Carbon vs. Aluminum for 'cross racing.
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
And aluminum cracks, and carbon bends.
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
If the frames were of equal weight, smart money would be on the carbon frame.
https://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper4.htm
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
If the frames were of equal weight, smart money would be on the carbon frame.
https://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper4.htm
#27
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,458
Bikes: Something Canadian, something Italian, something American, and something German
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times
in
10 Posts
And aluminum cracks, and carbon bends.
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
If the frames were of equal weight, smart money would be on the carbon frame.
https://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper4.htm
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
If the frames were of equal weight, smart money would be on the carbon frame.
https://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper4.htm
#28
Devil's Advocate
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa
Posts: 134
Bikes: Sterling Road bike, Chromolly Specialized Allez, Bianchi was given to me don't know model
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I say go with the crux simply because it is designed to be a race frame and the Crux carbon is just a renamed Tricross which has a more urban oriented geometry. On that note the nice Cannondale cross frame is made of aluminum and as strong and light as carbon, if you are a Cannondale dealer as well.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
And aluminum cracks, and carbon bends.
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
If the frames were of equal weight, smart money would be on the carbon frame.
https://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper4.htm
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
If the frames were of equal weight, smart money would be on the carbon frame.
https://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper4.htm
Beside its bollocksosity, it also misses the key point about CF and crash damage: the danger of delamination. This can be invisible but leave your frame ready to snap in half at a later time for no apparent reason.
* Although even this doesn't mean that CF will do better than an alu frame of the same weight in a crash. Strength is a measure of structure's ability to support weight, NOT to resist damage! A CF frame can be strong but still delaminate easily.
Last edited by meanwhile; 08-03-10 at 06:55 PM.
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
It's not a coke can frame or of equal weight of the carbon. It's heavier and thicker. It's no CAAD frame by any means. That said, if I have my bike and just drop it on a barricade, I'm pretty sure that out of these two frames, the carbon wouldn't be as good. Maybe it wouldn't crack it, but a chip is something to be concerned about. The aluminum might have a small dent, maybe not. Either way, like I said, it's not a beer can frame.
Last edited by meanwhile; 08-03-10 at 01:05 PM.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 4,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
To make this decision worse. The geometry isn't the same between the CF and aluminum. Specialized updated the aluminum and left the carbon the same as the tri cross. (well, that's what I was told by the specialized dealer, they haven't posted specs on the site yet. I believe dealers have it in their newest book though).
I was going to go for the aluminum for the new geometry, internal cable routing and $500. Unfortunately my finances didn't work out this year.
I was going to go for the aluminum for the new geometry, internal cable routing and $500. Unfortunately my finances didn't work out this year.
#32
astrositupataphysicyclist
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Media PA
Posts: 596
Bikes: too many now
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
my carbon road fork 'creaks' alot....and seat post. all the carbon i got. except for my footprints....
but a full carbon frame is for those who can afford it...and for cx? why even consider carbon? i love my aluxx...and steel steeds
but a full carbon frame is for those who can afford it...and for cx? why even consider carbon? i love my aluxx...and steel steeds
#35
Godfather of Soul
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,517
Bikes: 2002 Litespeed Vortex, 2010 Specialized Tricross Expert,2008 Gary Fischer Hi Fi Carbon, 2002 Specialized S-Works hard tail, 1990 Kestrel KM 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I rode a carbon framed triathlon bike for years and loved it. I also have a carbon mountain bike that rides incredibly well. For the latter, I wasn't looking for carbon but the local shop had an incredible deal and I couldn't pass it up (turns out it was miss-marked, but they honored it anyway). My road bike is titanium and I love the ride and the feeling that it is indestructible. Anyway, I also did a bunch of research on using a carbon mountain bike frame and was convinced that they are essentially just as durable as aluminum bikes. I wasn't willing to pay up for one, but when the deal presented itself, I jumped on it. Not sure if any of that helps...
#36
LMLN
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Toronto,On
Posts: 566
Bikes: Marin Novato, Argon Krypton, Jamis Aurora, IRO Mark V
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I've never enjoyed riding on aluminum therefore would choose carbon but what about a good steel frame?
