Well if you want aero tubes, light bikes, and stiff bikes, carbon is the material that is king. However, if you sacrifice weight, other materials are king, not carbon fibre. Steel is stronger than carbon in absolute terms for example. Better ride quality too, yet heavy as F***. Titanium might be better than steel for bikes, but is hard to work with and expensive. Metal can also be made aero usind 3d printing. Filippo Ghana's Hour record bike is not made using carbon, but was 3d printed because it allowed for faster production of the bike and weight does not matter on the track, no hills (duh). On a track time trial bike the weight mught actually help him go faster because the added weight might result in better conservation of speed. A heavier object is harder to slow down, so it keeps on maintaining speed better, bur is harder to accellerate. You only accellerate once in an hour record....
Shapable is important if you wanna optimize stiffness and weight. This is because you can put more material on certain areas that needs it (bb, forks etc...) and put less on areas that don't need as much (top tube). Then there's the aero aspect with cutouts for wheels or aerofoil tubing.
If you're a professional that needs to shave a second off their lap time, the average cyclists doesn't need it. Ego purchase for insecure people that know nothing about bikes. I want to be cool and have people like me and muh bike is 1% faster now...lmao
Some of the new Orbea metal frames look beautiful and sleek. Would be great if these aero inspired metal frames made a dent in the market and were more widely available.
Yeah, right. Beautiful and sleek is a weird way to challenge the performance, innit? Plus they’d have to be confident enough to equip the aluminium frames with better groupsets and finishing kit. Otherwise, the comparison is a bit skewed. That being said, I am mulling over the possibility of buying Orbea Terra H40 aluminium over carbon M30.
There are plenty of steel, aluminum, and titanium bikes available for build and sale. It all depends what you are into. Somedays I like steel, some days carbon, some days I like my old Klein (carbon and aluminum). Just because carbon is the material du jour doesn't mean it's the only material.
I have a road bike made of magnesium and it is absolutely the most comfortable bike I've ever been on in terms of how it absorbs the road and I don't notice that it lacks any performance compared to a carbon frame.
many carbon fiber bikes are rated up to 120 kg, there are some designed for lighter riders 100-110kg , particularly in the racing and lightweight categories. Titanium is incredibly strong while remaining lightweight, making it a good choice for heavier riders.
@@121mcvUK carbon could be made with a higher rating if manufacturers really wanted too imo. All it needs is more material on the key stress areas when doing a layup. The issue really is demand probably doesn't make it worthwhile else it'd be made to order and expensive. Titanium definitely is the more accessible material for heavier riders that has a good stiffness to weight ratio.
My question is how well are low end carbon fibre models .e.g. Specialized expert rather than S-Works made? Is the cheaper carbon layed up for its best use.
3D and hydroforming is an enhanchment for metal frames. And it will be more common, or is already. Still costly but not as much as big brands carbon frames.. The top tier carbon frames has flawes as well when they get lighter and lighter. A few airbubbles can be disaster o the road.... As for a crap welding it wont be fun either. More detectable on the other hand, a crack inside a carbon frame you need to scann. And more cost of course. A pro or aspiring pro will use carbon frame, sponsor picking up the bill ... Average cyclists, well we ride the bike we can afford. The industry are marketing hard and imposing new bikes, groupsets and wheelsets not leaving the choice to clients. Max profit is the key word. Well, i just dont care about shareholders when it comes to purchase my next bike 😂 Custom made and no big name is far more likeable for average joe. Spend the money on a bike fit, wheelset is the smartest investment!
Bubbles in the carbon fiber can be detected, the question is if these frames are made on a similar level as aerospace carbon fiber. While you have a good QC there (necessary for this business) it's not automatically reality on sports devices like bikes. Metal frames are typically produced on automated production lines, if it's set up correctly you get a consistent quality. Carbon fiber in bicycles is hand labor, where a lot depends on the individual worker.
I'm with you on how you've framed the market. Another thing to add is resell value. Watching that go from no concern to buyer to somewhat front of mind has been interesting. I've worked in the retail bike industry across decades and raced going from steel to carbon with some minor sponsor support for the carbon frame. I've gone back to steel intentionally knowing there's a decline in carbon quality and uncertainty in warranty support. Also not being around the business anymore. I've grown to dislike most the major brands for varying reasons. GCN is tight with carbon brands. Before Cycling Tips became Escape C. they loosely surveyed what other journalists rode - it was nearly all metal bikes. Some admitting frailties of carbon when traveling with bike.
