Carlitoo

Hi guys,

I need help making a decision. I'm I the market for a commuter (14km to work and back).
Since I'm a rather heavy guy, I've narrowed it down to cannondale, since they can take more weight... and I also like the style etc of course.
My local dealer has two suitable bikes; rode both, both feel great, both are fast. No complaints whatsoever.
Though one is a more expensive carbon bike, the other aluminium.

Here the links:

cannondale.com/USA/bike/Productdetail?Id=e4027082-9364-41a8-b00e-74209d7ee695

cannondale.com/International/bike/Productdetail?Id=92aa56b8-a2c2-47ee-9e01-cfe133dd663d

Pricewise the aluminium costs 800 Euros, the carbon 1300 Euros.

The components are pretty different from my understanding but is it worth the extra $$$?

What are your thoughts, what would you do/ suggest?
Any help is highly appreciated.

Many thanks inn advance from good old Germany,

Carlito

Ps: please add the 'www' in front of the url's yourself - I couldn't do that...

KraneXL

Not sure what's your indecision. Are you asking whether the carbon can handle the weight (which you didn't mention by the way but the manufacturer does give a recommended weight limit), or is the carbon bike worth the extra cost?

Carlitoo

Sorry, I'm always in a rush... two small kids in the background stealing all concentration^^
The aluminum will carry 140kg, the carbon 160 kg if my memory serves me correctly.
So it's rather about the components and the material (carbon/ aluminium) itself.

Thanks alot
Carlito

FargoRider

My opinion is you get what you pay for. The carbon model is a nicer frame with more grears, and a better drivetrain. Personally, I prefer a triple up front on all my bikes, but that's just me. It's nice the carbon does include braze-ons so it looks like it would support a rear rack? That's something I'd ask the bike shop.

I rode an aluminum framed Giant Rapid 1 for years as my daily commuter, but did experience hand fatigue and numbness from the road vibration on longer rides. It wasn't too bad, but over time (5 plus years) it really started bothering me. I did purchase a carbon road bike, and I couldn't believe the difference in smoothness and how it softened the road compared to the Giant.

I eventually sold the Giant when I found an older steel framed Bianchi I fell in love with, and haven't looked back. Have you looked into steel framed bikes?

alias5000

Other questions you could consider for yourself are:

- Will the carbon bike be secured enough at work so that theft worries will not bother you?
- Are you expecting very rough treatment of the bike (dings etc.)?

robertorolfo

So how does the steel compare to the carbon for you? Smoother still?

mcours2006

I can't speak for @FargoRider, but I've a couple of steel bikes as well as a carbon and the steel bikes, though heavier, are quite supple and smooth, much more so than the carbon or aluminum bikes I have. I am currently riding an Al cross bike with Al fork and it's quite harsh, even on pavement.

Carlitoo

Thanks for your help, guys!

I don't care so much about racks but I think you could mount one.
The bike will be stored in a separate room and I know the guys who might have access. Almost no chance stealing it.
The bike will always be handled with care... well, the roads are a little rough here and there but that's something any bike would have to chew through.
Yeah, I think it really is the price... is the carbon with all the better parts worth the extra 500? Will it last longer, will it be more or less robust...
Btw regular price on the carbon is 2000, on the aluminium 1000 Euro.
Thanks again
Carlito

Carlitoo

... also, I checked out the (German) market for steel bikes, which I read plenty good about, but those are even more expensive than carbon bikes or they are old as the hills or they have weird geometries.
So no chance for me

FargoRider

Well, it's hard to say. The Fuji is all a carbon frame with aluminum dropbars and seat post. The Bianchi is a all steel frame with carbon handlebars and carbon seatpost.

They both are buttery smooth and I have them setup a bit differently for geometry. I also have my rainy day commuter that's a '92 Bianchi Project-3 with steel fork, steel handlebars, and steel frame running 700x38 tires that probably is the smoothest rider I own.

I can't say for sure what's smoother, carbon or steel. They feel different, but they both knock down the road chatter compared to aluminum though.

FargoRider

One thing to also consider is climbing and sprinting. The carbon has a compact 50/34 front chainrings while the Quick2 is just an eleven speed with a single 38T chainring. Having more gears with a much wider range for commuting, is not a bad thing for me. If you can afford the carbon, having the 22 gear choices compared to 11 would be enough to sway me. Plus, it's just a nicer bike.

If you like them both, and you don't care about more gears, then grab the less expensive one. It's not like you have to keep this bike the rest of your life. You'll know what you really want after you get out there and ride.

