whatever. I feel I'm thinking rather sanely.

Aluminum or Steel, unless your priorities and/or view of what is practical and safe is on par with random people on the internet. I'd vote steel though, you'll be flexing the hell out of a frame, aluminum doesn't like that. Steel also tends to bend more then snap, from what I've read. Again though, I'm just some random know-it-all from the interwebs.


I have rode steel, aluminum and carbon and one thing that my highend lightweight carbon frame has over the other two is ride quality or comfort. Not all carbon bikes are built equal but I will say my 5.5 Madone is like riding a cloud, is it any faster debatable but I can say I feel a whole lot better after the ride. Saying that my next bike will be a Colnago Master Light.

I don't see any advantage to Carbon Fiber unless you race. It saves maybe 24-32 ounces and I have more than that to lose around the belly. It rides nicer with the really high pressure tires, but not appreciably better than steel. I don't race, I ride 700X28 tires, and when I looked at replacing my old TREK with cf a few years ago I decided to upgrade the drivetrain on the TREK and just keep riding. I like the aluminum for my commuter/utility bike but still think steel is best for touring or recreation.

I'm 6' I weigh 226, I regularly get out of the saddle on climbs on my CF Monocoque Motobecane.
I've got 300 climbs and double that sprints and over 3K miles sence I got the bike a year ago.
In a word NO
No you are not going to crack a well made CF frame simply because you are larger than the toothpicks who normally ride these things.

Big people on super light bikes are of equal practicality as a Yugo motor in a lambo body.

It's also a fairly unsafe material when it fails, more so then aluminum. Heavy rides break things far quicker then 140lbers.

Sure they may hold up well, for awhile, but what gains will you get? 5%? Worth the risk? If it is, you've got more balls then me.

I rather enjoy my relative safety and ability to live. Call me a wimp, crazy, or whatever. I feel I'm thinking rather sanely.

Aluminum or Steel, unless your priorities and/or view of what is practical and safe is on par with random people on the internet. I'd vote steel though, you'll be flexing the hell out of a frame, aluminum doesn't like that. Steel also tends to bend more then snap, from what I've read. Again though, I'm just some random know-it-all from the interwebs.

This is just so wrong on so many levels it isn't even funny. Let me set you straight on a few things.
First, Why should the fact that we are "larger" than someone else preclude us from riding/owning the best equipment out there??????????? Maybe we better take all the Ferrari's away from all the 300lb owners. Why wouldn't we, as large riders, want to be just as comfortable and have the best performance possible just like the next guy? That's a rather defeatist attitude you have there!

Second, You think that just because we are big we are slow???? What kind of nonsense is that? Maybe if we are out of shape we are slow but bigness does not mean slowness! Maybe since I'm 230+ I better give up my ultra-distance course records and resign myself to sitting on the couch with a Yugo in the front yard.

Third, Carbon Fiber can be made significantly stronger than steel. That's a fact. If you think carbon is so frail you better stop riding in airplanes!
Carbon is extremely strong and can be made into just about any shape an engineer wants. As hard as it is for you to accept, carbon has become the material of choice for making bicycles.

I just bought a new bike. At 325 pounds I wasn't even considering carbon until I talked with a lot of LBS guys and factory techs. Much to my surprise, they all gave me a green light on carbon frames. I narrowed my choices down to Specialized and Trek. I called each company twice, just so I could put my questions to multiple tech reps. Both guys at Trek told me about their official 275 pound limit, but also said that it was an extremely conservative number and that I really had nothing to worry about. Specialized said that they have NO WEIGHT LIMIT, and that their frames are tested to extremes that are beyond human abilities. The second guy from Specialized referenced his 290 pound powerlifting brother, and said that he's been on a Roubaix for a couple of years with no issues at all. I ended up with a Specialized Tarmac and it's awesome so far.

