6 ms·

There's No Good Reason to Buy a Carbon Bike

38 points by mikae1 3y ago

bilekas 3y ago
Yeah, well that's just like, your opinion, man.
- Eric_WVGG 3y ago
  Yes that's why he's a paid editorial columnist.
  - timeon 3y ago
    Hot-takes, rage-bait, click-baits - it brings attention.
    - SauciestGNU 3y ago
      This particular author is right about more than he's wrong (imo) but even when he's wrong he can at least make an argument for his position.
henriquez 3y ago
It’s not necessarily about “elite racing performance” for a lot of people. Carbon fiber frames dampen road vibrations a lot better than aluminum and are noticeably less “harsh” to ride. For road bikes which typically don’t have any shock absorbers, a decent quality carbon frame is simply much more comfortable to ride on than the equivalent aluminum frame from the same manufacturer. This can make a huge difference on longer rides. Carbon fiber isn’t as fragile as the article suggests. People have been riding it for decades and their bikes haven’t been exploding. Really any crash significant enough to cause frame damage will be a total loss to any bike frame, regardless of material (in terms of repair cost). No one “needs” a carbon bike but to say there’s “no good reason to buy one” is just dumb. Also the article suggesting steel frames over carbon is just weird at this point. Steel bikes are a super niche audience of budget or retro riders. I’m wondering if this article is a joke post.
- tmiku 3y ago
  I don't think it's a joke, Outside's writing has taken a hit since the acquisition in 2021. It's a headline for people to click on and the writing is an afterthought. I rolled my eyes with the steel frame thing at the end too. Steel bikes are cool, going fast on a steel bike is even cooler, but the Insufferable Steel Bike Guy is definitely on the rise.
  - operatingthetan 3y ago
    This is the bikesnobNYC guy trolling in norm-core-article form.
  - jerlam 3y ago
    The only Outside Online articles that I don't regret clicking on are from Alex Hutchinson, who writes mostly about performance studies: https://www.outsideonline.com/byline/alex-hutchinson/ https://www.outsideonline.com/byline/alex-hutchinson/
- mikae1 3y ago
  > Carbon fiber frames dampen road vibrations a lot better than aluminum and are noticeably less “harsh” to ride. This opinion piece argues that steel, not aluminum, is the alternative. Slightly wider tires makes differences between frame materials subtle[1]. Wider tires are more comfortable and certainly not dramatically slower[2]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcRzp6xwuzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcRzp6xwuzE [2] https://www.renehersecycles.com/why-wider-tires-are-not-slower/ https://www.renehersecycles.com/why-wider-tires-are-not-slow... (written by a wide tire salesman)
  - henriquez 3y ago
    Did you read my comment ?Steel bike people are going for retro flair, not modern performance.
- yodsanklai 3y ago
  > Carbon fiber frames dampen road vibrations a lot better than aluminum and are noticeably less “harsh” to ride. It's a common argument but I wonder how much more comfortable a carbon bike can be (I never had a carbon bike). Would bigger tires compensate for a more rigid frame?
renewiltord 3y ago
Man, I spend the money on a carbon fibre bike with an aero wheel cutout because I like the aesthetics. Obviously spending thousands of dollars to save a few grams when I'm going to promptly just gain a few kilograms by eating poorly is not a financially rational decision if the sheer performance is my target. And it's really nice that it's so light. Nice on a single finger.
- tmiku 3y ago
  Yeah, I feel like he totally glossed over the major overlap between carbon frames and higher-end components (which are totally reasonable to want as a rec cyclist!)
- rokkitmensch 3y ago
  Dentist bike!
  - mikae1 3y ago
    For dentists with taste: https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/marosticana/ https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/ma... :)
- jijijijij 3y ago
  Do you like the haptics tho? For me, carbon fiber frames usually feel like they're made of reed or something. I know it's tough, but it absolutely doesn't feel like it. I get irrational trust issues. I crave the certainty of steel.
hooverd 3y ago
Hollandophiles will always tell you the best bicycle is made out of cast iron, you don't want to be like those awful wielrennen.
zwieback 3y ago
I read back in the blog history of this author and thought to myself, "yeah, what an opinionated dork!" Then I got to his post about the beauty of friction shifters and went, "yeah, he's right!". Scrolled some more "what a dork". Etc.
- pkulak 3y ago
  I mean, it's Bike Snob NYC. You've captured his (online) personality quite well.
  - Gualdrapo 3y ago
