hollowmen

This summer, I'm going to be riding across the country on a fully supported trip. The only things I'll have on me is two water bottles, a hydration pack, and a small saddle bag with some basic tools.

My question is whether or not a carbon fiber bike would be okay for this kind of distance. I'm going to be riding with a larger group, so any damage to my bike will be a pretty big inconvenience, not to mention the financial blow.

Obviously weight isn't an issue. The question is whether or not 75-80 miles per day over the summer is a significant enough risk to the frame that it would be safer to stick with an aluminium.

Thoughts?

Barrettscv 

People cross the country on CF bikes every year, some do it in record time while racing almost non-stop.

fietsbob

Given it's supported , why not bring a backup bike too?
the Pros do that , they ride harder, further.

valygrl

I vote yes. It's only 3-4000 miles, it's not going to wear out, and any crash bad enough to mess it up would mess up any other frame too.

BigAura

A carbon fiber bike would be fine, assuming you're not a large clyde. 700 x 25c Kevlar tires would be a good idea.

hollowmen

Just stepped on the scale. Up to 160 after having been relegated to my trainer that counts as clyde, I'm sure!

Thanks for the input! I guess it's a matter of weighing the pros with the potential risks.

jimmuller 

You are worried about wearing out a frame with 80 miles a day for 3000 miles, with the only load being your day-rider weight**********?

I would never have bought such a bike in the first place. If you're worried, go with steel.

hollowmen

I guess I should have been more specific. I'm not necessarily looking for a technical assessment, but rather personal opinions.

I'm not worried about wearing the frame out. I'm curious as to whether or not people on these boards think the weight savings and comfort factor are worth the potential risk in the event of a crash, which could disrupt a trip where I don't have the luxury of stoping to get it fixed or replaced (I'd be holding up 30 other riders on a pretty strict schedule), and I can't bring a spare bike, or even frameset.

Thanks for the constructive feedback, though.

skilsaw

Everybody on the ride will face the same issues of durability.
Somebody is going to bust a chain. Somebody else will lose a few spokes. Then there is the guy that gets a wasp down the open neck of his shirt and spends a day in hospital.

If you have the bike already and are comfortable with it, take it across the country. If you are worried about breakdowns, purchase a new dedicated touring bike early enough to ride out the wrinkles, then ride that.

I like heavy bikes built like tractors. I have 2. I saw a beautiful Trek Madone 5.5 6 weeks ago that was $1000 off. Hummed and hawed for a few days. Then ordered a 18.5 ' canoe that is built like a battleship. I guess I just like dependability and will choose it over performance. That's probably why I didn't buy the performance bike

prathmann

I don't really see any added risk. In the event of a serious crash any frame could easily be left unrideable. I totaled one of my steel frames just by running into a dog. And my experience is that you're more likely to have a serious wheel or other component failure disrupt the trip than a failure of the frame, regardless of material. But over the course of only 4000 miles the risk of any such failure is pretty small.

And how disruptive would it really be? Fully supported for a group of 30 presumably includes at least one or two decent motor vehicles. So in the event of an equipment failure that rider can be shuttled ahead on the route to the next good bike shop. They should be able to repair or replace whatever component/frame/bike is needed while the rest of the group catches up. A far more likely cause for disruption would be a problem with one of the riders (whether due to a crash or other health issue).

fietsbob

Maybe the tour operator has room for nun,

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...weight-touring
he wants to tour on a carbon bike too..
Fully supported trip makes more sense than self contained, on one of them

Rowan

I have ridden randonnees on a CF bike that has now more than 7,700km on it. Absolutely no hassles with the frame whatsoever.

If you are riding a cheap, eBay Chinese-made, no-name frame, or an upmarket CF frame normally worth $4000 that you picked up for $400... then the answer would be to leave the bike at home and choose the aluminium one. That's where the risk management would seem tantamount. But if it's a bike from a reputable maker, then no problem.

The issue for mine would rest more on how comfortable the bike is day-in, day-out and in particular the saddle and reach... that is, how much weight are your hands bearing right now, and do you have any sign of shoulder or neck ache after riding?