I dunno! I wouldn't consider riding carbon. I'm way too big and way too powerful!:p

This is just so wrong on so many levels it isn't even funny. Let me set you straight on a few things.
First, Why should the fact that we are "larger" than someone else preclude us from riding/owning the best equipment out there??????????? Maybe we better take all the Ferrari's away from all the 300lb owners. Why wouldn't we, as large riders, want to be just as comfortable and have the best performance possible just like the next guy? That's a rather defeatist attitude you have there!

Second, You think that just because we are big we are slow???? What kind of nonsense is that? Maybe if we are out of shape we are slow but bigness does not mean slowness! Maybe since I'm 230+ I better give up my ultra-distance course records and resign myself to sitting on the couch with a Yugo in the front yard.

Third, Carbon Fiber can be made significantly stronger than steel. That's a fact. If you think carbon is so frail you better stop riding in airplanes!
Carbon is extremely strong and can be made into just about any shape an engineer wants. As hard as it is for you to accept, carbon has become the material of choice for making bicycles.


A lot of ranting there, I'll explain my view (read opinion, which has as much weight as any other regular person.)

You seem to think I'm saying fat or otherwise heavy people don't deserve expensive things, that's way off base. Money spent on comfort is great. Yes carbon is more comfortable then aluminum, and steel by a bit, but so are slightly wider tires at lower PSI. Which also, is much safer for us heavy folks.

My comment about the Yugo is simple, you knock an amazing 5lbs off a bike, that does what for a person that weighs 250-350lbs? Sure, you're not slow, many clydes outride people half their weight. I'm just of the opinion that people are too anal about light bikes, and the perceived gains from them.

Carbon is stronger then steel, that all depends, really. It's very stiff, but as durable? As safe? Again, it all depends. But when it fails, it's most definitely not as safe.

You seem extremely mad that someone said the huge wad of cash clydes (and people not in top physical form) drop on super light bicycles is wasted money. Sorry, but it is. Heavy people are slower uphill, accelerating, cornering, stopping, and maneuvering compared to light people. Dropping 5 lbs doesn't help much on the 50-100lbs the rider is handicapped with. It's most definitely silly to sacrifice safety in this regard.
Want comfort? Steel and 28C+ tires does that. Want speed? Train, have a stupidly low body fat percentage, and then buy a light bike, because one can no longer lose weight from their body.

I get people associate their objects to their self worth. This is why hummers, lambos, and other overpriced, flashy, and impractical crap sells so well. Also, this is why people (non competition grade riders) drop enough to feed a family for a year on light bikes. But don't get offended when someone calls BS.

Also, try and treat people with differing views more respectfully. I don't appreciate the tone.


You're not your job. You're not how much money you have in the bank. You're not the car (bike) you drive (ride). You're not the contents of your wallet. You're not your fu**ing khakis.

I dunno! I wouldn't consider riding carbon. I'm way too big and way too powerful!:p

Lmao.

A lot of ranting there, I'll explain my view (read opinion, which has as much weight as any other regular person.)

You seem to think I'm saying fat or otherwise heavy people don't deserve expensive things, that's way off base. Money spent on comfort is great. Yes carbon is more comfortable then aluminum, and steel by a bit, but so are slightly wider tires at lower PSI. Which also, is much safer for us heavy folks.

My comment about the Yugo is simple, you knock an amazing 5lbs off a bike, that does what for a person that weighs 250-350lbs? Sure, you're not slow, many clydes outride people half their weight. I'm just of the opinion that people are too anal about light bikes, and the perceived gains from them.

Carbon is stronger then steel, that all depends, really. It's very stiff, but as durable? As safe? Again, it all depends. But when it fails, it's most definitely not as safe.

You seem extremely mad that someone said the huge wad of cash clydes (and people not in top physical form) drop on super light bicycles is wasted money. Sorry, but it is. Heavy people are slower uphill, accelerating, cornering, stopping, and maneuvering compared to light people. Dropping 5 lbs doesn't help much on the 50-100lbs the rider is handicapped with. It's most definitely silly to sacrifice safety in this regard.
Want comfort? Steel and 28C+ tires does that. Want speed? Train, have a stupidly low body fat percentage, and then buy a light bike, because one can no longer lose weight from their body.

