Would carbon fiber make a difference to a beginner cyclist?
CyclingPiper
Posts: 14
I read speed comparisons done using skilled/pro cyclists, and the fiber is a little faster, but not vastly faster (and that's using pro cyclists, not someone like me). What about comfort? Carbon fiber supposedly has a little spring/give, while still being strong, so it's supposed to give a smoother ride. Can people who are new to road cycling generally tell much difference? I see people who buy carbon fiber for a first ever bike, probably for the bragging rights. But can new cyclists tell much difference?
0
Comments
-
A top end aluminium frame is every bit as good as a low end carbon one for similar money. Carbon frames have come down in price putting them within reach of more buyers, whereas only a few years ago the pricing was prohibitive. Each have their own characteristics. Whether or not you as an individual can detect them, is relative to you only. If a carbon frame is your first bike, how will you know if you can tell the differences between it and an aluminium frame if you've never had one and what's more, why does it matter? If you can afford carbon and want carbon, buy it. Who gives a toss whether you're averaging 5mph or 25mph on your carbon exotica. Anybody that does is simply jealous.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0
-
The marketing men would like you to focus on the material, and to think that there is a neat hierarchy in which aluminium is for cheap bikes and carbon is for nice bikes. The truth is that the quality of manufacture (i.e. good frames are made by good frame builders) and material, and suitability for intended purpose, are far more important. 'Blind' testing is a bit difficult in cycling, but a good frame builder could fool all of the self-proclaimed experts.
See this article from a couple of years back for example; two very different top riders and two very different bikes: http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/probikes/?id=wiggins_cavendish_track0 -
Probably not much difference in speed for a beginner if you buy a £500 alloy bike as opposed to a carbon bike at £1,000 to £1,500 if frames are roughly the same geometry.I read speed comparisons done using skilled/pro cyclists, and the fiber is a little faster, but not vastly faster (and that's using pro cyclists, not someone like me). What about comfort? Carbon fiber supposedly has a little spring/give, while still being strong, so it's supposed to give a smoother ride. Can people who are new to road cycling generally tell much difference? I see people who buy carbon fiber for a first ever bike, probably for the bragging rights. But can new cyclists tell much difference?
However the carbon bike should be more comfortable and smoother on the road, and at that price will come with better components. If you are going to get into cycling and ride a lot, and you can afford it, I would go for a carbon bike.0 -
Go for aluminium. That'll give you an excuse to buy a carbon bike in about 9 months (n+1 and all that).0
-
Presumably optimising your riding position, finding a seat that fits, getting the right tyre pressures, wearing the right clothing, etc are all things to get sorted before the material of the frame will make a perceivable difference.2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)0 -
Carbon fibre forks are usually considered to make a real difference to road buzz though. It's difficult to be to sure - very few of us will have blind tested the identical setup with same-geometry CF and aluminium forks. Most bikes above base level have CF forks anyway.
Overall wheels and tyres probably make far more difference to the ride than the frame material.0 -
-
Go for aluminium. That'll give you an excuse to buy a carbon bike in about 9 months (n+1 and all that).
Absolutely - and by the time you get a carbon bike your original bike will be worth more to you than you can sell it for - so you get to keep it as a spare.
I have 2 bikes of identical geometry - one Aluminum (cf forks) and the other Carbon Fibre - I'd like to say I prefer riding the CF because it's CF - but tbh I'm just as fast (or slow) on the Alu one - I just like the CF one better because it has better shifters and saddle on it ...0 -
My philosophy is always to start out on a cheap bike until you've sorted out your riding position and built up some conditioning so that you don't find out later after spending a lot of coin that your bike doesn't suit you not to mention beginners tend to have more tip overs and maintenance mistakes than experienced riders which can get expensive. Once you're ready to buy a better bike you can sell the old one (taking a 30% resale loss on a £500 bike is a lot less than on a £2,500 bike). You'll also appreciate a good quality bike much more than if it were your first one not having anything to compare it to.0
-
How well you get the bike to fit is a more important consideration than frame material.0
-
What do you mean by 'make a difference''?
They are different, so yes, it will make a difference.
What do you mean by 'beginner"?
How long do you plan to be a beginner? Do you plan to change your bike as soon as you are no longer a 'beginner'?
'Bragging rights'? Really?
Just because of the frame material? Nothing to do with quality, components or Brand??
Guessing the only reason you are asking this is because they cost more, right?
And there is your answer to what you should buy.
Want to spend less = aluminium
Happy to spend more =Carbon
Want bragging rights = Carbon + sad friends (to listen to sad brags)
It really is as simple as that for a beginner.
