Where issue is being drawn Chaad, is the article does not do justice to the subject in the least. The notion of vibration damping, ride quality and efficiency of energy transfer are being misrepresented in terms of their root cause. Differences being ascribed to materials aren't true. Geometry differences have colored this relationship. It is the relationship between material and geometry and the associated tradeoffs of each that limits combinations that should have been addressed. Why weaker and softer Aluminum ends up being stiffer for example. That is what should be addressed. Aluminum is not a stiffer material than carbon fiber...and yet the bike tested was because of geometry. It is much easier to make a carbon bike stiffer than Al for the same weight. . No meaningful extrapolation of ride quality can be drawn based upon the test description and yet conclusions were drawn which although true of 3 particular bikes, doesn't remotely represent the industry in terms of material characterists.