    Had the same thoughts about "Bike retrogrouch" a while back. And with more bloggers and people after that. Then I realized opinionated people tend to be noisy.
Finnucane 3y ago
I'm saving my pennies for a titanium bike from Seven. It will be a lot of pennies. (my current bike is a steel touring bike from Jamis, and it's been great, but it turns out that if you are in New England and ride every day for 14 years, you will eventually get a little rust.)
- convolvatron 3y ago
  if you aren't too fussy about appearance - take it down with some fine grit sandpaper until its clean. clean with alcohol. apply a dilute patina solution until it gets at least grey. clean it with alcohol again. warm it up with a hair dryer. apply carnauba wax.
303uru 3y ago
No good reason? Aerodynamics, period, end of story. I spend all my training hours on a titanium road bike. Why? It's durable. On race day, though, I'm on a top of the line aero road bike. Why? Because it's fast, noticeably. You simply cannot make round tubes aerodynamic and when you're racing at 25+ MPH it does make a real difference.
- preds 3y ago
  Everything you've said lines up with exactly what the author said. Carbon fiber bikes are made for and good for racing. If you're not actually racing you probably want to be on something more durable. It's almost like you just read the (intentionally sensationalised) headline..
  - 303uru 3y ago
    I'm very familiar with the author, he's of this new breed (see theradavist also) of look how relaxed and cool we are, no one needs carbon, see it's overpriced and stuff man. Meanwhile they're pedaling $15k custom manufacture titanium.
    - SauciestGNU 3y ago
      He's been writing as long as I've been riding as an adult (15 years or so). I'm not sure how "new" the breed is, but a lot of these folks pushing comfy tire frame bag relaxed cycling are the now middle-aged former fixed gear hipsters of days of yore. I might count myself among them. Personally I was a co-op rat around the Great Recession learning how to build bikes from parts, and in the process realizing that you can build a nice riding bike from 50-60 year old parts. You don't have to spend a fortune on Di2 and carbon. Now these folks are in more prestigious positions and the industry is paying attention to the demographic. We get companies like Crust and Velo-Orange and Riv selling us bikes based on how we actually ride (or like to think we do). I also race, but I race on a modest steel bike and only for the love of the sport, not because I'm a top tier competitive athlete.
- elorant 3y ago
whalesalad 3y ago
steel is real! honestly my favorite bikes have been made of steel. they absorb a lot more of the roughness in the road and don't transmit it into your body as much.
- chihuahua 3y ago
  Are other materials (e.g. aluminum, titanium, carbon) not real, or not as real as steel? Can you explain in what sense are they less real?
  - whalesalad 3y ago
    it's an expression used by people who like steel bikes. the other materials are indeed real, lol. https://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/blog/steel-is-real-but-why-is-it/ https://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/blog/steel-is-real-but-why-is...
  - Kon-Peki 3y ago
    People are still salty about the way that steel was pushed out of the market back in the 1990s. Especially in the sub-$1000 category (which was probably 90+% of the market), the aluminum bike that replaced the steel bike at the same price point was a noticeably worse bike, but it looked way cooler (forget the fact that aluminum bikes improved a lot as time went on). The collapse in demand for bike-appropriate steel tubing meant that any laggard bike makers were essentially forced to switch. So now, if you want a steel bike frame, you really only have the lower-end and the very high-end tubing available to you. Basically, steel bikes were killed by fashion trends more than anything else. It's no wonder hipsters love them.
- jackmott42 3y ago
  That is a myth. Material alone doesn't determine this, and modern road bikes are on 28mm tires at ~70psi so this isn't nearly as much of an issue as it was 20 years ago (and it wasn't a real issue then either)
  - whalesalad 3y ago
jack_riminton 3y ago
What about aluminium?
- vehemenz 3y ago
  Yeah, that's kind of the flaw in this argument. The main conclusion is basically correct, but steel rusts and aluminum doesn't. Plus aluminum is light enough to warrant upgrading over steel, and it barely costs anything more.
  - Gualdrapo 3y ago
    Stainless steel does not rust too (maybe it does Zig?) but if I recall correctly the con about it is that it's a bit heavier than "normal" steel. Still I'd love to have a classic-ish stainless steel bike with disc brakes.
- BozeWolf 3y ago
