ColinJ
Puzzle game procrastinator!
That is exactly what I think!Would I have a carbon MTB - absolutely no chance given some of the massive rock strikes my alloy MTB has had
I am getting my old 853 steel-framed MTB back
That is exactly what I think!Would I have a carbon MTB - absolutely no chance given some of the massive rock strikes my alloy MTB has had
That is exactly what I think!
I am getting my old 853 steel-framed MTB backonoff the road. That has survived some major hits over the years with just a few scratches to the paintwork.
Would I have a carbon MTB - absolutely no chance given some of the massive rock strikes my alloy MTB has had.
I'd be a bit wary having one, mainly damage - got a massive impact on the chain stays from a rock that flicked up then was catapulted down into the chainstay junction with the frame. Got wedged. Nothing more than big chunks of paint off, could have been catastrophic on a carbon bike - certainly a strike where their is no protection.
Even if it's catastrophic on carbon it can still be fixed fairly easily.
Even if it's catastrophic on carbon it can still be fixed fairly easily.
Not much use to a paralysed (or dead!) rider...
How do you know what that user's experience is with Cannondale mountain bikes? You're the one who seem to be led by an article in the creation of this thread, it's a bit insulting to dismiss their opinion as being brainwashed by marketing.Oh dear! Quote-
'Cannondale, for example, make some alloy frames that are at least equal to their carbon ones, and almost as light.'
Well they would say that wouldn't they. (Along with some of the bike mags.) It's called advertising, or the big sell. But you don't have to swallow and regurgitate it, uncritically!
To clarify Twilkes.
What does the word almost mean? Without actual weights of the two bikes it is meaningless. If he quotes the actual weight of the two bikes 9the alloy and the carbon bikes) we can extrapolate where the two bikes stand in relation to each other. Starting from the accepted fact that weight for weight carbon fibre composite is stronger than aluminium alloy, and strength for strength, aluminium alloy is heavier than carbon fibre composite, we would see at which end of the strength/weight ratio the alloy bike stood in relation to the carbon one. (i.e. Where the compromise lay.)
The closer to each other the two weights are, the less robust the alloy would be in comparison to the carbon one. The wider the weight gap between the two there will be less difference in robust strength, but the carbon bike should be the better performing bike, especially uphill. (Assuming most else being of equal worth.)
So if anyone can produce the real world weights of the two bikes conclusions may be drawn. All else is just anecdotal presentation.
Was itWhat was the name of the guy who kept posting on here a while ago about how great old time riders were in relation to modern times and if you factored in the advances in modern bikes the old timers would be faster. Robert Brown or something like that. He got quite 'excited' about it....