Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- From: Michael Warner <mvw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 20:48:50 +0930
On Wed, 30 May 2007 16:33:27 GMT, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
Geometry and common-sense design are probably bigger factors in comfort than
the material a frame is made of. A short-wheelbase carbon frame designed to
take nothing larger than 23c tires is going to knock you around in a way
that an outrageously-stiff oversized-tubing aluminum frame with a longer
wheelbase and 28 or even 25c tires will not.
That describes my two bikes (Giant OCR3 and TCR1) pretty exactly, except
that I was using 23c tyres on the OCR by the time I bought the TCR. Sorry,
but the TCR is far smoother at the same tube inflation pressure - compared
to the OCR, it feels as though I'm riding on a thin carpet.
--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw
.
- References:
- Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- From: bramski@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- From: Mike Jacoubowsky
- Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Prev by Date: Re: Puffy Bar Tape.
- Next by Date: Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Previous by thread: Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Next by thread: Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