Don't listen to all this 'high end aluminium v low end carbon" BS
Just accept that carbon costs more, then choose the quality of the frame/components as a separate decision.
If you are looking for people to make you feel better about spending less on your first bike.........you have come to the right place.
My advice would be to get the best first bike you can, then get an even better second one.
Obviously don't go silly and get a Dogma, but equally don't dumb it down too much.0 -
Don't listen to all this 'high end aluminium v low end carbon" BS
I'd rather have a good bike, myself. A good frame made from aluminium is better than an unremarkable or bad one in carbon (or anything else for that matter).0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19700484#p19700484]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:Don't listen to all this 'high end aluminium v low end carbon" BS
I'd rather have a good bike, myself.
And that's exactly what I said if you read my post fully instead of quoting one small part.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19700484#p19700484]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:A good frame made from aluminium is better than an unremarkable or bad one in carbon (or anything else for that matter).
Again, read my post.
Why would you be considering a bad frame in any material?
If you want a good frame in aluminium, you would want a good frame in carbon wouldn't you?
A good frame in carbon is better than a good frame in aluminium lol.
If you don't think so, just buy an aluminium one.
When the 'high end aluminium/low end carbon' BS is rolled out, there is never much mention of what is high end aluminium or low end carbon anyway.
Its just a cr@p line haters have heard others say, and then repeat to sound knowledgeable and put people off carbon.
No one has asked the OP anything about himself or his intended aluminium purchase.
As to mentioning frame builders lol.
Do you think the OP is really going to go down that route from what you have read?0 -
My advice would be to get the best first bike you can, then get an even better second one.
Obviously don't go silly and get a Dogma, but equally don't dumb it down too much.
And yet, as a beginner (albeit one who had been riding for a while on a 1990 steel touring bike) I went out and splashed £3.5k on a Look as my first road bike and have not for one moment regretted it!
But whether or not that is a good approach depends on how much you really can afford and how much you know yourself and what you are or are not likely to regret with hindsight. I've yet to see a bike that I would prefer to own than my Look.Faster than a tent.......0 -
How well you get the bike to fit is a more important consideration than frame material.
Really confused why choosing a different frame material has anything to do with the bike fitting you lol
Yet another comment that sounds sensible initially/to the un initiated, but actually makes no sense at all.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19700484#p19700484]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:
A good frame in carbon is better than a good frame in aluminium lol.Don't listen to all this 'high end aluminium v low end carbon" BS
If you don't think so, just buy an aluminium one.
Just not true, they're materials and different ones are good for different applications.0 -
How well you get the bike to fit is a more important consideration than frame material.
Really confused why choosing a different frame material has anything to do with the bike fitting you lol
Yet another comment that sounds sensible initially/to the un initiated, but actually makes no sense at all.
Makes perfect sense just because it doesn't fit in with your paradigm carbon is good aluminium is bad doesn't mean its incorrect. A beginner is better off considering the fit of the bike rather than worry too much about the material its made from, especially around the £300 -£1300 limit beginners operate from. Just see Cranky cranks post. I have just seen your other posts on this thread and your tagline......... you not really worth replying to are you.0 -
How well you get the bike to fit is a more important consideration than frame material.
Really confused why choosing a different frame material has anything to do with the bike fitting you lol
Yet another comment that sounds sensible initially/to the un initiated, but actually makes no sense at all.
Makes perfect sense just because it doesn't fit in with your paradigm carbon is good aluminium is bad doesn't mean its incorrect. A beginner is better off considering the fit of the bike rather than worry too much about the material its made from, especially around the £300 -£1300 limit beginners operate from. Just see Cranky cranks post. I have just seen your other posts on this thread and your tagline......... you not really worth replying to are you.
Seems like you are getting a little bit confused lol
I have never said aluminium was bad for starters. I had aluminium bikes when they first came out. There were aluminium haters then, just like there are carbon haters now.
There are loads of nice aluminium bikes. a frame is only part of the bike anyway.
Still do not get how frame material has anything to do with fit.
Allez and Tarmac are the same geometry arnt they? Why would fit be any different?
Its only three contact points on whatever bike you get, so where is the fit discrepancy exactly?
Why would a newbie know which of two bikes (one aluminium and one carbon) fitted better anyhow???
Can you please explain exactly how the aluminium bike route will mean a better fit for someone, or even how looking at carbon options will mess up getting a good fit.
My tagline? What about stock wheels?
