[Closed] alloy is dead (apparently) - carbon is the only way forward!

They may have a point.

^^^ http://www.primera-sports.com/ would be my guess.

Whoever they are sound like a money grabbing biased machine anyway.

I think you mean alu / ally. alloy is a different matter altogether

I really dont know, I just cant trust carbon, I am an engineer by trade and hence a logical person i KNOW carbon is stronger than alloy and lighter but when you pick it up somthing in my brain just says

how can somthing sooo light be strong and not fragile!

I like carbon, but I'd hardly say that aluminium was "dead" when it's still about the half the price for an equivalent frame.

enduro-aid - I'm with you on this one. I can see the appeal of carbon, however I am

a) Hardly petite (Some might even say a bit ... ahem... 'bulky')
b) As Clumsy as ****. Watching me ride is like finding yourself in a Norman Wisdom film
c) Not rich

I just wouldn't trust it. And I'm not shelling out that type of money for something I'd be constantly worrying about breaking

They're right.

In fact after the best part of 10 years on carbon bikes, carbon is feeling very retro. We need something lighter and altogether more exotic...

i'm not saying that i don't agree with their comments (other than the bit about needing £3k+), but i was just interested to hear the general consensus... they are probably right in a way, just in the same way that not so long ago, we were probably saying the same thing about ali frames when compared with steel, and now fast forward 15 or so years, steel is regarded as a 'niche' material at the upper end of the spectrum.

maybe i should cancel my Flux order and get a carbon yeti!

enduro aid, binners you two sound like the old guys I know complaining about how aluminium alloys are crap compared to steel..

Something more exotic? Maybe a frame made from the crystallized tears of angels?

meh

I know it is stronger but if it does get damaged [rock strike is my major concern] you cannot tell. At least with a ding or crack on ally you can make an informed decision about whether to ride or not without an x ray.
I would probably crack mine banging it against the wal on the way to the car
3k is a afair amount have they never heard of Boardman bikes , on one , planet X etc

it is somthing that im going to look at and see because with bike brands now offering DH options made from carbon (GT and Santacruz)

they must be strong enough to survive some clumsy riding

and with on one now offering a carbon 456 frame for 400 quid its not that expensive now

toys19 - there's nothing rational or logical about this. Quite the opposite.

I just associate carbon with race-whippets and being fine for someone lighter. I've snapped an alloy frame in half before now (told you I was clumsy) and I reckon I'd be constantly worrying about doing do the same to a carbon one.

However, if someone wants to let me try one out I may revise my opinion 😀

I've riden carbon road bikes for a good few years now but for some reason i still dont trust it on a mtb... purely psychological.

After years of using carbon bars and seat posts without any problems I wouldn't have any concern about it breaking. Cost would still put me off though, unless you're a racer then I don't think the small weight saving and increased stiffness is worth the extra few hundred quid. Unless of course you have a big sack of disposable income and a bike p0rn fetish.

What if they made a carbon Orange 5. I reckon you'd hear it coming from several miles away.

I've no doubt that carbon is stronger - my last 2 bikes were part carbon and the next one too

I've never had any issues at all with the material but the bonding of other bits drop-outs etc. failed on my last one [Yeti] and another on a mates bike [Giant, IIRC] also had a bonding failure of an attached part

What if they made a carbon Orange 5. I reckon you'd hear it coming from several miles away.

They'd need to make carbon filing cabinets first 😛

What if they made a carbon Orange 5. I reckon you'd hear it coming from several miles away.

So true.

I was riding my carbon 456 at Epping last weekend and there's a particularly fast rooty descent that made it sound like somebody had thrown a filing cabinet down some stairs.

I used to be a bit fussy about having a quiet bike, but this one is so much fun that I don't care any more.

