Thread: Steel
View Single Post
Old 06-19-22, 08:13 AM
  #44  
Classtime 
Senior Member
 
Classtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,706

Bikes: 82 Medici, 2011 Richard Sachs, 2011 Milwaukee Road

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1951 Post(s)
Liked 2,012 Times in 1,111 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
How do you compare the "quality" of a top-end steel vs carbon bike?
Top end steel is likely made to measure. Top end carbon is likely not—although it can be.

Originally Posted by Iride01
So your counter point for steel is that cyclist don't upgrade because they are happy with old components?

Don't get me wrong. I like steel bikes. I like carbon bikes too. Pretty much it's easier to find a very decent carbon bike today. Decent steel not so easy. Haven't seen one in the local shops here in a very long time.
Anybody might be happy with old components that work. My point is that a rider who’s primary high mileage bike is steel is less likely to be looking to replace it.

AND, Yes it is easier. Folks who have a decent bike and are looking for a newer decent bike, want another carbon bike. So yah, the shops have plenty of carbon bikes.

If it is really important, and we have time, we should Suvey: of 100 riders of carbon bikes on a popular route, how many of those bikes are at least 10 years old? And do the same for 100 riders of Steel. We could correct for age too. Let’s get to the bottom of this.
__________________
I don't do: disks, tubeless, e-shifting, or bead head nymphs.
Classtime is offline