Carbon fiber isn’t just extra stiff. If used properly it has an amazing ability to be stiff torsionally while providing vertical compliance. It’s possible to make an extremely stiff bike out of aluminum, but it would be extremely jarring over the smallest bumps in the road.
If it strong enough to keep Formula one drivers alive it should be strong enough to survive most stressors of Road racing and be light enough to go fast.
For a rider weighing 110+ kg, the best value often lies in aluminum endurance bikes or entry-level titanium bikes. They strike a balance between affordability, durability, and performance. Upgrade wheels and tires as needed for additional strength and comfort. If budget allows, a mid-range titanium bike offers the best combination of durability, weight capacity, and comfort.
For what I heard titanium if isn't a proper alloy is worst than aluminium or steel. Is not worth ever using it unless you spend on a proper frame. Again is what I heard from different sources, I personally don't know about it. Either way I can guaranty carbon fiber is the worst of all materials and is 100% fake marketing
@@nemureI think there are not many manufacturers offering Titanium at all. Steel was mainstream in the past, Aluminium has become mainstream from the 90s on. Mainstream means automation and inexpensive, mass produced frames. Titanium has never been mass produced, when you buy such a frame it's hand crafted and only a few do that.
@@simonm1447 you're right but that doesn't strike with what I said. There are cheap titanium frames for under 1k and others cost over 5k due to purity and alloys. I can't say if the cheap are actually worst than aluminium like I heard but I wouldn't be surprised if is true.
The difference between carbon steel aluminum and titanium is the complexity needed to shape them internally... Carbon can add and reduce material in key areas... If manufacturers could find a cost effective way to do the same with metal they could duplicate the weight across the board... The cost of carbon fiber sheets are dirt cheap when bought in the amounts major manufacturers tend to purchase... Heck they're already very cheap on Amazon and cheaper on other Asian sites.... As far as development of shapes... Most are copies of copies of copies,... The mold can be 3D printed with slight alterations to look different which is what we're seeing as it's always been... The price of the cheapest motorcycle transmission or brakes or engines require much more expensive development technical engineering and parts than the most expensive bike made.... Essentially you have brakes wheels frame and handlebars... Didn't get me started on why bike tires are so expressive... Less material... Doesn't need anywhere near as much development or testing but cost as much as my Goodyear tires that last 80 thousand miles and before someone talks about their lightness... They're not carrying thousands of pounds... As far as the aero equation it does very very very little... What's gained in direct wind or a head wind does not make up for the drag produced in a sidewind... Just watch the peloton try to close the gap in a crosswind and how sometimes a single rider or a few riders manage to catch up and sometimes pass riders with even a heading... Anyway, the best rider wins in the end...
A lighter bike handles different and accelerates better as well. And stiffness is absolutely not the same across all frame materials. Not even the same across the same materials.
If a manufacturer makes an aluminum bike with a monocoque frame, aerodynamic tubes, fully internal cable routing, and storage in the down tube, they sell millions of them. Carbon fiber bikes are simply beautiful compared to other bikes, including titanium ones.
Cervelo made very fast aluminum aero and TT frames about 20 years ago, as did Specialized. These could be made today and be more affordable than carbon frames while still being fast enough for 98% of the riders on the road. Unfortunately, most big bike brands treat aluminum as entry level today.
Ok, so what's the maximum allowable diameter-to-thickness ratio of a tube or section in CFRP? Lateral stiffness matters too... If you wrote up the stiffness & fatigue life targets accurately for a bike, you'll find that aluminum will get a lot closer than this composites engineer would want!
Bamboo is one of the strongest tube materials you could find. Large diameter tubes, and they are less fragile due to the strengthening after every growth section. Replicating that in something like carbon fiber would be revolutionary. The problem with bamboo is that bamboo doesn't allow for arbitrary wall diameter and wall thickness 😅. And the lugged+glue frame design is also adding some weight for bamboo.
@@Halliday55How much was the bamboo. I’ve have respected Craig Calfee since the mid 1990s and almost pulled the trigger on a Tetra carbon frame back then but chose instead a Colnago Master. My brother bought a Tetra and says he will NEVER choose some Asian mass produced carbon.
People who have been riding for several decades, once they reach an age where they have grey hair, and aren't racing, they tend to ride Titanium, if they have the money. If not, then lugged steel. For me, new carbon is nice for racing, but too stiff and highly overrated for daily commuting. I have a old (90's) Look carbon bike that feels good, but I don't use it everyday. Thanks.
