StanSeven

Cannondale is an excellent example. There's nobody better with aluminum. They make great aluminum frames. But if you want the best Cannondale has, you go CF.

SirHustlerEsq

...and remember that "best" is relative and heavily rooted in marketing.

StanSeven

I'm defining "best" by what Cannondale says in their own web site. On the EVO:

LIGHT: At under 700 grams, it is the lightest production frame in the world.
STIFF: It has the best stiffness-to-weight ever recorded, an incredible 142.3 Nm/deg/kg.
STRONG: Outperforms even most aluminum frames in destructive and fatigue testing.
SLIM: EVO's smaller diameter tubes give it a significant aero advantage over its oversized competitors, without the weight and stiffness compromises of aero tube shapes

SirHustlerEsq

The moral of the story is that the thread-starter can get a great bike that he'll be fine to keep for a lifetime, made of aluminum. There is a ton of marketing and product tailoring to tell us that we need a $5000 bicycle to enjoy riding, but it's simply not true. I'm about to go ride with a bunch of doctors on $10-15k bicycles and I'll keep up on my crappy aluminum bike just fine, and I'm the newb.

I'm not trying to start the frame material debate, I just wanted to reinforce that it doesn't matter how much he spends, aluminum will give him a bike that provides timeless fun. People don't say that enough in this hobby.

snidely

Like he said........

crank_addict

If a pro rider, easy choice... most follow the leader.. ha.

I ride steel and aluminum bikes but no longer a CF. I would have no problem in doing so but for now quite satisfied. With so many variables to judge and claim which material is best hardly makes for an argument. All have made huge improvements in just the last decade. My guess the only way to get a good study comparison would to have all three using identical geometry, components (post, stem, bars, saddle) and equal wheel build + tires. You might as well throw Ti into the bunch LOL - good luck. In the end all that matters is what feels right, type of riding, application, budget and lastly, reliability to longevity.

BTW: I give a vote and so far impressed with Giant's Aluxx 6000 ally frame and carbon fork combo. Like mentioned above, a second set of wheels w/changed cluster and different tire combo expands usefulness of the bike. I'll run from 23C slicks to 34C knobs on the same road frame... on and off road.

Bacciagalupe

That's not too hard to arrange these days. A few manufacturers will use the same geometry and components in both aluminum and CF models. At a minimum, Cannondale and Specialized do it, Trek does it as well.

Having done a few test rides that way, IMO the difference in ride feel is fairly small.

Samfujiabq

Always at least one!

squatchy

Sounds to me Hustler need to justify what he rides on by bashing people who chose to ride on what they choose to ride on

rpenmanparker 

One sees comments like this with some regularity. Could you please tell me how gearing down will negate the amount of extra energy required to move a heavier bike up a hill? Gearing down will make it possible for a rider with limited power output to move more weight up the hill, albeit more slowly. But the lighter bike will still require less energy on the climb than a heavier bike, no matter what you do with the gears.

SirHustlerEsq

I never bashed anyone, I only stated that aluminum gets the job done; I never meant to imply otherwise. I plan to buy a carbon bike next year as a luxury, not a necessity.

rebel1916

I have a 10+ year old Fuji Team with Eastern aluminum frame and a Kinesis CF fork. It is fairly comfortable for a race/crit type bike. My Van Dessel Rivet, though similarly aggressive, is noticeably less fatiguing to ride. It has Eastern CF bars and a no name CF post, but I am running the same wheels and tires as my old bike, cause I ran out of money to finish the build. Point being, Even older aluminum could be very nice. New CF is a bit nicer.

HAMMER MAN

i believe there is a good ride quality with aluminum. i have an aluminum custom Tiemeyer that i bought last year and it is my favorite bike. BTW i also own two steel rides, a waterford and serotta and a carbon Ridley.