After years of using carbon bars and seat posts without any problems I wouldn't have any concern about it breaking. Cost would still put me off though, unless you're a racer then I don't think the small weight saving and increased stiffness is worth the extra few hundred quid. Unless of course you have a big sack of disposable income and a bike p0rn fetish.

depends how it's designed / built innit.

we could build carbon frames that would last a life-time, but they'd be heavier than frames designed to last a few years and still be more or less as expensive. (cost of design + tooling + labour)

people associate high price with high performance, and rightly or wrongly expect an expensive frame to be light/fast.

carbon bikes are usually sold on their percieved performance benefits, rather than their percieved durability benefits.

don't expect light / fast carbon frames to last for years and years and years, they've been over-built if they do.

I know it is stronger but if it does get damaged [rock strike is my major concern] you cannot tell. At least with a ding or crack on ally you can make an informed decision about whether to ride or not without an x ray

It's just not that clear cut though. Carbon frames can show cracks, alu can fail without warning. Carbon all the way.

The frame materials of the future will be recyclable and not wasteful throw away stuff. Longevity and/or repairable should be a consideration of future frames.

"The frame materials of the future will be recyclable and not wasteful throw away stuff."

well that's a tick in favour of ali frames then surely.

and steel...

and cardboard

Bamboo

Carbon fibre recycling

Trek and MIT-RCF didn’t go into more precise detail on how the reclaimed carbon fiber would be used but other carbon fiber recycling research programs have shown a wide range of possibilities. While the chopped-up materials won't offer the same high stiffness and strength benefits of de novo long-fiber materials, the resultant bits can still be used to reinforce other polymer-based parts and ground-up bits can also be used as fillers in automotive tires or industrial building materials like asphalt.

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/trek-start-carbon-fiber-recycling-program-29993/

Just out of interest: what is the list price on the cheapest carbon full-suss frame? Anyone know?

I suspect this is the point that will make the whole discussion somewhat academic to most people

I don't see why a carbon bike can't be built to last but whether that goes against what we expect from carbon (light weight) I don't know.
I have use carbon parts for years with out problems, although did get panicy (probably stupidly) about little marks on the bars.
For most it's probably in the mind, if you trust carbon or aluminum.I certainly fall into the trust aluminum 'camp' and happier just to go with it, although probably defies logic.
As for frames I have no experience, although I did over hear a very experienced rider express regret at having a carbon full sus (from a well respected carbon bike manufacture) as the pivot points kept 'yawning' and the frame already been back. His words of advice, " a big mistake, don't do it, if you want a bike to last more than a season"

One reason for using Carbon is that it is 'stiffer' not necessarily stronger.

It also allows you to tailor the properties you want in the direction you want.

and BTW failure of Carbon can fail without warning just like ally. has very little post yield

It's just not that clear cut though. Carbon frames can show cracks, alu can fail without warning. Carbon all the way.

Pound for pound, carbon fiber is stronger that steel or aluminum. But it behaves differently when it is overloaded in an accident or impact. An overloaded metal part will bend or deform before it breaks, showing evidence of the load (Figure 1). An overloaded carbon fiber part will not bend or deform, so a damaged carbon part (with reduced strength due to the damage) may look normal?even after the same load that bent the metal part. But when the sum of the forces finally exceeds the strength limit of the carbon fiber, the carbon fiber part breaks, it does not bend (Figure 2).

http://www.bike-manual.com/brands/trek/om/hybrid/carbon_fiber.html

both fail without warning but with ione you can tell when it has exceeded load and been damged with your own eyes

Slight aside - does carbon fibre rot in UV light the way a lot of plastics become brittle in sunlight?

Carbon is essential. Being an overweight IT consultant, I need all the help I can get on the hills. I wouldn't consider spending less than 3k on a bike either. I just don't think I could have any fun on it otherwise.

I think Carbon Fibre is pretty swell, but I trust aluminium stuff more.

I owned a Carbon Hardtail for 2 months before it developed a 3" long, bloody great crack in the bottom of the down tube! Some sort of stress related thing - never crashed.

