Gone and bought a carbon bike!

[daccordimark]

I'm on my third carbon frame and I have to say it will be my last. I think carbon has been the greatest scam product in cycling history. I say third, but I've had three warranty replacements so technically I've ridden six carbons. The Look KG 386 is the only one I really have any faith in.

Why are they such a scam?

1. Consumers have been educated into believing they are buying a disposable product with a product lifespan of 3-5 years. If someone sold me a steel bike with that expectation, I'd be up in arms.

2. Cost: Even as little as eight years ago the most expensive bike in my LBS was £2k, now that's pretty much entry level and the most expensive bike is £13k+. It's well known that mould making carbon frames is much cheaper and much less labour intensive than hand building steel, so why the fabulous 5000% price hike? £8k for a bare Colnago? Hats off to the marketing guys - genius.

3. I've had a failure rate of roughly 95% on my carbons. It's close to zero for my steel bikes. Pretty much says it all.

4. The weight myth: Almost every carbon sold in retail is marketed with almost no statistics about weight of the bike, or if there are any, they are fallacious. My current 853 build with Record carbon comes in at 16.4lbs. A full half pound lighter than my Madone 5.9 with Dura Ace. My pal has a Specialized SWORKS aluminium Columbus slx frame which was comparably lighter than every single Giant carbon in our LBS. The Sales Manager politely asked us to leave.

I'm waiting for stainless steel to get cheaper. I'm pretty sure manufacturers will resist it though - even if it rolls out the same weight as carbon. Because then we'll be back in the territory of non disposable bicycle frames, and these greedy beggars do not like that. Again hats off to the Brand managers - greatest snake oil product roll out and pricing strategy in cycling if not all sporting history.

Interesting post, I am on the verge on buying a carbon-framed bike but now I'm doubting the wisdom of it all over again.

I sort of agree with point 1 - I've heard/read quite a few people say "everyone replaces their bikes every 3 years anyway" when you point out the longevity of steel. I for one keep my frames longer than that as a rule.

Point 2 - is that a combination of inflation and the bike shop realising there's more money to be made in selling high priced bikes rather than bikes getting more expensive per-se? There's plenty of bikes under £1000 on Evans website for instance and even quite a few carbon framed ones up to £1500. If your LBS are selling a bare Colnago frame for £8000 then it's them that's ripping people off not Colnago. The top of the range C59 shouldn't be more than £3500! Unfortunately steel frames aren't immune from over-pricing either - just look at how much Colnago or De Rosa or any other "premium brands" charge for their current steel frames. For that matter look at the prices UK builders are charging and tell me they're not jumping on the "steel is real" boutique bandwagon and making huge markups. As for the USA - don't get me started. At least the likes of Steve Goff and Bob Jacksons still seem to have down to earth pricing.

As for the weight thing your 853 frame is heavier than the Madone 5.9 frame surely? The Trek is what, 1.4kg for frame and forks? So really the fact your steel framed bike is lighter is because of the Italian loveliness and some seriously light wheels or something, not the frame material. If you took everything off the 853 and put it on the Trek it would be even lighter - possibly even blow away in the breeze! Having said that I do laugh when I read bike descriptions, especially aluminium framed bikes that have a "lightweight alloy frame" and the bike weighs more than my old Columbus SL steel racing bike (currently 9kg with all old school components). Even the carbon Bianchi I'm thinking of buying only weighs 1kg less than that. But I guess that comes back to point 2. They're putting so much "value" on the frame they have to stick 2kg wheelsets and heavy finishing kit on it to bring the price down.

The real killer in your post for me is the failure rate issue. My steel failure rate is zero except for one frame that broke several months after I ploughed into the side of a car and bent the frame a bit! No doubt on carbon or aluminium it would have been an instant write-off. What sort of failures have you had and was there any trouble getting replacements?

