Is a carbon frame really worth it?

Question

I can get an 8kg aluminium frame with carbon forks for a much better price, with ultegra components - but people swear by the carbon frame - is it really worth it?

Answer 1

Carbon is much more comfortable.  Having just a carbon fork is nicer than no carbon.  Not all carbon bikes are equal.  There are nice carbon bikes and carbon bikes that are not better than aluminum. I have both and the bike I ride more is the aluminum bike with the carbon fork, carbon stem, XTR crank,  King headset, and handlebars.  These additions cost more than a most carbon frames.  

Let the bike fit the purpose.  If you plan to do more than 100 a week then you might want some additional comfort.  If you only commute to work and back then a carbon fork is fine.  I found it better to get the fork and then add compnents you like.  I would take a good aluminum frame over a cheap carbon frame any day of the week.  P.S. I like the Trek 7.5 for commuting.  

Answer 2

I agree with Phoster and ARM.  For a road bike, I think that carbon is definitely worth it as long as you don't mind the extra cost.  For a mountain bike, however, I'm all about any other frame material instead of carbon (been through two of them and they're not suited for my type of trail riding).  If you shop around you might find some really good buys on '08 or possibly even leftover '07 closeouts.   A couple years ago I got a full carbon, full Ultegra/DA Cannondale Synapse for $2600 on season closeout (normal price on that bike was $3400).   Ask the shops to check their hotlists for deals that may not be readily made public to shoppers.  

Absolutely test ride several bikes if at all possible.  I was pretty sold on another bike after trying several....until I rode the Synapse.  There is a huge difference in the road feel.  I don't know if anyone is still putting out aluminum frames with carbon seatstays, but don't waste your time (or "upgrade" costs) on those frames if you find one.  Full aluminum can be rather harsh, but a carbon fork will tame it slightly, especially one with a bit of rake to it.  If you ride a full carbon frame you'll see how vastly different it is....pretty nice.  

Hope this helps....have fun shopping and enjoy the new ride!   :o)

Answer 3

Phoster's is the best answer so far.  I have multiple road bikes, have been riding for decades, and owned one of Gary Klein's first aluminum frames.

Carbon is nice (my daily ride) but not necessary, especially if you are young and on a budget.  Aluminum frames transmit more road shock to your body.  It's not something you would notice riding around the block, but can add up to fatigue after a long ride.  By long I mean more than 60 miles -- more than 4 hours.

Take a look at Sheldon Brown's excellent article on frame materials linked below.

My rule of thumb is that if you are under 40 years of age buy an aluminum frame.  Over 40, go with titanium or carbon.  I own all 3 and my high-end carbon frames are the most comfortable on long rides.

One last word.  I don't like the mixed material frames, like an aluminum frame with carbon seat or chain stays.  Plenty of good frames are made this way but any advantage of this design is outweighed by the risks of failure inherent in joining dissimilar materials at stress points.

The bike your actually ride is the best one, no matter what the frame material.  Too many of them languish in basements and garages.

Answer 4

Road bike? I've ridden both & like the carbon more. The aluminum was more comfortable, but noticeably soft & giving when I went all out. The carbon frame was tighter, felt right & didn't give as much, but a little harsher on rough surfaces.  But these bikes were about the same price. Specialized (carbon) vs Trek.

Answer 5

actually carbon is more comfortable than aluminum n most cases. i had a fuji alu that was made for racers, hard on my body then switched to a tcr giant and love it

bikingthings

Answer 6

I've always heard carbon is very likely to abruptly crack if dinged or hit hard enough. I wouldn't buy a used carbon frame or fork without having a professional tech from a reputable bike shop inspect it first. I've also heard (from pro racers), that the benefits are not worth the expense.

Answer 7

If it is all day comfort you are after, I would totally choose the full carbon bike if money is no factor.  There are many good Alu frames out there with shock absorbing inserts or carbon fork and seatstays.  That said, I much prefer my full carbon ride to my alloy one.  My non-carbon frame is the bike I use as a commuter, and to hook up the burley and pull the kids around.  It is a Felt road bike and I do like it.  If my wife or my work would allow me the time away, I'd hop on my Bianchi 928 and ride the roads of America for months, stopping only to eat, grab a posh hotel, or visit the occasional strip club.  My advice, go to your local bike shop, get fit properly, and buy the nicest rig you can afford.  The more you love your bike, the more you will ride it.  Don't skimp on your component group choice, but remember that weight savings have the most impact at the points of inertia. i.e. pedals, wheels, crankset, you know, stuff that moves.  Happy Pedaling!!!

Answer 8

I'm not a cyclist, I do however do a fair bit of sailing where carbon fibre is often touted as 'the' material', so make what you will of the following.

Carbon is lighter than alloys or metals generally strength for strength, so a carbon component should be lighter than its metal equivalent. Carbon components can be made in a more engineered form (ie more material where required, complex curved shapes can be easier and cheaper than machined metal components.

all of which should lead to a lighter overall bike.

however that comes at a cost, often Carbon is horrendously expensive compared to a metal alternative. appropriate use can make huge benefits.... on a sailing boat that benefit can be in the hundreds of Kilos. whether it makes enough of a difference to a bike, at the level you cycle at (or aspire to) is a different argument. is shaving a few hundred of grams worth that much to you. can you make advantage of that weight saving.