And the parrot speaks. Need to know they speak for the major brands. Have they ever said disc brakes suck or bike manufacturers still cant figure out how to make bottom bracket holes perfectly round , in tolerance, and concentric to each other.
@@LeeLee-fi7mx I am currently doing a PhD in chemistry, so I am familiar with Graphene. I just don't see how it would make any sense to use for structural applications.
@@LeeLee-fi7mx I am currently doing a PhD in chemistry (though on a different topic) , so I am somewhat familiar with Graphene. I don't see how it would currently make any sense to use for structural applications.
What is this high performance that I keep hearing about? For the average cyclcist it doesn’t make much difference if they are riding steel or carbon fibre. Average cyclist is almost never going to compete, so all the grams and watts are not gonna matter all that much.
Yes. However, bike companies are still producing aluminium frames for their lower end models. I rode aluminium all my life, but just got a carbon (intermediate level) and I'm delighted. It feels way better... all depends if you have money to buy. Nobody is obliged to buy carbon. You can even build a high-end aluminium one... I get your point though... In most cases, people just buy expensive high-end bikes to show up to others, which is really stupid btw...
If your a racer, that's great. But carbon fiber is fragile. If you're a regular Joe who keeps their bikes in the garage where they could get a little scratched then carbon fiber is not for you. When I worked on a bike shop in the US, guys would come in wanting to shave a few ounces of their bike weight. It was all I could do to keep my mouth shut. I wanted to tell them how much cheaper it would be to lose a few ounces off their body than their bike.
It's not fragile. I have lots of carbon bikes 10-20 years old which have been banged around and in some cases crashed severely and they are riding just fine. By contrast I've written off a steel frame in a very minor fender bender, wouldn't be economical to repair. I've had an aluminium frame crack from fatigue failure. Incidentally, carbon is also repairable, and is actually much easier to repair than a metal frame.
Especially those carbon forks and steerers. I just don't understand why so many metal bikes come with carbon fork+steerer. I would much rather want a carbon frame with a steel fork than the other way round. Also people forget that carbon frames/forks aren't necessary to achieve a light total weight. Component choices are far more relevant than choosing the most lightweight frame. And there isn't much logic in making the frame excessively stiff and then adding softer and bigger tires to make the bike ridable and efficient again.
@@imrevadasz1086 I have never destroyed a carbon fork. There's tons of logic in having a stiff bike and then having big tires. A stiff structure/chassis enables optimal handling characteristics. Not to mention carbon is anisotropic
If it's made correctly it offers advantages for pros aluminium bikes can't offer. However the question is if a non pro rider really needs this material. A normal rider may not benefit as much, and may be better suited with an aluminium bike.
I think bike industry has to explore other options as hard plastic polymers, glass fibers, etc. For example, a good and hard plastic polymer can be really lightweight, stiff and really really strong, without even counting that is by far the most easy to produce and also even 3D print
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm glad he discussed "shapeable", because that's for sure the most important
Well if you want aero tubes, light bikes, and stiff bikes, carbon is the material that is king.
However, if you sacrifice weight, other materials are king, not carbon fibre. Steel is stronger than carbon in absolute terms for example. Better ride quality too, yet heavy as F***. Titanium might be better than steel for bikes, but is hard to work with and expensive.
Metal can also be made aero usind 3d printing. Filippo Ghana's Hour record bike is not made using carbon, but was 3d printed because it allowed for faster production of the bike and weight does not matter on the track, no hills (duh). On a track time trial bike the weight mught actually help him go faster because the added weight might result in better conservation of speed. A heavier object is harder to slow down, so it keeps on maintaining speed better, bur is harder to accellerate. You only accellerate once in an hour record....
Shapable is important if you wanna optimize stiffness and weight. This is because you can put more material on certain areas that needs it (bb, forks etc...) and put less on areas that don't need as much (top tube). Then there's the aero aspect with cutouts for wheels or aerofoil tubing.
If you're a professional that needs to shave a second off their lap time, the average cyclists doesn't need it. Ego purchase for insecure people that know nothing about bikes.
I want to be cool and have people like me and muh bike is 1% faster now...lmao
@@joneinarmattiasvisser6113 4130 chromoly steel is far superior than carbon fiber in all aspects.
@@mericanignoranc3551 Exactly. High performance? Most ppl do not need high performance anything. It's artificial n created "demand" for most ppl.
Magnesium. Been used on high performance car wheels for decades and suspension fork stanchions.
