kiron scandium vs pl;anet x pro carbon

giler

Trying to get pro carbon on C2work scheme then this one comes along.
Anybody got any experience of the kiron?
I know it depends on fit primarily, but it looks a good deal as well. Puzzled

Gav2000

I had a look at both bikes recently and very nearly ordered the Planet X. The Kiron seemed to have a strange mix of 105, Ultegra and Dura Ace while the Planet X has Dura Ace in a reasonable number of places. In the end I've gone for a self build which will cost more but will be fun, the Planet X looks great value for the money though.

jimilindley

I think scandium is a very light aluminium alloy, which I've heard is quite fragile. I'm looking for a new bike too, but am thinking carbon for comfort reasons

System_1

jimilindley wrote:

I think scandium is a very light aluminium alloy, which I've heard is quite fragile. I'm looking for a new bike too, but am thinking carbon for comfort reasons

Scandium alloyed with aluminium is actually much stronger than aluminium on its own, particularly at weld zones, which is why it's used. There's nothing fragile about it. It also increases fatigue strength so a scandium frame should actually last longer than bog standard aluminium. From what I've read on reviews of Scandium bikes it also has the benefit of taking away a bit of the harshness associated with all aluminium bikes giving a ride closer to steel.

redddraggon

jimilindley wrote:

I'm looking for a new bike too, but am thinking carbon for comfort reasons

Why are you looking at carbon for "comfort reasons"? A Carbon fibre frame does not equal comfort, just as though an aluminium one doesn't equal harshness.

eg. Apparantly a Soloist Team is less harsh than a Soloist Carbon

TinyTed

I had a similar dilema (?) and looked at lots of alternatives and decided to go for the Planet X Sl Pro Carbon. It was delivered a couple of days ago, exactly as advertised and on time. It looks even better in the flesh than on their web site. Am cycling to work tomorrow on it for the first time and can't wait. Cannot see any downsides at all yet for the money.

aracer

System wrote:

jimilindley wrote:

I think scandium is a very light aluminium alloy, which I've heard is quite fragile. I'm looking for a new bike too, but am thinking carbon for comfort reasons

Scandium alloyed with aluminium is actually much stronger than aluminium on its own, particularly at weld zones, which is why it's used. There's nothing fragile about it. It also increases fatigue strength so a scandium frame should actually last longer than bog standard aluminium. From what I've read on reviews of Scandium bikes it also has the benefit of taking away a bit of the harshness associated with all aluminium bikes giving a ride closer to steel.

It is indeed a strong alloy of aluminium - which is in fact no lighter than normal aluminium. It is normally used though to make very lightweight alu frames (exploiting the strength), hence the fragility.

Given the alloy makes no significant difference to the performance of the metal in the elastic zone (which is what you're experiencing in normal riding), the comments about ride comfort just illustrate how perceived differences in ride comfort are all psychological rather than real.

Rich-Ti

I'd go for the Kiron just to be different 8)

giler

TinyTed
Don't suppose any of you are nr Cambridge with a Medium?
Just a stab in the dark

TinyTed

Warwickshire with a medium. Have gone on a couple of 15 mile journeys so far. Ace bike, good lucks, smooth shifts and comfortable. Have put Conti Gatorskins 25mm on too as i was not sure about the supplied Schwalbes. The Kiron may be good, i don't know, but i would highly recommend the SL Pro Carbon based on my experience so far.