cale

You better buy the bike soon because when you get the bill for the new roof on the house you're about to buy, it's going to make you very sad. Almost no new roofs provide the stimulation of a new bike and new roof discussion boards, should I buy a asphalt roof or a tile roof, are rarely as fulfilling. YMMV.

Oh, and my vote is for another CAD. Just try to get the old frame replaced under warranty before you jump. It will improve the resale value of your old bike.

Dreww10

Stopped by my local shop tonight to window shop and was given a spectacular price quote on a Dura-Ace equipped Scott Addict 10. Like, a "you're an idiot for passing on it" type of deal. So on the carbon side, it may have replaced the Tarmac on my list.

Any thoughts on Scott's? Do their bikes have a pretty good track record? Despite there being a big dealer here, I still don't see many/any of them on the road.

coasting 

Carbon, because you're worth it.

StanSeven

From the people I know with Scott Addicts, it's a really nice bike. It's underated from all the reviews I've read. If you get a good deal with a DA model, I would grab it.

Stucky

There's nothing magic about carbon. A good-handling, good-riding bike can be made of many materials. It's more about the design; quality; and geometry of the bike, than what it is made of. Personally, I like a stiff bike; but one that doesn't ride like a tractor. Both my Aluminum Klein and CF Venge fulfill those requirements. Dare i say, I think the old aluminum Klein even rides a little better than the late-model CF Venge?

If you like your bike, keep it. If you want something else, then try different bikes until you find what you want. Don't necessarily think that a CF bike will be better or be what you want it to be, just because it is CF.

Stucky

They're nice bikes. I'm not sure, but were they having some bottom-bracket issues with them, though?

Why not ride the Scott and see what YOU think of it?

rpenmanparker 

There is no way that even a Dura Ace group from the UK would cost like a new bike. Ultegra would be way under $1000.

BillyD

He's asplosive?

D1andonlyDman

Depends what you mean by "not better". If you mean "not any faster" I'd generally agree. My take is, at comparable levels of frame performance and weight, Carbon is more comfortable. Almost everything I own presently is double-butted steel (with older friction-shifting drivetrains). I have been looking at getting something much newer, somewhat lighter, and with a modern index-shifting gearing. After riding several new aluminum bikes in the $900 to $1500 range, as well as some well regarded older ones that I could get for around $500 such as a Cannondale CAAD7 and Specialized Allez M4, And several new Carbon bikes in the $1500-2400 range, as well as some well regarded used ones that I could get for $650-900, I pretty much have concluded that the Aluminum bikes that can match the best Carbon and Steel bikes in responsiveness, quite simply, transmit too much vibration to match the Carbon or Steel bikes for comfort and road feel. If this exercise showed me anything, it was that I won't enjoy an Aluminum bike enough to consider it an upgrade in the overall experience compared to my classic Steel bikes. The better Carbon bikes, OTOH, were lighter and at least as responsive as the best Steel bikes I've ridden - and they were at least as comfortable, maybe even more-so, than the Steel bikes. I very quickly came to the conclusion that if I DO get a modern bike with a modern drivetrain, in order to really appreciate it as an upgrade over my classic Tommasini SLX frame, it would need to be either a Carbon frame, or a state of the art Steel frame with a Carbon fork and Carbon stays (such as a Serotta Colorado III). No doubt if I go the NEW route, Carbon will cost me something on the order of $700-$1200 more than Aluminum for comparable weight and performance and component quality. But I believe that, from a comfort perspective, it will be worth that premium.

GuyDebord

+1
I left carbon for Ti and couldnt be happier

rpenmanparker 

I checked. Wiggle has them for about $650 right now.

Lazyass

Double butted spokes and 25mm ires with a high tpi does much more for me to reduce road vibrations than frame material. I just do not like the dead feeling of carbon nor the durability.

2702

I have both frame materials. The aluminum bike is from Giant with their top material the SLR frame. My carbon is the SL4 Spec carbon. I run 25 in the rear with the Giant aluminum bike due to a slight increase in buzz. Its there. If I only had funds for one bike or room the carbon is well worth it over the long haul. Make the investment in carbon if you see one bike lasting you forever.

velociraptor

I totally know where you're coming from.

You are a smart dude and can read the writing on the wall.

I say, go out with your guns ablazin'.

Buy your dream bike now. Spend whatever is necessary. Cash, credit... Beg, borrow, steal.

Don't worry about the wife... It's always better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.

In twenty years, she'll hardly ever think about how you blew your mortgage down payment

Jarrett2

I believed that until I owned an aluminum bike and a carbon bike with the exact same geometry. Difference is night and day to me.

SirHustlerEsq

I went from a CAAD11 to an Evo and for my primary bike, ridden daily, I'd have a hard time going back to the CAAD10. After about four hours in the saddle, the ride quality improvement is clear with no downsides. I can't speak for the Tarmac, of course. I rode 8,000 miles last year, so the cost differential is probably worth it.

I could easily dent any tube on the CAAD10 with my thumb, so if you're worried about handlebar smash the Evo is superior because it can be repaired and is almost certainly more durable in that regard. No one is going to repair the CAAD10, so if you are so worried about durability in a crash I'd either go with a lugged carbon bike or Ti, but you're denying yourself liberty by avoiding composites.

velociraptor

Have you perchance taken part in any gamma-ray experiments lately?

In a crash with enough force to damage an AI bike, I'd be more concerned about the durability of my body.

Stucky

Ultimately, I think everyone needs to find out for themselves, by having the experience of riding different bikes. You can't really even tell on a test ride- you have to live with a bike for a while. That is why I bou8ght my (used) Venge- I just wanted to see what all the fuss was about "good carbon bikes". I had never bought into all the hype; never even pictured myself owning a carbon bike; but I just had to try it. And while I like my CF bike well-enough, I can't say that it offers any advantage in performance or comfort over the old Klein. Ifr I had paid new-bike price for it, I would have been very disappointed. Even at less than half of new-price, I keep thinking that it seems like a lot for something that is no better than an 18 year-old AL bike. But I guess it depends on how good your old bike is; and how curious you are. For me, it was a worthwhile experiment, to satisfy my curiosity and enable me to have 2 good bikes. Best thing about it? The style and looks....and an excuse to get rid of my old Bikesdirect bike.

bt

both

cale

Maybe an elite-level racing bike (carbon or otherwise) isn't a great choice for someone that is measuring "comfort" as a prime criteria. Good bikes are rarely a sum of their parts. You just bought into the idea that what some people called a "good carbon bike" would be good for you.

Buy for the ride, not for the show.

Stucky

Actually, I find the Venge very comfortable; as I do the Klein. My point is just that since the same thing can be achieved with an old AL bike (albeit, a very well-designed, well-made AL bike) it's not the CF material that is doing anything magic; but rather how a bike is designed and constructed. Both bikes are very stiff, and yet ride nicely- even with 23mm tires.

wallrat

Don't sell the bike. You NEED a backup bike. Keep the CAAD and get a second bike that's carbon to keep the CAAD company.

Lazyass

What matters for a proper comparison is what wheels, tires and air pressure each had.

Jarrett2

Funny you mention that, I had 32s on my aluminum bike and 25s on the carbon and the carbon is substantially more comfortable.

I've since had to spend more money on the aluminum bike (by adding carbon parts) to make it closer in comfort to the carbon bike.

2702

Going up the same hill on my carbon vs aluminum bike the Carbon transmit more power no question. That alone makes it worth it to me.
Yeah, the comfort part can be solved with High TPI tires, and bigger size.