You aPParently don't know the difference between sarcasm and statements of fact and well, maybe a pile of stinky b.s.?

Well if the reference is to your correct statement about poor impact resistance, why the comment. Trying to validate your _________?

I love sarcasm,but am usually to dense to get it myself.

Flyefisher: What type of tires do you like? On my carbon frame I like to use the Specialized flat resistant tire @ 120lbs. This produces a "harder" surface ride which is well absorbed by my Trek. I ride with friend who prefers a "softer" surface riding tire on an aluminum frame. Tires do contribute to the ride. Comments?

Nobody I know hits their bike frame with a hammer so that position doesn't hold any logic with me. I treat my bike, like an F1 racers treats his race car...with TLC. Bike riders are not going run into anything at 100mph...like an F1 might and if they do, their safety concerns are greater then a CF frame rider. If a bike crashes at 45mph on a down hill run going into a corner, the resulting damage is going to be similar to TI or Al frame, not pretty. I don't believe based on a bike riders usage, carbon frames will deteriorate from extended exposure to the sun or poor cleaning habits. Anyone that purchases a Carbon frame, will care for it, just like TI, AL or Steel.

I give up.Is everyone below the bottom rung here.So what do you think happens in any kind of mishap where a tube gets dinked reasonably hard by a solid object. All it might have to do is fall against something to get the same effect. NO??? Ever seen a F-1 race?No crashes? No mishaps? No rough stuff? No one off the track?Eeryone just tools around like a bunch of old ladies out for a sunday drive?Give me a break pleeze!!!I'll reserve comment on the ASSUMPTION aboout care.

CF is used in car racing almost entirely for it's light weight and it's strength. An F1 car puts down almost 900hp from an engine bolted right to the CF tub, that's considerably more power than any cyclist will ever put to the ground. The mast of a racing sailboat has to withstand having 10,000+ sq/ft of sail area up in various wind conditions (do the math, it's a big load). So anybody saying anything general about the strength of CF just doesn't know what they are talking about...plain and simple (and there are a few of them posting in this thread). Now to get deeper into that, of course an improperly laid up CF frame can/will fail....but so will any other frame if it's constructed poorly. Imagine the uproar from the "steel is real" folks if I said I'd never buy a steel frame because maybe the guys welding rig didn't quite make the weld's on the head tube strong enough....

As to hitting it with a hammer, that's about the most stupid thing I've heard, I can hit a steel frame with a hammer the right way in the right place to damage it beyond repair (CF will take more than just a light tap to do anything to it). Although there is semi-sorta-kind of a good point in there about the impact qualities of CF, it's a rigid material and will break instead of bend....and should be thoroughly checked out after a big impact (just as any other frame should be). But beyond that, I don't know to many people that buy a bike based on what will happen to them when they get hit by a car.

Andrew

edit: PS - The helmet I hope you guys are wearing on your heads is made of plastic....a plastic that is a considerable amount weaker than properly laid up carbon fiber. So if you think CF is so weak....what do you wear on your head?

You are absolutely right! how could I have been so insanely stupid.Next time I will use a piece of concrete curbing,like could be encountered in a low speed crash or other mishap. Even more 'real life',maybe, but the same effect neverlesss.

OK, try to read without moving your mouth. Maybe doing 2 things at once is confusing you.
One doesn't have anything to do with the other. Gabear's thoughts on impact strength of carbon as used in F1, which I disagree with, and the analogy with bicycles, which I agree with are 2 seperate issues.
****impact strength of carbon fiber is different than F1 vs. bicycle analogy*****
Why did you post a question that was already answered 2 posts before?
****why ask about impact when it was answered 2 posts before?****
Why can't you simply read posts and try to understand simple, conversational english?****attention: these are all rhetorical questions that require no response. This post is to help you catch up since you are having so much difficulty on your own.****

Yo Roadtax,
How do you like those tires. I've got a Trek CF and will be needing some new tires soon. I'd like something a little more durable than what I'm running now, but also don't want armadillos. Let me know.