  Aluminium generally is stiff, quite uncomfortable for longer rides (100km). I own one, had a lot of fun with it. Now I have a carbon road bike, don’t care about the weight, did care about comfort. Comfortable, flexible, but still has stiffness in the right direction (torsion is way less). Longer rides are much more pleasant. There are also nice titanium bikes and steel bikes. From what I heard titanium and steel frames tend to be a bit more flexible, no idea why.
  - drunner 3y ago
    This is one of those things that doesn't make any sense. The amount of vertical deflection difference between aluminium and carbon is nothing, tires make the biggest difference by far. Yet many people will say carbon is more 'comfortable'. Its hard to tell how much placebo it is.
    - BozeWolf 3y ago
      Running the same tires... same rims. Of course it is a complicated system, so you can never compare it 1:1. Fact is that carbon bikes tend to ride more comfortable, if they are designed for it. Also the frame can be shaped and put together to flex in the right directions, which is harder with aluminium. Then again, there are also endurance bikes (many 1000s of km's a week) made from titanium (J. Guillem) which are comfortable and also have much simpler shapes than carbon frames.
chihuahua 3y ago
By the same reasoning, there's no good reason to buy jewelry, a watch that costs more than $50, nice clothes, sports cars, nice silverware, and lots more things. Some people who are into cycling have a lot of disposable income, and they want to buy themselves something nice. Then they feel happy for a while. The author claims that there are only "pro racers" and "everyone else", but that's not true - there are also amateur racers, who benefit from carbon bikes except they're not doing it to earn a living. Finally, the argument that carbon bikes are ugly and steel bikes are beautiful is completely subjective. I feel that the exact opposite is true, but it's irrelevant because it's a subjective opinion.
- mantas 3y ago
  Titanium is nice, expensive and durable :)
- mikae1 3y ago
  > Some people who are into cycling have a lot of disposable income, and they want to buy themselves something nice. Then they feel happy for a while. If that’s the case you contact a frame builder that will make you a bespoke lugged steel frame tailored to your measurements. The off-the-shelf carbon frame is the collectible sneaker of the bike world. The custom steel frame is the pair of bespoke Italian leather shoes. The Marosticana[1] perhaps? [1] https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/marosticana/ https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/ma...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
rokkitmensch 3y ago
People who ride carbon mountain bikes absolutely baffle me. The thing is going to get seriously chewed up if you're having fun and pushing your limits, why make it a glass canon to boot?!
- jackmott42 3y ago
  This is a misconception. Carbon fiber mountain bikes are not more delicate. Designed properly they are more durable. The idea that carbon fiber is innately delicate comes from road bikes designed to be as light and stiff as possible, and they can end up brittle, and weak in areas that don't normally see stresses. Not all road bikes are designed like this, even high end ones, but some early ultra light bikes were. Bikes that need to be durable use different types of fibers that can bend more before cracking, and may include layers of kevlar or other composites with more 'toughness' in key areas. My wife has a carbon fiber mountain bike and has been racing every weekend, winning, jumping, crashing, riding every day, for 3 years now, bike is fine.
- plorkyeran 3y ago
  Perhaps you should take the popularity of carbon mountain bikes to be a hint that your preconceptions of carbon durability are inaccurate.
  - rokkitmensch 3y ago
    These old materials sciences classes are leading me astray! Fatigue, embrittlement, they must be solved problems by now.
- thefz 3y ago
  Carbon MTBs are pretty strong. Just don't clamp the frame so much you are crushing it and avoid direct rock hits, which will damage any material anyway.
  - jackmott42 3y ago
    There used to be a video on youtube of a carbon mountain bike fork, and they were SMASHING it with a ball peen hammer, repeatedly. It did do a little damage but remained rideable, and was in much better shape than the metal forks they smashed.
Simulacra 3y ago
What a ridiculous article. Carbon is stiff and comfortable, and I love it. Its more forgiving than aluminum, stiffer than steel, and cheaper than titanium. The author just sounds bitter, or disgruntled
FridgeSeal 3y ago
