Jumping from Steel to Carbon? Advice needed

[exapkib]

I write this email after thirty blissful miles in the hills on my steel bike that I love--my Yamaguchi. I will thank you in advance for indulging a post full of introspective questions. I really am interested in the responses that this post elicits.

The principle question is completely subjective and rather simple: Should I buy a carbon bike (it would be my first non-metal ride). The incredibly priced BH Ultralight that sold recently in our own classifieds was what put me over the edge--once my mind committed that much to buying a lightweight carbon frame, it has been hard to walk it back from the edge.

The story begins, though, last year--I was riding the Alpine Loop with a friend, and we came to the section of the pass that was still closed to cars. I made the fateful mistake of helping to lift his bike (a Cannondale SuperSix Evo HiMod w/Carbon wheels) over the barrier immediately after lifting my own bike over said barrier. I was stunned. I have told myself the usual truths--the difference in weight (especially for the bare frame) doesn't make that big of a difference, yadda yadda yadda.

Apparently, some part of me remains unconvinced. A couple of great deals here post BH have me thinking about trying a (used, mid-grade) carbon bike just to see how it compares to my own ride.

How much lighter would a frame need to be to make a difference when out riding?

Do I really need a stiffer bike? Or is carbon supposed to be more compliant? Or is it really somehow both at the same time?

If I had a mid-grade carbon frame, when would I choose to ride it over the Yamaguchi?

How many bikes can a person ride at one time? How many bikes does a person need?

Any advice or experience would be most welcome. Thanks.

(By the way--I am not ready to sell the Yamaguchi. Not at all. That's probably the single largest thing holding me back from another purchase. Though, I have seen a few bikes go by in the classifieds that made me think seriously about proposing a temporary (six weeks or so) 'exchange' with some of the good folks looking to move their bikes here. What could possibly go wrong?)

[eddief]

you can only ride one at a time. you need 3 bikes.

a steel
a carbon
a titanium

They will each feel a little different, but if you get ones that match you and your riding style, you will enjoy being able to choose from the small herd each time you ride. 2-3 lbs of lightness can put a smile on your face.

I don't own a carbon anymore, cuz I have yet to find the one that will take fatter tires. I did love the relative lightness of my Roubaix to just jump on and do out of the saddle climbing.

I run 28mm Conti 4000 ii si tires on all 3 of my bikes now and those tires are a big factor in liking the current herd.

[Drmojo]

Like Eric signs off "ride metal"

[vqdriver]

yes, buy it. ride it. only then will you have the answer.
the used market is your friend in this instance.

i can say i appreciate my steel bikes that much more because i also own a great carbon bike.

could you maybe swap bikes with your friend for a weekend?
they may learn to appreciate the character of your 'guchi in return.

[Clancy]

I have a custom made stainless steel bike with a stainless steel fork, a custom Ti with an Enve fork, and up until a few weeks ago, a Sarto, which is a very nice, high end, hand made Italian frame. The Sarto is their stock geometry. I took the components off the Sarto to build up another Ti frame I just purchased.

There are very subtle differences between the steel and Ti bikes in ride due to materials. The steel is somewhat more springy, noticeably. But bigger differences in handling because of the differences in geometry.

The Sarto was the most spectacular carbon bike I've ever ridden out of 4-5 carbon bikes I've owned. Sublime. It's handling was the perfect balance of ease of turning, straight line stability, high speed confidence of any bike I've ridden including my two custom bikes that ride incredibly. Of all the bikes I've owned, I'd place the Sarto number one in handling, the other two tied for second although they handle differently.

The ride quality was the big difference. Most carbon bikes do not mute the small vibrations at all like steel/Ti. The Sarto did this better then any other carbon bike I've ridden and very close to my other two. We have tons of chip seal around here plus poor roads and the Sarto handled it pretty well. It was at the end of long rides that I could tell I was more fatigued.

Biggest difference was of course weight. The Sarto would seem to just spring forward and it was very light riding which I felt climbing, turning. The Sarto was also much, much stiffer in the BB without giving up a thing in comfort.

Each one of my other carbon bikes rode different. One high end bike could not descend w/o seemingly getting into a high speed wobble the frame was so flexy. Others felt wooden. Some so diff they jolted me all over the place.

The reason I say that is with carbon it seems to me you can get pretty much the ride you're looking for within the limits of carbon. There's some pretty harsh ones out there, some noddles.

I've found tire size and quality to have a major influence on ride feel and of course geometry the obvious influence on handling.

With that said, you can pick up feather light frames for smokin' deals, particularly if you are patient. Problem is finding the one that gives you what you want out of it. There seems to be the biggest hurdle. Seems more predictable with steel where carbon can be all over the map.

