[Closed] Santa Cruz, Carbon vs Alloy. is it worth it?

There was a thread on this last week
No consensus other than go with what you want/ can afford
Have a look at LTM racing on eBay for some good deals

It’s not worth it no. But if you want it, that is a different matter

Weight versus money. Depends if you think it will end up the wrong side of what you think is a good weight. The cheaper alloy bronsons weigh a portly 34lbs(the US website is good for weight comparisons)

did think this would be lurking some where on here.

these few answers validate my thoughts too probably not worth but wins bling points

It was my thread the other week. (Alloy vs Carbon FS MTB frames, real world differences)

The consensus was that there wasn't one! Lots of interesting stuff came up, especially around weight - Apparently it's normal for a carbon version of a bike to be only a few hundred grams lighter. Santa Cruz's are over a kilo (5010 alloy L 3847g, 5010 CC L 2500g), however there's only a couple of hundred grams between the C and CC, so assuming the base kit was something you could live with, a C might make more sense than a frame only CC. Stiffness is likely similar/same. The jury is out on relative longevity, but unless very unluckily crashed or stored in direct sunlight, the carbon versions could well outlive the alloy version (obviously not relevant unless you're planning to keep the bike long term).

One thing that was interesting reading was an article on comparing Knolly Warden carbon and alloy bikes (google 'Duelling Knolly Wardens - Final Verdicts - NSMB.com'). Not directly comparable but interesting all the same...

that nsmb knolly article is a good one! obvs doesnt relate to santa cruz directly but certainly show that allow vs carbon is negligible .

so ultimately the wallet decides

Carbon all the way for me (Bronson V3 CC owner) - personally think Santa Cruz alloy frames are really nasty - welds aren’t the greatest I’ve seen and the tubes are much thinner vs carbon so visually they don’t look any where near as good.

Of all the Santa Cruz bikes I see at Wind Hill each week (and there are lots) I don't think I've ever seen an alloy one.

As an aside, I'm always amazed at how little exclusivity they have, given their price and status. Guess they're the Porsche of the MTB world.

JP

The welds on my brothers alu Nomad V4 are fine.

Considering that the guy broke 2 steel Cotic longshot Rockets within short succession, the Nomad has held up just perfectly.

For a given price and if I was doing a custom build, I'd be spending my money on an alu frame, carbon wheels, fox suspension and coil front and rear. Chassis weight is fairly low down my priority list.

Just to put in a POV from a Santa Cruz dealer. We sell very few aluminium models and I get the impression that's the general pattern in the UK. It's not that common a discussion - so maybe folks have already decided on the Carbon.

Santa Cruz don't make a big point on the weight, although there's a fair difference. In order I'd say strength, stiffness, then weight as the advantages of Carbon over aluminium.

Carbon C launching made a big difference to us/our customer base. We're a little more real world/GX spec than top end Kashima/X01 builds. Before the Carbon C bikes, we'd be doing slightly more basic build with a CC frame rather than posher parts on aluminium.

In contrast to raybanwomble, I'd spend on the frame rather than the bits - cheaper parts have never been so good with trickle down tech. Frame's the heart of the bike - there's an element of having a sort of insurance policy of the tougher carbon frame when you do inevitably crash too.

Neither's right or wrong though!

Just get what you prefer I only personally buy Carbon due to weight benefits.

jjprestidge

As an aside, I’m always amazed at how little exclusivity they have, given their price and status. Guess they’re the Porsche of the MTB world.

I have to agree with this when riding on weekends its really rare I see anything other than Santa Cruz and of course my Scott. I really was not aware they are so popular.