INMO it is no different than other frames, depends on how they are made, the geometry, and of course fit. head, seat angle, TT i feel are 3 of the most important measurements for any frame, then saddle, and what type of components that you add.
Carbon inmo is really over-blown for the amount that you spend and quite exagerated as the utmost frame material to have and ride. i have no issues riding the Tiemeyer 50 + miles on crap roads like they have here in Texas. i would not hesitate to buy another aluminum frame again

catonec 

the difference felt between "ride quality" is is highly dependent upon many variables as others had said. wheel/tire choice, psi, yada yada.

I think it comes down to differences in 2 particular bikes, so results will vary. to say carbon is smoother than alum is an invalid statement without identifying which carbon and which alum.

In my case I went from a my 2005 lemond 6066 alum to my 2010 carbon kestrel. I transferred all my components from the lemond to the kestrel so I think I have a valid comparison which is only looking at the frame and seatpost. heres my impression.

while the lemond rode nice, comfortable, I was able to feel a "bounce" in the frame when on rough roads. while climbing, really putting power down, I could again feel that bounce. it actually became part of my pedal stroke, maybe it helped me set cadence and make it up the hill. The bounce could be best described as hitting a bump, feeling a rebound, followed by 3 or 4 more rebounds that diminished in strength. like dropping a basketball on concrete.

the kestrel also rides very well. rough roads seem a little more harsh. I do not have the diminishing bounce at all. the initial hit is felt, maybe slightly stronger, and then its completely gone, no echo. I will definitely say that when Im climbing, putting down the same power, this bike jumps to life. My legs feel more connected to the drivetrain. No bounce at all. suprisingly though I dont feel like my body is getting beaten up or jarred by the end of my ride. cant explain because if its a stiffer frame then the shock should be absorbed by my joints and muscles.

I prefer my carbon frame over my old alum for many reasons. the transfer of power well outweighs the slight comfort advantage of my lemond.

the saying goes, "high end alum is better than low end carbon" I believe that %100. I will say high end compared to high end, carbon rules for efficiency.

hueyhoolihan

i can't tell you "how gearing down will negate the amount of extra energy required to move a heavier bike up a hill". actually, i don't think it can. you'll have to ask somebody else...

bgrider

I have to say that I am suprised this topic did not turn into a aluminum frame bashing thread. I am a firm believer that tire pressure has more effect on ride quality than frame material. I ride an aluminum frame and am regularly amazed at how smooth and comfortable it is.

SirHustlerEsq

I recently went from a 17mm bead-to-bead wheel width to 23mm (25mm external) and it feels like a different bike now. The change was surprising. The change from a cheap post to a 20mm set-back PRO Vibe 7 post made a significant difference as well. With the wheels, the bike no longer liquifies my insides over a local, insanely rough road.

hybridbkrdr

OK, now it looks like tube design, tire pressure and rims can make a difference. So, someone in the long distance forum said Vittoria Randonneur tires roll really well. Does anyone have any opinion on Velocity Deep V rims?

rpenmanparker 

You said it is easier to climb 7 miles on a 13 lb bike than on an 18 lb bike, but gearing could make up for the weight difference. I was pointing out is not easier to climb with the heavier bike when using lower gearing in a total energy expended sense, only in a capability sense.

SirHustlerEsq

I read on a frame builder's site that aluminum is "durable for a few hard racing seasons". What happens to aluminum that doesn't happen to other materials?

Wesley36

Aluminium has no fatigue limit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit
That said, an aluminium frame should last a lot longer than a few seasons of hard racing, barring catastrophic damage like a crash.

justkeepedaling

Funny how this always gets brought up.

Light: No Evo has ever measured frame only at 700 grams or less (or anywhere near 700 grams even). This includes evo nano, etc etc special edition
Stiff: There are stiffer bikes out there torsionally
Strong: meh whatever, all manufacturers test like crazy for strength nowadays
Slim: Shown in Cervelo's testing that there is no advantage to be had with the Evo vs something like a SL4