#37
Tiocfáidh ár Lá
Ok now that this is settled let me put in my 2 cents. I've rode all kinds of cross bikes over the years, all AL and up until I got my Lemond Poprad in 853 steel I had no idea how harsh a ride my AL bikes were. I can't speak for carbon frames off road but I'll never ride another AL cross bike. The steel bike is heavier yes but the ride is so forgiving that it makes the extra weight worth it.
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 270
Bikes: Felt F3C w/ Campy Chorus; Motobecane Vent Noir
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Last year I rode a 25 pound steel single speed conversion. It was a beast over the barriers and on run ups. But the ride was nice.
I decided to be more competitve this year in CX and race with gears - I'm not a masher! So went around to different shops to try to find something. I'm not a big fan of Treks, but that's what I get my team deal on. Was looking hard at the XO2 as my price was going to be okay. But I don't think the all AL frame w/ carbon fork justifies the retail price, nor my team price. Kept searching and test rode a few carbon fiber bikes on the off road trails near another bike shop. Tried an '09 Tricross and an '11 Crux - both CF. Crux rode beautfiully soaking everything up. Tricross was a little stiff, but power transfer was nice. Probably due to frame construction, lugged v. monocoque.
All in all, I decided to go with carbon fiber A) to head off the upgrade bug next year LOL and B) lightweight, absorbant ride. The less harsh the ride for me the better due to back and shoulder problems.
So my Blue Norcross should be here in hopefully a week and a half! Excited to say the least!
I decided to be more competitve this year in CX and race with gears - I'm not a masher! So went around to different shops to try to find something. I'm not a big fan of Treks, but that's what I get my team deal on. Was looking hard at the XO2 as my price was going to be okay. But I don't think the all AL frame w/ carbon fork justifies the retail price, nor my team price. Kept searching and test rode a few carbon fiber bikes on the off road trails near another bike shop. Tried an '09 Tricross and an '11 Crux - both CF. Crux rode beautfiully soaking everything up. Tricross was a little stiff, but power transfer was nice. Probably due to frame construction, lugged v. monocoque.
All in all, I decided to go with carbon fiber A) to head off the upgrade bug next year LOL and B) lightweight, absorbant ride. The less harsh the ride for me the better due to back and shoulder problems.
So my Blue Norcross should be here in hopefully a week and a half! Excited to say the least!
#39
misanthrope
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Are you planning on racing cross? If so, it's a lot of stop, go, run, back on the bike, go again, stop, run, etc.
Carbon would help your accelerations and would weigh less when you're lugging that thing up a steep a hill.
Just a thought.
Carbon would help your accelerations and would weigh less when you're lugging that thing up a steep a hill.
Just a thought.
#40
Banned
Still say cross racing to win is a 2 bike team for each rider, plus a bike cleaner
and quick triage mechanic...
Pick an A bike, and a B bike. Can't decide between metal and Carbon Composite?
.. one of each, & fit them with 105 stuff so you can afford the backup bike.
and quick triage mechanic...
Pick an A bike, and a B bike. Can't decide between metal and Carbon Composite?
.. one of each, & fit them with 105 stuff so you can afford the backup bike.
#42
Fatso
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 40
Bikes: 2010 GIANT TCX 1, 2010 Tomac Cortez
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If you have the money a Lynsky Ti built up with SRAM Apex for $2700.
Or you could get the highly regarded Motobecane Fantom CX for about $1000 less.
CX racing bikes can do dual purpose as road training bikes with a wheel swap, so they are a good value IMO and therefore its worth investing in one that will last.
Or you could get the highly regarded Motobecane Fantom CX for about $1000 less.
CX racing bikes can do dual purpose as road training bikes with a wheel swap, so they are a good value IMO and therefore its worth investing in one that will last.
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Athens, Ohio
Posts: 5,104
Bikes: Custom Custom Custom
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Buy two aluminum and use the money you saved on a quiver of tubular tires and wheels.
I roll with 2 bikes and about 6 pairs of tubular wheels to every cross race
I roll with 2 bikes and about 6 pairs of tubular wheels to every cross race
#44
Señor Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 196
Bikes: Motobecane Immortal, Van Dessel Gin & Trombones, Rawland Stag, Bianchi SASS
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You said "racing", right?