I get people associate their objects to their self worth. This is why hummers, lambos, and other overpriced, flashy, and impractical crap sells so well. Also, this is why people (non competition grade riders) drop enough to feed a family for a year on light bikes. But don't get offended when someone calls BS.

Also, try and treat people with differing views more respectfully. I don't appreciate the tone.

I take offence with how you discibe me. I', 225lbs on a stupid super expensive sub 17lbs bike, I however am not really upset but I do feel for people who think they have to tell others what is right or wrong for them. Does my $6000 bike make me faster likely not, could I loose some wieght, you bet. Fact is I did not buy the bike to be exsisive or show off. I bought it because cycling is my passion and I enjoy quality. Have you ever rode a high end bike for more than a test ride? Maybe you have but you certianly don't talk like you have. Call me brainwashed but once you have rode a quality frame the money will not seem so out of place. I have two bikes now one aluminum that is a very nice capable machine that sits lonely in the corner waiting for winter training seesions and a high end carbon bike that gives me endless amonuts of pleasure that no other bike has ever given me, it has taken my riding to a whole other level. And as for safety come on, steel breaks, aluminum breaks, carbon breaks, I'd almost bet you ride a bike with a carbon fork and you likely never even think about it, we take more of a chance just riding on the road. Thanks for your advice but I'll keep riding my carbon along with all the other guys I ride with some for over a decade on carbon without failure. And hey I promise I added no tone to my post.

I'm riding a hand made bike, that all told, I've spent $4.2k on.

I chose a steel frame and fork, aluminum seat post. I'm all for comfort, don't get me wrong. IMO Carbon doesn't ride much if any better then slightly wider tires on a steel frame.

I'm not trying to offend anyone who's heavy. I'm far from light myself (235lbs on a good day.) If I had the athletic ability of TDF riders, I'd still be slow, even on a 5lb bike that cost $50,000.

Also, I'm not saying carbon is weak, and will snap like a toothpick. I'm saying that if, and when it does, it won't bend, or slowly fracture, it will explode into very sharp fragments. Be it from fatigue, mis-use, an accident, hitting an unseen pothole, or getting a tiny, tiny scratch that completely compromises it's integrity.
If my frame fails, for whatever reason, I'd rather it bend then fracture into something that could impale me with tens of thousands of splinters. A seatpost doing this would not be fun, same goes for a fork.

I'm riding a hand made bike, that all told, I've spent $4.2k on.

I chose a steel frame and fork, aluminum seat post. I'm all for comfort, don't get me wrong. Carbon doesn't ride much if any better then slightly wider tires on a steel frame.

I'm not trying to offend anyone who's heavy. I'm far from light myself (235lbs on a good day.) If I had the athletic ability of TDF riders, I'd still be slow, even on a 5lb bike that cost $50,000.

Also, I'm not saying carbon is weak, and will snap like a toothpick. I'm saying that if, and when it does, it won't bend, or slowly fracture, it will explode into very sharp fragments. Be it from fatigue, mis-use, an accident, hitting an unseen pothole, or getting a tiny, tiny scratch that completely compromises it's integrity.
If my frame fails, for whatever reason, I'd rather it bend then fracture into something that could impale me with tens of thousands of splinters. A seatpost doing this would not be fun, same goes for a fork.

At least you'e not one of those guys who say spending money on a quality bike is wrong. Have fun riding what makes you happy and I'll ride what makes me happy. That my friend is the bottom line.

I'm riding a hand made bike, that all told, I've spent $4.2k on.

I chose a steel frame and fork, aluminum seat post. I'm all for comfort, don't get me wrong. Carbon doesn't ride much if any better then slightly wider tires on a steel frame.

