Carbon bike

[R3awak3n]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I call BS that there is no difference between other materials and carbon. Carbon rides better than any steel or aluminum bike, is stiffer than any steel bike, and is lighter than any metal bike. (all else being equal). Owned carbon: Calfee, Look, Bianchi. There is a reason all of the pros ride carbon bikes.

I've probably said all this before but the carbon Vs. debate is starting to look like the climate change "debate" which is basically ridiculous. Carbon is lighter and stiffer and rides better. Believe it, or delude yourself. I'm sorry. it's true that some steel frames come close, but overall, no.

unlike the climate debate, this is up to opinion. Carbon is lighter no doubt but some people don't care about that and prefer the ride of steel or aluminum.

The reason pros ride carbon bikes is because they are paid to do so, if somehow steel made a revival because it was cheaper to manufacture, they would be ridding steel

[bob heinatz]

One strong vote for carbon by mtechnica!

[nmrt]

Originally Posted by mtechnica

I call BS that there is no difference between other materials and carbon. Carbon rides better than any steel or aluminum bike, is stiffer than any steel bike, and is lighter than any metal bike. (all else being equal). Owned carbon: Calfee, Look, Bianchi. There is a reason all of the pros ride carbon bikes.

I've probably said all this before but the carbon Vs. debate is starting to look like the climate change "debate" which is basically ridiculous. Carbon is lighter and stiffer and rides better. Believe it, or delude yourself. I'm sorry. it's true that some steel frames come close, but overall, no.

hah
you might as well have said, cookies n cream is the best ice cream ever!
period.

[Hilltopperny]

I have had quite a few bikes over the years. I still do and most of them are metal, but after trying out a new carbon hardtail 29er I figured it was time to give a modern carbon cx/gravel/allroad bike a try. I picked the Stigmata cc and really like it so far.

The bike is very responsive to input and geometry feels very comfortable as well. The bike just wants to go fast. It is very well thought out and the integration and routing of the frame makes for a sexy looking bike.

There are so many options out there right now. Try and demo a few and see what works best for you. I think that we have never had more options than now for versatile quality carbon bikes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[roguedog]

You all, please stop talking. I've enough problems with lusting after metal bikes and now you all are tempting me with carbon!

Bad Paceline peeps.

[sjbraun]

Originally Posted by zennmotion

Hampsten's prices for custom carbon models are on a par with comparable factory bikes. One would have the same challenge of finding something to try out no matter the material anyway, right? Steve would make sure it fit right!

I ride a carbon Hampsten. Its a fantastic bike. Pricewise, like Zenmotion said, less than many top shelf production frames.

[zennmotion]

Originally Posted by sjbraun

I ride a carbon Hampsten. Its a fantastic bike. Pricewise, like Zenmotion said, less than many top shelf production frames.

This post is useless without pictures...

[weisan]

bob pal, by your choice of a Peg and a Spectrum, it's obvious that you are a man of good taste, and you can tell a good riding bike from a not so-good riding bike, regardless of the material.

My advice to anyone who wanted to try something or anything bike-related has always been...."What the heck are you waiting for, you only get to live ONCE!"

So, yeah, instead of trying to argue or explain the difference between a carbon bike and a non-carbon bike (as you can see is a highly emotional topic), my best advice is to get one and try it for yourself. Go the route of getting a used bike at a bargain price is the way to go. You should be able to find one in your ballpark fit numbers and budget to satisfy your itch as well as good enough to get a feel for it. From there on, if you so choose, you can go on to the next level of purchasing a custom or a more expensive or a different one after being informed of your first experience. Or it may further solidify your love for the Peg and Spectrum.

Don't worry too much about the name on the downtube, they don't mean much these days because they are all copying each other and coming up with superficial product differentiators and truth be told using more or less the same suppliers/manufacturers in Taiwan or China. And if you spent $8k on a bike, you have to justify it somehow or else you will be like the emperor walking down the street naked and consider dumb if you dare to say otherwise. Just go out and get one that you like aesthetically and fits your budget.

I understand you like to do your research and consult others before you jump in but truly speaking, whatever we say here pales in comparison to your actual experience of getting on a carbon bike and ride it for yourself.

I am not gonna list out my resume in order to add any level of credibility to what I am saying...you just have to trust me on this one. Or not.

Just remember one thing : what's true in life is also true in biking, the grass looks greener on the other side.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

The reason pros ride carbon bikes is because they are paid to do so, if somehow steel made a revival because it was cheaper to manufacture, they would be ridding steel

I very much doubt this. Carbon bikes are no longer 'experimental' or prototypes. They are ubiquitous and not only because they are cheap to manufacture.

