Steel versus Carbon - Total Weight
10-20-15, 03:22 PM
#176
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 3,247
Bikes: Moots Vamoots, Colnago C60, Santa Cruz Stigmata CC, and too many other bikes I don't ride
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
LOL... the guys with the lighter carbon bikes don't have the time to post here and they are out there riding.
10-20-15, 05:02 PM
#177
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,564
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Liked 2,250 Times
in
1,510 Posts
10-20-15, 05:05 PM
#178
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,564
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Liked 2,250 Times
in
1,510 Posts
All someone has to do is watch any local race or tri and see what people ride. The exception is some crit riders who worry about crashing and ruining their frame
10-20-15, 06:01 PM
#180
Boom.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Pittsburgh -> Cleveland -> San Francisco
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
10-20-15, 06:13 PM
#181
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,564
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Liked 2,250 Times
in
1,510 Posts
Last edited by StanSeven; 10-20-15 at 07:10 PM.
10-20-15, 06:28 PM
#183
Boom.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Pittsburgh -> Cleveland -> San Francisco
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
10-20-15, 06:55 PM
#185
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Pinehurst, NC, US
Posts: 1,718
Bikes: 2020 Trek Emonda SL6, 90's Vintage EL-OS Steel Bianchi with 2014 Campy Chorus Upgrade
Liked 164 Times
in
111 Posts
Are some folks really saying that a couple pounds does not make a measureable (although pretty small in virtually all cases) difference over something like 40K? It just isn't a complicated calculation. It would seem to me that claiming otherwise begs at least some kind of rationale as to why typically used analytical techniques don't apply here.
dave
dave
10-20-15, 07:56 PM
#186
Boom.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Pittsburgh -> Cleveland -> San Francisco
Posts: 2,523
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Are some folks really saying that a couple pounds does not make a measureable (although pretty small in virtually all cases) difference over something like 40K? It just isn't a complicated calculation. It would seem to me that claiming otherwise begs at least some kind of rationale as to why typically used analytical techniques don't apply here.
dave
dave
10-20-15, 08:16 PM
#187
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Ride your bike 100 times on 40km route with 3% ave gradient. Trade said bike for one 2kg's heavier. Repeat the route 100 times. We'll give 3% error. Will the heavier bike be slower 97 times? Maybe...
Ride your bike 100 times on 40km route with 60% humidity. Trade said bike for one 2kg's heavier. Repeat the route 100 times at 85% humidity...
Ride your bikes 100 times...
Ride your bike 100 times on 40km route with 60% humidity. Trade said bike for one 2kg's heavier. Repeat the route 100 times at 85% humidity...
Ride your bikes 100 times...
10-20-15, 08:25 PM
#188
Less drag = less effort needed to push the bicycle forward. Less weight = less effort needed to push the bike up a hill.
Whether the difference is substantial enough is up to the individual. Just because you don't think the difference is worth it to you does not mean that the difference isn't there.
It really is not that complicated.
Whether the difference is substantial enough is up to the individual. Just because you don't think the difference is worth it to you does not mean that the difference isn't there.
It really is not that complicated.
10-20-15, 09:03 PM
#190
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,564
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Liked 2,250 Times
in
1,510 Posts
Less drag = less effort needed to push the bicycle forward. Less weight = less effort needed to push the bike up a hill.
Whether the difference is substantial enough is up to the individual. Just because you don't think the difference is worth it to you does not mean that the difference isn't there.
Whether the difference is substantial enough is up to the individual. Just because you don't think the difference is worth it to you does not mean that the difference isn't there.
10-20-15, 10:51 PM
#191
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lund, Sweden
Posts: 323
Bikes: Ridley Noah, Trek Emonda, Colnago C59, Colnago Master, 1980 Colnago Super, Wilier Blade
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
In a time trial or the TdF every small advantage helps, but 99% don't do time trials and are not performing at max effort on a normal ride. I do a lot of group rides and even though the entire group is on carbon and my frame is steel we complete our ride at the same time and my watt-meter shows no measurable difference between my results using steel vs my CF roadbike during normal riding. An interesting real life example with some randomized testing of carbon vs steel with 4kgs difference in weight: Doctor claims carbon offers no benefit over steel | road.cc
Last edited by kingfishr; 10-20-15 at 10:59 PM.
10-21-15, 04:16 AM
#192
Senior Member
Are some folks really saying that a couple pounds does not make a measureable (although pretty small in virtually all cases) difference over something like 40K? It just isn't a complicated calculation. It would seem to me that claiming otherwise begs at least some kind of rationale as to why typically used analytical techniques don't apply here.
dave
dave
10-21-15, 04:54 AM
#193
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
In a time trial or the TdF every small advantage helps, but 99% don't do time trials and are not performing at max effort on a normal ride. I do a lot of group rides and even though the entire group is on carbon and my frame is steel we complete our ride at the same time and my watt-meter shows no measurable difference between my results using steel vs my CF roadbike during normal riding. An interesting real life example with some randomized testing of carbon vs steel with 4kgs difference in weight: Doctor claims carbon offers no benefit over steel | road.cc
10-21-15, 04:56 AM
#194
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There is a difference. All that happens is you compensate for it with slightly different effort levels that are indistinguishable from the normal variances from the many other factors that affect your rides.
10-21-15, 05:04 AM
#195
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
But damn, I can contribute to the stupid science too. Ford, my new Chinabike, the one that weighs only 13.5 lb ready to ride, you know the one I'm talking about. So far I haven't been able to ride it to within 1 mph of my Ti bike which weighs 0.5 lb more. That's right. Ford has been 1-2 mph slower than the heavier Ti on the same route. And the one time I have ridden the steel bike recently, the one that weighs 17.1 lb with pedals and all, it was 0.5 mph faster than Ford and only 0.5 mph slower than the Ti. Same three contact point setup on all three bikes. Oh dear, my life is a shambles. What to do? What to do?
10-21-15, 05:23 AM
#197
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
I guess the tongue-in-cheek aspect kind of got lost in the shuffle. Fear not, I'm not contemplating suicide.
Last edited by rpenmanparker; 10-21-15 at 05:42 AM.
10-21-15, 05:25 AM
#198
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lund, Sweden
Posts: 323
Bikes: Ridley Noah, Trek Emonda, Colnago C59, Colnago Master, 1980 Colnago Super, Wilier Blade
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Cute, but meaningless as the experiment was totally uncontrolled. The experimenter admits to including outlier situations like snow and harder efforts which nullify the results. Those results should have been discarded. Also the experimental results should have been calculated as a multi-variable regression with things like wind direction and speed included. This is just more drivel to muddy up the understanding of the situation. Not that I think he should have observed faster times on the lighter bike, but I certainly think he should have performed the experiment more credibly.
10-21-15, 05:29 AM
#199
Sorry, I just opened the thread & read the last response. Hadn't seen the previous silliness.
10-21-15, 05:41 AM
#200
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Have you seen any better research and experiments that prove the contrary? I haven't, and I know the reason why not, they would show similar results to what this doctor showed, the differences for normal, non-competitive cycling is insignificant. That's not to say people shouldn't buy new bikes, but expectations on performance improvements from new hardware always exceed reality.