I'm not trying to offend anyone who's heavy. I'm far from light myself (235lbs on a good day.) If I had the athletic ability of TDF riders, I'd still be slow, even on a 5lb bike that cost $50,000.

Also, I'm not saying carbon is weak, and will snap like a toothpick. I'm saying that if, and when it does, it won't bend, or slowly fracture, it will explode into very sharp fragments. Be it from fatigue, mis-use, an accident, hitting an unseen pothole, or getting a tiny, tiny scratch that completely compromises it's integrity.
If my frame fails, for whatever reason, I'd rather it bend then fracture into something that could impale me with tens of thousands of splinters. A seatpost doing this would not be fun, same goes for a fork.

And I here I thought the fear mongers only dealt in politics. Even a cursory Google search will reveal frames of various materials failing in ways you’ve never imagined.

And I here I thought the fear mongers only dealt in politics. Even a cursory Google search will reveal frames of various materials failing in ways you’ve never imagined.

Fair's fair, I should of said "I'd rather it have a tendency to bend then fracture into something that could impale me with tens of thousands of splinters."

Like I said, it's not that I feel carbon is sub standard, or inherently weaker, just that it isn't quite as safe.
It also doesn't take abuse nearly as well, and I do tend to abuse things, just by being the weight I am, among other things.
Things like this are what keep me off carbon:

http://www.bustedcarbon.com/
http://www.bustedcarbon.com/2009/06/broken-steerer-on-trek.html is pretty nasty.
and

http://charleshutcheson.blogspot.com/2009/07/oh-carnage.html
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_MGr72o7jZnI/Sk6k_qV5iEI/AAAAAAAAAZc/ZnNeiz5o6PY/s400/kecks+bike.JPG


At about 12 to go, we were waved to one side of a traffic median we normally split for. There was an ambulance and people all around someone. I did not know it then, but it was Keck. He is fine, but he did have to go to the ER to find out if he had carbon fiber in his arm from his frame.

I think about the money I spent on my Orbea CF bike and then watch my neighbor hook up to his bass boat for a Saturday morning fishing trip. How about $42,000.00 not counting the countless $500.00 rod/reel sets he has. My $3000.00 bike no longer seems out of this world.

Another measure is that my wife has decided to really start riding, and doing well. She had a nice steel Giant with good components. Then she tried a Cannondale CF bike that is made for females. Since she came home with that bike two things changed. She no longer says a word about the cost of my bike and she is riding so much better. Of course I did not even bother asking what she paid for her bike and she has not volunteered the amount.

All this just to say I have been in other sports that do not have near the health benefits of cycling, yet the costs are often more than even the CF bikes. I have personally found riding a bicycle not inexpensive, but the benefit per dollar is very high.

Fair's fair, I should of said "I'd rather it have a tendency to bend then fracture into something that could impale me with tens of thousands of splinters."

Like I said, it's not that I feel carbon is sub standard, or inherently weaker, just that it isn't quite as safe.
It also doesn't take abuse nearly as well, and I do tend to abuse things, just by being the weight I am, among other things.
Things like this are what keep me off carbon:

http://www.bustedcarbon.com/
http://www.bustedcarbon.com/2009/06/broken-steerer-on-trek.html is pretty nasty.
and

http://charleshutcheson.blogspot.com/2009/07/oh-carnage.html
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_MGr72o7jZnI/Sk6k_qV5iEI/AAAAAAAAAZc/ZnNeiz5o6PY/s400/kecks+bike.JPG


Hey, you drink whatever kool-aid makes you happy bro. :D

Boy this is like cats & dogs.

Go with whatever you like. I feel you are a candidate for a well build Carbon bike.
b

At one time CF manufacturers were building bikes that had 180-200lb weight limits. I know I got my Klein Quantum cause I was just too heavy for the Kestrel in 1990.