Apart from that, make sure you have a handlebar bag (and yes, I even mount mine on the CF handlebars I have on two of my bikes) to carry food, spare tyre/tube/patch kits, sunscreen and phone. I also use a Topeak seatpost rack (attached to an alloy seatpost) if I think I need extra clothing along a route. Works on randonnees and centuries, so would work for you, too.

ks1g

+1. If it's comfortable, ride it. Depending on the setup, adjust saddle/saddle position/handlebars for comfort. Maybe replace CF handlebar & seatpost (if that's what it uses) for better ability to handle any loads clamped to those parts.

I would also look at your wheels and gearing. Performance road bikes usually have lighter-weight wheels that may not hold up as well for sustained use. I'd also go with 25mm, maybe 28mm tires (if they'll fit) and ride slightly lower tire pressure (90-100 psi) for increased comfort. A bomb-proof spare wheelset is always handy to have around, anyway. Gearing - a compact road double and big cogset will give you gearing about as low as you commonly get with a road triple. If the bike has a SRAM group, get an Apex rear derailluer and cassette for a 32t big cog for hills. If Shimano, a wide-range MTB derailluer and cogs, or maybe the long-cage deralliuer normally used with the triple cranks will work (I've done that with an Ultegra 9 speed and 32t MTB casette, 10 speed may be an entirely different matter).

The other question is how does the bike handle? Some are designed to be twitchy for easy manuevering in race situations. For touring, I'd want something stable. Performance & stability are not mutually exclusive (and not a function of frame material). I have one road bike is very twitchy; I never/rarely try riding hands-off for example. My other road bike is quite stable (yet it was expressly marketed to the racing community). Note that adding a handlebar bag may completely change the handling, so test before heading out. Enjoy your trip!

BigBlueToe

A fully supported ride like you describe seems to me to be just a series of fairly normal one-day rides, all taking place within an unusually short period. Your ride might equal two or three years worth of day rides for someone like me. Would anyone spend the money for a carbon fiber bike if they were concerned that it might not last 2 or 3 years? I doubt it.

I'd say the biggeest factor would be comfort. What seems comfortable for a one day ride can become very painful after a week or two of back-to-back long rides. Consider tweaks you might do to make it a little more comfortable - Brooks saddle? Gel strips under bar tape?

danacf

I agree with ks1g regarding wheels. I have done numerous one to two week supported tours in the western states and Canada. As carbon fiber has increased in popularity, the number of parrticipants riding carbon fiber on those trips has also increased. I have not witnessed any problems with the frame and components other than the wheels. Several riders broke spokes on their 20 spoke lightweight wheels and ended up using the spare wheel the support vehicle was carrying. The bike shops in several of the small towns we passed through had conventional spokes, but not the special spokes the wheel required. A lot of the roads I've ridden on out there aren't in the best shape. There seems to be an abundance of chip seal, broken pavement and expansion joints. I ride 36 conventional spoke DT trekking rims and Nashbar Duro 26mm tires with about 85-90lbs of air. The tires appear to be closer to small 28 than a 25. The tires glide over chip seal and take the bumps much better than the 23mm tires, and they save your butt too. If a 28 tire won't clear your frame, use the biggest tire that will.

sstorkel

I've put 12,000 miles on my carbon fiber road bike over the last 3 years. It has light-weight SRAM Red components and carbon fiber handlebars (got 'em for $80; they're not worth MSRP). I've dropped it on the ground a couple of times and been hit by a car once (at low speed). So far, the frame doesn't have a single scuff on it and the bike rides like a dream. I wouldn't hesitate to use it on a fully-supported tour.

If you buy a decent frame, my guess is you won't be able to walk away from any crash that would render the frame unrideable. I'd worry more about component failures (bent derailleur, broken shifter, damaged fork, etc)... and theft.

10 Wheels

You can only ride One Day at a Time.

50 bike rides at max.

