https://www.bustedcarbon.com/

https://www.wreckedexotics.com/archive/

cars get crashed sometimes. Cars are dangerous. We shouldn't drive cars.

We are also often sponsored and get discounts and can sell our old bike for nearly as much as we paid.

umd; what bars do you use?

Are you alluding to my broken carbon bars?

No, was just interested to know.

For most of this season I've been using some old Bontrager bars I had laying around after I broke my [carbon] 3T Ergosum bars. I bought new [aluminum] ones but have been too lazy to swap them on until I need to replace my bar tape again...

As far as the OP's question, I destroyed an aluminum frame in a crash, but I've crashed my carbon TCR countless times during the 25k-30k miles I rode it before replacing it with my Tarmac. Rode that Tarmac for a season and replaced with a Tarmac SL2 which is in it's second season, and has probably 20k-25k miles on it as well.

amen to that.

Most of the comments in this thread have been addressing catastrophic failure. But isn't the question more about fatigue strength?

CF doesn't "fatigue" like aluminum does. The biggest problem with some of the early carbon frames is delamination and lugs coming unglued.

Some CF frames will last just fine even with a lot of abuse. I have an 1999 Trek 5000 OCLV that I've taken up and down fire roads around here and other places plenty of times, and it's holding up just fine. I've been through a couple of bottom brackets, a few headsets, a few sets of wheels, and the cranks are perceptibly worn in spots from rubbing my shoes. The frame is holding up just fine. A guy at work who parks his bike near mine rides an old lugged-tube style Trek CF bike (3300?) that he bought used. His is much older than mine and is in good shape as well.

I've also broken a couple of steel frames racing, and seen a few more steel frames broken racing. It used to be that you could get tubes replaced in a steel frame pretty cheaply, but there are fewer and fewer framebuilders around to do it. I've seen CF bikes go down hard in races and come back up fine (the look 496 and 596 track bikes, in particular), and others disintegrate (a couple of BMC track machines). I've crashed my Giant TCR track frame pretty hard and it's fine-- a couple of chips out of the clearcoat that were easily filled. I crashed into the back of my Specialized Langster Pro at full speed in a madison (aluminum, it belonged to someone else at the time) and it's fine, too. I use it as a TT frame so I don't have to change setups. I think at this point all my steel frames mostly just hang on the wall.

Height is not the most important thing in sizing a frame. Sizes can vary wildly for the same height depending on other measurements.

I'm not sure I would agree. Height (specifically from the seat to the crank) seems like it *is* the --most-- important measurement.

I think what you mean, or at least what I think, is that there are other very important measurements that can make or break your comfort on the frame as well. Having to large of a drop from the saddle to handlebars, to long of a top tube, etc etc can make a bike really uncomfortable to ride despite being the correct vertical size.

The height of the person is not that import.

All the people that say "I'm x tall and I ride a bike that is y, and you are x tall also, so that bike that is z is too big/small for you" are doing it wrong.

Aaaaah. Well - I was wrong, in that case I pretty much agree with you. :-D Height can give you rough ballbark (if you're 6"2 and riding a 52cm frame it's nearly certainly to small for you), but height and inseam is a lot better. I think?

Inseam and torso (which effectively combine to give height)

If you like Italian 2 wheeled machines and want to spend the dough, look at a Colnago. They make the steel frame in 65cm.
https://www.wrenchscience.com/road/fr...-X+Light+-2010

I'm heavier than you and I have over 20K miles on a Gunnar steel frame which cost $700 back in 06. You can get them custom sized, as well.
Cheaper still is Soma. Steel and you can get the right size, once you figure that part out.

In carbon, some Ridley models come in big sizes with tall head tubes.

famous last words

Carbon bike owners don't buy carbon bikes for the longevity of it. Owners of carbon want stiff performance for climbing and/or sprinting doubled with a smooth ride.

You sound more like a recreational rider and I imagine in Texas your not hitting any cat 1 climbs very often. I think you should reconsider Ti. It sounds more suitable for you since you want longevity coupled with a nice ride. Check out the Habenero's as others have suggested and also the Ti frame over a PBK.com. Both bikes I have riden and was very much impressed. I do not think you will be dissapointed in Ti unless you plan on racing seriously in the future and in that case longevity of a frame isn't as important as performance.

Yeah JTD, do you? My 1993 LS400, which was motoring just fine, just bit the dust because a gigantic tree limb fell on it. At least I still have my 1992 RB-1.

you want to hook a brother up UMD?

generalize much?

just join a race team. You don't have to be fast. Even Cat 4s often get pretty good discounts on apparel and equipment.

I don't think I was. I mean you have guys who genuinely need to stiffness of a carbon bike for racing and you have those who just want to look like a pro. For someone who is not racing does it really make much of a difference whether they are riding carbon, Al or Ti...nah. 90% of people on carbon bikes I would imagine aren't demanding out of it what it is built to do. The guys who use carbon for what it is made to do are sponsored so arent concerned with longevity.

I bought my carbon bike for longevity and ride quality, not for doing sprints or time trials. The manufacturer of my bike, Calfee, has carbon fiber frames built in the late 80's with over 120,000 miles on them and they ride just fine. I don't race, I ride do solo rides and group rides on the weekends. I test rode ti bikes, steel bikes and carbon bikes and liked the way the bike I bought rides. It was calling me as I was riding it.

In the past four years I have become faster and now sprinting is something that appeals to me. I am sure glad I bought that CF bike.

My next bike will be Ti not because it is stronger but because it is different from what I already have.

No.