Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- From: Qui si parla Campagnolo <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 May 2007 05:20:25 -0700
On May 30, 9:39 am, "bram...@xxxxxxxxx" <bram...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm looking at purchasing a new road bike. My main goals include some
minor racing, but mostly some major centuries and hill challenges this
summer.
What would people say are the real benefits of carbon, aluminum, and
composite bikes are? I know that aluminum is quite stiff and taking
bumps on it can be a less comfortable experience (I own an older Fuji
Al right now). But are carbon bikes really that much lighter, or is
it the added flex that really helps, but won't that decrease your own
power output if the frame flexes as you apply force? Don't stiff
bikes perform better on downhill sections because they are so much
stiffer?
Only 3 things are important, fit, fit and of course, fit. You don't
mention steel either. Well made, about the same weight as many
'blends, rides like a dream, looks great, lasts forever. No mention of
ti either, great material. Blend bikes are marketing 101, aluminum
'should' be cheap, the market is awash with carbon, the latest 'great'
thing and as some tell it, the 'last word' in frame material(of
course, not true).
So, just about any bike that fits you will work for you, ragardless of
material. Ride all 4 materials, to see what suits you, then get a fit
and get the one that fits you...did I mention fit??
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- From: Jay Beattie
- Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- References:
- Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- From: bramski@xxxxxxxxx
- Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Prev by Date: Re: Anodized aluminum fractures
- Next by Date: Re: Anodized aluminum fractures
- Previous by thread: Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Next by thread: Re: Carbon vs. Aluminum vs. Composite
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|