Have fun.

kayakdiver

If I did a supported cross country ride, it would be on my Giant TCR SL3.... No question about it. It would be a blast from start to finish.

ironwood

I once met a Dutchman riding an old three speed who was averaging about eighty miles a day with light camping gear. This was in Denmark. He was retuning home from Nordkap Northernmost Norway. That's touring.

Booger1

I would be having a little chat with the bike maker if it didn't.....

Gus Riley

My road machine is a 1999 Aegis Aro Sevelt. I wouldn't think twice about riding it cross country...supported. I might replace tires, cables and chain before the trip, and carry extra spokes, but I'd certainly ride it across...wish I had the cash to do it that way.

I am crossing this summer also...but self contained on a LHT, along the TransAm Trail, east to west...will we cross paths?

john426

Dear Hollowmen:

Go with a steel frame. It has more "give" than aluminum and is much cheaper than carbon.

John

Bike Hermit

There are so many reasons I would not ride a cf bike across country. Where to start?
Comfort - not because carbon fiber makes for an uncomfortable ride, but more because 99% of carbon fiber bikes use a race geometry- great for racing, not so great for long steady distance. The tires on a cf bike are necessarily skinny, because wider tires won't fit. A wider tire does not automatically roll slower but does provide more cushion, another contributing factor to comfort for lsd rides.
Fenders - a cf bike will not (probably) accept fenders. You'll be very lucky not to encounter rain on the trip. Then fenders will make you happy. And a bike doesn't look right without fenders anyway IMHO
As for accidents- I have seen broken steel bikes but I've also seen dents in steel and aluminum tubes that would have made a cf tube questionable at best.
Somebody posted earlier that a cf bike should last two or three years?! A steel bike should last 20 or 30.

MassiveD

+1

It isn't the carbon fiber, it is the bikes they make out of it. So long as you are certain that you will be comfortable riding this bike, and you don't nick it, stone chip from passing truck kind of thing. The carbon should be fine. They make helicopter blades out of that stuff. Unfortunately they make disposable race frames out of it too.

There is a lot to be said for riding what everyone else is riding. Same gear, same results, different gear, different results and a pack of people who just don't care after the first 10 explanations. What is everyone else riding. It this supported because the cyclists are marginal, hedonists, or racers? Do you already own the carbon bike?

MassiveD

"I'm not worried about wearing the frame out."

You won't fatigue it out, there are a range of bad things that can happen durability wise on carbon frames. To some extent it will depend on the specific frame. Is it noted for strength.

"I'm curious as to whether or not people on these boards think the weight savings"

Well not even you think the weight saving is worth it. And I would agree, unless this is a group of budding Lon Haldemans. My neighbour and his race club have done the trans Canada twice on race bikes, they like to rip it. But I average 10mph made good when loaded touring, and I have no problem knocking off 80 miles a day, and the bike weighs a ton, and I am physically pretty past it. But I set my own schedule.

"and comfort factor"

There is no comfort factor, that is just sales BS. The frame is only a small part of comfort anyway. as has been pointed out, it is unlikely you will be able deploy all comfort factors, from proper geometry to gears to tires, to fenders on this bike. It is going to be uncomfortable. What is critical is that it not be a problem that gets worse, and becomes unrideably agonizing. Wrong seat, wrong bars, wrong shoes, wrong gear, wrong fit, it can become total agony.

"are worth the potential risk in the event of a crash, which could disrupt a trip where I don't have the luxury of stoping to get it fixed or replaced (I'd be holding up 30 other riders on a pretty strict schedule), and I can't bring a spare bike, or even frameset."

Yeah, well that doesn't sound good does it. There is the additional point that if you are the only person with a carbon bike, then everyone will be down on you since it wouldn't have happened with steel, whether that is true or not.

Again, there is little percentage in being the odd man out unless you are smart enough about bikes to build something trully out there. If Lance was doing this with 30 other cancer survivors, say. And his bike company wanted to make him a custom carbon bike with perfect fit, and designed for this trip, that would be awesome. I like steel, but carbon has the potential to be better, it just rarely works out that way. And so far never in touring. If there are 30 other folks on carbon bikes, it would be worth it, but otherwise no.