Today however, CF is so strong that bikes that need extra weight to meet the UCI minimums will have no trouble with a 300lb clide.

That said, we all have our little preferences. I will never ride Al again because of the harshness of the ones that I owned. Right now the top of my short list for my next bike is the Colnago CLX 2, or Maybe the ACE.. but all 4 bikes in my current list for the next bike are CF.

I tend to think that, with most bikes, you have to trust the designer. Incorrectly assembled carbon fiber, aluminum, steel, titanium, or any other material bikes can fail catastrophically. Repairs require a certain degree of skill to not render the bike unsafe. Even steel. Did the guy who carefully un-brazed the old tube and braze in a new tube use the right tube? Maybe. Maybe not. Same thing for Aluminum. 6061 has different degrees of strength/flexibility depending on how it's been heat treated and/or artificially aged. If you want to repair an Al frame, even if you weld it, it might still fail again near the heat-affected-zone.

I'd say that the word direct from whoever makes the frame is probably your best bet. And I just don't like carbon at all, but that's me and that's not about the rider weight, it's that I don't trust the designers to get carbon fiber right.

My comment about the Yugo is simple, you knock an amazing 5lbs off a bike, that does what for a person that weighs 250-350lbs? Sure, you're not slow, many clydes outride people half their weight. I'm just of the opinion that people are too anal about light bikes, and the perceived gains from them.

It's ridiculous to think that weight doesn't matter just because you're heavy. If you were going to climb to the top of Mt. Everest, which backpack would you want to carry? The 23lb backpack, the 19lb backpack or the 15lb backpack?

Weight does matter, especially when you're working near the limits of your personal endurance...


Carbon is stronger then steel, that all depends, really. It's very stiff, but as durable? As safe? Again, it all depends. But when it fails, it's most definitely not as safe.

Any catastrophic failure during a ride is going to make you very unhappy regardless of the material. Personally, I've seen more aluminum frames and components fail catastrophically than any other material. Is carbon fiber more likely to fail while Just Riding Along than steel, aluminum, or titanium? I haven't seen any credible evidence that suggests it is...

This topic has been done to death, yes.

What it comes down to is two camps: those who have no problem trying new things and have tried and use CF, and those who are afraid and spread that fear willingly.

There will always be examples of failing carbon. There will also be examples of spectacularly failing steel and aluminum. The fact remains that CF is strong enough for the OP at 225 lbs. All of the rest is just opinion and personal preference.

In the end, does CF make me faster? Nope. It makes me more comfortable, longer. And that makes me more efficient, which gives me the extra 5% (distance or speed) that some seem to think is non-existent. Even though I tip the scales at 250+.

I'll chime in and I by no means do I express a profession opinion...

I personally like steel. I also like old stuff. not new houses, old ones built with dimensional lumber 100+ years old.

My favourite car is a 1969 Corvette Stingray (although I wouldn't pass up on a free C6)

I like old... I own a Miyata 610 (touring bike) triple ring up front. no it isnt the lightest nor does it matter that is what I wanted and I like it (havent even rode it just got it sunday)

my point is this. at 6'6" 270lbs I am just not interested in the 'weight game'

technology advances but not always for the better... so if you want carbon get carbon, the same goes for Ti or steel or Al or whatever floats your boat.

don't judge me and my stuff cause I am not going to judge yours. be happy! we are all on the same team CYCLIST ought to not matter what we ride just as long as we ride...

i know this didn't clarify but I said my piece....

PS carbon fiber is a carcinogen. I worked with it in the military, exploding frames and that in my skin? no thanks.

Dropping 5 lbs doesn't help much on the 50-100lbs the rider is handicapped with.All I know is that when I don't need to carry my bike lock to work I can spin at least 1 gear higher up the hills (and I am obese). Even for big people 5lbs is a noticeable difference. Plus, we can loose weight during the lifespan of our bike. Having said all that, I got a LHT which is NOT a lightweight (but is very comfortable).