On the other subject here...CF is great if that's what you like. Why do people try to impose their bike wants/needs on others through silly bickering. All materials have their advantages and disadvantages but I think for the average rider (or even near professional) they're all good. How about we spend 10 grand for a state of the art bike for one of the smarta$$es on the board, and then we'll throw Lance on my old Schwinn Varisity. My money's on Lance. Point is, it's the rider much more than it's the bike.
Find a bike YOU like that YOU'LL ride and it's the perfect bike for you.

Unbelieveable. Did you read his post? HE JUST SAID THE SAME THING.

"Although there is semi-sorta-kind of a good point in there about the impact qualities of CF, it's a rigid material and will break instead of bend....and should be thoroughly checked out after a big impact (just as any other frame should be)."

You are absolutely right. I meant to.Apparently some are unable to grasp a concept.I'm out this one. Suggestion...This site ought to have a FILTER on it to prevent materials questions. Anyone looking for a real answer and no hype or BS should try www.cyclingforum.com or www.roadbikereview.com And, I promise to stay out of it.

Why give up...:p F1's crash all the time, that's not the debate. The debate is CF strength during crashes for the average bike owner worthy. I say yes... When F1 crashes, damage is considerably greater then when one drops his bike against a post or the ground or falls in an accident. If race car designers feel CF is strong enough to withstand extreme accidents and while protecting their driver, don't you think that same strength would hold up duing the average bike usage...I think so. And, to assume we're all below the rung because we disagree with your position is a rediculus statement. CF is used in helmets, mfging of weapons, all components of race cars, high performance valve covers, and motor mounts, etc... If CF is delicate, why would designers make motor mounts that are required to handle excessive force from 700-1100 hp engines. Where do you get your facts from?

It must be a gift or something because you still don't get it.

Now back that statement up with some actual tech, not just some BS generalization. Since I'm all for helping people learn for themselves, go out and search the internet and find out how much impact it will take to do such precarious damage to a piece of CF. Go ahead, it's ok...we'll all wait for you to come back with the answer. When you get back figure out what kind of impact will break it (ie will the lil curb encounter do it? Or does it need to be a car going 50mph?), then tell us what will happen with a steel, aluminum, titanium bike in the same situation. Do that and everybody has everything cleared up, nobody will be able to claim about this or that generalization.

It's obviously ok to ride a bike with a CF fork (which, for the most part, stronger by far than their old steel counter-parts). Easton has carbon handlebars which are far stronger than anything Al. But of course the frame is fragile...handle with care...like glass. Why some people have this misconception of the strenght of CF is just strange, you are going to have to do more than have a "low speed encounter" with the curb or banging it with a hammer to damage it. Don't assume that it's a plastic product that it's so weak that it can't take regular use/abuse. CF laid up with common materials will have impact resistance in the five figure range of psi.

The analogies of race cars and such has about as much to do with everything as the silly hammer comment, but remember when you see a car break CF pieces off, that piece has succumbed to huge shock loads. Hitting a wall at even small speeds (say around 60-70mph) will create 100+ g's to the intial parts....and this from a 1400lb car...do the math, it's a big number, much..MUCH larger than a bike will see from hitting the curb (you can find out that force to while you're out searching for the tech above).

Is CF weaker than steal for impacts? Yes - although the impact that breaks CF will bend your steel frame to the point of no return.
Is CF so weak that you have to baby it? No

Andrew

I will finish with this... I have spoken to multiple frame makers and some old bike techs prior to my recent purchase. BTW, my purchase was Ti/Carbon frame. It became apparent to me that many frame makers and techies are voicing dislike or concern for CF frames and components using many reasons. CF has changed greatly in the last few years. I believe negative opinions are not based on fact, but due to development or retooling costs to stay the game. I just ran a search on the internet for CF applications and learned that CF is growing fast in many areas where strength, ability to handle force and weight are major concerns.

