Carbon bars ? what's the reasons/logic ?

weeksy59

Is it purely a weight thing ?

Debating a set from Classifieds on here.

What's the reasons apart from being pretty

turnercraig

It's not just a weight thing, although it does help

The carbon is very effective at stopping a lot of the trail 'buzz', it has a damping effect and can help with arm pump and fatigue.

I have had the Ritchey WCS carbon low riser bars for about 6 months now and I love them

Surf-Matt

They absorb a bit of trail "buzz" - it really does make a difference.

And...they look cool too..

Carbon seatpost is not of interest thought (hence getting a Thomson) - the bars absorb energy through slight flexing - this can't happen through the vertical plane as with seatposts - rather than bending, the carbon molecules are just sitting tightly together - so I think carbon posts are a bit silly. I also attach lights and a mudguard (in winter) to mine and am not convinced a carbon seatpost can handle this. The stuff on my bars tends to stay put.

ride_whenever

I run a carbon post on my pompino, wouldn't run one on my 456 or inbred. They do give a bit of lateral flex because you've not got a vertical seattube. So you get a little rearwards flex and it is much more comfy than the ally one it replaced.

canada16

+1 for the Ritchey carbon WCS.

Got mine for 45.00 and lighter and stronger than most, apart from the EC90's?

And they look so so sweet

weeksy59

canada16 wrote:

+1 for the Ritchey carbon WCS.

that's what they are.

blablablacksheep

do carbon bars stop any of the juttering that can give you "clicking/trigger finger"?

blablablacksheep

do carbon bars stop any of the juttering that can give you "clicking/trigger finger"?

blablablacksheep

do carbon bars stop any of the juttering that can give you "clicking/trigger finger"?

blablablacksheep

do carbon bars stop any of the juttering that can give you "clicking/trigger finger"?

Surf-Matt

They reduce fatigue a bit but no need to post FOUR times...

I went for BBB bars - they are slightly reinforced with alu so pretty much no chance of snapping them. And they were stupidly good vfm.

http://www.kudubikes.co.uk/cgi-bin/trol ... BBFIBERTOP

Northwind

Surf-Matt wrote:

I also attach lights and a mudguard (in winter) to mine and am not convinced a carbon seatpost can handle this.

My Next SL post handles a mudguard and lights just fine The crush force from these is trivial compared to the seat clamp. The surface can get scuffed, but that's life.

And it does actually seem to make a difference to vibration, I don't think it's the case that carbon bars do this by flexing vertically, I think it's more the case that the material doesn't carry vibrations the same way- to give you the full scientific analysis, whack an alloy tube and it goes bong, whack a carbon tube and it goes thunk

Noclue

Northwind wrote:

to give you the full scientific analysis, whack an alloy tube and it goes bong, whack a carbon tube and it goes thunk

LOL have you considered a career in the aerospace industry

blablablacksheep

not sure why it posted 4 times lol

turnercraig

blablablacksheep wrote:

do carbon bars stop any of the juttering that can give you "clicking/trigger finger"?

Not quite sure what you mean?

Basically they do help with arm pump and looks the muts nuts

supersonic

Depends on conctruction. My RF Next is very stiff - noticably stiffer than a lightweight alloy bar, but does have an extra something.

Surf-Matt

supersonic wrote:

Depends on conctruction. My RF Next is very stiff - noticably stiffer than a lightweight alloy bar, but does have an extra something.

Price tag?!

The place I really noticed a difference was in our local town (laughably called a City...!) - the cobbled streets are way comfier with the carbon bars!

supersonic

They were 50 quid.

Zeroman_IR

They do a fantastic job of filtering trail buzz. In my case however, I've had a pair snap on me so I don't think I could trust carbon again.

bomberesque

supersonic wrote:

Depends on conctruction. My RF Next is very stiff - noticably stiffer than a lightweight alloy bar, but does have an extra something.

funny, I was about to say that I really noticed the trailbuzz damping effect on my RF Nexts. I think it is because I'm running them on a fully rigid bike though, the Truvativ carbons on my HT are on top of a pair of coil sprung Pikes and I can't say that I noticed the difference from alu ones, except for the shininess of course 8)

supersonic

Interesting question for ya: if skinny steel frames have whip and comfort enhancing flex, why no steel bars?!

Surf-Matt

Corrosion issues where they interface with brake lever/shifters/stem?

Good question though - triple/double butted light steel would seem useful for bars.

My steel framed Stumpy has alu bars - I assumed it was a weight thing?

ride_whenever

you can get steel jump bars...

I'd gues it is due to cost of setting up the butting to make it light and bent maybe

Anonymous

i've been salivating I mean looking at carbons for my giant x5, am still a bit sheepish about them, I mean how strong are they?

robmanic1

canada16 wrote:

+1 for the Ritchey carbon WCS.

Got mine for 45.00 and lighter and stronger than most, apart from the EC90's?

And they look so so sweet

+ another, especially with matching seatpost, suweeet!

weeksy59

Just waiting for payment options from the guy and they'll be mine

Northwind

supersonic wrote:

Interesting question for ya: if skinny steel frames have whip and comfort enhancing flex, why no steel bars?!

Frequency? A slow flex can be beneficial, a fast flex is a buzz... I don't have any of the technical vocabulary for this but I know from building guitars that steel has more sustain than aluminium... I suppose the best comparison would be a fork with damping and a fork without, they both boing but one boings once and the other boings for ages.

supersonic

I think it is the dimensions compared to a frame, and the support. Steel is stiff, so needs to be thin walled to give it the characteristics of whippy feeling frames. Too thin and you risk buckling the walls, which I think is what might happen with a weight competetive steel bar.

You see cheap steel bars on argos specials - weigh about a pound, and really jarring!

77ric

i've got a set of Atomlab GIs on my bike, and i noticed that they have noticeably less trail buzz than the original bars that came with the bike. now it maybe cause the GIs are made from 4130 chromoly steel and the originals were alloy or it might be because they have a BMX size clamp area as opposed to standard MTB clamp area so no narrowing from the clamp area (does that make sense?).

to me they feel they flex about the same but less trail buzz, they are a touch heavier to, but by less that 100g i think. Carbon on the other hand does have different acoustic properties too, the guitar man will know that so yeah more thunk than chime, which must translate to less vibration transmission along the length of the bars, and therefore less trail buzz, but i must point out i did do higher physics some 14 years.

Tank-slapper

On a full suspension bike, the reduction of vibration is limited and not very noticeable. It is more about weight saving and the amount of benefit here is governed by the components being swapped. If parts being swapped are heavy, then it probably is worth spending a bit more and getting carbon replacements. Otherwise, light alloy is just as good.

weeksy59

Tank-slapper wrote:

On a full suspension bike, the reduction of vibration is limited and not very noticeable..

Will be going on a HT Hardrock sport.