OK its a bit of a jibe at the haters, but at the end of the day its pretty much a fact that wheels are the Achilles heel of stock bikes.
I think it makes complete sense that stock wheels are poor by the way. Same as its better that chains and cassettes etc. are generally not groupset quality.
Keeps the cost down and you spec the ones you want when you upgrade/they wear out.
Loads of people put decent wheels straight on a new bike. Do you find that cranky then?
ZFG if you don't reply though
0 -
How well you get the bike to fit is a more important consideration than frame material.
Really confused why choosing a different frame material has anything to do with the bike fitting you lol
Yet another comment that sounds sensible initially/to the un initiated, but actually makes no sense at all.
Makes perfect sense just because it doesn't fit in with your paradigm carbon is good aluminium is bad doesn't mean its incorrect. A beginner is better off considering the fit of the bike rather than worry too much about the material its made from, especially around the £300 -£1300 limit beginners operate from. Just see Cranky cranks post. I have just seen your other posts on this thread and your tagline......... you not really worth replying to are you.
Seems like you are getting a little bit confused lol
I have never said aluminium was bad for starters. I had aluminium bikes when they first came out. There were aluminium haters then, just like there are carbon haters now.
There are loads of nice aluminium bikes. a frame is only part of the bike anyway.
Still do not get how frame material has anything to do with fit.
Allez and Tarmac are the same geometry arnt they? Why would fit be any different?
Its only three contact points on whatever bike you get, so where is the fit discrepancy exactly?
Why would a newbie know which of two bikes (one aluminium and one carbon) fitted better anyhow???
Can you please explain exactly how the aluminium bike route will mean a better fit for someone, or even how looking at carbon options will mess up getting a good fit.
My tagline? What about stock wheels?
OK its a bit of a jibe at the haters, but at the end of the day its pretty much a fact that wheels are the Achilles heel of stock bikes.
I think it makes complete sense that stock wheels are poor by the way. Same as its better that chains and cassettes etc. are generally not groupset quality.
Keeps the cost down and you spec the ones you want when you upgrade/they wear out.
Loads of people put decent wheels straight on a new bike. Do you find that cranky then?
ZFG if you don't reply though
Not very good at comprehension are you - I suggest you try harder in your english lessons at school next week.0 -
I first advice is... get the bike which looks the best. For someone starting out, riding a bike they love to get out the shed/spare room/bedroom is the most important thing.
I have an aluminium bike I truly love and a carbon bike which is "better" in almost every sense but doesn't have a personality in the same way.
Check out Paul's Cycles, some awesome Cannondales at entry prices. A SuperSIx Evo 6 would be all the bike most people need.0 -
I had aluminium bikes when they first came out.
Not sure which is funnier, this or that you thought he was referring to the stock wheels comment.0 -
[quote="
Not very good at comprehension are you - I suggest you try harder in your english lessons at school next week.
So no actual answers then? Is that the best response you can give lol.
What a TWIT (my spelling is not up to much either ) 0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19701222#p19701222]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:I had aluminium bikes when they first came out.
Not sure which is funnier, this or that you thought he was referring to the stock wheels comment.
Why is it funny to have had aluminium when it was new?
I did ask the question, but he is not that great at answers :roll:0 -
Aluminium has been used to make bikes since the early part of the 20th century...0
-
I am trying to think of something I hate as much as you guys hate carbon fibre bikes (apart from the forks no doubt).
I will get back to you just as soon as I do................0 -
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19701232#p19701232]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:Aluminium has been used to make bikes since the early part of the 20th century...
You really should try living in the real world sometime soon.
It was much nearer 1983 IMO.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19701232#p19701232]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:Aluminium has been used to make bikes since the early part of the 20th century...
You really should try living in the real world sometime soon.
It was much nearer 1983 IMO.
Nice example from 1934 here: http://classiccycleus.com/home/repair/bikes/0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19701249#p19701249]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19701232#p19701232]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:Aluminium has been used to make bikes since the early part of the 20th century...
You really should try living in the real world sometime soon.
It was much nearer 1983 IMO.
Nice example from 1934 here: http://classiccycleus.com/home/repair/bikes/
Mmmm nice link SM
I love cycling, so thats v interesting to me.
I wonder if haters existed then lol0 -
[quote="
Not very good at comprehension are you - I suggest you try harder in your english lessons at school next week.
So no actual answers then? Is that the best response you can give lol.
What a TWIT (my spelling is not up to much either )
Takes one to know one. Don't worry you'll get through puberty soon and discover girls. Best wishes on getting over your issues.0
