Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Is carbon worth it?

Is carbon fiber worth the extra money?

First with "It depends"!

I'm actually struggling with the question myself right now. I am lusting for a Tarmac. But the truth is that @ my level & purpose, I don't really NEED to upgrade from my Allez.

Well... it depends on what kind of riding you do.

It also depends on if you can afford the extra $$$.

Yes, it may not make any difference depending on your ride style, but all your friends will think you are cool.:D

Yes.

How am I going to mount my rack for the panniers on a carbon 105?

Carbon doesn't register on police radar guns. Therefor, you're not impeded by posted speed limits. Well worth the extra cash that you'll save in traffic citations alone.

Is carbon fiber worth the extra money?I think so. But, like others have said, depends on you. And also depends on the particular bike. My last bike prior had been aluminum. Harsh ride. CF I got 5 years ago was much smoother. Of course, the aluminum was 12yrs older than that. YMMV.


Yes, it may not make any difference depending on your ride style, but all your friends will think you are cool.:DThis short post is so unlike you. Alright? Who are you and what have you done with our Beanz?!

How am I going to mount my rack for the panniers on a carbon 105?

Duct Tape and Zip Ties.

This short post is so unlike you. Alright? Who are you and what have you done with our Beanz?!

217366

Duct Tape and Zip Ties.

That's a relief, I figured I'd have to invest in a quart of modeler's glue. I figured that model glue would melt the rack brackets into the seat stays on the CF.

For me the big difference was vibration in the handlebars. I ride mainly oil and chip country roads. The extra damping of carbon was worth the $400 dollar upgrade.

I wonder if you saved on money on going aluminum and went carbon seat post, fork, bars, stem. double wrapped the bars, good wheelset and added a dose of HTFU (just learned that phrase) you could get the same road dampening results? for far less money, and supposed worry of carbon frame exploding on one scratch.

My office buddy and I joke about carbon all the time. He's about 6'6" and I'm 6'2". Really, we're both waaay too big for carbon, we think.

That said, I commute 16 miles (32 round trip) on paved shoulder and average 16+ mph on the way there and 18+ on the way back. I regularly fly by people on carbon when I'm riding my Fuji (no joke ... I wasn't passed this week once, and I went by about 10 people today). If speed is your thing, get your red blood cell count up. The frame only tweaks your speed (at least in my opinion).

In the meantime, I'm not interested in sitting on a broken carbon seatpost or likewise: http://www.bustedcarbon.com/

Now, if I were 160lbs, maybe my opinion would be different .........

My office buddy and I joke about carbon all the time. He's about 6'6" and I'm 6'2". Really, we're both waaay too big for carbon, we think.

That said, I commute 16 miles (32 round trip) on paved shoulder and average 16+ mph on the way there and 18+ on the way back. I regularly fly by people on carbon when I'm riding my Fuji (no joke ... I wasn't passed this week once, and I went by about 10 people today). If speed is your thing, get your red blood cell count up. The frame only tweaks your speed (at least in my opinion).

In the meantime, I'm not interested in sitting on a broken carbon seatpost or likewise: http://www.bustedcarbon.com/

Now, if I were 160lbs, maybe my opinion would be different .........

After seeing that I'm tempted to get rid of the carbon fiber fork on my bike. :-(

This short post is so unlike you. Alright? Who are you and what have you done with our Beanz?!


Hey, I don't want to get involved.:D

My office buddy and I joke about carbon all the time. He's about 6'6" and I'm 6'2". Really, we're both waaay too big for carbon, we think.

That said, I commute 16 miles (32 round trip) on paved shoulder and average 16+ mph on the way there and 18+ on the way back. I regularly fly by people on carbon when I'm riding my Fuji (no joke ... I wasn't passed this week once, and I went by about 10 people today). If speed is your thing, get your red blood cell count up. The frame only tweaks your speed (at least in my opinion).

In the meantime, I'm not interested in sitting on a broken carbon seatpost or likewise: http://www.bustedcarbon.com/

Now, if I were 160lbs, maybe my opinion would be different .........

