Old 07-07-11 | 02:29 PM
  #112  
RT's Avatar
RT
The Weird Beard
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,554
Likes: 3
From: COS
Originally Posted by 2ndGen
I agree. It is bad a$$. No diggity, no doubt.

The more I research carbon failures, I'm appreciating my aluminum bike more and more.
For me, I think that sub-50 mile rides are not an issue (especially with my build).
I'm always one to do research and know that if I get a lemon or a particular
frameset that is the 1 bad apple of the bunch, so be it. I'll have to deal with it.

That Cervelo R3/5 is a gorgeous bike. It's my favorite (the new R5 is off the hook).
Maybe I might go custom instead of mass produced by a local craftsman (like Parlee).
Once Trek started producing their carbon frames overseas, failure rates skyrocketed.

That's one thing about my bike...I never worry about it asploding on me.
I've hurled down mountains at 40mph and it's felt 100% safe.
I used to have a Trek 1.5 (the first series back in '09).
Excellent bike, but it'd get squirrely when I'd push it.
(EVO, EVO...please have a good track record by the time I'm ready to buy!)

Oh yeah, OP! Pics or it didn't happen! Let's see the new & improved R3 you got!

Me first!
Word.

This thread has been entertaining, but the sum of the posts from both sides helps me to this very conclusion. I draw the line at a carbon fork, and even then the quality is different with each. The quality of a CroMo or Alu fork is less of a concern. Carbon frame is for wussy

Ride heavy, ride strong.
RT is offline  
Reply