There’s plenty of reasons people (me included) buy carbon bikes. - they’re lighter - the aesthetics: I like a good steel/titanium bike, but the flowing lines and zero-joins of a carbon frame are awesome - manufacturers can control and alter the layup to control the degree and direction of flex in different regions of the frame. Plus dampening properties are helpful. Weight savings alone are a “Good Reason”. Edit: Wow this article is insufferable. “You’re not good enough to have a carbon bike” and “you’re too peasant to work on it properly”. If the author wants to have an inferiority complex over what I’m guessing is a failed racing career and an inability to learn basic mechanics skills, then that’s on them. I’ve owned carbon mountain and road bikes, put thousands of K’s on them, maintained and upgraded them with zero issues.
- sco1 3y ago
  > Weight savings alone are a “Good Reason”. They're not always lighter either :)
  - operatingthetan 3y ago
    The frames, at the high-end? Yeah they are always lighter. Putting Tiagra on a 700 gram carbon frame and comparing it to Dura-Ace on a 1700 gram ti frame isn't the comparison we are looking for here exactly.
system2 3y ago
I am mountain biking very often. The day I changed my rims to carbon fiber ones was the day I could go another 5+ miles. I replaced my entire frame with a carbon fiber one. Now I am nearly doubling my distance which is 20-30 miles with it. I can hop over things easily, climbing hills is a breeze. Sure, it is not as strong as heavy metal ones, but I do not know if any mountain biker would return to non-carbon fiber alloys. At least for mountain bikes, the carbon fiber anything is a win. Rim or frame, any upgrade is a net upgrade. It feels like this article was written by a person who never rode a bike. I doubt it is the fact because it comes from a reputable website.
jackmott42 3y ago
Carbon fiber bikes have two main properties that can affect performance: 1. they are a little lighter. This doesn't matter nearly as much as most cyclists think, but it does matter a bit. If you race competitively in the mountains, you might care. 2. There is more design freedom for shaping them aerodynamically. This makes a bit more difference than weight, and if you are competing you definitely want it.
- timeon 3y ago
  > doesn't matter nearly as much as most cyclists think Weight matters also off-bike. For example if you need to carry it upstairs daily. So it can matter even for people that do not race.
  - plorkyeran 3y ago
    Even just loading a bike onto a car rack is a pretty big difference. I don't think I'd pay for carbon if the only benefit was it being easier to carry, but it is a pretty big benefit.
  - PretzelPirate 3y ago
    I used to live in a 3rd floor walk up in NYC. I appreciated my carbon bike. I even considered buying carbon wheels.
- habnds 3y ago
  they can also be stiffer in some directions and more flexible in others, which is a huge underestimated advantage compared to metal bikes.
Damogran6 3y ago
Only reason I have a Carbon bike is that was what was available over COVID. Paid $350 for a Museew frame that used to go for a LOT more ($3500?) I have no illusions of grandeur. When I'm in better than normal shape, I can barely see a fraction of it's potential...it just transferrs SO much speed in a sprint...which I can't do for very long.
thot_experiment 3y ago
Wow, not a single mention of fatigue limits in the article and in the comments here, I MUST POST. Titanium and steel have a property called a fatigue limit[0], aluminum and carbon do not. There's a stress threshold below which steel and titanium accumulate zero wear, making their cycle life effectively infinite. Every bump Al and CF take puts them on setp closer to failure, and that failure tends to be catastrophic. I will never ride bikes made out of the latter two materials, I need to rely on this machine for my life, I don't want it's cycle life nagging me in the back of my mind. If you want to save weight, take the brakes and gears off. :P [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit
- thefz 3y ago
  True. But carbon MTBs can last a decade of abuse.
  - habnds 3y ago
    yeah this isn't a real concern
  - mikae1 3y ago
    Decade? Is that a merit?
    - habnds 3y ago
      if you haven't destroyed your mtb after 10 years of riding you might not need a mountain bike at all.
      - mikae1 3y ago
        And with MTB you mean MTB frameset? I see plenty of hard ridden +10 year old MTB steel frames. I have two myself. In mountainbiking I think the greater threat to longevity is “standards” inflation though. 157mm super boost spacing, here we come.
ploum 3y ago
Carbon is not only about weight. It has many interesting properties like dampening, stiffness in the right direction while being lean in another. A carbon bike could be completely different from another. It’s like hiding springs in some part of the frame. I may hear that some people don’t like the feeling of carbon. In fact, I prefer Aluminium. But my muscles prefer carbon because it filters a lot more vibrations. So the article is both useless and completely ill-informed.

