QuakerProf

This is not a "should I buy it?" thread, so please don't burn me. I ride a 2009 Giant Transend LX with all the typical commuter equipment, and I'm not in the market for a new bike. I ride 18 miles round trip through suburbs from a house to a college campus, and then lock up outside the college rec center.

I am, however, interested in the trend of increasingly expensive "commuter" bikes. One that struck me recently was the Cannondale Quick Carbon 1, a full carbon bike over 2,000 bucks...

but since there are so many Kona Dew (and variants) fans on these forums, I wonder what everyone thinks of the new Super Dew (2010). Too much carbon for a commuter bike? It's 2,500, which seems strange to even sell as a commuter option. I'd be afraid to even lock that up in my office, which is a real office (not a cubicle)- there are still cleaning people, maintenance people, IT, etc.

Thoughts? Is this a trend that just caters to new riders with lots of cash, or would any of the serious commuters really consider such a bike?

canyoneagle

I like the idea of a performance oriented commuting bike, but feel carbon is un-necessary for such a bike.

The Kona looks nice, for sure, but I'd lose the carbon bits if I were asked to give my $.02 on the spec.

Frankly, I feel that the sporty IGH bikes in the same vein (MEC Hold Steady, Norco Ceres, Giant Seek 0, Swobo Baxter, etc) offer damn near the same level of performance at half the price, with a bit more all-weather functionality.

Still, I see the new Dew fitting beautifully into a niche that offers an alternative to buying a road bike and adapting it as a commuter.

alan s 

Nice bike. The frame is aluminum alloy (scandium), not carbon. The carbon fork and handlebars are good for soaking up road vibration. But it's a little too expensive for a commuter. Probably best for someone who wants an upright position on a road bike, i.e. no drop bars.

chaadster

I'm not well-heeled enough to buy one, but I certainly get the Super Dew concept.

I imagine the ideal rider lives in a city, doesn't have the time to get out of town for rides, loves to hammer, lives in a warm, dry climate, has showers at work, and makes good money. Maybe they only have one bike, or a mountain bike they never get to ride.

Works for me, although that doesn't describe my life at all. I'd like to have one anyway!

canyoneagle

I was referring to the carbon components, not the frame.

I am one of those carbon skeptics, and would rather a chromoly fork and chromoly or good quality aluminum bars/seatpost, etc. I can easily manage the fatigue life on the aluminum bars versus the still evolving (IMO) world of carbon handlebars/seatposts/head tubes/forks.

I have no issue considering carbon in pure tensile applications (belt drive, for example), but am highly skeptical of the multi-material interfaces (bottom brackets, dropouts, etc) and non-optimal use (anything with forces other than pure tensile stress). This is especially true (for me) in the context of a pragmatic application such as commuting, where I see the use of carbon bits as un-necessary if not risky.