View Single Post
Old 09-05-09 | 09:21 AM
  #8  
JunkYardBike's Avatar
JunkYardBike
Dropped
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 30
From: Northwestern NJ
Originally Posted by ricohman
Last week I compared my new carbon Roubaix with my steel Marinoni. The Roubaix rides a lot smoother, less buzz by far. Hell it even has less buzz in the bars than my Rocky Mountain Sherpa 30 touring bike.
I have 25 or so steel bikes and one carbon. If I had to do a century tomorrow you can bet I will be taking that new Specialized Roubaix.
If I was going on a nice 30 mile Sunday run I would take the Marinoni but the steel bike has seen its last century for now.
What is this buzz you speak of? I rode a hilly century last weekend on a new-to-me aluminum frame/carbon fork rig. It's got 'comfort compact' geometry, so slightly longer chainstays and wheelbase than a comparable 'road race' geometry. I swapped the wheels/tires from a Reynolds 531 framed steel bike which is a good 7-10lbs heavier. It's also far more flexy, and feels more sluggish up hills. However, over rough pavement and gravel roads, it's a much cushier ride. Despite this, I couldn't tell much difference in the overall ride. There really wasn't much more buzz in the aluminum frame, but neither did the carbon fork seem to dampen buzz vs. steel. In fact, I think carbon is probably stiffer than my steel forks. I did hit about a mile stretch of milled pavement awaiting resurfacing, and I could detect the increased stiffness of the frame vs. my 531 steel bike. It threw the bike around a bit more. The aluminum/carbon bike isdefinitely nicer up hills with the reduced weight and added stiffness.

I seem to remember your Marinoni has narrower tires than the Roubaix. That makes a huge difference.
JunkYardBike is offline  
Reply