I think that like many (male) dominated sports there are a large amount of ill informed gadget comments (this exists, therefore it must better), this is lighter it must be better, this is newer it must be better, brand X is used by team Y, therefore they must better. Many sports people (especailly at amateur level go down the route of I'm not doing as well as I expected.. it must be my shoes, bike, sails, whatever... whereas often the problem is the person themselves

What matters is can you get a performance benefit from using a Carbon frame?

Are there other things that you could do with the cash (either not spend it, get another more significant benefit from spending the same money elsewhere. who knows it mayy be that a carbon frame will make more sense in a few years time.

Answer 9

unless you are a professioal rider or paticularly weak , the weight diference/advantage a carbon frame gives you is not balanced by the extra exhorbitant cost

Answer 10

If your’e looking for the best compromise between comfort, performance, and cost then a good quality steel frame is unbeatable. If you have a big budget then a Ti frame is even better.

Answer 11

Think about longevity too. A quality steel or titanium frame can last forever if properly cared for. There is growing evidence that aluminum has a very specific life (Howard Zinn at Velonews feels this way). Carbon is still relatively new and no one is really sure how long it will last.

As far as what bike is best? Pick the one that's best for you. I wouldn't trade my fancy carbon race bike for anything. It's fantastically stiff, accelerates like a rocket, and corners like its on rails. Basically, it's a way better bike than I am a rider and it does anything I ask of it. For comfort, I could probably do better but I ride with a bunch of hammerheads who attack constantly and a more comfortable bike would leave me behind. I know it's not about the bike, but every little bit helps.

Answer 12

Have ridden both and I can hardly tell the difference.

I bought a trek 1400 with aluminium frame ( carbon forks ) and can comfortably ride it for 120 miles ( 6 - 7 hours ) non stop.

Go to a good bike shop and see if they will let you test ride both.

Edit: as for carbon breaking I would not be concerned. A freind has a carbon frame hardtail mountain bike and you should see the abuse it takes !

Answer 13

as i considered various bikes, someone told me that if you can't afford a good carbon to go with an aluminum and you would be further ahead.

the problem with carbons is that they range a lot.  an inexpensive frame is often flexible and whippy.  it does ride good, as flexible frames usually do, but they dont transfer power as well as they should and they have no life to them.  they are a dead frame.  anyone who remembers the alans and guercitti's will know this.

every material has its strengths and weaknesses.  steel rides nearly as well as carbon, but it corodes and fatigues over time.  i am concerned that as carbons are made of layers of cloth and resin a lot like plywood that over time oxidation and use will weaken them.

i would say if you are replacing your bike every 5 or so years no problem, but i kept my last bike 25years.  aluminum only oxidises so far and doesnt lose much strength with use.  if ride is a major issue for you, as in you feel beat up it might be worth looking into.  for me, i ride a large bike (60cm)  frames that large tend to ride well no matter the material.  I chose a Bianchi Nirone, an aluminum/carbon mix, and i have to say Binachi builds one heck of a bike.

i would suggest if you go carbon, go with a good brand, not some mail order or off brand.  

Answer 14

I have a whole plethora of cycles. I have three road bikes that are similar.

One is a reynolds steel frame, one is an aluminium frame from an excellent designer and one is a carbon fibre framed machine that came from a well known manufacturer and cost a lot of money.

The steel frame is beautiful and comfortable and will stand all sort of abuse but is comparatively heavy. (steel forks, brooks saddle).

The aluminium one is beautifully designed and built and uses carbon forks. I have also fitted a carbon seat post. The machine is light, bright and climbs wonderfully, but after about 4 hours the constant hum from the road becomes a pain in the bum??????

The carbon fibre framed bike has carbon everything and is quite light, however, when I ride it, I feel totally remote from the bike. It's not a sensation I enjoy.

So, you pays your money and takes your choice.

Personally I prefer the Aluminium frame with the carbon add ons, but I usually ride the steel frame as I totally enjoy it.

Nobody really cares what bike you use unless they know a lot about bikes - and most people don't - so save your money unless you have enough money to spend and not regret spending it?

Let's face it, most people will tell you that their bike (or frame) is better than the one that you are riding and will explain why at great length.

Answer 15

Carbon can be less jarring.  However, It is designed for race use.  The downside of it is that, if you get a ding, you are looking at a new frame.

However, if you want a great ride quality, I would go for Titanium.  This has the same frame rigidity of steel, but is lighter than aluminium.

However, if all you want is comfort, you might try a full susser.  Shock seat posts are another answer, although the downside to this is that they can give an eliptical arc when peddling.

You might also consider fatter tyres, perhaps on a lower pressure, or even changing your saddle.

Most of these ideas will probably be cheaper and more suitable for you than a trick carbon frame (Other than Ti, which is more expensive but worth it).

Luck