Carbon fibre bikes give you cancer....official....

Heard it on the news this morning that carbon fibre can give you lung disease or even cancer so its back to metal for me :? .
So which one? Titanium has probably got an enormous carbon footprint, aluminium give you dementia, magnesium bikes are in short supply, steel bikes go rusty and weigh 3 tons per inch and bamboo bikes attract pandas.....
What bike frame should I buy?
VOTE NOW [not binding] :roll:
So which one? Titanium has probably got an enormous carbon footprint, aluminium give you dementia, magnesium bikes are in short supply, steel bikes go rusty and weigh 3 tons per inch and bamboo bikes attract pandas.....

What bike frame should I buy?
VOTE NOW [not binding] :roll:
Club rides are for sheep
What bike should Bonk Man buy to avoid an early carbon fibre related death? 0 votes
Heavy old steel
0%
0 votes
Brain shrivelling alloy
0%
0 votes
Hard to find magnesium
0%
0 votes
Planet wasting titanium
0%
0 votes
Bear attracting thick grass stems
0%
0 votes
Stick to carbon as long as you don't inhale..
0%
0 votes
0
Posts
Can't see a problem
Twitter
Flickr
www.ogmorevalleywheelers.co.uk
10TT 24:36 25TT: 57:59 50TT: 2:08:11, 100TT: 4:30:05 12hr 204.... unfinished business
Carbon fibres are probably worse, but still.
I suspect that even cutting a carbon steerer without a mask, would put me at less risk from cancer than 5 years spent inhaling 2nd hand smoke in clubs and pubs.
http://www.facebook.com/groups/eastbradfordcyclingclub/
http://www.facebook.com/groups/eastbradfordcyclingclub/
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2008/05May/Pages ... tubes.aspx
You shortened the quote "Steel is really heavy"
Carbon fibre is a figment of everyones imagination
Not much steel in the pro peloton, or many sub 17lb steel bikes. Fine for a 'retro look, but alu, ti and carbon have made steel so last year.
www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=44397853765
true so what. i ride steel. its not like we all hav to join the carbon fibre/titanium/aluminium elitists club
I have all three. alu road bike, carbon [race] and steel fixed. the steel gets the most attention
www.ogmorevalleywheelers.co.uk
10TT 24:36 25TT: 57:59 50TT: 2:08:11, 100TT: 4:30:05 12hr 204.... unfinished business
I've noticed more elitism coming from steel oweners in the last 5 years.
contains a few carbon bikes??? Do I need a mask??? Is this a second hand smoke type
of thing where they say that second hand smoke is more dangerous than if you were
actually smoking the cig yourself??? Should I be riding a carbon bike so I'm no longer
getting carbon fiber 2nd. hand because I'm actually riding it myself and am therefore
safer??? So many questions - so few answers.
Dennis Noward
Its all to do with osmosis. If you ride a carbon bike, your body tries to deal with the imbalance in carbon concentration by moving water across your cell walls into the bike to try to equalise the concentration. Thus you get lighter and thinner (and appear faster) while your bike starts swelling. Thats why the tubes on carbon frames are so fat - water retention.
OTOH, when you're on a steel bike, you have the higher carbon concentration, the fluid* goes the other way and the steel tubes appear thin while you get fatter.
* - havent worked out where the fluid comes from yet. I think its the rusty water that collects in your BB.
In all seriousness this is easier said than done. I'm having a hard time thinking of anyone
I know who rides or even owns a steel bike except as an antique. Can't remember the
last time I saw one at our local and regional races. Then again it seems that everyone is
younger these days and most of them don't seem to realize that steel is even an option.
Oh my god, I'm alone out here.
Dennis Noward
Cancer is a fair price to pay for the lovely goodness of carbon. :P
I ride a steel tt lo-pro thing dating back to the 80's in our fixed competition and it is as good and more comfy than my alloy Dolan.
My winter bike is 531c but with carbon [wheeeze] fibre forks, will be replaced by an Amazon soon as it has virtually rusted through in places, shame , but that's steel for you at least it weighs less with the tubes being so corroded away :?
As an aside: the very fact that a glib phrase like "steel is real" was coined in the first place suggests to me that the people who use it don't have any strong arguments in favour of steel. In particular the traditionalist argument is a very weak one. If we're going to be traditionalists then lets go back to steel rims, solid tyres and rod brakes. Oh and how many of the "steel is real" crowd have steel rims, steel calipers, steel stems, etc?
And before all the steel lovers protest. My road bike has a 501 frame.
Or at least it would do if you were a policeman in a humourous/philosophical Irish novel.
Despite all of this, steel still sells as it can be used to build a cheep-ish, comfortable ride and overall it still has a part in todays market.
Marketing departments have managed to convince us that CF is "the material of the future...today!!" and is the must have material for; cranks, handlebars, stems and saddles. However, alloys cope very well for these components.
Having said all that, CF does make for some brilliant bikes
Carbon .... the ultra fast lean and slightly carcainomious and Steel the comfortable but dead ended twig on the tree..
Which do we choose ? At what point do we consider each other a completely different entity or even lifeform??
I'm honestly not being pedantic when I say this, but I can't see how any three word phrase can "sum up the unquantifiable benefits of steel". My problem with the phrase is that it is glib and you nothing about steel that it couldn't equally tell you about any other material. Aluminium alloy is real, carbon composites are real, as indeed are wood, grass and dog poo. It tells us nothing that we don't already know.
I'm not anti steel by any means, of the road bikes I have owned only one has had a aluminium alloy frame the rest have been steel of some sort. My mountainbikes tend to be about 50/50 steel/aluminium. In spite of the obvious benefits of carbon composites I have never owned a bike made from the material because I wouldn't be able to trust it after a crash. It's fine for the pro peleton who can probably throw away their frames after an off. I can't.
Many people suggest that aluminium is not crash resistant, some even go so far as to suggest an aluminium frame will fail unexpectedly without even being involved in a crash. More than once I have read the phrase "unlike steel, aluminium has a finite fatigue life". The very fact that I have read exactly the same words written by more than one cycling writer suggests that only one of them really knew what they mean, the rest of them just lifted them because they seemed to prove their argument. It is however nonsense. Steel does not have an infinite fatigue life. Bend a peice of steel backwards and forwards enough times and it will eventually snap. It will last a lot longer than a peice of aluminium under the same circumstances, but it does not have an infinite fatigue life. Secondly raw aluminium has a very short fatigure life, but one of the reasons for alloying aluminium and heat treating it is to improve it's fatigue life. Even so the comparison is largely irrelevant. Aluminium bike frames are built to be very stiff, they don't flex very much at all so their fatigue life will generally be much longer than their expected lifespan.
I have an aluminium framed jump bike that's a good few years old now and it shows no signs of fatigue. That frame gets a load more hammer than any road going frame.
Oh and by the way I used to work in a non-ferous foundry so I picked up quite a bit about aluminium alloys. Although I'm a long way from being an expert. An aluminium bronze frame would be much prettier than a titanium one, shame it wouldn't be much use.