Has Specialized achieved something really specialized in the Aethos?

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

Fair enough and you are not wrong about thinking its crazy light. It always blow my mind when I get a carbon bike and how light the frame/fork is (and I never had anything that light, not even close) but thats carbon, its light stiff and strong and it seems that we keep on developing work on it that things can get lighter. I assume we are about hitting limitations or at least close and will have to move to a different material (I think one is already in development, forget the name snd even lighter than carbon).

I would be interested in ridding one myself and compare it to other carbon bikes. Maybe not as stiff which might be up my alley.

Sometimes we (they) just really want to push the limit and the engineering and testing only plays a part. And some times they walk it back but always keep improving the entire frame. Thinking of Cervelo R5 which was a super light bike 10 years ago and it got a redesign at some point and got heavier. And what about Ritchey Logic tubing? I had crazy light P-Team bikes back in the mid 90's and today Ritchey does not sell a bike that light and the tubing as fares I understand is heavier today. Sometimes you just need to make a 1000 of something and put it on the street if you will and see how it goes. You can't rely on papers and lawyers 100% of the time.

For that matter what's up with English? He makes things out of fairy dust tubing.

Bikes are cool and IMO keep getting cooler.

[Davist]

Good point about pushing the limits.. I do remember when the Ritchey p23/Bridgestone MB0 came out, there was a big feature in bicycle guide where they said the total steel used in the frame, if made into an ingot, would be the size of a deck of cards, that blew me away, and then those bikes got lighter..

[Bici-Sonora]

Originally Posted by Davist

Good point about pushing the limits.. I do remember when the Ritchey p23/Bridgestone MB0 came out, there was a big feature in bicycle guide where they said the total steel used in the frame, if made into an ingot, would be the size of a deck of cards, that blew me away, and then those bikes got lighter..

I raced a couple of NORBA seasons on an MB-0 BITD, crashing plenty of times, and the frame survived; I sold it to my father-in-law and he still has it and rides it. That said, I also saw some crack at the shop I worked at. I wonder what we’ll say about the Atheos in 30 years? Would anyone ride one of these in 20-30 years? I know a super long lifespan is not really what an ultralight carbon bike is about. Somebody above mentioned putting 80,000 miles on a tarmac and then getting it warranted. After 20-30 years I would be more concerned about the bikes safety than the warranty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Yoshi]

Originally Posted by bfd

Yow, how do you define “China?!” Does it include Taiwan? Some of the best carbon frames are built in Taiwan usually by Giant. They may not be “custom” like you find from US builders, but it appears all of the companies you mentioned and many more buy their frames from there. Moreover, it is my understanding that even Trek doesn’t build very many frames, if any, in Wisconsin anymore, it comes from Taiwan or “China.”

Good Luck!

No, I said China. Not Taiwan, not Tibet, not Hong Kong.
I've spent quite a bit of time in the Pacific and I'm pretty familiar with how different countries there conduct their business. China is the worst.

[benb]

I've had 3 carbon bikes.. all pretty expensive but nowhere near what this bike would cost to build up.

Money's not the issue, I can buy one of these without blinking.

But I won't. Here's the problem. I'm in that 170-175 range.. if I didn't break this thing, it's still going to look like *** after a year cause it's going to have chips all over the bottom of the bike in the finish if I ride it out in the real world where I live.

Every Carbon bike I've had does this. It makes them look cheap and very used after little more than one season despite them being super expensive. It doesn't affect the performance but given the price it gives me buyers remorse that doesn't happen with my metal bikes.

This thing is largely a show off piece to show the in-crowd that you blew a lot of money. It's no different than an expensive wrist watch or a ostentatious guitar or whatever.

If I'm going to buy some show off money piece I'd rather buy the wrist watch or guitar or whatever.. something that's not going to look dinged up and worn out in short order.

Cause the much cheaper bike even carbon will look the same after a year and not really perform any worse.

Realistically given I'm getting older & slower I'm probably never buying another Carbon bike again.. they're just not aligning with my cycling interests as time goes on, and I'm still younger than most on the forum. The Carbon bike I have right now will easily last me through my 50th birthday given I already treat it as a sunny day bike for days I'm feeling wicked strong.

There's just no version of the world where I'm 60 and I'm riding 12mph pace on a $10,000 carbon bike trying to pretend I'm 20-something riding at a 20mph pace.

[littleego]

Originally Posted by benb

There's just no version of the world where I'm 60 and I'm riding 12mph pace on a $10,000 carbon bike trying to pretend I'm 20-something riding at a 20mph pace.

You’re bungling my argument. I tell myself that I can justify the fancy bike because it compensates for my aging bones.

[benb]

Originally Posted by littleego

You’re bungling my argument. I tell myself that I can justify the fancy bike because it compensates for my aging bones.

I'd like to think there's no way I'm going to be that slow in another 16 years, but I seem to get injured a heck of a lot more now than I did in my 30s. I've done 1 hour at 20mph+ with rolling hills and winds in my 40s.

But I'm starting the year putting flat pedals on my gravel bike and probably restricting myself to the MUT because I've got a hamstring/glute problem that's persisted for almost a year that's heavily aggravated by cycling. So carbon bikes are completely irrelevant for me right now.

