There is no reason to buy a carbon bike

[Pastashop]

FTA:

This is utter bunk and speaks more to the lack of experience this author has. I've lived on the west coast for 10 years now and salt air absolutely gets into steel frames and eats them alive. By contrast, CFRP is stable in these conditions and easily repaired.

Right, which is why that old carmudgeon on the West Coast who owned a single bike and rode it > 20,000 km/yr had it rust away from under him... I lived in the SF Bay Area for many years and rode my bike plenty. Yeah, the spokes on the wheels would corrode, but if your bike was painted and you touched it up in places, the bike rusting away from under you is actually what's pure bunk, IMO. But folks with more money than sense were always attracted by fancy status symbols...

[krooj]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Well, I really have to push back on this one. Thirty years and counting in the Bay Area (SF/Oakland) and the ONLY steel frame I owned with rust issues was, ironically enough, a STAINLESS frame (Cinelli XCr) I purchased from Florida where the extreme humidity did the damage. The seller reimbursed me for the damage, so all good. But, point being, I’d much rather own a steel steed in the Bay Area than in the humid Southeast.

Yeah, I've definitely heard this before, but IME, each year I pull apart one of my bikes for service, there's a tonne of rust sitting in the BB shell... Worst was when I lived in SoCal and did the SB -> VTA coastal rides: bikes would get that sticky coat of salty mist and ultimately develop surface rust. Stinner, Marinoni, even the Ti True North needed a regular wipe down, though the frame itself was never affected.

[Pastashop]

Adding to this: there are those of us that love solo riding for the purposes of challenging oneself, for fitness, besting times, and betterment of the craft of handling. I don't have the time nor lack of responsibility to commit what's required to audax/touring style rides and that puts me into the majority of riders. Why in the hell would I be pushing myself on a bike purpose built for touring? Riding Tam or Mt. Hamilton on a Trek 520... no thanks.

When I was in college, I had to ride from nearly sea level up to the top of Panoramic Way, where I lived. I'd do this almost daily. Riding up to Skyline, Canada Rd, to Santa Cruz, etc... Sure, a light Ti or Carbon bike could help me get up that hill 3 minutes sooner. Feels great for the first few weeks after you switch to a lighter bikie. And then you get used to it!

Of course, then one day your riding buddy shows up with something fancier and gets a few feet on you in a sprint to the mailbox, so you start thinking... "Gotta get me that laterally stiff, vertically compliant frame..."

I get it – buying a thing is actionable. We're the weirdos that buy more than one bike. Most people aren't like that! Meanwhile, getting an hour extra sleep the night before, or having one less beer – well, that probably impacts your climbing speed more, but it takes more discipline. And how many regular punters have optimized that side of their rides?

[krooj]

Originally Posted by Pastashop

Of course, then one day your riding buddy shows up with something fancier and gets a few feet on you in a sprint to the mailbox, so you start thinking... "Gotta get me that laterally stiff, vertically compliant frame..."

This thought has never really played out in my head in any serious way, but I'm not fixated on what other people are out there doing and measuring myself against it - never have been.

[spoonrobot]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

If you think anyone in this thread is "mad" or "outrages" it's just because you are looking for something that isnt there.

This is a bike discussion forum. I think it's fair to recognize and chat about an absolutely worthless article that we all wasted our time skimming through.

What does make me upset is that I used to think Outside mag was a really great publication back in it's glory days, and it's sad to me to see it degenerate into a a click baity rag of worthlessness.

Everything dies baby, that's a fact.

Hmm I don't know Angry, this post I read earlier in the thread sure seems like someone experienced some strong emotions reading the article. Not mad? No outrage? Okay sure, apply whatever characterization you want, but something not there? Well, that just can't be true when responses are written as such.

Proof positive Outside is a dumpster fire of a publication. That was easily one of the worst articles I’ve read in a while.

I like steel bikes too; but that article is junk journalism. RIP Outside magazine.

[Pastashop]

Originally Posted by krooj

This thought has never really played out in my head in any serious way, but I'm not fixated on what other people are out there doing and measuring myself against it - never have been.

I don't try to "keep up with the Joneses" and usually do my own thing. But when I raced, I definitely had moments when I felt that I could place a few spots higher on a time trial by riding deeper rims instead of my old 32-spoke Open Pros, or beating the pack up a climb with a 2lb lighter bike. All other things being equal, that is. That was when I was young, and my budget definitely did not correspond to my needs with regard to technologically-enhanced bike performance. Nowadays, it's quite the opposite – I have the money to afford the utmost in bike performance, but my bike stable is decidedly "lo-fi". Still, if I look on Strava after a ride and see that I was 3 seconds off pace from snagging 1st place for some little climb that day, I feel like I coulda gotten it, because I know the fellar who beat me was riding a 5 lb lighter, more aero sled. Yes, it's quite myopic in many ways, but I did look on those top-10 segment lists while sipping my post-ride coffee... It's completely illogical, but there it is. And I am merely saying that, by the same (il)logic, Snob's point stands that most people purchase carbon bikes for completely impractical reasons.