[Tickdoc]

I quite like the ride of my carbon bike (cervelo,s3) but I don't ride it anymore because of the bb feel and the creaks.

I just have gotten spoiled to the feel of a really well connected bb and solid feeling drivetrain.

It feels very strange now when I ride it...over reactive and twitchy, even though I know it is an efficient machine, and light.

You may not have that experience and instead have a "this is what I was missing!" Experience.

Either way, all is good.

Not sure I would let go of a Yamaguchi to try carbon though.

Can you demo something first?

[Ken Robb]

1-Demo some carbon bikes if you can.

2- Rent a carbon bike if there are no demos.

3-If you see a fabulous deal on a decent used carbon bike that fits you, buy it and see how you like it. If you don't you should be able to resell it without taking a financial beating.

[weisan]

kib pal, you have asked a legitimate question.

At the end of the day, only you can decide if it's worth it.

I have gone down this path several times, this is what I can share with you.

First thing first - it's not the material.

I have ridden bikes that are made of all three materials (Ti, Carbon, Steel) - some sang to me like nightingale, some sucked so much that I practically gave them away just to get them out of my sight.

But here's the thing: one's man trash is another man's treasure.

Just because I dislike a particular bike of a particular material, that doesn't mean it's condemned forever. No...on the contrary, another person might pick it up and love it at first sight. If you ask me why that is so...I dunno, beats me?!

So what I am trying to say to you is this: by all means, try carbon, try anything, try everything! The important thing is to keep an open mind and be ready to be surprised - both in the positive and the negative sense of the word.

DO NOT assume automatically that just because others swooned about a particular (carbon) bike and has gotten positive reviews that you too would like it. No, it doesn't work that way.

Oh, and about that weight thing. It's over rated....for the most part. Why? Because we are not pushing our machines anywhere close to reaping or seeing any meaningful benefit. By meaningful, I meant this. I rode my steel Rivendell yesterday. It weighs at least 23 pounds. I have yet to find another steel bike or simply another bike that rides as nice as it does. For the sake of argument, I completed my usual route in 2 hrs 30 mins. Today, I rode my carbon wonder bike. That thing weighs 16 pounds. I completed the same route/same distance in 2 hrs 22 mins. Granted, there are other factors that come into play, I do feel "lighter" and "faster" going up the hill but in real life, it doesn't translate into a significant difference in performance, at least, not significant enough for me to want to take it out every time...because why? "Going fast" is not the ONLY metric I used to determine whether I am having fun on a bike, often it's not.

But it's nice to have "options" and multiple bikes to choose from and change things up every now and then on a ride. Variety is the spice of life, as they say.

How do I choose which bike to ride on in any particular day?

I dunno, there's no fixed formula that I applied, just depends on what I feel like doing. I tried to be "fair" by taking turns bringing every bike that I have out for a ride....because to me a bike is a tool, it's not just a display item. If I don't ride it, I won't keep it around no matter how precious or how rare it is.

As someone famous once said, "It's all about the ride."

[Tandem Rider]

I don't think that it should be an either/or question. It needs to be an "and" situation.

My all time favorite bike to ride was a custom steel, as long as there wasn't a lot of climbing, accelerating, etc. in other words, not for racing or the "A" ride. It is a noticeable disadvantage in that scenario, it's for all day in the saddle, rolling out the miles. I much prefer a carbon bike for racing or the "A" ride, lighter, stiffer, and "snappier". It also kinda sorta seems like a consumable or expendable item. Different tools for different jobs.

[shovelhd]

Need can only be defined by you. That said, everyone has their take.

I've ridden and raced carbon bikes as my primary bike for about 8 years (Felt F5, Felt Fc, Redline Conquest Team Carbon). I've also owned aluminum bikes (Giant OCR2, Redline Conquest Pro), and I just finished building up a steel bike (Ritchey Breakaway Cross). They are all a little different, and some are surprisingly similar.

The Fc is my baseline. It's by far my favorite bike and the standard that others have to measure up to. It's very quick, responsive, stiff where it needs to be, and is very comfortable for long rides. The Redline was the best of the aluminum bikes, but they both rode fairly harsh, even with 28mm tires. I had them fitted as commuters so they were heavy, but even laden, they were not a comfortable ride. I bought the Ritchey as a travel bike that could be ridden comfortably for longer distances. I have it set up for the road with 28's, so there's that, but it rides like a dream. Not as quick as the Felt, almost as stiff, and just as comfortable. Modern steel is amazing. It definitely does not get the attention it deserves by the mass market. This one is a keeper.

If you long for carbon, go for it. Done right, its an amazing frame material.