38 points by mikae1 3y ago

bilekas 3y ago

Yeah, well that's just like, your opinion, man.

Eric_WVGG 3y ago
Yes that's why he's a paid editorial columnist.
- timeon 3y ago
  Hot-takes, rage-bait, click-baits - it brings attention.
  - SauciestGNU 3y ago
    This particular author is right about more than he's wrong (imo) but even when he's wrong he can at least make an argument for his position.

henriquez 3y ago

It’s not necessarily about “elite racing performance” for a lot of people. Carbon fiber frames dampen road vibrations a lot better than aluminum and are noticeably less “harsh” to ride. For road bikes which typically don’t have any shock absorbers, a decent quality carbon frame is simply much more comfortable to ride on than the equivalent aluminum frame from the same manufacturer. This can make a huge difference on longer rides. Carbon fiber isn’t as fragile as the article suggests. People have been riding it for decades and their bikes haven’t been exploding. Really any crash significant enough to cause frame damage will be a total loss to any bike frame, regardless of material (in terms of repair cost). No one “needs” a carbon bike but to say there’s “no good reason to buy one” is just dumb. Also the article suggesting steel frames over carbon is just weird at this point. Steel bikes are a super niche audience of budget or retro riders. I’m wondering if this article is a joke post.

tmiku 3y ago
I don't think it's a joke, Outside's writing has taken a hit since the acquisition in 2021. It's a headline for people to click on and the writing is an afterthought. I rolled my eyes with the steel frame thing at the end too. Steel bikes are cool, going fast on a steel bike is even cooler, but the Insufferable Steel Bike Guy is definitely on the rise.
- operatingthetan 3y ago
  This is the bikesnobNYC guy trolling in norm-core-article form.
- jerlam 3y ago
  The only Outside Online articles that I don't regret clicking on are from Alex Hutchinson, who writes mostly about performance studies: https://www.outsideonline.com/byline/alex-hutchinson/ https://www.outsideonline.com/byline/alex-hutchinson/
mikae1 3y ago
> Carbon fiber frames dampen road vibrations a lot better than aluminum and are noticeably less “harsh” to ride. This opinion piece argues that steel, not aluminum, is the alternative. Slightly wider tires makes differences between frame materials subtle[1]. Wider tires are more comfortable and certainly not dramatically slower[2]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcRzp6xwuzE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcRzp6xwuzE [2] https://www.renehersecycles.com/why-wider-tires-are-not-slower/ https://www.renehersecycles.com/why-wider-tires-are-not-slow... (written by a wide tire salesman)
- henriquez 3y ago
  Did you read my comment ?Steel bike people are going for retro flair, not modern performance.
yodsanklai 3y ago
> Carbon fiber frames dampen road vibrations a lot better than aluminum and are noticeably less “harsh” to ride. It's a common argument but I wonder how much more comfortable a carbon bike can be (I never had a carbon bike). Would bigger tires compensate for a more rigid frame?

renewiltord 3y ago

Man, I spend the money on a carbon fibre bike with an aero wheel cutout because I like the aesthetics. Obviously spending thousands of dollars to save a few grams when I'm going to promptly just gain a few kilograms by eating poorly is not a financially rational decision if the sheer performance is my target. And it's really nice that it's so light. Nice on a single finger.

tmiku 3y ago
Yeah, I feel like he totally glossed over the major overlap between carbon frames and higher-end components (which are totally reasonable to want as a rec cyclist!)
rokkitmensch 3y ago
Dentist bike!
- mikae1 3y ago
  For dentists with taste: https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/marosticana/ https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/ma... :)
jijijijij 3y ago
Do you like the haptics tho? For me, carbon fiber frames usually feel like they're made of reed or something. I know it's tough, but it absolutely doesn't feel like it. I get irrational trust issues. I crave the certainty of steel.

hooverd 3y ago

Hollandophiles will always tell you the best bicycle is made out of cast iron, you don't want to be like those awful wielrennen.

zwieback 3y ago

I read back in the blog history of this author and thought to myself, "yeah, what an opinionated dork!" Then I got to his post about the beauty of friction shifters and went, "yeah, he's right!". Scrolled some more "what a dork". Etc.

pkulak 3y ago
I mean, it's Bike Snob NYC. You've captured his (online) personality quite well.
- Gualdrapo 3y ago
  Had the same thoughts about "Bike retrogrouch" a while back. And with more bloggers and people after that. Then I realized opinionated people tend to be noisy.

