cale

Pretty bike. Too nice for me, I drop bikes and motorcycles. Nothing that nice should ever pass my way. :-)

kaliayev

All kidding aside I can see the advantages of CF for competitive racing or aggressive riding styles. If I was in one of those categories cf or possibly a high end aluminium frame would be my choice. I do have a 16.2lb steel racer made of Reynolds 853 Team Pro. Never felt like it has held me back when riding hard or climbing. As far as all day comfort it holds its own with the cf Spech Roubaix I used to own.

bclawrence

I guess i should have said that I have been riding a trek 1.1 for a little over a year. I read that most people get their first bike to see want they want on their next bike. Went with the trek thinking I would upgrade.

garciawork

Here's my take: I am 23, started riding road at 19 on a Tarmac. It was wrecked by an idiot in a car, replaced it with a much nicers Tarmac SL3 pro, while at the same time having a custom steel bike built by Bernie Mikkelsen. Road the cf until the Mikkelsen was built up, then the carbon bike sat unused until I sold it. And then I got a Lynksey R230 as a gift from my boss (he was buying 3 or 4 frames from them, and they gave him a HUGE discount on an extra R230), and I love them both far more than either CF bike I have had. This is the first time since I started riding that I am not always lusting after a new bike. New parts, wheels etc is another story.

None of that is to say that carbon sucks, I just honestly prefer the ride of both steel and Ti, and both bikes get ridden very regularly depending on the ride I intend to do.

kingfishr

I think you need both, steel to train on and CF when it's time for business. That way when you are out training you will either perform well, then everyone will be impressed because you are using stone-age technology, or if you perform poorly you can blame the frame. Then when you ride competetive rides you will be even faster on your cf bike...

rpenmanparker 

I love steel, and have ridden it for more than 30 years but also know that it requires upkeep. If you are not absolutely meticulous about keeping it clean, dry and free from perspiration, it will likely need repainting every several years. And that is not considering the damage to paint from the chain, taking wheels on and off, etc. Two thoughts you don't seem to have considered. First in your price range, what about titanium? Isn't that obvious? Nothing lasts longer or looks better, and it rides great. Also should get you withing about 0.25 lb of what you can do with mid range carbon. But second, you may not know the English builder Mercian. For decades they have made some of the most beautiful and sweetest riding steel bikes in the world. They will do custom and semi-custom. One reason I mention them is that besides all the usual high grade steel tubings, they also build with Reynolds stainless steel. For your stated longevity goal is that a no brainer or what?

Regarding your intended uses: If you get a really light weight steel frame, you can come in fewer than two pounds over mid-range carbon. I have a Ritchey steel Break Away that weighs under 15.5 lb with SRAM Red, other light parts, and 1,250 g wheels. The Ritchey is a light frame, but going custom you could surely do lighter (I ride a 54cm; can't say what penalty if you are much bigger).

Good luck.

Robert

surgeonstone

I get it. I have ridden for over 30 years and still have, a high quality steel frame , Italian, from the 70's. They do last, it is a good frame, it does have beautiful artistic lug work, I get it. But no way in hell would I buy another. I bought a Merlin Ti/Carbon Fiber frame 8 years ago with a Campy Record Grouppo and the difference was like flying a C-130 versus a F-18.
Yeah there are pretty good steel race frames, I have one, it's replacement value today would be 7000 dollars but the ride quality of my current bike shames it.

cale

Titanium did get some attention earlier in the thread, but I disagree regarding your "nothing.. looks better" comment. I agree, looks are highly subjective but titanium, of all frame materials, has offered the fewest variances in tube style or tube joining esthetics of any frame material. Frankly, I find titanium framed bikes visually uninspiring and sterile.

To the OP'er I would offer this comment. Life is short but not THAT short! You have plenty of time to buy bikes. When I was your age, and had reached a point of relative financial stability and was in the prime of my cycling abilities, I bought a steel-framed racing bike that was similar to those that professionals rode (maybe a generation back) . But that was back in 1988. If I were young and in the same position today, I would buy a carbon fiber frame and hang on it the best components I could afford. In 25 years time you'll have a classic bike that will remind you of the commitment you made to cycling years earlier. But that's just me, YMMV.

Cale

Debusama

Yeah, he doesn't get crazy with being all artsy about the lugs and stuff, but you get all the fit and handling benefits of a custom frame at an affordable price.

rpenmanparker 

Fair enough, although I see lots of highly shaped Ti tubes. My Everti Falcon doesn't look like the latest carbon, but it does have important tube shaping features. I do tend to make sweeping generalizations and this stuff is all SO personal. Sorry. But without further apology I can say that I like Ti (just like I like carbon, steel, Al...). You know what, Ti CAN be painted for more design freedom.

Just trying to show that there are many long lived choices.

bullwinkle

Here's second vote for the OP to check out Mercian. I've had mine for five years now and it's become one of my go-to bikes. Mine's pretty heavy as it's built up as a tourer, but it rides like silk.