Are you saying that you haven't experienced those thoughts / feelings, or am I misunderstanding?

BTW, this is a great post by Snob on the illogic of racing for most of us... How do you spell "cognitive dissonance" again?

[45K10]

When I started rinding in the 80's it was on a steel bike because that was mainly all there was and it felt great.

When I started racing in the 00's it was on an Aluminum frame and it felt great.

5 years later I raced on a CF frame it also felt great.

Now when I do ride on the road it's on a 90's steel frame and you guessed it, it feels great...

[krooj]

Originally Posted by Pastashop

...Still, if I look on Strava after a ride and see that I was 3 seconds off pace from snagging 1st place for some little climb that day, I feel like I coulda gotten it, because I know the fellar who beat me was riding a 5 lb lighter, more aero sled....

Hell no, and I never cared. Why on earth would I let myself be gamified by some app? There will be folks faster than me, just as there will be folks slower than me, but I'm just measuring me against me. Insofar as racing, haven't bothered other than some fast group rides and cross racing in the early 00s.

[Pastashop]

Originally Posted by krooj

Hell no, and I never cared. Why on earth would I let myself be gamified by some app? There will be folks faster than me, just as there will be folks slower than me, but I'm just measuring me against me. Insofar as racing, haven't bothered other than some fast group rides and cross racing in the early 00s.

OK, so I'm a bit confused on the reasoning here. Earlier you said:

Adding to this: there are those of us that love solo riding for the purposes of challenging oneself, for fitness, besting times, and betterment of the craft of handling. I don't have the time nor lack of responsibility to commit what's required to audax/touring style rides and that puts me into the majority of riders. Why in the hell would I be pushing myself on a bike purpose built for touring? Riding Tam or Mt. Hamilton on a Trek 520... no thanks.

If you only care about improving *yourself*, why would you resort to doing that on lighter bikes?.. Do you stop at lighter / more aero bike, or do you soon go to a motor assist? Or am I misunderstanding the kind of bike you prefer for these rides over a Trek 520, and reasons for it?

[5oakterrace]

I am sick of reading about steel as some kind of forever bike. After riding I stand and I drip. Soaking wet with sweat. Any of that salt ends up on the bike and it eats through paint. Wipe it down and all you do is move it around a bit. Try to get it out of the cracks (cable guides, etc). So ... wash it every ride? You do not sweat and you are fine. Any chip has to be filled before rust develops. Ride 5k a year and you get a lot of chips. Sand them and d it right and you end up with "patchwork" bike. Every year take the bike apart and use frame saver.

I am a " never steel" advocate. And really forget about it if you live in an area where there is moisture. Like in the woods in New england where I live. Complete pain. Aluminum., titanium, much much better.

[tomato coupe]

Proof positive Outside is a dumpster fire of a publication. That was easily one of the worst articles I’ve read in a while.

I like steel bikes too; but that article is junk journalism. RIP Outside magazine.

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

Hmm I don't know Angry, this post I read earlier in the thread sure seems like someone experienced some strong emotions reading the article. Not mad? No outrage? Okay sure, apply whatever characterization you want, but something not there? Well, that just can't be true when responses are written as such.

Nothing in the post you quoted indicates the poster was mad or outraged.

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by 5oakterrace

I am sick of reading about steel as some kind of forever bike. After riding I stand and I drip. Soaking wet with sweat. Any of that salt ends up on the bike and it eats through paint. Wipe it down and all you do is move it around a bit. Try to get it out of the cracks (cable guides, etc). So ... wash it every ride? You do not sweat and you are fine. Any chip has to be filled before rust develops. Ride 5k a year and you get a lot of chips. Sand them and d it right and you end up with "patchwork" bike. Every year take the bike apart and use frame saver.

I am a " never steel" advocate. And really forget about it if you live in an area where there is moisture. Like in the woods in New england where I live. Complete pain. Aluminum., titanium, much much better.

LOL, I ride predominantly steel and can't relate to a single thing you just said. But at least it makes a cool 180 degree "opinion" piece to the original article.

[spoonrobot]

Originally Posted by tomato coupe

Nothing in the post you quoted indicates the poster was mad or outraged.

There is no objective measure for this statement. Subjectively? Well...

dumpster fire of a publication

one of the worst articles I’ve read

junk journalism

If you were dragged before a judge and tried to make this argument, 9 times out of 10 you'd fail.

Did people read the article? Yes
Did some people experience an emotional response? Yes
What were those emotions? __________________(Fill in the blank)

[spoonrobot]

Are we witnessing the Paceline equivalent of "I just think it's funny that..."

?

[tomato coupe]

Originally Posted by spoonrobot

There is no objective measure for this statement. Subjectively? Well...

If you were dragged before a judge and tried to make this argument, 9 times out of 10 you'd fail...

Subjective or not, you don't have to be mad or outraged to make those assessments. People do it everyday when they evaluate movies, books, food, music, etc.