I'm now going to spend a few more hours pouring over websites trying to price up builds with frames like the Genesis Volare 853 to see if I can do it for the same price and weight as the Bianchi Sempre Pro with Veloce. Damn my indecision! Damn customer choice! Damn the Internet! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

Mark.

 

[NeilM]

A few months ago, having built myself a couple of what I thought were respectably light steel bikes, I had reason to pick up and move my son's Boardman Pro Carbon and I was stopped in my tracks by how light it was. Now I will accept it was the top model when he bought it, is equipped with SRAM Red groupset and Zipp carbon tubs, but even so..

As for reliability, he has ridden tens of thousands of k's both in the UK and in Europe, wearing out cassettes, chains, brake blocks and a couple of sets of cables, but nothing more than that, albeit he rides mostly in dry weather.

By contrast, I am just finishing off a Rourke 853 frame, that I have tried to build as light as I can afford, I have gone with alloy bars, stem and seatpost, as I am not sure in my mind about carbon, and I have used a SRAM Force22 groupset as opposed to Red, as I really couldn't justify the extra £500. I have used hand built wheels (built by site sponsor Malcolm at The Cycle Clinic) that come in at under 1500g and still the all up weight of the bike is around 8k which I consider light for a steel bike, but not for carbon.

If I could find a carbon bike I like that I could afford, I'd buy it, but so far my tastes exceed my wallet.

 

[M-Power]

Great post Greasemonkey. The only positive side from all this high priced equipment is that 'decent' bicycle shops have a greater chance of making a proper living. Many are/were just barely existing. The renaissance of cycling in recent years has been a good thing overall IMO.

I shall be going to drool over the £££s Colnagos at Harrods next week when I take a family trip in

 

[Deleted member 24574]

Why are people saying carbon wears out?

It's does not coorode, should last for ever.

My 2007 LeMond is full carbon has done over 30,000 miles and been through plenty of components but the frame is still perfect bar a couple of scrapes.

 

[Grease Monkey]

Its manufacturers who have monetised cycling to this point of absurdity. Many of the carbon Giant frames - when weighed accurately (as my pal has done) have actual frame weights of 1150-1250gr. A top end 853 silver soldered is only going to be 100-150gr heavier. The difference in weight of a nice SLR saddle. The latesr American stainless steel tubesets are allowing frame builds of 1050gr, and they're really only scratching the surface of stainless (pardon the awful pun)

Carbon Failures so far:

Trek Madone - bottom bracket (catastrophic), seat stay (warped but rideable, not warrantied)

Giant Defy - paint (woeful) headset debonding, top tube (catastrophic)

Look 386 - paint (now a white bobbled carbon mess) seatpin bolt (warrantied)

Colnago C1 - chain stay (both cracked, near catastrophic, still awaiting warranty decision)

 

[Grease Monkey]

In my experience (and my pal the mechanic) The vast majority of catastrophic failures are the bonding agents failing. This can happen anywhere between 3-10 years into use, so have a good look around your Lemond. The lugged (either aluminium or vcarbon lugs) frames are less prone to de bonding but generally have more 'bits' bonded into them which are just as likely to fail.

I see the rise and rise of stainless steel. Manufacturers will resist it off course because yet again the Bicycle will become durable and long lasting. Prices will never return to ten years ago though - they have successfully marketed and monetised the product so that when you say to the average punter that a good bike costs £5000, they just say 'Okay, do you want my long card number? '

But truly, carbon bike manufacturing and marketing - scam of the century.

I certainly will not be buying another one.

 

[Old Ned]

You haven't mentioned titanium..................................

 

[Grease Monkey]

Yeah. Because this is a thread about carbon!

 

[Old Ned]

But it is an alternative to carbon, as is Aluminium - which you have mentioned.

 

[Grease Monkey]

Stay on topic! If you really want a titanium rant, just start another thread Carbon is complicated enough. To be honest titanium is a very small part of the market but nonetheless has the same sort of material failure issues.

But getting back to the OT...