HacO

This is a loaded question!
I hope you don’t do this when you go to your doctor office. You just ask the doctor “Doc, I got a headache, what’d you think?” and expect him to give you the correct diagnose.
Pls describe/define your “explode”. Give me a better definition of your “explode”.
I have few questions for you:

• Was the bike on static mode or dynamic state?
• After the “explosion”, are part spreading out to 3 cm or 30 meter range? Or was it just shattering?
• Rider’s weight? 50kg? or 500kg?
• Conditions of the terrain that you ride? Jump down any cliff? 5m high or 50m high?
• Speed/velocity/angle at the moment of impact? Any hard data, recording of the incident?
• Wind speed, direction? Humidity? Snowy? Dry? Wet? Temperature?
• Bike maker, model, serial #, duration of service of your bike? Specs of CF? Full detailed blue print of frame, complete report of stress (FEA) analysis would be helpful too.
• Any report of discrepancy during manufacturing process.
• Certified records of materials that make up of your bike, along with all related tests that had been (conducted by certified lab) performed on the frame.
• Any inspection/validating documents?
• Up-to-date records of maintenance service (by certified personnel).

Bear in mind, all technical entailed are conformed to a recognized international standard system.

Yes, you CF bike may/will explode given the right conditions.

I do not know where you get this idea of “explode” from. But just because there is something happens out there; without evaluate the history, root cause and prematurely judge it false, is rather hasty. Wouldn’t you say?
Let just say the frame came from the land that make fake rice, fake eggs (yes, this is a rampant problem), fake cars, and even fake elevators. The only passion that known and famous for is making money. What make you think the fibers in that bike are real. Could they be using fiber glass instead of? Same can be said about the UV coating….etc.

OK, given they use the correct materials, was the material properly stored in the required temperature (sub 0 degree Celsius) to insure the quality/purity? In combination of improper process of poor lay-up technique, uneven pressure, incomplete curing, presence of porosity; delaminations will be difficult to detect with NDT (non destructive test). Are they competent/certified to detect it? This is only a tip of an iceberg. I rather not facing these questions while cruising down the (fill in the blank) mountain at 100 km/h, or facing a pot hole with some vehicle along the side or behind.

Perhaps I did not explain myself better before. I want to make it clear about my position on this; CF is a fantastic material in itself. It’s the application into bike building that I do not trust. My definition of application comprised of:

1-R/D
2-Fabrication/manufacturing methodology.
3-Quality assurance, service, and handlings.

As illustrated as very limited as aforementioned questions, unless bike industry endured the same kind of scrutiny, the bike industry/technology never was/is/will be the same as aerospace level. By trumpeting “We use the same technology as the Boeing/aircraft industry” is very misleading if not deceptive. This fallacy was coined up by some smart Marketing people, and by association, gave them the right to sell their products at such astronomical price. If building steel (Titanium) bike is as cheap and can be sold as much profit as CF, I am certain the bike company/industry will route customers toward steel (or Titanium) by saying “Yeah! Boeing use Steel, Titanium in all of their aircrafts”.
As for me, there are just too many questions in all 3 stages of the production. IMHO, Steel or Titanium is a better choice for bike building.

Glass of (baby) milk, anyone?

rebel1916

Bizarrely, excessively wordy, and full of crap. Amazing.

vettracer

Wow, you have no idea how easy it is to poorly weld and or damage metal tubing during bike assembly. Bad construction is bad construction and regardless of the material type may result in catastrophic failure.

pallen

Maybe after tens or hundreds of thousands of CF bikes are sold and ridden for a decade or so, we will finally find out if CF is a good material for a bike...

gregf83 

Did you wait that long before deciding whether combo brake/shifters were a good idea vs downtube shifters?

There are early adopters and laggards. Laggards refuse to use new technologies and generally ride around on down-tube shifter equipped steel bikes without cell phones. They still covet their rotary dial phones.

rebel1916

I think he was saying this has already happened.

Snydermann

I can show you steel bikes that have lasted over 100 years and many great bikes that are 50 years old.

Show me a plastic bike that old.

Case closed on longevity, for now. No one can prove how long a plastic bike will last.

canam73

Outstanding!

gregf83 

I may have missed his sarcasm but it appears the Luddites are still posting!

pallen

The fact we cant yet prove how long a "plastic" bike will last tells me they last long enough.

vettracer

I can show you wood bicycles that are almost 200 years old. Show me a steel bike that old.

Case closed on longevity for now. No one can prove how long a steel bike will last.

Really, what a silly argument. As I posted much earlier in this thread, the steel bikes that are around now, are here because they were not used much. Show me a steel bike 100 years old, or carbon bike 30 years old, no big deal. Show me either with 100,000 miles on them and I will be impressed.

Banzai

Why does anyone on BF care how long the bike will last?

Almost every other thread is about upgrading a brand new bike, or buying a brand new bike to replace the one that is only 2 years old in the hopes of purchasing 1mph average speed, or some variation on either of those themes.

Seriously...find the frame material that will disintegrate at about 3 years. It will be the perfect BF bike.

Banzai

For what it's worth, I severely lust after the Breezer Venturi, and the new Ritchey Road Logic.

But, I'm stuck with my CAAD9 until the frame breaks on me in about 6 more months...

Camilo

This guy has just given the best advice in this thread!