Comments on: Carbon 29″ers: “Black Magic” Or “Sliced Bread”?

By: SinnerSpinner

SinnerSpinner — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:08:20 +0000

The CAAD9 was an interesting example to throw out there…? Probably the most refined aluminum frame in production to date. A true “carbon killer”, and not inexpensive to produce. Your main point is understood however, and anyone who doesn’t see carbon mtb frames becoming both stronger and cheaper in the future should be in for a pleasant surprise.

By: yourdaguy

yourdaguy — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:27:03 +0000

Jdog; I also own a CAAD9 and it is my favorite overall bike. It is 99% as stiff as the TCR Aluxx and way more comfortable to ride long. You buddy might be interested to know that I also own the only CAAD9 Ironman ever made. Apparently they made one as a marketing example to decide if they were going to make them and then decided not to make them. They painted it yellow over the original Red and put the made in USA decals on and a company executive sold it on Ebay through an Ebay store.

By: DP

DP — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:12:16 +0000

I find it interesting that over 10 years ago you could buy a carbon framed bike for under $2000 (Trek Y-11) but now I don’t think you can touch one for less than $4000.

By: EJ

EJ — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:11:52 +0000

I keep hearing that carbon bikes are stiffer, but is that true? Several years ago, Velonews compared the stiffness of several carbon road bikes (such as the Cervelo R3 and the Scott CR1). The stiffest bike by far was the control–an aluminum Cannondale Caad7.

I ride road almost exclusively. In the past two years I’ve ridden a Ridley Excalibur and a Giant TCR Advanced (2009). Both are stiff bikes, but not as stiff as the aluminum Cannondale I used to ride. It seems to me that the biggest advantages to carbon are weight (carbon frames keep getting lighter, while aluminum frames seem to have reached the limit) and ride quality (carbon bikes can be stiff while retaining some degree of compliance). But in terms of absolute stiffness, aluminum seems to be as good as anything out there (consider that Dura Ace and Hollowgram cranks. both of which are extremely stiff, are aluminum).

Can anyone offer any insight based on something other than their opinion?

As for the durability of carbon, I have a hard time trusting the material on the road and can’t imagine riding a carbon MTB. That said, I’m a racer, and my road bikes have been ridden hard and crashed even harder, and they’ve held up fine. I suspect our collective fear of carbon failure is mostly irrational.

By: Lee T

Lee T — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:06:27 +0000

@GT – excellent analysis – a unique combination of understanding of designing,riding and marketing bikes. As you say, carbon fiber is so tunable.

@ Aguy – at my age ( I’m a grandfather) I am not expecting a new career as a pro XC racer, especially at my (40 pounds less than before mountain bikes 3 years back) 210 pounds. Maybe, then, I am a poser, but I can’t get past the acceleration my Flys give me, or the way I can do more Hurkey Creek laps faster, or the unique, compliant ride they give. They don’t jar like my aluminum HTs, but they are not springy like the one steel frame I used (still want a Fargo, though). You are right on the collisions with rocks – I use helicopter tape to cut the risk without being heavy, but beyond that I would rather do a crash replacement than give up the carbon benefits. Besides, the only bikes I’ve ever broken are aluminum.

In short, I’m saving for the SF 100.

Disclaimer – I work in aerospace, in composites manufacture. I have seen the failures and the successes, and the story of both is still being written in my trade too.