3k vs UD

mb london

Can someone please tell what the difference is in finish between carbon 3k and UD

Thanks

njee20

UD is unidirectional - just a general shiny grey, seemingly random colour. 3k is a reasonably tight 'woven' finish.

paul.skibum

njee20 wrote:

UD is unidirectional - just a general shiny grey, seemingly random colour. 3k is a reasonably tight 'woven' finish.

Doesn't explain the difference between them though - as in properties, strength etc. You have peaked my interest, now bed it back down!

mb london

3k would be the more aesthetically pleasing then

supersonic

It depends how the frame is made - both materials work well when used properly.

Northwind

TBH I think you'll probably find that in many cases, when a choice is offered it's actually the same construction, with a different top layer. The top weave of carbon parts is often just cosmetic/protective, basically the equivalent of paint (or wallpaper, I suppose) so they just swap that to give a different look.

Not always, of course, but I'd bet money if you took one of these chinese frames where they offer various different types, that's what you'd find.

BikeSwan

As mentioned above the top layer of carbon is cosmetic, some people prefer UD, some 3K. It's just the way it is. Neither has a strength or weight advantage. You generally find UD on higher end components and frames because it looks "classier" than the (rather on the noise) 3K weave pattern. I prefer UD for the record.

compositepro

3k means 3000 filament nothing else

UD means Unidirectional nothing else

Lightweight frames especially the road ones dont have cosmetic layers as such
there just isn't enough left for that little luxury

If you are asking which is the better theres a lot more to it than 3k or UD