is it me, or is the whole carbon seatstay phenomenon running rampant and out of control....I dunno, but I just have not warmed up to the trend...perhaps the cheapskate in me is worried about long term structural integrity and not about "dampening the ride". if you want to dampen the ride, lift your butt off the seat!!! so I pose these questions? is it a fad or is it here to stay? if its here to stay, do you guys feel that a frame that is part carbon and part metal, be it whatever, is actually a good value in the long run, ie will it last and is it stronger or weaker then a all metal frame?

that's why I'm stickin' with Steel... the carbon/steel hybrids look cool, and I'm sure the ride is sweet... but how long can they really hold up ?

jeff

my sentiment exactly....i mean, its friggin pavement that you are riding on, not soft cushy grass....you can only cut down ride vibration so much...*shrug*...personally, i dont mind a all aluminum ride and definitley appreciate a reynolds frame too...

I have to agree... I have ridden carbon before and don't enjoy it at all. I'm 150lbs and to me most feels unresponsive and flexy, and has kind of a dead feeling at times, plus I SWEAR that when I changed out my Tange Prestige fork for a LOOK carbon, I got MORE vibration from the road... far more... than with the steel fork. YMMV

Well, I suppose it is a natural development. I mean carbon fiber forks seem to dominate. The next area to move into are the seat stays. It does seem to be an appropriate use for the material. I also think that with proper engineering a bike with carbon fiber seat stays should hold up fine.

However, having a bike with one material on the main triangle and carbon fiber on the seat stays seems rather unesthetic and I can see your point.

But given the number of bicycle manufacturers and bikes offered, if you don't like them, I am sure you will be able to avoid them. If it gets really bad, there are always custom frame builders.

Many bike companies that offer a steel frame have both carbon and traditonal steel stays available, especially if you're willing to buy the frameset rather than a complete bike.

So is carbon just a fad?

I was reading the new Bicycle magazine and despite all the negatives about carbon, the magazine said carbon is here to stay because the pros will always choose lightweight materials. (But then again the pros can afford to replace their bikes several times each season).

The second shooter on the Grassy Knoll had a rifle with a carbon stock - proving the CIA's involvement.

Conspiracy sheesh

I've only ever used two carbon forks, but I have to agree. The Profile-Design BSC carbon fork I have is an absolute BONE RATTLER compared to the steel 531 fork. The carbon has no spring at all.
I'd even go so far as to say that my Sansonetti aluminum fork has much more give than the BSC.

And what's with the cost of carbon?!?! There's no way I'd ever spend $2000 on a carbon frame.

Basically, I blame the system. In a bike companies' quest to try and sell you a different bike every year, they have to come up with something - anything - new. So, bonding a bit of carbon for a seatstay achieves a few things -

1) It's easy to bond in a one piece assembly - no PITA seatstays to mitre and weld in there. You don't even have to be that accurate with the bonding. You should see the instructions you get with these things. In a word - dodgy.
2) It tends to save about 40g-60g compared to steel stays. Apparently that means a lot to some people. Personally I'd rather save that in the wheels, and have a frame with structural integrity.
3) Everyone is under the impression CF has some magical damping properties, which I've never seen quantified. People keep believeing it though. If you want damping, get a sloping top tube frame that exposes more seatpost, take 5psi out of your already over inflated tires, double wrap your bars, and buy a seat that is actually comfortable. *BAM* - Instantaneous more damping than glueing a bit of CF into the stays will ever produce.

Of course, none of this will satisfy the consumers' lust for anything that vaguely carries the illusion of being 'high tech' or 'high performance'. Most people will keep eating the same old **** and believeing whatever their told, regardless of the reality.

Makes me wonder - as a product manager for a large bike company, you'd have to have borderline contempt for the human race, wouldn't you? How could you not? It's a pretty simple formula to keep the plebs chomping at the bit and extolling the rhetoric.

Ah man, I feel another Bill Hicks quote coming on....someone stop me

A long time ago.. wasn't ALUMINUM considered a fad???

Consumer driven? Of course!

I just bought my first bike in nearly a decade. I didn't know where the heck to start. I ended up w/ the carbon seat stays, mainly because I didn't know any better and I figured it couldn't hurt. Now that I know (a little) better, the seat stays still don't hurt, but now I am convinced that they're not a necessity since I'm pedaling all the time and don't spend a lot of time w/ my full weight on the seat.

That said, the carbon still may offer a weight savings for the bike (my Trek 2200 is a hair over 17 lbs).

Give me my carbon monocoque framest with it's full carbon fork anyday over my old Columbus SLX frameset. Maybe if I was some luddite living in an Amish farming community I might still ride it. But I will not through a wrench in the gears of change so that I can disparage modernity.

Maybe you are all just too bloody cheap and this is how you justify still riding that crap. I don't care if it is a custom fabricated HJ lugged jewel, It still will never climb as well or sprint as well or be more comfortable at the end of a long day,

Awwww did we hurt your feelings talking about carbon like that???

Bad example, SLX frames were ANVILS!! I had two, and hated both of them.

I dunno.. Isn't climbing and sprinting more about the engine? Ride quality and subsequently fatique at the end of your 20, 50 100 miles might be more of what it all comes down to.. Unless your whole ride is a climb or sprint! (go light & stiff!!)

