High-end steel road bicycles vs carbon fiber bikes

[beepbeep]

Just had a thought.
The best of both worlds - a steel frame with carbon wheels?

 

[964Cup]

Nah. Carbon frame, steel wheels. That way, you *will* crash and you will need a new bike. Getting a new bike is always good, right?

 

[legrandefromage]

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=362329

 

[kingbling]

interesting article I noticed this morning:
http://stories.worldsteel.org/innovatio ... l-cycling/

do people not read the whole thread

 

[Pionir]

Carbon is faster for top level racing, as said plenty of times already.

However I find it hard to believe all the stories of harshness of carbon vs comfort of steel. In a brazed triangle steel doesn't really have anywhere to deflect to so can't be that compliant.

You'll get more flex in a 32mm tyre as illustrated by the fact steel frames or even suspension still haven't made a comeback in Paris Roubaix which lets face it, would be where a significantly more comfortable ride would be used if it was worth it.

That said, I just don't like how carbon frames look, but that's nothing to do with speed in top level racing

 

[Velodiversity]

have a look at rob english's frames if you want to see what can be done lightweight in steel

 

[mattr]

Carbon is faster for top level racing, as said plenty of times already.

Only because the fastest guys ride carbon. The actual numeric difference between carbon and modern steel is pretty much down into single figures of watts. That's why all the marketing refers to % gains. Cos 20% sounds like a lot. Going from 10 watts of drag to 8. Not so much. And in bunch racing, it's even less relevant.

However I find it hard to believe all the stories of harshness of carbon vs comfort of steel. In a brazed triangle steel doesn't really have anywhere to deflect to so can't be that compliant.

I suspect its more down to the frequencies that the frames either absorb or transmit than anything else. Not the absolute stiffness. Some frequencies we are more sensitive to.

And again, as mentioned earlier int he thread (i think) carbon is mainly aimed at head down, arse up racing and absolute minimum weight (sub 700gram frames for instance). So tuning to damp out annoying frequencies for tubby middle aged blokes isn't really on the agenda as much as it should be.

You'll get more flex in a 32mm tyre as illustrated by the fact steel frames or even suspension still haven't made a comeback in Paris Roubaix which lets face it, would be where a significantly more comfortable ride would be used if it was worth it.

IIRC the Pinarello K8-S was used in P-R last year. But then again, so were big tyres.

 

[Velodiversity]

The reason carbon frames are made the same shape as steel tubed ones is to do with the regulations not maximizing the properties of the material. Mike Burrows frames from the early 90s showed what You can do with aerodynamics in an rider upright position of not constrained by the regs brought in to ban them. In particular, the machine he made for Olano's hour attempt, dropped because of the rule changes, is probably the most aerodynamic TT machine ever. Including chain case!

 

[cce]

Mike Burrows frames from the early 90s

yup, it was only quite recently that cervelo surpassed the "boardman lotus" which they still use as a benchmark

 

[Velodiversity]

And the lotus version was very "draggy" by the standard of mikes later variations...!
Don't know if you've seen the Tony hadland book on burrows but it's a fantastic insight into design.