I'm 6'1, weigh anywhere from 230-255 depending on training. In the last 5 years, I've put 25,000 miles on my seat post which is the exact model shown in the picture. I would guess that the blogger is correct, over torque. Or maybe he crashed or dropped his bike somewhere along the line. :(

I would guess that the blogger is correct, over torque. Or maybe he crashed or dropped his bike somewhere along the line. :(

I would guess that this accounts for 98% of the BS that's posted on BustedCarbon.com...

Is carbon fiber worth the extra money?


LOL. An obviously baited hook, Neil B, but I'll take it just for fun.

We all know the answer to this one. It depends...

Carbon fibre is a remarkable material. In some ways it is ideal for making bike frames because of its combination of strength and lightness, and the fact that it can be moulded in ways that push the envelope of frame geometry. If you want a light bike at affordable money it is really the way to go. The question is really how much weight matters to you.

As for its rumoured disadvantages, it really doesn't break because you're a heavy rider. It is remarkably robust - CX and mountainbikes are now made of carbon, people are bouncing down trails on them with no ill effects, and you rely on its weight-bearing qualities, and resistance to fatigue, every time you get on a 'plane. It will sometime crack if you crash it, but you can break anything. I wonder how many of those who advocate the robustness of steel know that the top Reynolds and Columbus tubing is made from sheets of alloy that are less than 0.4mm thick?

Don't get me wrong, I love steel bikes. I have two. I love the elegance of a classic steel frame and I like the springiness they can provide. But that springiness comes at a price, in terms both of weight and of rigidity. A light steel frame will be heavier and less rigid, and therefore less efficient, than the carbon version.

So, I have two steel bikes. I also have two carbon bikes. The are a Giant TCR and a Giant SCR (the predecessor to the Defy). How do they compare for comfort? There really isn't much difference that I could attribute to the materials. They all have very distinct geometries, and as any framebuilder will tell you, more depends on geometry and on tyres than on frame material. But all my bikes are comfortable for their purpose. I can go faster in comfort on the TCR than on any of the others, I can go further in comfort on the SCR (unloaded) or the steel tourer (loaded) than on the other two, I can cruise around, shop, visit friends and, when the mood takes me, train on the steel fixie in complete comfort. Over poor road surfaces the SCR, and the tourer with its fatter tyres, are equally good at removing the buzziness from the ride.

I wouldn't touch aluminium, of course... . LOL. Actually I wouldn't, not because it can't be made comfortable (see comments on geometry and tyres) but because in general I don't like the look of many aluminium frames. The carbon or steel equivalents are more pleasing. And so is Titanium, of course, but I certainly wouldn't buy Ti. It makes beautiful bikes, but good ones are just too expensive. For me, the advantages over steel aren't big enough to justify the price and it's still not as light as carbon.

The only worthwhile advice is to wait until you can afford a new bike and then buy the bike that suits you best at the relevant price point. If you intend to race on-road, that's likely to be carbon. If money is tight it will probably be aluminium. If money is no object is is likely to be carbon or Ti (unless you're an enthusiast for hand-built steel). Other than that, it could be anything. it depends...

My husband feels that his carbon bike seems livelier going up hills more than his other bikes. I catch up with him going down hills on my steel bike, so it all evens out.

I'm curious about the quality of different carbon made bike components. Some outlet stores sell cheap carbon handlebars and parts that are affordable. Safety would be my number one concern. Basically, what is the fundamental difference between cheap carbon fiber frames and expensive ones?

I'm curious about the quality of different carbon made bike components. Some outlet stores sell cheap carbon handlebars and parts that are affordable. Safety would be my number one concern. Basically, what is the fundamental difference between cheap carbon fiber frames and expensive ones?

Er, the unfortunate answer is that it's impossible to say. The issue is, who is making them and where? If the parts are branded it's easy to have confidence. Giant and Merida are the biggest manufacturers of carbon bikes and equipment and I wouldn't worry about anything they made. And it isn't just a question of price, because they make stuff for most of the other manufacturers, too - a Colnago carbon frame made by Giant is going to cost you more than a Giant carbon frame made by Giant. There probably won't be any difference in the materials, but the specifications and geometry will vary.