I don't bother with Carbon bars anymore as the weight saving is usually about 20g and every time I 'torqued' them correctly the damn things would spin lose on descents .. that's a heart-in-mouth moment on a rock-stewn DH !

Just out of interest: what is the list price on the cheapest carbon full-suss frame?

Longevity must be something else to consider though. I've put a hairline crack in every Alu frame I've owned, eventually - what's carbon like for fatiguing and cracking?

Partly why I reckon frames under the 1k mark are the way forwards. For AM stuff like the nukeproof mega (if it ever arrives), for trail frames like the Canyon Nerve XC. And any number of hardtail frames (on-one's, ragleys, etc.)

I'd feel happier throwing one of these down a mountain than a two and a half grand frame, regardless of the material it was made of, as it's almost at a disposable price point.

If I brought a frame for a grand and got three years use form it then I'd be happy. At which point I'd probably want something new anyway and standards/technologies would probably have moved on too.

I'm amazed The Oracle hasn't put everyone in their place on this thread yet..

both fail without warning but with ione you can tell when it has exceeded load and been damged with your own eyes

Again, not necessarily. Carbon may show small cracks after a crash whilst an alu frame may look fine, then snap suddenly. We all know the 'theory', but that doesn't mean that in every instance you'll bend an alu part, or that a carbon part will go from shiny and perfect to snapped and impaling you!

So given that both can snap suddenly, we should moderate the question. What is the most painful to be removed from the body part just impaled on it. A roughly snapped alloy tube or shards of splintered carbon fibre?

The reverse is also not true either Yes both can fail without warning but quite clearly both materials have different properties and react to crashes, overload and stress differently - ihvae given a link to show this. Whilst it is true that either material MAY show no outward sign [ I MAY fall out of a plane and live] you cannot ignore what each material generally does. I suppose you could ignore the typical and focus on the atypical if you want but I dont know why you would wish to do this

I dont have a problem with Carbon fibre per se and would happily have it on a roa d bike [ and bars and post on mTB]but where it is subject to impact I would rather not.

EDIT:Nearly binners but it is which material is this most likely to happen to without warning and which is the cheapest to replace

Ultimately anyone suggesting alu alloy is dead needs a brain transplant. From a financial standpoint alone there's no comparison, then there's the impact toughness question, then there's an ease of repair question.

They're clearly just trying to sell carbon.

depending on the repair needed, fixing carbon is much easier than alu

then there's an ease of repair question

If you're a Ninja, this may interest you 🙂

Anyway, once you've heard enough of the preamble - FF to 12:50

aluminium has it's uses - in places were you need something chunky but need to keep the weight down.

As for impact - nice thick chunks of metal - alu alloy or steel etc - no problem. You make hammer heads out of big heavy chunks or metal for a reason.

Impacts onto thin walled metal tubing - no thanks. If you are lucky and get a bend the part is now plastically deformed and the load path is different and the material is no longer consistent thickness. If you are unlucky you get a little hairline crack which will grow very quickly in a dynamic application.

Composite impact - yup it can get nasty but a delamination does not mean failure is imminent. Fibre failure does but fibre failure is significant. Most frames should be designed for rocks being thrown up. a 50g rock at 30mph is about 5J. If the carbon is not designed to take that itself then it really doesn't need much protection to protect it (have a paper due out on this very subject)

For anyone worried about composites surviving a harsh life then go buy a fibreglass handled sledge hammer or mattock and give it some stick: http://www.toolstation.com/shop/Hand+Tools/Axes+Picks+Sledgehammers/d10/sd3179

You would bend a metal handled one very quickly - that is if your hands and arms can take the vibrations.

uplink - Member
If you're a Ninja, this may interest you

Anyway, once you've heard enough of the preamble - FF to 12:50

Arghhhh so much abuse of engineering terms but nice demonstrations. Would like to see bamboo compared to them too and mention of weight (for specific strength)