KraneXL

If its mostly commuting, I'd get the aluminum. It will hold up better under those conditions. I had this same decision to make a few years ago and chose the aluminum due to it being one size larger and lower replacement value. Back then the component were almost identical, so it was largely a choice of frame material. I'd avoid steel especially if you intend to use the bike to help you lose weight.

Carlitoo

The frames are - except for 1.5cm or so in top tube length - identical. Both are rated xl. Both fit and feel really good.
Why do you think that the aluminum bike is tougher or more suitable? The carbon bike can take more weight (at least it's rated that way) than the aluminum^^
I'm lost...

KraneXL

That wasn't the case when I was bike shopping. They've expanded more since then.I was referring to such things as nicks and digs, bumps and bruises. When I hear commuting I think crowded train stations and storage rooms at work where unaware janitors treat it like your typical WalMart bike. Otherwise, I'd choose carbon.

And yes, a similar carbon bike is a lot stronger than steel but it is susceptible to other things such as UV light, and chemicals so each has its benefits and cons either way. There is no perfect bike or frame material for all conditions. Like I said, I went back and forth too.

Carlitoo

One aspect, I didn't mention is, that I want to use my upcoming bike as a sports vehicle more or less. Since I've two small kids and literally no time for sports I try to incorporate workout in my daily routines. So it's better for me to take 30 extra minutes to get to work and back instead of spending a total of three hours in the gym.
I did that already last year and it worked pretty good (my mountaibike was annoying as hell though - numb hands and arms; not very fast).
So when I'm riding my bike, I push myself to the limits. Always full blast.
Sorry for not mentioning that earlier!
Thanks for all your help guys!
Carlito

RubeRad

My opinion, both are very nice bikes, and you would have to be extremely sensitive to ride the aluminum one and think "oh these crappy parts", so why not save the money? And in that price range, more expensive is probably going to push you towards race-oriented parts, which are lighter but less durable. (although the Carbon has 105, which is at the sweet spot)

I got numb hands (never arms though) on my mtb, and recently replaced the bars with Jones H Loop (aluminum, SG), numbness gone, very comfortable. You might consider the same.

Also I don't think there's anything special about Cannondale for heavy riders. I frequent the "Clydesdales & Athenas" subforum, and I've never heard anybody say that before. Although, funny story, once I was browsing in a bike shop in the 90s, and the salesman steered me towards the then-innovative Cannondale fat-tubed aluminum bikes, "because of your weight". My girlfriend (now wife) still pokes me about that. Maybe your opinion is a holdover from back then?

KraneXL

At the time of my research Cannondale offered the largest frame from the major manufacturers on the market.

Carlitoo

Hey Rube,

I guess you might be right. Could save some serious $!
Still I'm torn back and forth...
I've changed literally everything on my old mountaibike to reduce stress on my arms and hands. Higher bar, a raiser or whatever that's called in English... the thing you put on your front wheel axle to higher the bar. Also changed the seat and played with seat position.
Never really worked - unfortunately!
I guess it's about time. Season starts and I definitely need a change.
I will let you guys know my decision... as soon as I'm able to make one^^
All the best,
Carlito

alias5000

Have you ever tried a drop bar bike?

Carlitoo

Hey alias,

yes, I tested two or three of them. Not my cup of tea. Feels just too sporty. I will stick with them "normal" bars.

Cheers,
Carlito

alias5000

Okay, cool. I was just asking, because sometimes (for some people) arms and hands can be happier with those bars.

Carlitoo

Yeah, maybe easier on the arms but less easy on my back which needs as much relief as possible!

Carlitoo

Because of my back (riding comfort) I will do one more test ride on both bikes, tomorrow.
If the carbon isn't significantly smoother, I'll get the quick 2.

KraneXL

The only reason I have not to get the carbon would be cost. A carbon bike is typically lighter, more comfortable and stiffer. A better question is whether the extra added cost is worth the amount of improvement you get. If I were in the market today, I'd get the carbon. Good luck.

Carlitoo

Yes, Krane,

that's exactly the point.
I've to pay 60% more on the carbon but from my memory it's maybe 10% better. I guess that's a little too much money for that amount of improvement....although I'd love to have the carbon just for the looks.
Looking at the parts list, both bikes are relatively similar... some people prefer Shimano, some Sram.
Some people love disc brakes, some hate it....matter of taste.
Man, normally this is an easy call if there wasn't the carbon-voodoo.
Thanks again for all your help/ thoughts/ insights.

Cheers, Carlito