I'd spend money on redundancy vs. bling.
If you are sponsored, have a significant discount, or have deep pockets then ignore me...whatever.
Frame material is probably lowest on my list of limiters.
Worrying about buzz and harsh ride in cross *racing*? That's silly.
Cross is hard. Stuff will break. That stuff can add up over a season.
Heck, the season hasn't even started yet, but I'm already replacing/repairing stuff from the weekly "practice" races around here.
See nitro's post above. that's how you show up to a 'cross race.
I'd spend money on redundancy vs. bling.
If you are sponsored, have a significant discount, or have deep pockets then ignore me...whatever.
Frame material is probably lowest on my list of limiters.
Worrying about buzz and harsh ride in cross *racing*? That's silly.
Cross is hard. Stuff will break. That stuff can add up over a season.
Heck, the season hasn't even started yet, but I'm already replacing/repairing stuff from the weekly "practice" races around here.
See nitro's post above. that's how you show up to a 'cross race.
#46
Tiocfáidh ár Lá
#47
Señor Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 196
Bikes: Motobecane Immortal, Van Dessel Gin & Trombones, Rawland Stag, Bianchi SASS
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Full disclosure: I recently switched from a light Aluminum frame with CF rear triangle to an almost 2 lb heavier steel Poprad. But switching was about fit rather than material. I sized down.
Yes, on the road with high pressure slicks, I can notice the ride difference on longer rides.
But during the few practice 'cross races I've had on the new-to-me steel frame, I don't perceive much difference in harshness when my lungs are on fire and I'm bleeding through my eyes. I suck just as much on steel, cf, and aluminum.
Maybe if I sucked less, and my long list of limiters wasn't so...ummm...long, then frame material might get bumped up in priority.
Yes, on the road with high pressure slicks, I can notice the ride difference on longer rides.
But during the few practice 'cross races I've had on the new-to-me steel frame, I don't perceive much difference in harshness when my lungs are on fire and I'm bleeding through my eyes. I suck just as much on steel, cf, and aluminum.
Maybe if I sucked less, and my long list of limiters wasn't so...ummm...long, then frame material might get bumped up in priority.
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
And aluminum cracks, and carbon bends.
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
mzeffex does not know that a carbon frame would fare better in a collision than an aluminum frame. A collision that "only" bent aluminum (and therefore compromised frame integrity because of aluminum's terrible fatigue resistance) would probably do nothing to the carbon frame except perhaps chipping some resin or paint, which is easily repaired and would not weaken the frame. A collision that cracked carbon would almost surely do the same to a Coke-can frame.
Firstly, the alu alloy tubes used in modern cross racers do NOT have "terrible fatigue resistance" - a lot of metallurgy and engineering has gone into this. In fact the problem was solved at least 20 years ago, which is why alu MTBs from that time like Kona Cindercones - which have much harder lives than crossers - are still aound.
Second, the problem with carbon isn't so much its vulnerability to damage as that it can be damaged with no visible sign. If an alu frame is risky to ride, you'll see the problem. If a carbon frame has become delaminated you probably won't know anything about it until it snaps while you're riding it.
Which isn't to say you shouldn't ride a carbon crosser - I don't think delamination is much of a risk from a crash on soft ground - but let's get the facts right.
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 619
Bikes: Road and Mountain
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I say go with the alu this year and reward yourself next year with carbon. Take the $ and buy some wheels.
However, I went carbon this year and stiffness, agility are measurably better over my alu bike. The first time I road it I went up a small grass hill and I was like whoa! The weight difference is about 1.5 pounds, again this helps over 45 minutes of racing, plus another the following day. There are certainly people winning on both materials, but a $500 difference isn't a lot for the Crux. With all this said, a custom geo steel Strong, PM or Vanilla will be next for me.
However, I went carbon this year and stiffness, agility are measurably better over my alu bike. The first time I road it I went up a small grass hill and I was like whoa! The weight difference is about 1.5 pounds, again this helps over 45 minutes of racing, plus another the following day. There are certainly people winning on both materials, but a $500 difference isn't a lot for the Crux. With all this said, a custom geo steel Strong, PM or Vanilla will be next for me.