:crash: at myself for reading this far :(

flyefisher,
If you've read this far I'm sure you are now more unsure about the Ti v. C dichotomy than you were before starting this thread. To minimize the confusion, don't ask these online fools who perpetuate mindless arguing; rather, go to bike shops and ride purchase suspects made of each material. This will provide the best information. Also, ask the owner questions regarding each of the materials' properties which you find to be germane to your wants and needs. Research manufacturers' websites and, if possible, speak with their respective builders and/or representatives. Compare and contrast reviews from generally well-respected soucres, whether they be internet, television, periodicals, etc. Ride the frames again to build confidence in your potential decision. If you're spending a relatively lofty sum of money on a frame, it's only normal to be meticulous and information-hungry. A bike's performance is, of course, a primary concern; however, appearance may be taken into account, even if only inherently. Purchasing a high-end bike is never an effortless undertaking if you are truly concerned with the end riding experience. Take your time in making a decision.

And to all of you emotion-driven tools who insist on heatedly discussing who is and isn't right about this or that topic: You all look like idiots. Information, not endless rhetoric, was requested by the thread's starter. I would show you people in question how to more effectively insult your opposition, but I have been formally warned of banishment from this forum by the moderator and such a tutorial would, I fear, incite such repercussion (not that I'm in any way benefitting from being on here, save wasting my free time).

WaltH i - After a period of flats I switched to the Armadillo's and that was the end of them. They are slightly heavier but much more flat proof than any other tire I have used. I have had a couple of flats where the valve stem appears to have been twisted (by me when I was removing the pump) causing the tube to tear by the valve with a small slow leak. I inflate the tires to 120 every morning I ride (five per week).

Did anyone happen to see what happened when
Roberto Laiseka's carbon Fibre fork met with a chain
kicked up from the road in this years Vuelta?
Fork shattered and Roberto did a faceplant.
When CF fails it often fails catastrophically, I think that is
the point that everyone has been trying to make.
If you have CF and crash, I'd inspect the frame very
carefully, and even then I'm not sure you could see
anything that might indicate impending failure.

My final thought on this thread?
To Quote Ben Serotta " Its the Tubes damnit"

Marty

Lotek: It was my understanding that the CF fork that failed was a special super light non-production prototype. I assume that everyone else in the field had carbon forks as does every high end bike sold. For anti CF riders, what are you using for fork materials?

That's the biggest point. Although even then it may or may not fail catastrophically. CF is laid up in layers (layers, just like Onions and Ogre's :)). You could have a small problem and get some cracking that won't lead to a big failure, but can/will in the future.

For more information on the strength of CF, check out Easton's information on it's CF handlebars, or Reynolds info on their forks. Basically the CF failed at much higher levels than steel/Al. So while the CF did fail (but at high levels), at the same impact force that broke the CF, other materials (steel and Al) would be pretzle-ized to the point of no return as well and probably at a catostrophic level as well (we're talking about forces that are 500-1000% higher than their normal failure points).

If you want to get even deeper into it, there are a few sites around that list all kinds of properties of different materials, real scientific information, not more generalizations based on opions or agendas, etc.

Checking CF after a failure, well past a visual inspection there isn't much you can do. You could take it and get it x-rayed, I'm sure most larger towns will have a place to do it, or at least a composites shop somewhere that could give you more information.

Andrew

Not sure about the prototype and I hadn't seen much
followup on that particular crash.
Serotta offers Steel fork, its a $495 upcharge over their
carbon Fibre fork. Sachs, Rivendell, Vanilla, Bohm
all use steel forks so the high end statement is a bit skewed.
Of course they are all traditionalist steel frame builders.
I'm not really anti CF, I think it is wonderful material
its just not my preference. I, being the retrogrouch type,
have a nice Steel Fork on my rides. yeah they're heavy but
I'm not racing and I like the road feel.
To each his own, and isn't that the whole point?

Marty

Marty: Sounds good to me>

pokey, you said i believe that the rear springs on the corvette Z01 are made of composite, not CF. Composite usually implies a ceramic-type substance, not a carbon fiber. Actually, composite could be any combination of materials... not to pick...

*plays loud self-proclaiming trumpet