Interesting discussion, I really appreciate you all.

enjoy the ride!

It is most definitely not crap, as anyone who has studied materials science knows.

Ignoring the perils of comparing two completely different bicycles and attributing the differences to "the materials", let's just talk about materials for a bit.

Aluminum parts have to be made strong enough not to break, which is why aluminum components are for the most part stiff. Generally speaking, an equally strong carbon component will be more compliant. But that is not always the case. It depends on the component design.

Neither type of component absorbs vibration, which would require it to convert mechanical motion to heat. Viscoeleastic materials like rubber absorb vibration. Metals and carbon composites do very little absorption.

Now let's talk compliance, the ability to deform under stress. Which component on the bike has the most compliance? If you guessed tires, you were correct. Another component that has similar compliance magnitude is a seatpost, when it is fully extended. Seatposts are long beams, fixed at one end, with a heavy weight (your butt) on the other end. And even here, the compliance difference between a super stiff aluminum post and a super bendy carbon post is about 2 mm (Velo Magazine test).

So whenever I read that carbon is so much more comfortable than X, I have to roll my eyes.

When subjective experience contradicts engineering prediction, then the engineering usually missed something.

I’ve swapped enough bars to know the difference is real.

And riding metal vs CF frames (especially road/gravel frames), the difference in feel is unmistakable to anyone.

That fact that you can’t explain it does not mean it does not exist.

Of course the assuption here is that the CF has been designed properly. But in my experience with reputable CF products, they generally are.

Which is it? You say above "aluminum components are for the most part stiff. .........an equally strong carbon component will be more compliant."

Compliance is comfort. So why are you rolling your eyes? You realize you can both be right about the materials, but also wrong about the compliance part. Right?

I'm not saying to mold a carbon bike to be identical to an alloy one in all shapes and sizes, I'm saying since you CAN mold carbon differently they DO mold them to their advantage.........for as I quote you "more compliant".

How is "more compliant" not more comfortable? That's an outright contradiction.

Either you stated something you didn't intend to saying carbon tends to be more compliant, or you need to concede that it can be more comfortable.

"More compliant" typically means a max. deflection of, say, 4 mm vs 3 mm. Academic distinction, not practical.

Marketing copy: Our Wizzy Wiggy Techno Stuff[tm] increases compliance by 33%. Buy it for an unprecedented level of comfort!

<eye roll>

"Absorbs vibration" -- a false statement for metal or carbon composite.

I mean, in the bending of a seatstay or chainstay in a frame 1mm difference to me sounds like a mile. 1mm in a spring/damper system would be nothing, but for a "beam" 1mm sounds like a more tangible difference.

The "compliance" of your bartape is apples and oranges but 1mm in bartape thickness certainly matters. Or in your gloves.

I hear and agree with the science here, I think you're just discounting the practical application actually mattering. So will have to just chalk it up as I disagree.

I wish before selling my alloy cross bike I put the Notio on it. The Notio has accelerometers that easily for the same tire/pressure setup could have registered usable values.

As the ride feel on same tire/pressure on the carbon TCX is like fine ribeye compared to the dogfood of the alloy Crockett I had. I honestly went into that bike purchase wanting electronic shifting. I didn't care about a weight or "compliance" change. I didn't even believe it would matter for which bike beat me up more. Same tire pressure and tires...........I had to do a double take after riding the TCX. Like, I was shocked how different it felt. I checked the tire pressures, etc....

I got a bike fit a few years ago on my gravel/cx rig and the fitter recommended trying a wider bar - I splurged on an Enve G series carbon handlebar to replace the OEM aluminum one and it turned out to be one of the best bike purchases I've ever made. It fits better, rides smoother and has the fringe added benefit of shaving a few grams. I'll leave it up to others to argue if that is a result of the material (carbon vs alloy) or some other design aspect, but I have zero regrets on this purchase and would not hesitate to buy another one. The difference between this bar and my stock alloy bar is very clear.

Also for the OP - I have been running my carbon handlebar on an alloy stem with no issues. The Enve bar has a grippy material where the stem clamp goes, which (I think) negates the need for carbon paste.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f781bbe653.jpg

can you cite some examples?

No. You can use an Al stem. Very few people run CF stems, even on high end mtbs.

Thanks for pointing this out. It definitely changes the discussion. It points out a pet peeve of mine - people who post a model of bike and expect that the readers will know what the heck it is. For something fairly common like any Trek or Specialized product, maybe (but still...). In this case I know nothing about what is a Farley and since it's a fat bike, the comments I personally made, and probably quite a few others, are virtually irrelevant. If dphillips had provided this simple information, like "fat bike" "carbonfiber (or whatever) frame", "XYZ group", it would have been much better, imo. I thought I was talking about just a heavy road or hybrid type bike that wouldn't (IMO) be worth any upgrades other than fit/contact items. If it starts out as a pretty high end bike, I would probably have said, go for it. (I guess I kind of did in an earlier post).

Oh, a fat bike...
Unless there's a fit issue being addressed, I can't imagine any handlebar upgrade changing the ride comfort on a fat bike.

It does seem like tire pressure is the first place to look when changing comfort of a fatbike.

link to handlebar review / deflection testing :

https://blog.fairwheelbikes.com/revi...dlebar-review/

.

agree - but there still could be a difference if comparing a heavy / stiff steel handlebar to a flexy alloy or carbon handlebar ... for example ... (?)

maybe

sorta / kinda
.

Yeah so it is a fat bike. They are comfortable bars, who cares?

I will give more information when I have another question.

Thank you all for your replies.

No. pretty cool if you did but not necessary

just make sure to use carbon paste and torque to spec

Carbon naturally helps dampen due to it being composed of multi layers. Thus handlebars, forks, seat posts, and even some Ti companies putting carbon on seat stays.

dphillips here, I sincerely apologize for the lack of information given. I totally understand what you are saying Camilo All good points. I will try to provide more information specific to the question asked.

Just a suggestion … don’t wait another 3-1/2 years to provide that info.

Thank you to all who replied
 

I did purchase MTB Carbon Bars RXL SL 740mm no logos way back in October of 22, - lol. They do offer some flexibility that I can feel and I am very happy with the quality and finish. The bars came with a rough mounting point to which I added Carbon Grip Paste. Never have I had any slipage. I was skeptical as to the flex feel since the tire pressure is currently at 8lbs. I do ride to work year round ( SW WI ) brr. This Bike Forum is full of so much great information.

Thanks again.
dp

I tried some unbranded carbon handlebars, but they are super stiff. Did eventually find some rubber filled metal bars for comfort on my favorite ride:
https://a.co/d/0fBY217

For carbon, I suppose it depends on the design. They can be made vertically stiff or vertically compliant depending. The ones I got were super light, so I put them on a commuter bike I have to lift up on to a bus bike rack every day.