Some of the new Orbea metal frames look beautiful and sleek.
Would be great if these aero inspired metal frames made a dent in the market and were more widely available.
Yeah, right. Beautiful and sleek is a weird way to challenge the performance, innit? Plus they’d have to be confident enough to equip the aluminium frames with better groupsets and finishing kit. Otherwise, the comparison is a bit skewed. That being said, I am mulling over the possibility of buying Orbea Terra H40 aluminium over carbon M30.
There are plenty of steel, aluminum, and titanium bikes available for build and sale. It all depends what you are into. Somedays I like steel, some days carbon, some days I like my old Klein (carbon and aluminum). Just because carbon is the material du jour doesn't mean it's the only material.
I have a road bike made of magnesium and it is absolutely the most comfortable bike I've ever been on in terms of how it absorbs the road and I don't notice that it lacks any performance compared to a carbon frame.
It lacks significant stiffness
Does it explode when it rains? 😂
@sidskofa oh! That must be why it's 2 lb lighter than it was new 20 years ago.
Vibration damping of carbon is superior to all other materials
Great Information Brother 😎
How about bamboo?
Or plastic
Aluminium is better than bamboo
@@shoregamesdxbCarbon framea are technically plastic
Sam pilgrim explained this one😂
I don't believe it,listen carefully to the question
many carbon fiber bikes are rated up to 120 kg, there are some designed for lighter riders 100-110kg , particularly in the racing and lightweight categories. Titanium is incredibly strong while remaining lightweight, making it a good choice for heavier riders.
@@121mcvUK carbon could be made with a higher rating if manufacturers really wanted too imo. All it needs is more material on the key stress areas when doing a layup. The issue really is demand probably doesn't make it worthwhile else it'd be made to order and expensive. Titanium definitely is the more accessible material for heavier riders that has a good stiffness to weight ratio.
105kg here, just got my new TI frame! Can’t wait to build it up, get it dirty, and put it away wet!!
They need to start using vibraniab instead, it'll absorb all shock meaning theres no need for suspension
3D printed frame is next
My question is how well are low end carbon fibre models .e.g. Specialized expert rather than S-Works made? Is the cheaper carbon layed up for its best use.
No difference
3D and hydroforming is an enhanchment for metal frames. And it will be more common, or is already. Still costly but not as much as big brands carbon frames.. The top tier carbon frames has flawes as well when they get lighter and lighter. A few airbubbles can be disaster o the road.... As for a crap welding it wont be fun either. More detectable on the other hand, a crack inside a carbon frame you need to scann. And more cost of course.
A pro or aspiring pro will use carbon frame, sponsor picking up the bill ...
Average cyclists, well we ride the bike we can afford. The industry are marketing hard and imposing new bikes, groupsets and wheelsets not leaving the choice to clients. Max profit is the key word.
Well, i just dont care about shareholders when it comes to purchase my next bike 😂
Custom made and no big name is far more likeable for average joe. Spend the money on a bike fit, wheelset is the smartest investment!
My Thoughts exactly!! 👌🙏 I couldn't write it better 👌
Bubbles in the carbon fiber can be detected, the question is if these frames are made on a similar level as aerospace carbon fiber. While you have a good QC there (necessary for this business) it's not automatically reality on sports devices like bikes.
Metal frames are typically produced on automated production lines, if it's set up correctly you get a consistent quality. Carbon fiber in bicycles is hand labor, where a lot depends on the individual worker.
I'm with you on how you've framed the market. Another thing to add is resell value. Watching that go from no concern to buyer to somewhat front of mind has been interesting.
I've worked in the retail bike industry across decades and raced going from steel to carbon with some minor sponsor support for the carbon frame. I've gone back to steel intentionally knowing there's a decline in carbon quality and uncertainty in warranty support. Also not being around the business anymore.
I've grown to dislike most the major brands for varying reasons.
GCN is tight with carbon brands.
Before Cycling Tips became Escape C. they loosely surveyed what other journalists rode - it was nearly all metal bikes. Some admitting frailties of carbon when traveling with bike.
Carbon fiber isn’t just extra stiff. If used properly it has an amazing ability to be stiff torsionally while providing vertical compliance. It’s possible to make an extremely stiff bike out of aluminum, but it would be extremely jarring over the smallest bumps in the road.
If it strong enough to keep Formula one drivers alive it should be strong enough to survive most stressors of Road racing and be light enough to go fast.
What about hemp?