But the point of all that is if that's the kind of reality for me going forward $10,000 silly carbon bikes don't mean anything.

My carbon bike right now has the tallest gearing of any of my bikes and it's by FAR the hardest to stay disciplined to go slow on when I need to go slow.. it's exciting to ride and wakes up all the inner demons that say "overdo it, it's worth it!"

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by benb

But I won't. Here's the problem. I'm in that 170-175 range.. if I didn't break this thing, it's still going to look like *** after a year cause it's going to have chips all over the bottom of the bike in the finish if I ride it out in the real world where I live.

I'm interested to hear more about this. Are you saying you've experienced paint chipping more easily on carbon fiber frames than steel frames? Certainly unpainted titanium frames wouldn't have this issue, but I'm unaware of any reason why, if done properly, paint on carbon fiber should be any less durable than paint on steel.

[flying]

Originally Posted by benb

I'd like to think there's no way I'm going to be that slow in another 16 years,
but I seem to get injured a heck of a lot more now than I did in my 30s.
I've done 1 hour at 20mph+ with rolling hills and winds in my 40s.

For myself...I'm now 64 been riding road 35 years.. kept logs...
My Times did not really change a lot on the longer 3-4 hour rides.

One 53 miler gains 4000' ride I have slowed maybe 10 min max.
But if I wanted to really push I could be very close to the times from 25-30 years ago....but why?

The one place I have slowed a bunch is a 10 mile HC climb with 17% sections.
I have literally climbed it hundreds of times over the years. On that climb I now hear the song "I haven't got time for the pain" in my head
I tend to look around & take in the views now... glad I can even still climb it but it takes 40% longer than my best times of 30+ years ago.

But as I have often said IMHO the beauty of cycling only gets better.
It is definitely not about the bike & a side benefit of riding decades is you still can ride & you really appreciate the hobby & the beauty it affords....all just IMHO of course

[benb]

Originally Posted by prototoast

I'm interested to hear more about this. Are you saying you've experienced paint chipping more easily on carbon fiber frames than steel frames? Certainly unpainted titanium frames wouldn't have this issue, but I'm unaware of any reason why, if done properly, paint on carbon fiber should be any less durable than paint on steel.

Just my personal experience but yes, the carbon bikes I've had seem to be really chip prone, possibly due to weight weenie paint jobs?

I had a Custom Ti Serotta that I rode for 5 seasons and you couldn't even tell it had been ridden 1 day when I got rid of that once the decals had been redone.

My latest carbon bike I was hemming and hawing over buying a custom Seven Axiom something something instead of the Carbon bike. That was 5 years ago.

I'm sure the Seven would look almost brand new if I'd gone with that.

I have an 8 year old Steel bike that sees ALL the abuse. It has chips but not really any worse than the carbon bike, and the carbon bike is babied by comparison.

And do I care about chips on my $500 Steel frame as much as I would on a $5000 Carbon frame? Not at all.

The Ti frame from Seven was going to be like $4000. So not hugely different than this Specialized. But a much longer term purchase.

I mean frankly I guess for me ultra light weight at $5k doesn't sound as good if it has carbon durability.

My current Carbon frame was $2k for the frameset. Still a lot but not outrageous next to $5000 for mostly weight savings. And now it's chipped so it's water under the bridge. Realistically it got a bunch of dings and chips in the first couple thousand miles within a few months of getting it. And it's never been crashed or dropped or fallen over at all.

I guess the thing is you can get a custom metal frame (particularly Ti) and it will have cachet for years.. get a carbon one and you might as well budget to replace it every year if you want it to look good enough to impress people.

I hate the bike buying process.. I'd rather they last a really long time.

[littleego]

Originally Posted by benb

I'd like to think there's no way I'm going to be that slow in another 16 years, but I seem to get injured a heck of a lot more now than I did in my 30s. I've done 1 hour at 20mph+ with rolling hills and winds in my 40s.

But I'm starting the year putting flat pedals on my gravel bike and probably restricting myself to the MUT because I've got a hamstring/glute problem that's persisted for almost a year that's heavily aggravated by cycling. So carbon bikes are completely irrelevant for me right now.

But the point of all that is if that's the kind of reality for me going forward $10,000 silly carbon bikes don't mean anything.

My carbon bike right now has the tallest gearing of any of my bikes and it's by FAR the hardest to stay disciplined to go slow on when I need to go slow.. it's exciting to ride and wakes up all the inner demons that say "overdo it, it's worth it!"

Well it sounds like I have a decade on you so I’m sticking to my story. Interestingly, my wife has the opposite take. I tell her how much I like the way the Aethos rides and she says I’m too old to need a bike like that; it would only have made sense when I was younger and couldn’t afford one anyway.

[pasadena]

4.64kg Aethos
This is pretty amazing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69OrDvwix6g

[tomato coupe]

Originally Posted by benb

get a carbon one and you might as well budget to replace it every year if you want it to look good enough to impress people.

Many people don't buy bikes to impress other people -- they buy bikes to ride them.

[mtechnica]

Use it

[mtechnica]

Originally Posted by tomato coupe

Many people don't buy bikes to impress other people -- they buy bikes to ride them.

I know right. Sometimes this forum is so depressing.