Vexxer

If you are already a big guy, does a a bikes weight make that much of a difference? I am going to purchasing a road bike very soon, and Im trying to decide whether spending 400 or 500 more dollars for a carbon bike, instead of a aluminum bike is really worth it.

Lazyass

Get aluminum and lose body weight.

IcySmooth52

What you're getting with a more expensive bicycle isn't just weight savings. You're usually getting many features, depending on which model. Don't think a lighter frame is the only or even first benefit of carbon.

Vexxer

Got any examples? Im talking about Aluminum and Carbon frames with identical or comparable groupsets from the same manufacturer.

rebel1916

CF is sweet, but if you are just getting into it I'd save the money.

IcySmooth52

Model is still a HUGE factor here. Not just component group and frame material.

Think of frame material as a way that the designer can translate what they intended for a product. Carbon is more expensive due to construction processes, but is far more versatile (why it's used). It can be made lighter than aluminum because of it's lack of design limitations.

But if you were looking between the Giant Defy Advanced with 105 and Giant TCR SLR with 105, guess which one is faster. The aluminum.

rms13

Most of what you are getting with more expense is lighter weight. Lighter frame, lighter wheels, lighter components. Once you get past shimano 105 group it's dimishing returns. One could argue that the case with 9 speed Sora but 11 speed 105 has improved ergonomics and shifting so I think you'll see benefits there. As for frames, you can find aluminum that is better than carbon. Better wheels are usually lighter. Some will say better wheels are stiffer and give better acceleration etc but again it's marginal compared to the cost in most cases. And yes if your a heavy rider most of the high end stuff is pointless and even with wheels you'll be better served with heavier, sturdier higher spoke wheels

Johnny Mullet

Unless you are fit and under 180 lbs, bicycle weight means nothing!

JimPz

The best answer is ride them both, then you will see what if any difference the frame makes, as stated, the light weight of cabon may be the least of its benefits.
But if you try them, you will know how they feel & ride & be better able to choose.

Vexxer

Im not huge, Im 6'5 220... Even if I ever got peak fitness though, I doubt I would be under 200.

FIVE ONE SIX

with all due respect, 220#'s for a cyclist is heavy, but i'm sure most of that has to do with the fact that you're very tall. i've been riding since 2005, when i started i was 182#'s, and 10 years later after a few injuries and taking 3 years off because of my job, i'm 228#'s. i will say without a shadow of a doubt i was much faster 9 or 10 years ago at 185-190#'s than i am now at 228#'s. bottom line, it's not the car, it's the engine! definitely try both bikes and get whichever one you feel better on. i have friends that ride aluminum bikes that are much faster than other friends that ride carbon bikes. and i have a friend that's 240#'s that can easily average 17's and 18's on hilly rides, but he'll be the first one to admit that he would be faster if he dropped some weight...

Kimmo

Aluminium has a finite fatigue life, so even the best ally frames will eventually fail given enough use. Carbon, although perhaps slightly fragile in some respects (care must be taken with torque settings on fasteners, for example), doesn't necessarily have such a finite life. A well-designed and well-made carbon frame should last until you break it in a crash or hang it up. However, damage to the paint can eventually lead to failure from exposure to UV and/or moisture.

But the main advantage to carbon is its anisotropy, meaning you can have a super stiff frame that's so comfortable you'll think your tyres are soft. Very difficult to achieve with metal. Also, it's amenable to being shaped any old how, offering potential aero and style advantages. OTOH, many folks feel something that's popped out of a mold lacks 'soul' or whatever next to something that's been welded or brazed from tubes, despite the possibility that there's more manual labour gone into in the carbon frame. I love carbon, but I have to admit that it seems like cheating, somehow... a great plastic frame has a hard time seeming as special as a great metal one. This subjective stuff definitely affects your sense of ownership. But you will definitely get more bang for your buck with carbon.

As for weight, meh; it's heaps overrated. Mostly just bragging rights and wank, but lighter is definitely nicer up to a point. A bike can feel lighter if the rims and tyres are light, and the centre of gravity is low (light seat, post, bars, stem & brifters). 8kg should be light enough for anyone except pro climbers.

Kimmo

Having said that, ally is getting pretty fancy these days; hydroforming really opens up the possibilities.

Lazyass

LOL, let's see, I have a 18 year old aluminum bike that's going strong. How many people buy a new bike and ride it for 18 years? Not many. Of all the reasons to not buy aluminum, that's not one.

Kimmo

So? I have a 20+yo ally bike.

But ~75% of the busted frames I've seen in the last ten years were aluminium.

Although to be fair, given stuff like the Smartweld tech in the vid above, that may become a thing of the past...

Lazyass

75% of the busted frames I and most others have seen in the last ten years are carbon.

Trsnrtr

Correct. You're right on both accounts, fatigue and the fact that most people don't ride the same bike day in and day out for 18 years.

Aluminum fatigue not an issue.

Trsnrtr

75% of the busted bikes that I've owned have been steel.

Sy Reene

My impression is that OP is faced with scenario along lines of comparing (just one example): Trek Emonda ALR5 with Emonda S5.. questioning relative merit of going with one vs the other for a heavier rider.

Lazyass

In 28 years and probably 10-12 steel bikes I never broke one. Matter of fact, I've never broken any frame, even a MTB frame and I raced aluminum hardtails for eight years. If you're breaking a lot of frames perhaps you should lose weight or stop stretching the truth to help support your argument

RNAV

Yeah, that'd be a decision that would have to be made by riding both bikes. I haven't ridden the Emonda ALR5, but I have ridden the Emonda S4 (it's the S5 with Tiagra vs. 105), and I can say it's a fantastic riding bike. I'm very much interested in test riding the ALR just to see how it compares.

Vexxer

I was looking at '13 and '14 Fuji's that Performance still had in stock, Tiagra and 105 equipped ones in the $750 to the $1300 range ... In this model year, I guess that would be the $900 to $1500 range. Im on a budget, so I will likely go with a previous model year of whatever I choose if its available in my size. Im going to look at other brands and other shops, the sales person and Performance was pushing me very hard towards the carbon though, which is what got me wondering.

PepeM

Can't you test ride them?

IcySmooth52

I'm going to stand by saying model needs to be known first. But if it were wether getting the same model in either carbon & Tiagra or aluminum & 105, the difference in price is the answer for the overall value of each.

105 Secteur @ $1,200 vs Tiagra Roubaix @ $1,700 = the Secteur to me, but if the Roubaix were $1,500...

GravelMN

Weight does make a difference, but if you are taking about two bikes, of very similar frame geometry, in the same size, with the same groupset, from the same manufacturer, how much weight are you actually saving going from aluminum to CF? Not enough that you are going to notice it as a big guy on his first road bike.

Does that mean you should forgo the CF for the cost savings? Not necessarily. Frame materials have other qualities besides weight including rigidity, vibration dampening, etc. that affect the comfort and feel of the bike. You should also consider your longer term goals. If you are not planning to be anything other than a recreational rider, then you may want to go aluminum. If your aspirations include becoming a fast rider who can keep up with the A-group on aggressive club rides or hammer out personal bests on long endurance rides, upgrading your components as you go, then you might want to consider CF. Another thought is that if you plan on upgrading to an entirely different bike in a few years, you might want to save the bucks and keep your aluminum "starter" bike as your rainy day, Plan B bike.

While I'm not giving you a definitive answer, what I'm trying to convey is that there are many fine frames made in several different materials, all with their own qualities. Weight does matter but it shouldn't be the deciding factor by itself. Ride both bikes and decide which one you will be the most satisfied with over the next 5 to 10 years.