Finnucane 3y ago

I'm saving my pennies for a titanium bike from Seven. It will be a lot of pennies. (my current bike is a steel touring bike from Jamis, and it's been great, but it turns out that if you are in New England and ride every day for 14 years, you will eventually get a little rust.)

convolvatron 3y ago
if you aren't too fussy about appearance - take it down with some fine grit sandpaper until its clean. clean with alcohol. apply a dilute patina solution until it gets at least grey. clean it with alcohol again. warm it up with a hair dryer. apply carnauba wax.

303uru 3y ago

No good reason? Aerodynamics, period, end of story. I spend all my training hours on a titanium road bike. Why? It's durable. On race day, though, I'm on a top of the line aero road bike. Why? Because it's fast, noticeably. You simply cannot make round tubes aerodynamic and when you're racing at 25+ MPH it does make a real difference.

preds 3y ago
Everything you've said lines up with exactly what the author said. Carbon fiber bikes are made for and good for racing. If you're not actually racing you probably want to be on something more durable. It's almost like you just read the (intentionally sensationalised) headline..
- 303uru 3y ago
  I'm very familiar with the author, he's of this new breed (see theradavist also) of look how relaxed and cool we are, no one needs carbon, see it's overpriced and stuff man. Meanwhile they're pedaling $15k custom manufacture titanium.
  - SauciestGNU 3y ago
    He's been writing as long as I've been riding as an adult (15 years or so). I'm not sure how "new" the breed is, but a lot of these folks pushing comfy tire frame bag relaxed cycling are the now middle-aged former fixed gear hipsters of days of yore. I might count myself among them. Personally I was a co-op rat around the Great Recession learning how to build bikes from parts, and in the process realizing that you can build a nice riding bike from 50-60 year old parts. You don't have to spend a fortune on Di2 and carbon. Now these folks are in more prestigious positions and the industry is paying attention to the demographic. We get companies like Crust and Velo-Orange and Riv selling us bikes based on how we actually ride (or like to think we do). I also race, but I race on a modest steel bike and only for the love of the sport, not because I'm a top tier competitive athlete.
elorant 3y ago

whalesalad 3y ago

steel is real! honestly my favorite bikes have been made of steel. they absorb a lot more of the roughness in the road and don't transmit it into your body as much.

chihuahua 3y ago
Are other materials (e.g. aluminum, titanium, carbon) not real, or not as real as steel? Can you explain in what sense are they less real?
- whalesalad 3y ago
  it's an expression used by people who like steel bikes. the other materials are indeed real, lol. https://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/blog/steel-is-real-but-why-is-it/ https://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/blog/steel-is-real-but-why-is...
- Kon-Peki 3y ago
  People are still salty about the way that steel was pushed out of the market back in the 1990s. Especially in the sub-$1000 category (which was probably 90+% of the market), the aluminum bike that replaced the steel bike at the same price point was a noticeably worse bike, but it looked way cooler (forget the fact that aluminum bikes improved a lot as time went on). The collapse in demand for bike-appropriate steel tubing meant that any laggard bike makers were essentially forced to switch. So now, if you want a steel bike frame, you really only have the lower-end and the very high-end tubing available to you. Basically, steel bikes were killed by fashion trends more than anything else. It's no wonder hipsters love them.
jackmott42 3y ago
That is a myth. Material alone doesn't determine this, and modern road bikes are on 28mm tires at ~70psi so this isn't nearly as much of an issue as it was 20 years ago (and it wasn't a real issue then either)
- whalesalad 3y ago

jack_riminton 3y ago

What about aluminium?