Is there such a difference that a week or so of training couldn't make up for??
3 pounds might be truly a worthwile difference.. If its shaved off the time of race day!! I think the different materials may be better suited to a certain style of rider, or a certain type of riding. Personally (and this is coming from someone who has only had 4 bikes in my lifetime) 20 inch BMX steel, heavy ass CROMO 26 inch Univega MTB 15 yrs ago (suspension? ha!), cannondale killer V (old massive cannondale aluminum, NO suspension) and now lemond poprad reynolds 853 cross bike.... I think you adapt to whatever you ride pretty quickly, and unless you make a bad choice for you (which is. . I have no Idea) or make a bad choice for how you ride, you wont really notice because unless youre a top top top rider youll adapt and get pretty good at whatever you have. (yes Id love to have a bike of each material to actually side by side and ride depending on how Im feeling... but this wont be for a while ; )

Thylacine's #3 comment above is pretty straight I think.. honestly when we run 100 lbs plus in our tires, how much softness can we expect.. get a little gel under your butt for that.

Actually being happy and proud of what you ride is what its all about. if you're a techno geek with a hint of nostalgia you may love steel w/carbon seatstays, if you're a bottom line weight weenie youll love new disposable aluminum, a rich(er) steel lover may go for a TI gem. . . if you like red youll love your red frame whatever it is!!! and methinks that if youre in love with your bicycle then no matter what it is youll ride it your best!! no frame can be scientifically proven to give you 3 MPH average gain over another for everyone!! (unles there's a really drastic weight reduction.. but as mentioned above.. rotating mass is the best mass to reduce (wheels, pedals shoes tires tubes)

my heartfelt 2 cents
~Steve
(materials science is my baby, there is beauty in ALL quality frames, get one of each and ride what matches (in your head) how you're feeling that day!)

With jet airplanes being manufactured out of a combination of carbon fibre, titanium and aluminum to withstand the effects of fatigue (exposed to repeat forces at a much higher frequency than bicycles) I would suspect many of the comments above are non-founded. If you are concerned with mixing dissimilar materials one only need to look at how long reinforced concrete (steel & concrete) and timber construction (wood, nails, and steel gusset plates) have been around. However, as with any new combination of materials, there is a learning curve.

i like the ride of my giant tcr composite. i realize there are plenty of people out there that don't like the feel or ride of carbon but for me it's the only way to fly. i think my bike rides great and thats all that matters to me

"However, as with any new combination of materials, there is a learning curve."...touche.... i do admit that as a material, i am warming up to the continued use of carbon fiber in more and more component and frame applications and perhaps i'll be riding one someday down the road. and as some other member noted, aluminum was at one time a controversial material, thats a very good point..but by looking at todays market place, its quite clear that the masses have accepted it as a suitable material and perhaps carbon fiber will find that same acceptance....from a cost perspective, is it really that expensive to work with and produce?

i'm no scientist, but i think....

carbon fiber is where it's at. CF has gotten a lot cheaper and better in quality (remember kestrel frames from the early 90s?!? man...) and it's only going to continue to do so as science and industry progress. not only will it get cheaper, but it's going to get stronger and lighter. this isn't really the case in titanium, where the price of the raw material is what keeps it expensive. as for aluminum, perhaps there is room for improvement, but it seems to have shown what it can do on the road.

metals will continue to improve, of course. i believe it's TT who has just developed a new thin-walled, high strength titanium, but it's expensive!

CF seems like the logical choice to move forward with, but it could be any other composite that comes along, too, and i'm quite certain that we are going to soon have a nice material that is lightweight, inexpensive and can be tuned to ride however you want it. stiff where it needs to be, forgiving where it needs to be.

i'd love to see a bike in 5-10 years where chains and bolts are the only metal on the whole thing and you might be able to make the chain links from CF, and perhaps eventually replace bolts with some kind of neat interlocking thingie. who knows?

p.s. - i ride two steel bikes, a pinarello track frame made from (i think) oria tubing and a colorado concept serotta (granted, the serotta has CF bars, fork, seatpost and misc other parts) and am probably getting another steel frame this summer, hopefully made of the super light true temper s2 steel alloy.

pdxtex .... sounds to me like you are warming up to the idea of owning CF bike!

I must admit that when I bought my CF bike last October I was concerned with the useful of my investment. So far I am very pleased with the bike but not exactly sure how many years/miles I should expect from it. So far I've put on 1,500 miles since I bought her in Oct (but I was off most of Jan & Feb due to a broken collar bone... went down while riding my steel frame in the rain).

Addendum to prior post ".... concerned with the useful life of my investment." Hopefully my post makes a little more sense this time!

My fear is a crash with a cf bike and calling it junk. I need something durable.

hmmm, I have almost 9k miles on my Trek 5200 frame, I have weighed between 190 and 220 for all of those miles. I bunnyhop RR tracks, potholes and cattle guards. All of that without a single problem from the frame. (or the wheels btw, Mavic Heliums) As for power output, I dont know, but at times when lifting I was squating over 400 pounds so I figure I'm puttin' it to the bike during sprints.

I'm sure there are other stories out there that should work towards debunking the belief that CF is a 1 season frame material.