Carbon Frames/Durability

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caligurl

OMG! now I'M freaking out, too! is specialized a "big enough name"????

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

my hubby had a brand new carbon bike... isaac brand.. big in europe... new to US... it cracked in the seat tube within a month of having it....! they sent him a new frame (after giving him the 3rd degree on what HE did to the bike.. uhm.. NOTHING.. it's his baby!

---

I think Specialized has made more than a fair share of carbon for you to be confident. Trust me, I'm still freaking, but hoping I can trust the Bianchi and Colnago names (yeah, I ride a bunch of bikes that I don't deserve, but I love them just the same!)

One thing that I keep thinking is that her frame cracked right where the carbon and aluminum meet. On one of my Bianchis, it has carbon and aluminum too, but the carbon is nested inside of the aluminum - it's not like a lugged frame, like the Raleigh appeared to be. I'll see if I can find out what the bike shop/manufacturer says with regards to her frame. Clearly, she didn't do anything wrong.

I'm not sure about the Specialized carbon frames, but lots of folks I've known raced on Trek carbon frames (not to mention a big pro team) and they held up well thru thousands of miles of training and racing.

Just remember to take the bike off the roof rack before you drive into the garage! (LOL--a bf made that mistake--amazingly his Trek frame was OK, but his car roof had a crease from where the rack moved, and my garage frame had a dent from his seat!).

Speaking of carbon vs. steel- I have both. My first bike was a Jamis Quest- steel frame with carbon forks in the front and rear. It's been a great bike for me. I've ridden over 10,000 miles in two years with no problems at all.

One thing about steel- over time if you live in a wet or humid climate, it will, IF you aren't careful, have a tendency to rust at the bottom of the frame. Most steel bikes have a hole on the underneath for that very purpose- to keep water from collecting inside the tubes. My bike mechanic friend says to put some car paste wax on the frame from time to time to help it out. I need to do that at this point to preserve my frame.

I have a carbon bike from Scott.(CR 1) The difference between steel and carbon is rigidity. I am at the point in my cycling where I felt I would benefit from a higher end bike which is why I bought the Scott. However, this frame is designed for racing, so it is constructed a little differently than other carbon frames. They race a similar frame to mine in Europe and it seems to have done quite well. This is partly because of the weight. Carbon is light and rigid. Racers like that combo which is why you see carbon in the racing scene.

Most of the companies that make stock bikes have frames that are made in Taiwan. This isn't a bad thing. It's because labor is cheaper there and keeps the cost of a bike down. If you want to know more about carbon bikes and frames, check out how the manufacturers build them. I liked the Scott frame because of the way the carbon is wrapped. I don't think you need to worry about the manufacturer of the bike as much as the LBS from where you purchased the bike. That's where you will go to get any problems resolved most of the time. Specialized has been around awhile and has a great reputation so I wouldn't worry about them being big enough. Sometimes big is not necessarily good.

IF you are a beginner to cycling, I'd suggest steel. I enjoy riding my Jamis, even if it has taken a back seat to the Scott. Steel handles well and is comfortable for long rides. Try different bikes on the road to see what works best for you. That is the most important part.

I'd recommend a Lemond Zurich. It's a combination of carbon and steel. And it's quite a beautiful blue (the picture on the Lemond site doesn't really give it justice. It looks more teal than blue) :D I've only had "Ferris" for less than a year, but put about 2500 miles on it last summer without any issues (knock on wood). I don't know if that would give you more "life" out of the bike having a combination frame or not. But I just thought I'd put it out there for you to chew on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veloputt

...I've known [folks who] raced on Trek carbon frames (not to mention a big pro team) and they held up well thru thousands of miles of training and racing.

---

I think the pros have more than one frame per season. And it's not so much about the number of miles with carbon fiber, as it is about time.

V.

Who wants a bike that lasts a lifetime anyway?
Half the fun is shopping for a new one after a few years.
The only people who want a bike to last forever are the old men at our local clubs who are riding bikes from the 70's and wear the gear to match!
I'm sorry, but technology advances in bikes as much as anywhere else and I enjoy the keeping up with it, its half the fun!
Carbon is this year's IT, in a few years it will be Magnesium. I , for one, want to be able to try it out without feeling too guilty.If you buy a frame that last forever you have no justification in moving on...
Don't you just love it, fashion, fitness and gadget all in one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dok-torr

Who wants a bike that lasts a lifetime anyway?
Half the fun is shopping for a new one after a few years.

---

I agree with you to a point,. However, if I'm going to pay $4K+ for a bike, I want it to be around for the long haul. After all, you can always upgrade components, etc., if the frame lasts. I was raised by two members of the "greatest generation" (dad served in the Army during WW2), so my parents were kids during the Depression. Therefore, I inherited their attitudes about saving/spending. I don't mind paying for quality, but I consider longevity a factor of quality. An "expensive" bike is an investment.

I consider my Luna to be my future vintage Mustang, even though it's a new bike. In other words, it'll be my classic that I envision enjoying for many years.

I ride a Trek WSD 5200 (now the Madone) and love it. A great bike is so much about fit, and this fits. I tried out several women's specific, including composite frames. (I am 5'3"). Trying different bikes made the difference, when I rode the Trek I fell in love.

My HB has had his Specialized with carbon fork over 10 years and no problems whatsoever, and he is a tall rider. The issue with carbon appears to be the manufacturer who knows how to use carbon as opposed to the material itself. This is why I think you'll see conflicting views. Don't get me wrong though -- my goal is to have 3 primary bikes one of these days...carbon, steel and ti for all diff reasons (I'll need to add plutonium to that list :p ). I have aluminum also but it doesn't thrill me.

And, Mindyhubby, not sure it was mentioned but what about the new compact chainrings in lieu of a triple? I am looking to switch either this summer or next from my triple. (Terry's site had a good description -- compact -- chainset with two chainwheels; a "double" as opposed to a "triple". What makes it different from a traditional double is that it has smaller chainrings. A typical Shimano double has 39/52 rings. A new Shimano compact which will be available in January has 34/50 rings. This chainset, the FC-R700, will come in 165mm, 170mm, 172.5mm and 175mm crank lengths. Good news for those with shorter legs since no one else makes a compact shorter than 170mm.) I use 165 crankarms so plan on doing the Shimano compact soon.

2 more cents to add to the mix!