Since I asked for a pro-carbon thread, and asked the anti-carbon opinions to stay away. I thought it best to have a separate place for the anti-carbon folks to vent their opinions.

There's no other way to the lightest build except with carbon frame, fork and componentry. I do think it offers a more comfortable ride than aluminum. At least oversized aluminum. It's getting relatively affordable these days too.

I have to admit, I have fewer and fewer reservations about carbon these days. I wouldn't mind buying a carbon bike next time. I might stay away from the very lightest carbon builds though.

I don't hate carbon but I might if it failed liked these, especially on tour.

Why would I care to vent about other people's decisions?

My steel trekking build came in right around 32#. I'm sure even if I laughed at the potential for their CF "assploding", they'd probably laugh at me for such a svetle build for a land of extreme hills, and no meaningful exchange of ideas would ever occur.

Thank you for deciding to segregate the groups.
If there were a large demand for posters to just randomly rant about hating carbon, then they would do it on their own by starting threads about it. Look back- there just arent threads where the main topic is 'I hate carbon'. Only yours, really.

Strong work creating a demand though, I guess.



Oh- and I dont hate carbon. My wife has a bike with a carbon fork, I built a carbon road bike for my brother in law, my oldest niece rides on an old school carbon composite road bike(if anything, that things gonna snap), and one of my sister's bikes is carbon. I ride with people many times a week who have full carbon bikes and have helped maintain a couple of them this year.
Its a perfectly fine material, in general.

i'm not aware of anyone who hates carbon.
it's just they don't have a need to force the utilization
of an overpriced material into a use for which it is
not as well suited as some "inferior" materials.

assuming bikes are spec'd and sized the same,
the difference between carbon and modern day
steel would be a smidge more than a pound.
and a smaller difference with aluminum.
(shouldn't there be an "i hate aluminium" thread?)

https://www.rodbikes.com/blog/tag/ste...-carbon-frame/

the yuuuuge increase in price just doesn't make up
for a minimal weight reduction (and increased risk
of damage). better use of funds would be for
lighter and more compact gear.

better yet, instead of an off-the-rack mass produced
chinese crabon frame that can sorta be used for
touring (if you squint), the same bucks will get you a
custom made steel touring frame.

aside from the ever present well-documented danger
of assploding, carbon currently just isn't as well suited
to touring.

sorry about that.
i was wrong.
turns out the steel bike is lighter than carbon.

"Nothing Weighs Less than A Part not installed"


NB: The Pros Race Carbon bikes & components, With a Truck Full of Spares..





I like my Carbon Fiber Mandolin..
...

Do tell!


Sacrilege!?

You mean the steel bike with a CARBON fork? Unless they have same component spec and size, you can’t get any meaningful info out of relative complete bike weights.

If all was equal, I’d trust a light carbon frame over a light steel frame x10. We know carbon is a stronger material on a weight per weight basis.

No praising carbon here! Go to the other side of the street*

*squeezie's rules

And we all know that spider web is stronger than carbon on a weight per weight basis, but I haven't seen a frame made of it yet. Steel has a high shear strength, you will not see carbon fiber used in nuts or bolts, which gives lie to the idea that carbon is stronger. There are only a couple ways in which carbon is stronger than steel, and many ways in which steel is stronger than carbon.

One problem with carbon is that it is bonded with polymer, which dries and breaks down over time, and with exposure to uv light. Oscillation from riding and breakdown of perishable substances will eventually result in deterioration. The same thing happens to steel from oxygen and oscillation, but on a much slower scale.

I used to practice achery, and loved when carbon arrows were introduced. But then my shooting improved to the point that I was constantly splitting arrows, and carbon arrows are expensive. I went back to aluminum arrows, as I could straighten them out after hitting them with another arrow.

If you buy a light steel frame, and do the basics to keep it clean, your great grandchildren will be able to enjoy it when they are old enough to ride. I doibt the same could be said about carbon.

I'd definitely ride one of those Rodriguez bikes over a carbon wonderbike...for lot's of reasons; style, ride qualities, and the fact that it's hand made in Washington, oh and it's not a specialized...I'd rather give profit to a great bike shop that actually builds bikes in house than feed a corporate bottom line.

+1. Your point about potential longevity issues and duty-cycle of carbon frames has been a particular concern of mine, especially for a touring frame that's constantly (24/7) being exposed to the elements.

what is the problem?

I don't know if there is a definitive problem, that's why I said concern. I realize that carbon bicycles are clear-coated with UV resistant(?) paint but I'm not sure how the grit-rain-sun exposure on an extended tour will effect it. I have heard that even a small cut/abrasion in the clear-coat can allow the fibers to soak in water and compromise the frame's integrity. I don't know the truthiness of this but it sounds logical.

Although steel frames are vulnerable to water, rust is not a fast process, with respect to compromising a frame's integrity. Plus steel is easily re-painted, stripped to the metal itself, not just touched up. I've re-painted my 40-yo steel bicycle several times, and it's still my daily ride.

As an aside, re-painting a bicycle a new color is nice and can be aesthetically pleasing. Don't know if carbon bikes could handle it.

get titanium, does not rust...

I have several friends who after some years got bored with their carbon paint design and painted their frames in new colours.. any problem if done by people who know what to do.

no concerns anywhere, just too much drama, some like carbon, some not, each buys what she/he thinks is best.

Friend of a friend hit a tree last week. The Whisky carbon fork was completely (visually) undamaged while the Surly ICT frame folded in half. Now, that fork is likely compromised too, but it's a demonstration of the impact resistance and relative strength of modern carbon. The entire bike folded before the steering tube (also carbon) failed.

I say modern carbon very specifically because there has been a long maturation period to the material, and improving technologies in ultrasound and manufacturing in the last decade or so has really brought things to a new level. Today's carbon is many orders of magnitude more reliable than the carbon bikes of the onset.

I have no reservations about carbon. I used to, but I don't anymore. I usually gravitate towards steel for aesthetics, but my list of other reasons (durability, vibration damping, ride feel) is getting shorter since Carbon bikes often out-perform Steel in all categories, even flex. Even budget-wise, it's getting more accessible, and the entry level frames today compare well to pro frames from two or three years ago.

Carbon today? Totally different animal. I have zero reservations.

Nice visual! Thanks.

Personally I don't fear carbon, and I do own/ride a carbon bicycle, at times. Maybe you're right in that the duty-cycle of carbon bikes has improved greatly in recent years. As I've said, I'm ready for a functionally equivalent (or better!) touring bike made of carbon. It might be closer than I've been surmising

I just looked it up online and painting a carbon frame does actually seem straight-forward. For me it'd be about getting rid of those hideous & ostentatious (IMO) logos-decals manufactures love to put on, as much as changing color.

In my personal opinion, that bike already exists! Most of the current crop of carbon cyclocross bikes are rated for tougher conditions and abuse than a carbon road bike, for example. Thicker layups, stronger transitions between tubes, etc.

Niner makes a carbon "adventure" / CX bike with front rack mounts, and the price isn't egregious:

RLT 9 RDO 2-STAR APEX 1

All I want from a touring bike is that it can be thrown into a box or bag without too much thought. Packed up the bikes today. Straight into a box, wheels jammed along side the frame. I padded the outer ends of the axles so they don't tear through the boxes. Rack, seat whatever gets dumped in the box. If it can't survive I don't want it. Also needs to survive being dropped off a guard rail fully loaded.

Definitely interesting. BUT 40mm tire maximum won't cut-it for my current touring interest.

I like your touring interest