MAMIL goes full-carbon

[Jon George]

After a convoluted set of circumstances that led to me riding a Norcross Blue cyclocross frame, initially with bar-ends, and finally drops, I have just bought a Orbea Ocra 105. After a short, twenty mile smash up this afternoon, I am insanely happy with it. I may be easily pleased, but at 54 you have to take your pleasures where you find them ...

 

[Globalti]

Carbon is the future; it has developed way beyond what metals could ever achieve and will continue to develop. See my post on the bikes and kit forum on the subject of carbon frame development.

 

[fossala]

...it has developed way beyond what metals could ever achieve ...

If you only have a small criteria of going faster with less effort. Any other sort of riding, metal still wins out.

 

[Globalti]

How so?

 

[fossala]

Can be fixed, can take bumps better, can be loaded as it isn't only made to be strong in certain directions. Doesn't cost a small fortune. Don't have to use far east cheap labour.

 

[mattobrien]

Congrats Jon, I look forward to seeing your new stead.

We should arrange a Carbon ride and invite along Mr @Andrew_Culture so it will speed up his move to a plastic bike, with him seeing how fast, with how little effort, we are able to go, compared to him ;-)

 

[Venod]

I always rode Steel, starting on the basic then 531, I thought aluminium would be too harsh & not as durable (I was wrong) I now have 3 Aluminium bikes 2 MTB, 1 cyclocross/.road, I thought carbon is not for me too easily damaged & only for those who have their frames bought for them, ( I was wrong ) I have had 1 carbon bike, very light very fast & responsive & very strong, the only thing I didn't like was the massive head tube but its like that to give it strength. I have had 2 titanium & am in the process of building another, 1 Airbourne Chinook ( now Van Nicholas) sold in a moment of weakness I saw it the other day it still looks brilliant, 1 Sunday Cycles Silk Road Pro ( now Sabbath ) I cracked this, got it welded up again and rode it on fixed for a while, I am now building a Kinesis Gran Fondo. So which was the best bike? well I don't have a favourite they all have their good & bad points, my favourite material is without doubt titanium having worked with it, its strength to weight ratio is amazing its also corrosion resistant & doesn't need protecting.

 

[Globalti]

Carbon can be repaired; with the increase in the numbers of carbon bikes on the roads there's an increase in the numbers of repairers. There's penty on the web now about carbon repairs.

 

[Boris Bajic]

I congratulate the OP and at the same time I despair.

Recent technological advances in cycle design and manufacture are as follows:

1. The Ergo lever: You can swap cogs out of the saddle and the whole sensation is generally lovely.
2. The clipless pedal (any system): Your feet stay where they ought to stay. You can lift the pedal. A novice can ride fixed without fear.

Recent technological blind alleys are as follows:

1. The use of carbon fibre for bicycle frames.

I've checked and I find that I am right in all the above points. It's lovely that the carbon ride made the OP happy, but the OP is wrong and so is everyone who supports him in his delusion.

Disagree if you will, but your empty protests will be carried away in the wind and will echo silently in your own wrongheaded zeal.

 

[mattobrien]

but the OP is wrong and so is everyone who supports him in his delusion.

All the OP said is

I am insanely happy with it.

He doesn't claim that carbon is better than any other material.

With respect, how can he be wrong?

Sure the best bike is the one that gets ridden and makes the rider happy. Beyond that surely it's just semantics.

 

[Globalti]

Surely metal frame technology has hit the evolutionary buffers? Apart from minor refinements in alloys and wall profiles and possibly jointing techniques, there's nowhere else for it to go. Granted, some manufacturers have messed around with hydroforming to alter the shape of malleable tubes but I suspect this has more to do with marketing and aesthetics than performance.

Carbon on the other hand has moved on massively in the last ten years and I'm sure will continue to evolve as different manufacturers learn new techniques, invest in new equipment and then copy each other.

 

[Kiwiavenger]

After a convoluted set of circumstances that led to me riding a Norcross Blue cyclocross frame, initially with bar-ends, and finally drops, I have just bought a Orbea Ocra 105. After a short, twenty mile smash up this afternoon, I am insanely happy with it. I may be easily pleased, but at 54 you have to take your pleasures where you find them ...

that is the bike i want! very jealous at this moment in time!!

enjoy it

 

[green1]

I waiting for the OAMIL's to go carbon.

 

[TheJDog]

I congratulate the OP and at the same time I despair.

Recent technological advances in cycle design and manufacture are as follows:

1. The Ergo lever: You can swap cogs out of the saddle and the whole sensation is generally lovely.
2. The clipless pedal (any system): Your feet stay where they ought to stay. You can lift the pedal. A novice can ride fixed without fear.

Recent technological blind alleys are as follows:

1. The use of carbon fibre for bicycle frames.

I've checked and I find that I am right in all the above points. It's lovely that the carbon ride made the OP happy, but the OP is wrong and so is everyone who supports him in his delusion.

Disagree if you will, but your empty protests will be carried away in the wind and will echo silently in your own wrongheaded zeal.

3. Indexed gears.

If you want a lighter bike, carbon has no competition. If you want a bike that can be completely repaired after you misjudge a corner and your headset ends up 90 degrees to where it should be (happened to me when I was 17) then I suppose you need metal. But that extent of a repair would cost me more now than it would to replace my carbon frame if I knackered it.

 

[User16625]

I have a carbon fibre bike. I also have an aluminium (or was it aluminum, cant remember) road bike. The CF bike is better because it comes with better components and cost a lot more. I dont understand the bollox with frame/chassis rigidity etc. With bicycles I find they handle all the same. How can a road bike absorb bumps more effectively than another? They all use solid frames. With suspension and shock absorbers I can understand if theres noticeable difference. Im sure half the motoring and cycling reviews are just made up. I mean how do you go about finding the limits of tyre grip without losing control, possibly crashing?