vehemenz 3y ago
Yeah, that's kind of the flaw in this argument. The main conclusion is basically correct, but steel rusts and aluminum doesn't. Plus aluminum is light enough to warrant upgrading over steel, and it barely costs anything more.
- Gualdrapo 3y ago
  Stainless steel does not rust too (maybe it does Zig?) but if I recall correctly the con about it is that it's a bit heavier than "normal" steel. Still I'd love to have a classic-ish stainless steel bike with disc brakes.
BozeWolf 3y ago
Aluminium generally is stiff, quite uncomfortable for longer rides (100km). I own one, had a lot of fun with it. Now I have a carbon road bike, don’t care about the weight, did care about comfort. Comfortable, flexible, but still has stiffness in the right direction (torsion is way less). Longer rides are much more pleasant. There are also nice titanium bikes and steel bikes. From what I heard titanium and steel frames tend to be a bit more flexible, no idea why.
- drunner 3y ago
  This is one of those things that doesn't make any sense. The amount of vertical deflection difference between aluminium and carbon is nothing, tires make the biggest difference by far. Yet many people will say carbon is more 'comfortable'. Its hard to tell how much placebo it is.
  - BozeWolf 3y ago
    Running the same tires... same rims. Of course it is a complicated system, so you can never compare it 1:1. Fact is that carbon bikes tend to ride more comfortable, if they are designed for it. Also the frame can be shaped and put together to flex in the right directions, which is harder with aluminium. Then again, there are also endurance bikes (many 1000s of km's a week) made from titanium (J. Guillem) which are comfortable and also have much simpler shapes than carbon frames.

chihuahua 3y ago

By the same reasoning, there's no good reason to buy jewelry, a watch that costs more than $50, nice clothes, sports cars, nice silverware, and lots more things. Some people who are into cycling have a lot of disposable income, and they want to buy themselves something nice. Then they feel happy for a while. The author claims that there are only "pro racers" and "everyone else", but that's not true - there are also amateur racers, who benefit from carbon bikes except they're not doing it to earn a living. Finally, the argument that carbon bikes are ugly and steel bikes are beautiful is completely subjective. I feel that the exact opposite is true, but it's irrelevant because it's a subjective opinion.

mantas 3y ago
Titanium is nice, expensive and durable :)
mikae1 3y ago
> Some people who are into cycling have a lot of disposable income, and they want to buy themselves something nice. Then they feel happy for a while. If that’s the case you contact a frame builder that will make you a bespoke lugged steel frame tailored to your measurements. The off-the-shelf carbon frame is the collectible sneaker of the bike world. The custom steel frame is the pair of bespoke Italian leather shoes. The Marosticana[1] perhaps? [1] https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/marosticana/ https://officinabattaglin.com/products/custom-steel-bikes/ma...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

rokkitmensch 3y ago

People who ride carbon mountain bikes absolutely baffle me. The thing is going to get seriously chewed up if you're having fun and pushing your limits, why make it a glass canon to boot?!

jackmott42 3y ago
This is a misconception. Carbon fiber mountain bikes are not more delicate. Designed properly they are more durable. The idea that carbon fiber is innately delicate comes from road bikes designed to be as light and stiff as possible, and they can end up brittle, and weak in areas that don't normally see stresses. Not all road bikes are designed like this, even high end ones, but some early ultra light bikes were. Bikes that need to be durable use different types of fibers that can bend more before cracking, and may include layers of kevlar or other composites with more 'toughness' in key areas. My wife has a carbon fiber mountain bike and has been racing every weekend, winning, jumping, crashing, riding every day, for 3 years now, bike is fine.
plorkyeran 3y ago
Perhaps you should take the popularity of carbon mountain bikes to be a hint that your preconceptions of carbon durability are inaccurate.
- rokkitmensch 3y ago
  These old materials sciences classes are leading me astray! Fatigue, embrittlement, they must be solved problems by now.
thefz 3y ago
Carbon MTBs are pretty strong. Just don't clamp the frame so much you are crushing it and avoid direct rock hits, which will damage any material anyway.
- jackmott42 3y ago
  There used to be a video on youtube of a carbon mountain bike fork, and they were SMASHING it with a ball peen hammer, repeatedly. It did do a little damage but remained rideable, and was in much better shape than the metal forks they smashed.

