Originally Posted by
BillyD
But the author didn't make that stuff up, he spoke to professional riders, PROFESSIONALS, just the people some CF guys idolize. And he spoke to industry experts, too.
*I'm* not making this stuff up, and it appears to me, and any other objective reader, the author isn't either.
Listen, I'll be the first to admit I'm not objective. You couldn't GIVE me a CF bike, I'll take steel or Ti thankyouverymuch! But I didn't write the article, somebody else did, and it sounds pretty objective to me. What part is giving you guys so much problems? What part are we supposed to ignore, that on those rare occasions when it fails that it shatters without warning? Ok, I'll ignore that part, but can *you*? No skin off my shin, I don't ride them.
Let's look at the actual quotes and the author's accompanying comments:
Author: "But there has been a catch. Unlike steel or aluminum, carbon fiber does not bend in crashes. Rather the bikes and wheels frequently shatter, often hurling riders to the road and, many fear, increasing the severity of injuries."
To back this up he quotes a physician in sports medicine who says this: "Anyone in a team who’s being honest with you will tell you how frequently their bikes are breaking; everybody knows,” and "Few people in the public appreciate how many bikes a pro team will go through in a season, because they break for one reason or another. The bikes, they completely explode.”
Note that what the doctor says has nothing to do with the author's assertion that carbon causes more injuries. If the author did have someone "in the know" to support that claim, why didn't he supply the quote?
Here's another one:
Author: "While steel and aluminum bikes generally telegraph an impending failure by displaying cracks, carbon fiber generally fails without warning. " ZOMG! Spontaneous asplsion!
Actual quote from materials scientist: "[Carbon fiber] fractures into many pieces while metals bend, the energy absorption is the bending.”
Note, he doesn't say
anything about spontaneous asplosion. He just talks about carbon's well understood failure mode.
In fact, what the actual quotes are saying is not at all surprising when examined outside the author's breathless fear mongering. Ultra-light carbon bikes break when they are crashed. This isn't news. Do you really think that steel, Ti or aluminum would fare any better when engineered to their very limits of strength to weight? Carbon, at least, is cheaper to repair.
The author of the article appears to be attempting to support the "spontaneous asplosion" thesis. After all, scaring people is a great way to get attention. By that standard, the article is a great success. The trouble is, he doesn't appear to have anything to support that idea.