[rePhil]

I'm a strange one. After reading ride reports, when a 585 showed up in the classifieds I thought I would give it a try. I liked it so much when another one showed up on another forum I bought it too. Then I found a spare fork I had to have. Bike wise, I'm in a happy place.

[Kirk007]

The lightness bug; it is appealing isn't it. I'm in the midst of my own experiment, having picked up a Colnago C50 and a Spectrum Ti off the forum, which I can now compare and contrast with a Peg Marcelo and a Kirk steel bike with steel fork. I've had other carbon bikes and passed them on for various reasons; these included a Calfee Tetra Pro (nice - rode very much like a steel bike but a bit lighter); a Merckx MxM (probably shouldv'e kept that one), a Ridley Damocles (stiff as h*ll yet you could flex the top tube between your fingers (disconcerting).

My conclusions to date: (1) fit, geometry and design matter much more than material; (2) weight matters; undoubtably a lot more if you are racing (I'm not) but also I think contributes to the way the bike feels when riding, and not just at the extremes. I say this as years ago I did a test on a seven mile ride, timing myself with various bikes. Riding a Merckx MXl (about 2 pounds heavier) was a wee bit slower than the Calfee, but not enough to matter outside of the race context. But it did feel different, both good and bad. Once up to speed and on descending the Merckx was a beast (in the good way). But it felt (again subjective) slower to accelerate and get up to speed.

Fast forward to today, the C50, Spectrum and Peg are all within a few ounces of each other, all built with Campy 11 and swapping various wheelsets. They are all big bikes (the C50 is a 63, the Peg a 62) so its not as easy to get a "light" bike with frames this size. But if I was to spring for some fancy carbon wheels I could get them to around 16 pounds. This is light enough for me (heck 17-18 is light enough for me).

They each ride a little different as one would expect. The biggest difference I discern though is the difference the various wheelsets make. They are all spectacular bikes and I am beginning to feel a bit silly having all of them as each one of them is easily good enough to be "the bike."

My advice - scratch the itch as you likely won't be satisfied until you try something (although an option, depending on shops near you would be rental. For instance a shop in the Seattle area will rent you a C60 or Dogma etc., for $100 a day.) But, I would focus alot on geometry, design, reviews of the particular frame for ride characteristics rather than just jumping on one that fits and thinking it will give you a generic carbon experience.

[froze]

Actually you need 4 bikes, AL, CF, TI, ST, then after you've ridden them for a while you'll slowly settle on either the TI or the ST bike and will sell the others.

I've ridden a lot of CF bikes and never found one I liked; I rode AL bikes and never found one I liked; I did buy a Scandium bike but hated it, it rode like a brick but the worse part was that it cracked at the top of the headtube after only 8,000 miles; I now have and ride 6 ST bikes and 1 TI bike, but my main bike is the TI bike which rides the best of any bike I've ever ridden, the only ST bike I have that comes close to the comfort (it's a toss up) is my touring when loaded, it gets pretty plush riding when loaded.

I've also had a custom built ST bike, and quite frankly, I couldn't tell the difference between custom and production, but that may be due to the fact that I don't have quirky body dimensions that need to be considered. So I sold the bike because it was so nice looking I was afraid to ride it and see it get scratched! So selling it took the worry off of me.

Of course everyone is different, someone else may have all sorts of bike materials and may prefer CF, so the first paragraph was said tongue in cheek!

[parris]

I've ridden steel bikes for many years and have been looking at carbon a bit over the last several months. I did some work for a partial barter of a Roubaix. It's a nice enough bike that is very quiet on a couple of my regular rides.

I will say though that I prefer either my old Club Special or my JKS any day of the week overall. When I hit rough patches on the carbon bike there's a "thwack" then very little that I'm just not use to. I also don't pick up how the bike, the road, and I are interacting unlike the steel bikes. For lack of a better term I feel like I have to think my way on some roads or "disconnected".

It could very well be that it's me and not the bike. Or that That particular model and I are a good match. Finally for context I've been on steel bikes to the exclusion of any other material for a bit over 30 years so there could just be an adjustment to how the other material feels.

I still am interested in carbon and the deal I got made the gamble worth it. But I'm in NO rush to hang my other bikes up for the wonderbike...

[FlashUNC]

A lot of this depends on your expectations. If you expect carbon to be made of unicorn tears, add 150 watts to your FTP, and let you descend with the abandon of Cancellara, you're going to be disappointed.

For context, my two road frames are lugged steel and tig'd aluminum, with a groad bike made of carbon and some long-time road miles on various carbon frames.

Its like anything else, the material matters less than the fit and the geometry, and a set of wheels and tires can change pretty dramatically the feel of any given frame.

That said, I think carbon can generally provide that magic combination of stiffness, comfort, and weight easier and more often than just about any other material.

Find something that fits, the rest will fall into place.