To the OP: Go to a local Cannondale or Specialized or Trek dealership and ask for a test ride on a 105-equipped (or thereabouts) carbon bike and report back. Have the salesperson spend the time to get a close position to your own and bring your own pedals if the bike in question doesn't use your kind. Go for a 10-mile ride, not some parking lot 'test'.

I'm quite sure you'll be pleasantly surprised.

As to other comments - bikes are terrible investments. Upon this most can agree. Some hold value better than others but mostly we need to buy them because we enjoy them. Any idea of selling, even after just one year, and recouping our money is folly. They plummet in value and the higher the MSRP, the harder they fall. High end ones are more valuable often for their components than the frames. They are nothing more than a commodity and the market is flooded with used carbon bikes.

[mcteague]

After 10 years on a Seven Axiom I too lusted after carbon. Lots of research led me to the Parlee Z5. Geometry and size were nearly the same as my Seven. I was sure I was going to get one after reading all the reviews. Trouble is, I did not like the ride. It was not bad, just kind of dead. There was no feedback from the road. I did like the way the stiffness helped when climbing though.

I ended up back with Seven and got the mixed Ti/carbon 622 SLX. I seems to have the best of both worlds, stiff & light but also transmits a nice amount of road feel. Plus, the filament wound carbon tubes are a bit more resistant to cracking upon impact as compared to those molded in forms IMO. Still, I really do like the look of the new styles with hidden cables, so clean. But, as I do my own wrenching, I'll stick to external cables for the time being.

Tim

[Clean39T]

Alright, here's my hot take...

If you are a discerning rider, pay attention to details, and already have top-end titanium and steel, there's no reason to muck about with anything other than hand-built carbon. Lower end carbon is just badly clumped together glue and rides like crap. It's the equivalent of getting a Surly to try out steel. In order to get good ride quality out of carbon, it has to be top-shelf stuff. But then the conundrum - which top shelf? What's the real good stuff, vs. the marketed crap dressed up to look nice?

Some people do fine with made-in-asia carbon bikes, including peeps winning the TdF, but others will never be satisfied by them, including yours truly, because they simply do not have the same quality control, consistency, or testing that you'll get if purchasing from an actual in-house builder. I've done too much reading and research to ever trust my teeth/brain to one of them. And really, to ever trust a superlight used carbon frameset full stop. My OCD is too intense. It is what it is. I've gotten to the same place with carbon forks - unless I know how/where they were built, I have no interest in riding them, especially if used.

For me, the only carbon I'd trust in the second-hand market is older LOOK and any TIME because of their manufacturing standards, in-house building, and their robustness (absent a few dark years and odd design choices to avoid). Plus some models from DeRosa, Colnago, et. Al. from when they were 100% Made in Italy.

If buying new, my list would drop Look and any of the others who have outsourced, and expand to include Holland, Argonaut, Crumpton, and MUSA Parlee (incl. Hampsten variants) - with Holland being at the very top by a country-mile.

So, that's my take on carbon. If I wanted it badly enough, and had space, I'd be buying one of the Time Izons or Scylons that are on super-sale at Merlin right now in my size. Both are exceptionally nice bikes, Made in France, and designed with both safety and performance in mind.

But I've also come to the conclusion that there's simply no reason for me to ride carbon when nice steel exists and will on balance out-perform carbon according to my overall quality-of-riding rating system. And I'm talking 100% steel - frame and fork. There are benefits for racers chasing fractional gains, and there are benefits for manufacturers pumping out new models with glorious planned obsolescence, but for this committed and hard-riding enthusiast, there's nothing for me to gain from riding carbon anything.

So, who wants to talk disc brakes?

[ptourkin]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

Alright, here's my hot take...

If you are a discerning rider, pay attention to details, and already have top-end titanium and steel, there's no reason to muck about with anything other than hand-built carbon. Lower end carbon is just badly clumped together glue and rides like crap. It's the equivalent of getting a Surly to try out steel. In order to get good ride quality out of carbon, it has to be top-shelf stuff. But then the conundrum - which top shelf? What's the real good stuff, vs. the marketed crap dressed up to look nice?

Some people do fine with made-in-asia carbon bikes, including peeps winning the TdF, but others will never be satisfied by them, including yours truly, because they simply do not have the same quality control, consistency, or testing that you'll get if purchasing from an actual in-house builder. I've done too much reading and research to ever trust my teeth/brain to one of them. And really, to ever trust a superlight used carbon frameset full stop. My OCD is too intense. It is what it is. I've gotten to the same place with carbon forks - unless I know how/where they were built, I have no interest in riding them, especially if used.