Simulacra 3y ago

What a ridiculous article. Carbon is stiff and comfortable, and I love it. Its more forgiving than aluminum, stiffer than steel, and cheaper than titanium. The author just sounds bitter, or disgruntled

FridgeSeal 3y ago

There’s plenty of reasons people (me included) buy carbon bikes. - they’re lighter - the aesthetics: I like a good steel/titanium bike, but the flowing lines and zero-joins of a carbon frame are awesome - manufacturers can control and alter the layup to control the degree and direction of flex in different regions of the frame. Plus dampening properties are helpful. Weight savings alone are a “Good Reason”. Edit: Wow this article is insufferable. “You’re not good enough to have a carbon bike” and “you’re too peasant to work on it properly”. If the author wants to have an inferiority complex over what I’m guessing is a failed racing career and an inability to learn basic mechanics skills, then that’s on them. I’ve owned carbon mountain and road bikes, put thousands of K’s on them, maintained and upgraded them with zero issues.

sco1 3y ago
> Weight savings alone are a “Good Reason”. They're not always lighter either :)
- operatingthetan 3y ago
  The frames, at the high-end? Yeah they are always lighter. Putting Tiagra on a 700 gram carbon frame and comparing it to Dura-Ace on a 1700 gram ti frame isn't the comparison we are looking for here exactly.

system2 3y ago

I am mountain biking very often. The day I changed my rims to carbon fiber ones was the day I could go another 5+ miles. I replaced my entire frame with a carbon fiber one. Now I am nearly doubling my distance which is 20-30 miles with it. I can hop over things easily, climbing hills is a breeze. Sure, it is not as strong as heavy metal ones, but I do not know if any mountain biker would return to non-carbon fiber alloys. At least for mountain bikes, the carbon fiber anything is a win. Rim or frame, any upgrade is a net upgrade. It feels like this article was written by a person who never rode a bike. I doubt it is the fact because it comes from a reputable website.

jackmott42 3y ago

Carbon fiber bikes have two main properties that can affect performance: 1. they are a little lighter. This doesn't matter nearly as much as most cyclists think, but it does matter a bit. If you race competitively in the mountains, you might care. 2. There is more design freedom for shaping them aerodynamically. This makes a bit more difference than weight, and if you are competing you definitely want it.

timeon 3y ago
> doesn't matter nearly as much as most cyclists think Weight matters also off-bike. For example if you need to carry it upstairs daily. So it can matter even for people that do not race.
- plorkyeran 3y ago
  Even just loading a bike onto a car rack is a pretty big difference. I don't think I'd pay for carbon if the only benefit was it being easier to carry, but it is a pretty big benefit.
- PretzelPirate 3y ago
  I used to live in a 3rd floor walk up in NYC. I appreciated my carbon bike. I even considered buying carbon wheels.
habnds 3y ago
they can also be stiffer in some directions and more flexible in others, which is a huge underestimated advantage compared to metal bikes.

Damogran6 3y ago

Only reason I have a Carbon bike is that was what was available over COVID. Paid $350 for a Museew frame that used to go for a LOT more ($3500?) I have no illusions of grandeur. When I'm in better than normal shape, I can barely see a fraction of it's potential...it just transferrs SO much speed in a sprint...which I can't do for very long.

thot_experiment 3y ago

Wow, not a single mention of fatigue limits in the article and in the comments here, I MUST POST. Titanium and steel have a property called a fatigue limit[0], aluminum and carbon do not. There's a stress threshold below which steel and titanium accumulate zero wear, making their cycle life effectively infinite. Every bump Al and CF take puts them on setp closer to failure, and that failure tends to be catastrophic. I will never ride bikes made out of the latter two materials, I need to rely on this machine for my life, I don't want it's cycle life nagging me in the back of my mind. If you want to save weight, take the brakes and gears off. :P [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_limit

thefz 3y ago
True. But carbon MTBs can last a decade of abuse.
- habnds 3y ago
  yeah this isn't a real concern
- mikae1 3y ago
  Decade? Is that a merit?
  - habnds 3y ago
    if you haven't destroyed your mtb after 10 years of riding you might not need a mountain bike at all.
    - mikae1 3y ago
      And with MTB you mean MTB frameset? I see plenty of hard ridden +10 year old MTB steel frames. I have two myself. In mountainbiking I think the greater threat to longevity is “standards” inflation though. 157mm super boost spacing, here we come.

ploum 3y ago

Carbon is not only about weight. It has many interesting properties like dampening, stiffness in the right direction while being lean in another. A carbon bike could be completely different from another. It’s like hiding springs in some part of the frame. I may hear that some people don’t like the feeling of carbon. In fact, I prefer Aluminium. But my muscles prefer carbon because it filters a lot more vibrations. So the article is both useless and completely ill-informed.