4 ms·

I just don't buy this. At all. Why don't we see the Tour de France peloton rolling through on wooden bikes? They can afford the best of the best.

consp 8y ago
1. Weight, while it is lighter per unit than CFRP, you need more of it to sustain the same rigidity making it heavier. You actually need very little CFRP for a bike and mostly solid or near-solid wooden panels. Quite some of the minimum weight of professional bikes is additional equipment and the gearing mechanism. (min weight is a bit less than 7kg) 2. Stiffness. While not good for every day usage, it is good if you want to go fast. All energy absorbed is wasted as heat or vibrations (e.g. sound).
Carpetsmoker 8y ago
A lot of the post is about comfort and durability. If you're doing the Tour de France then your most important concern by far is pure performance. Everything else is secondary. You're not riding the Tour de France when you're commuting to work or riding as a hobby.
tokai 8y ago
They want high frame stiffness to minimize loss of power to flexing. I feel you though. I would rather improve ride smoothness with larger tires, lower tire pressure, lesser tension of spokes, different sadle, etc, than riding on a wooden bike.
crispyambulance 8y ago
I don't buy it either. Although, elite racers are ultra-fit people in their teens to twenties and are quite a different demographic than the typical high-end bicycle consumer-- which is males in their 40's and older with some disposable income and a bit of a mid-life crisis going on (I'm one). The wooden bike idea comes around every once in a while, the last one I remember was bamboo. I think it makes a viable frame material but they're very much "a look" rather than some kind special material that provides any specific "ride quality". It is totally possible to have a "quality ride" with any frame material you want: steel, carbon-fiber, titanium, aluminum or wood. When it comes to a "quality ride" people underestimate the importance of three things: 1. Their own fitness, 2. The fit/geometry of the bike and 3. The most simple thing of all, tire selection.

consp 8y ago

1. Weight, while it is lighter per unit than CFRP, you need more of it to sustain the same rigidity making it heavier. You actually need very little CFRP for a bike and mostly solid or near-solid wooden panels. Quite some of the minimum weight of professional bikes is additional equipment and the gearing mechanism. (min weight is a bit less than 7kg) 2. Stiffness. While not good for every day usage, it is good if you want to go fast. All energy absorbed is wasted as heat or vibrations (e.g. sound).

Carpetsmoker 8y ago

A lot of the post is about comfort and durability. If you're doing the Tour de France then your most important concern by far is pure performance. Everything else is secondary. You're not riding the Tour de France when you're commuting to work or riding as a hobby.

tokai 8y ago

They want high frame stiffness to minimize loss of power to flexing. I feel you though. I would rather improve ride smoothness with larger tires, lower tire pressure, lesser tension of spokes, different sadle, etc, than riding on a wooden bike.

crispyambulance 8y ago

I don't buy it either. Although, elite racers are ultra-fit people in their teens to twenties and are quite a different demographic than the typical high-end bicycle consumer-- which is males in their 40's and older with some disposable income and a bit of a mid-life crisis going on (I'm one). The wooden bike idea comes around every once in a while, the last one I remember was bamboo. I think it makes a viable frame material but they're very much "a look" rather than some kind special material that provides any specific "ride quality". It is totally possible to have a "quality ride" with any frame material you want: steel, carbon-fiber, titanium, aluminum or wood. When it comes to a "quality ride" people underestimate the importance of three things: 1. Their own fitness, 2. The fit/geometry of the bike and 3. The most simple thing of all, tire selection.