Sage advice, or lunacy? Hmmm...
 

No good reason to buy a CF bike? :popcorn

https://www.outsideonline.com/cultur...a-carbon-bike/

I stopped reading at ''CF bikes are ugly''

BS article from an old timer.

huh.

I'm sure this thread will be civil and full of productive, polite discussion.

Don't get your hopes too high.

Sounds like he doesn’t make enough working for outside to afford a carbon fiber bike.


I recently flew with a captain that was an engineer designing high end sail boats out of carbon fiber in his previous life. The only thing he brought up, which I could see as a draw back and is not talked about. When you crash a carbon fiber bike unless you have noticeable structural damage, chances are you think it’s good. I know I do. The only way to know for sure if the carbon fiber is structurally sound is to apply it to high heat and look at it with a microscope. The cracks are small and usually can’t be seen with a naked eye, not too mention the paint does a good job at hiding them.

Many materials are viable for making a bike frame: Steel, Ti, Carbon Fiber, Aluminum, Bamboo, Wood....

It's really up to the consumer to decide what makes most sense for him/her. I think a well-made frame from ANY material that fits the rider is better than a not-so-well made and/or poorly fitting one made of wonderful material.

This old timer has ridden nothing but carbon since the late nineties. Thirteen carbon frames from Colnago, LOOK, Cervelo, Cinelli and Yoeleo. I've crashed hard and been hit by cars twice, ruined both wheels once, never hurt the frame.

Kind of sad, really. Eben Weiss (a.k.a. BSNYC) has been selling variations on this tired theme since at least 2010. In the early days these could at least be kind of funny. Now they are just a bore.

If I really think about it, The accessories like saddles, tires, riding apparel, handlebar tape etc are probably more important to the ride that what material the frame is made out of. If you're out there in a pair of bibs/shorts that aren't working for you, it's not going to matter if steel is real, ti is fly, or plastic is fantastic. :D

The way its written - meh, stupid article.

It's all about wants vs needs.

My Emonda aluminum ALR5 out of the box is $1000 cheaper than the CF SL5 version of the bike. $1000 buys you a few ounces of weight savings. Or I can put that $1000 into a decent set of wheels and be well over a pound lighter, and have better wheels...With the wheel upgrade - the ALR close in weight to the SL6 - which comes in at $5k.

3k gets you similar performance to 5k.

The CF version of the bike get's me absolutely nothing extra. The only reason to purchase the CF version is to say I have CF.

Bike snob was fun when "it" was young. As a former Brooklyn resident, I found lots of funny things in his writing to connect with. Then he got big and Outside gave him a column, and, well, the material has gotten somewhat tired.

Like therapy, after a while, you just run out of things to talk about.

Actually most important item is tires (quality, size, and proper inflation) after bike fit.

What KILLS me is seeing fellow "serious" cyclists spend big bucks on a CF frame and have them proclaim how smooth the ride is, while they are riding their 23 or 25mm tires at 110+ PSI. They would do much better on ANY frame material with 28's at 75PSI but it's consumer choice.

fify.

When talking about particular goods or categories of goods, there is no way to distinguish between wants and needs.

I love it <sarcasm> when OP's post a link to something and then don't offer any opinion of their own or give any indication of what the thread purpose is.

Seems to fit one of the definitions of Trolling to me.

Especially when the article is behind a paywall.

True, but my R3 is still more comfortable on 25mm tires at 80/75 than my Lynskey is with 28s at 65/60 and it's been a while, but I think they're both better than the steel frames of my youth.

Weiss is an entertaining writer, but a bit of a jerk and a one-trick pony.

Apparently, only World Tour pros race. This may come as some surprise to all of you folks who line up for local crits.

Also, only CF bikes are broken in crashes. This may come as a surprise to those who have broken metal frames in crashes.

Also, apparently the laws of physics only apply to World Tour pros, so that none of the rest of us derive any aerodynamic benefits from a more aerodynamic bike, nor any advantage in climbing from a lighter bike.

Basically, the whole thing is...

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...662b4617f9.gif

What a stupid column. I bet this guy is a blast at parties.

Except to my wife, I don’t think I have ever justified any bike related purchase beyond a new chain or cassette as a need.

Probably says, "Well, actually...." a lot. That is, of course, the sort of thing that everyone JUST LOVES at a party.

Unless for whatever reason the CF version is simply more comfortable to you, and then when you add the better wheels it is Much lighter and Much more comfortable.

Yo0u are mixing standards here ... are we rating bikes by performance (and what does "performance:" mean in this context) oro by price, or by "perceived value" (which we all can immediately see is purely subjective) .... You say the Al version gets you "similar" performance .... but if i am buying for Max performance, not to save money ... I would get the CF. In fact, i would get the CF and put better wheels on it and for &6K get a better bike than the stock CF version or the upgraded Al version.

If I were Actually buying the bike, being me with my mindset, abilities, desires and finances, i would follow your route: Get the Al frame (all the performance I need, not being a great performer anyway) and get good wheels .... but that is "perceived vale," where ultimate performance is compromised by financial concerns, and we are both looking for "bang per buck" and willing to get a little less "bang" to save some bucks.

Saying there is no benefit to CF except bragging rights is just ignorant. Saying that To You the benefits of CF seems minuscule and not worth the cost is valid.

Bieksnob has terned into "Grant Peterson of new York," preaching his "ultimate bicycle philosophy" to whoever will listen. I didn't even bother reading the article .... we have all heard it all before. "I like what I like and this is why what I like is better, why I am smarter, and why people who agree with me are smart and people who think differently are dumb."

I listen to specialists about their specialties. If @RChung talks about aero and energy expenditure, if @PeteHski or some of the other actual engineers start breaking down the physics, I listen, because I know I don't know. When it comes to general knowledge, basic logic, and assessing one's personal needs and desires ... I have many decades of practice and I can do that pretty well. Therefore, when someone tells me what I think or need to think, what I want or should want, all that nonsense ....

He was a lot funnier when he was mocking brakeless fixie riders.

See post 10. I don't know about any paywall, the article popped up on my Google feed.

(I'm not telling anyone what to think, say or brag about)

Performance based on value as it relates to me and what I do, which is very similar to what other recreational riders do...

The 3k ALR (price including wheel upgrade) is pretty much going to get me to the same place in the same amount of time as the 5k carbon model.

Aero on a long ride or century? I guess if I'm doing a 100 mile TT it would matter - but just like most everyone else, I'm not doing 100 mile TT's on a standard road bike. I'm drafting other riders with very limited time up front. And I'm riding the speed of the paceline - the CF bike isn't getting me into a faster paceline, so my time will be based off the paceline time.

Climbing? The bikes are within a few ounces of each other, in some cases the ALR + wheels weighs less than the CF of the same total cost.

Sure, if I double the cost I can get a more aero or lighter bike - but I'm talking dollar for dollar, and in some cases more dollars for the CF bike - the extra performance just isn't there.

Reading is fundamental .... to some ...

Please note the following:

Dude I Directly Agreed with you, and you are still not happy .... whatever.