For no-name stuff, you're probably going to be OK but I'd be rather more sceptical, personally.

I'm curious about the quality of different carbon made bike components. Some outlet stores sell cheap carbon handlebars and parts that are affordable. Safety would be my number one concern. Basically, what is the fundamental difference between cheap carbon fiber frames and expensive ones?

Here ya go. :)

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php/765178-Some-compelling-reasons-to-ignore-generic-carbon-frames

In short, much like most anything else, you tend to get what you pay for.

Neil, A random thought reply... I like 6061-T6 aluminum, but there's nothing wrong with any of the other frame materials that are common these days. If I were to try a 'new to me' material, in particular CF I'd go with a brand I'm familiar with and trust like Cannondale, Trek or Giant.

There dosen't appear to be any reason that a C/A can't ride a CF frame, wheel strength is and will always be the critical element. I'm not so confident about carbon seatposts and handle bars.

The value v. expense is a personal issue that only you can answer.

Brad

I'm not sure everyone here understands that Neil posted this as a joking response to the "head-banging" thread.

I'm not sure everyone here understands that Neil posted this as a joking response to the "head-banging" thread.

Yes, but as Mr. Beanz predicted, most of the responses were consistent with his predictions. I'm still waiting for someone to suggest I skip carbon fiber and go straight for the only bike for Clydes - the Worksman.

Yes, but as Mr. Beanz predicted, most of the responses were consistent with his predictions. I'm still waiting for someone to suggest I skip carbon fiber and go straight for the only bike for Clydes - the Worksman.

Sorry, I omitted this from my review. But go for it - you know it makes sense, and it's your patriotic duty.

Sorry, I omitted this from my review. But go for it - you know it makes sense, and it's your patriotic duty.

Just think, if only everyone here saw their civic duty and bought a Worksman, then, well...we'd all have heavy, lumbering bikes sitting in our garages.

Sorry, I omitted this from my review. But go for it - you know it makes sense, and it's your patriotic duty.

Motorcycle wheels on a bicycle are the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Motorcycle wheels on a bicycle are the last refuge of a scoundrel.

I wonder what Dr JOhnson would have thought of bicycling? Somewhat like a dog walking on its hind legs, perhaps?

I'm pretty sure he'd have been a "steel is real" man, anyway.

I wonder what Dr JOhnson would have thought of bicycling? Somewhat like a dog walking on its hind legs, perhaps?

I'm pretty sure he'd have been a "steel is real" man, anyway.

Hmm, time to recycle my Dr. Johnson parody. A couple years ago in the Road forum there was a long thread about two young people who broke up because he wore Lycra in public. The copies of the text messages were as tawdry and coarse as could be expected. Someone compared the exchanges to the letters between Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barret, and I was moved to write this:

"On November 17, we supped at Mr. Dilly's, along with Sir Joshua Reynolds, Mr. Garrick, Mr. Wilkes, and Mr. TheHistorian. The latter gentleman introduced the topic of a correspondence between two young persons that had recently been published. Not being familiar with the journal that printed the correspondence, I asked for some information regarding these curious documents. The exchanges were between a pair of young persons, and laid out in public details of their intimacy, and the lost bonds of affection between them, in an extraordinary manner. I ventured, after Mr. TheHistorian was finished his recitation, a recitation that Mr. Garrick thought well-done for an amateur, that such public disclosure of their private letters could only help the young people in their reconciliation, and perhaps aid others in a like plight. Dr. Johnson did not agree. BOSWELL: But sirs, didn't you find the young lady's statement "It was disgusting! DISTURBING EVEN! Why would I want anyone else to see my guy in those tight ass pants?! " a moving cri du coeur? JOHNSON: This is miserable stuff, sir."

Worth reading, certainly. But not worth going to read.

Not for you Neil. It would feel twitchy!