For a rider weighing 110+ kg, the best value often lies in aluminum endurance bikes or entry-level titanium bikes. They strike a balance between affordability, durability, and performance. Upgrade wheels and tires as needed for additional strength and comfort. If budget allows, a mid-range titanium bike offers the best combination of durability, weight capacity, and comfort.
For what I heard titanium if isn't a proper alloy is worst than aluminium or steel.
Is not worth ever using it unless you spend on a proper frame.
Again is what I heard from different sources, I personally don't know about it.
Either way I can guaranty carbon fiber is the worst of all materials and is 100% fake marketing
@@nemureI think there are not many manufacturers offering Titanium at all. Steel was mainstream in the past, Aluminium has become mainstream from the 90s on. Mainstream means automation and inexpensive, mass produced frames.
Titanium has never been mass produced, when you buy such a frame it's hand crafted and only a few do that.
@@simonm1447 you're right but that doesn't strike with what I said.
There are cheap titanium frames for under 1k and others cost over 5k due to purity and alloys.
I can't say if the cheap are actually worst than aluminium like I heard but I wouldn't be surprised if is true.
The difference between carbon steel aluminum and titanium is the complexity needed to shape them internally... Carbon can add and reduce material in key areas... If manufacturers could find a cost effective way to do the same with metal they could duplicate the weight across the board... The cost of carbon fiber sheets are dirt cheap when bought in the amounts major manufacturers tend to purchase... Heck they're already very cheap on Amazon and cheaper on other Asian sites.... As far as development of shapes... Most are copies of copies of copies,... The mold can be 3D printed with slight alterations to look different which is what we're seeing as it's always been... The price of the cheapest motorcycle transmission or brakes or engines require much more expensive development technical engineering and parts than the most expensive bike made.... Essentially you have brakes wheels frame and handlebars... Didn't get me started on why bike tires are so expressive... Less material... Doesn't need anywhere near as much development or testing but cost as much as my Goodyear tires that last 80 thousand miles and before someone talks about their lightness... They're not carrying thousands of pounds... As far as the aero equation it does very very very little... What's gained in direct wind or a head wind does not make up for the drag produced in a sidewind... Just watch the peloton try to close the gap in a crosswind and how sometimes a single rider or a few riders manage to catch up and sometimes pass riders with even a heading... Anyway, the best rider wins in the end...
Alloy is good if you don't look after your bike so much like myself 😂
Weight doesn't matter unless climbing allot. Stiffness is about the same through all frame materials
Everything matters on the highest level
A lighter bike handles different and accelerates better as well. And stiffness is absolutely not the same across all frame materials. Not even the same across the same materials.
Exactly, it's tube profile that determines stiffness more.
Still the amount of carbon used is same in terms of stiffness to a high end titanium steel or aluminum. It's all about shape now
Bikes don't have to be that stiff, all bullshit
@joegrach7659 that's what I'm saying. Carbon is all about the shapes now
If a manufacturer makes an aluminum bike with a monocoque frame, aerodynamic tubes, fully internal cable routing, and storage in the down tube, they sell millions of them. Carbon fiber bikes are simply beautiful compared to other bikes, including titanium ones.
Cervelo made very fast aluminum aero and TT frames about 20 years ago, as did Specialized. These could be made today and be more affordable than carbon frames while still being fast enough for 98% of the riders on the road. Unfortunately, most big bike brands treat aluminum as entry level today.
Ok, so what's the maximum allowable diameter-to-thickness ratio of a tube or section in CFRP? Lateral stiffness matters too...
If you wrote up the stiffness & fatigue life targets accurately for a bike, you'll find that aluminum will get a lot closer than this composites engineer would want!
Flax fiber
Well, let's figure out how to reclaim the stuff because the failure rate at factory is quite high...
Bamboo is one of the strongest tube materials you could find. Large diameter tubes, and they are less fragile due to the strengthening after every growth section. Replicating that in something like carbon fiber would be revolutionary. The problem with bamboo is that bamboo doesn't allow for arbitrary wall diameter and wall thickness 😅. And the lugged+glue frame design is also adding some weight for bamboo.
Bamboo is unique. I have a Calfee bamboo that I will never sell. It's a little heavy but nothing rides like bamboo.
but is bamboo stiff enough for my 800w sprints tho
@@Halliday55How much was the bamboo. I’ve have respected Craig Calfee since the mid 1990s and almost pulled the trigger on a Tetra carbon frame back then but chose instead a Colnago Master. My brother bought a Tetra and says he will NEVER choose some Asian mass produced carbon.