For me, the only carbon I'd trust in the second-hand market is older LOOK and any TIME because of their manufacturing standards, in-house building, and their robustness (absent a few dark years and odd design choices to avoid). Plus some models from DeRosa, Colnago, et. Al. from when they were 100% Made in Italy.

If buying new, my list would drop Look and any of the others who have outsourced, and expand to include Holland, Argonaut, Crumpton, and MUSA Parlee (incl. Hampsten variants) - with Holland being at the very top by a country-mile.

So, that's my take on carbon. If I wanted it badly enough, and had space, I'd be buying one of the Time Izons or Scylons that are on super-sale at Merlin right now in my size. Both are exceptionally nice bikes, Made in France, and designed with both safety and performance in mind.

But I've also come to the conclusion that there's simply no reason for me to ride carbon when nice steel exists and will on balance out-perform carbon according to my overall quality-of-riding rating system. And I'm talking 100% steel - frame and fork. There are benefits for racers chasing fractional gains, and there are benefits for manufacturers pumping out new models with glorious planned obsolescence, but for this committed and hard-riding enthusiast, there's nothing for me to gain from riding carbon anything.

So, who wants to talk disc brakes?

I am surrounded by Holland HCs. They are so good. The disc version clears 30s. What are you waiting for?

[zennmotion]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

Alright, here's my hot take...

If you are a discerning rider, pay attention to details, and already have top-end titanium and steel, there's no reason to muck about with anything other than hand-built carbon. Lower end carbon is just badly clumped together glue and rides like crap. It's the equivalent of getting a Surly to try out steel. In order to get good ride quality out of carbon, it has to be top-shelf stuff. But then the conundrum - which top shelf? What's the real good stuff, vs. the marketed crap dressed up to look nice?

Some people do fine with made-in-asia carbon bikes, including peeps winning the TdF, but others will never be satisfied by them, including yours truly, because they simply do not have the same quality control, consistency, or testing that you'll get if purchasing from an actual in-house builder. I've done too much reading and research to ever trust my teeth/brain to one of them. And really, to ever trust a superlight used carbon frameset full stop. My OCD is too intense. It is what it is. I've gotten to the same place with carbon forks - unless I know how/where they were built, I have no interest in riding them, especially if used.

For me, the only carbon I'd trust in the second-hand market is older LOOK and any TIME because of their manufacturing standards, in-house building, and their robustness (absent a few dark years and odd design choices to avoid). Plus some models from DeRosa, Colnago, et. Al. from when they were 100% Made in Italy.

If buying new, my list would drop Look and any of the others who have outsourced, and expand to include Holland, Argonaut, Crumpton, and MUSA Parlee (incl. Hampsten variants) - with Holland being at the very top by a country-mile.

So, that's my take on carbon. If I wanted it badly enough, and had space, I'd be buying one of the Time Izons or Scylons that are on super-sale at Merlin right now in my size. Both are exceptionally nice bikes, Made in France, and designed with both safety and performance in mind.

But I've also come to the conclusion that there's simply no reason for me to ride carbon when nice steel exists and will on balance out-perform carbon according to my overall quality-of-riding rating system. And I'm talking 100% steel - frame and fork. There are benefits for racers chasing fractional gains, and there are benefits for manufacturers pumping out new models with glorious planned obsolescence, but for this committed and hard-riding enthusiast, there's nothing for me to gain from riding carbon anything.

So, who wants to talk disc brakes?

So, everybody has opinions, but these seem like some strong generalized assertions from someone who has limited experience with carbon bikes beyond google research. Among other things, the notion that "made in Asia" carbon= shoddy is old. But I guess the purpose of forums is confirmation and reassurance that we like what we like.

[R3awak3n]

Originally Posted by zennmotion

So, everybody has opinions, but these seem like some strong generalized assertions from someone who has limited experience with carbon bikes beyond google research. Among other things, the notion that "made in Asia" carbon= shoddy is old. But I guess the purpose of forums is confirmation and reassurance that we like what we like.

and interesting since I remember hearing CLEAN say he loved his carbon trek.

also agree on the genralizations, if made in US, ITALY or ... insert western country here... good, china or taiwan bad. Its not as simple as that. THere is plenty of quality control in taiwan and they are making some of the best carbon stuff in the world. I know its cool to hate on china/taiwan but there is nice stuff there, the nice stuff is not cheap (sure compared to the Portland builder it might be).


I also disagree that carbon is for racers only.

[cinco]

Originally Posted by dzxc

The same way blindfolded (and set up similarly) you couldn't tell a Richard Sachs from a Motobecane,

Ooof!