People who have been riding for several decades, once they reach an age where they have grey hair, and aren't racing, they tend to ride Titanium, if they have the money. If not, then lugged steel. For me, new carbon is nice for racing, but too stiff and highly overrated for daily commuting. I have a old (90's) Look carbon bike that feels good, but I don't use it everyday. Thanks.
I use my carbon bikes and my Al bikes every day.
And the parrot speaks. Need to know they speak for the major brands. Have they ever said disc brakes suck or bike manufacturers still cant figure out how to make bottom bracket holes perfectly round , in tolerance, and concentric to each other.
Here's the plot twist - disc brakes don't suck
I'm thinking of getting aluminum Specialized Ellez Sprint, does that have a good stiffness to weight ratio?
Get a Cannondale CAAD 10
No 1 is talking about Graphene anymore. Why
Graphene has other good aplications, but not as fibers on frames. You can see graphene on tires
What does Graphene have to do with this?
@Paksusuoli95 Duh, the discussion is about bike frame materials, and graphene has been used in some bike frames 🤦♂️
@@LeeLee-fi7mx I am currently doing a PhD in chemistry, so I am familiar with Graphene. I just don't see how it would make any sense to use for structural applications.
@@LeeLee-fi7mx I am currently doing a PhD in chemistry (though on a different topic) , so I am somewhat familiar with Graphene. I don't see how it would currently make any sense to use for structural applications.
Carbon fiber is the disposable camera of the bike world.
What is this high performance that I keep hearing about? For the average cyclcist it doesn’t make much difference if they are riding steel or carbon fibre. Average cyclist is almost never going to compete, so all the grams and watts are not gonna matter all that much.
Yes. However, bike companies are still producing aluminium frames for their lower end models. I rode aluminium all my life, but just got a carbon (intermediate level) and I'm delighted. It feels way better... all depends if you have money to buy. Nobody is obliged to buy carbon. You can even build a high-end aluminium one...
I get your point though...
In most cases, people just buy expensive high-end bikes to show up to others, which is really stupid btw...
The materials is made for different uses. Carbon isnt always the best
Your all wrong, you can't beat a good old iron made bike
My steel Colnago Master still hanging on my local group rides. Off the back but still.
If your a racer, that's great. But carbon fiber is fragile. If you're a regular Joe who keeps their bikes in the garage where they could get a little scratched then carbon fiber is not for you. When I worked on a bike shop in the US, guys would come in wanting to shave a few ounces of their bike weight. It was all I could do to keep my mouth shut. I wanted to tell them how much cheaper it would be to lose a few ounces off their body than their bike.
It's not fragile. I have lots of carbon bikes 10-20 years old which have been banged around and in some cases crashed severely and they are riding just fine. By contrast I've written off a steel frame in a very minor fender bender, wouldn't be economical to repair. I've had an aluminium frame crack from fatigue failure. Incidentally, carbon is also repairable, and is actually much easier to repair than a metal frame.
@@blorg8206much easier but also degrading its structural properties, maybe
Especially those carbon forks and steerers. I just don't understand why so many metal bikes come with carbon fork+steerer. I would much rather want a carbon frame with a steel fork than the other way round.
Also people forget that carbon frames/forks aren't necessary to achieve a light total weight. Component choices are far more relevant than choosing the most lightweight frame. And there isn't much logic in making the frame excessively stiff and then adding softer and bigger tires to make the bike ridable and efficient again.
@@imrevadasz1086 I have never destroyed a carbon fork. There's tons of logic in having a stiff bike and then having big tires. A stiff structure/chassis enables optimal handling characteristics. Not to mention carbon is anisotropic
This is how bike manufacturers push up there prices! So of course they will say carbon is the better material!! It's all a scam.
For sure Carbon isn’t ’good value’ compared to the others …. Not forgetting the others should last a lifetime, and are more robust
If it's made correctly it offers advantages for pros aluminium bikes can't offer.
However the question is if a non pro rider really needs this material. A normal rider may not benefit as much, and may be better suited with an aluminium bike.
I think bike industry has to explore other options as hard plastic polymers, glass fibers, etc. For example, a good and hard plastic polymer can be really lightweight, stiff and really really strong, without even counting that is by far the most easy to produce and also even 3D print
3D printed metal frames will blow carbon frames away.
High-quality steel can't be beat.
what you mean, steel is heavier than aluminum
Other than CF, probably correct.
Magnesium