I have a friend with a cc nomad and although he wouldn’t buy alloy (simply states because carbon is better, end of)
He says he would never buy cc carbon gain as it’s just not worth the premium

It’s a shame they don’t sell the c frame only really. Guess no one would stump up the massive extra wedge on cc carbon then though.
I’m with rayban. Alloy and get better specced wheels suspension

Was out riding with a friend who has an alloy SC (no idea which, but one of the single-pivot models) and it always looks a really tidy bike to me. Certainly, it looks a quality item and well made. My own TB2 CC is, however, in a different league (IMHO) and were I looking at SC, I would not consider an alloy frame. If you can't stretch to their carbon frames, or specifically want an alloy one, then I'd look elsewhere - loads of equally good alloy frames on the market without paying SC money for them.

Regarding CC vs C, I wouldn't bother. The benefits are tiny (I'd challenge 99% of riders to even tell the difference!) and cost difference is high. FWIW, my own CC was adequately discounted that I felt able to justify it!

If they only made a nice carbon 5010 with xt or similar groupset as a standard build I’d have it, and I’m sure I’m not alone 😀

I’d be more than happy to discuss a Sram to Shimano swap Iain!

I’d be more than happy to discuss a Sram to Shimano swap Iain!

As would Sprockets Iain!. I wouldn't bother though, the XT on my Bronson isn't as good as the GX I had on the capra.

good answers guys, I think the NSMB article referenced above makes a good point that ultimately the only difference in in the wallet. I also take from this that it really is a preference thing

dont think anyone has mentioned that alloy is marginally more environmentally friendly as it could be recycled although the likelihood is that eventually both carbon and alloy end up in land fill.

the comment regarding looking elsewhere for a perhaps cheaper alloy frame i think misses my original question as there a plenty of uber expensive alloy bikes around too. i personally would like to jump on the SC bandwagon and quite happy to go Carbon but when the bikes weigh nearly the same, ride the same and come in the same spec, why spend the extra money.

mind is made up gonna go alloy Bronson S unless i stumble across an 18 carbon nomad in Ink blue
cheers guys

As would Sprockets Iain!. I wouldn’t bother though, the XT on my Bronson isn’t as good as the GX I had on the capra.

Yeah, it's on my list to have a chat with Dave......gotta save up a bit first though !

Could always wait for the new models to roll out and get last years bike? Depends on when you need it I guess. I saved about 30% on my Hightower when I bought it about a year and a bit ago, S build.

I've got an alloy 5010 it's brilliant - I reckon carbon wheels would make more difference than a carbon frame.

depends on your wallet, i have a cc 5010 v2, love it, i also have a chameleon alu with carbon wheels. i also love it.

would i upgrade to the Chameleon C to save 1/2 kg, probably not at £1,399 for the frame.
my bike weighs around 12.5kg as it is

ps. get the matt black one, brightly coloured santa cruz give the age away :0)

A carbon Santa Cruz is still a chuffing heavy bike. Little noticeable benefit in a high spec carbon Hightower bs a mid spec Cotic Flare mac. Sure the scales might say something but in the real world pick the bike up test the difference was not noticeable. Both bikes felt a similar weight and the SC was not really a star performer in the climbing stakes relative to the Flare either - both very similar bikes, flare was better in some ways, the SC in other ways but it was small differences either wish... so no, the additional cost worth it.... but that is not to say if you want an SC and you can afford it you shouldn’t get the carbon version. Nobody’s judging you. Buy what you want for whatever reason you want.

A friend of mine has just built up a alloy bronson with top end suspension and wheels.... In his opinion it rides way better than the same cost carbon version.

I have an alloy geometron.. dt wheels and fox's best.... It's my forever bike..

reading was an article on comparing Knolly Warden carbon and alloy bikes (google ‘Duelling Knolly Wardens – Final Verdicts – NSMB.com’). Not directly comparable but interesting all the same…

Yes. Neat! For Enduro style bikes: makes sense.
(XC racing machines: might be different so. Guess there "Carbon" has an advantage...)

Bronson: new 2019 models out? There are some neat Bronson frames (2018?) on sale right now...

A carbon Santa Cruz is still a chuffing heavy bike

What's chuffing heavy? my Bronson CC is 30lb in full big day guise, it's not a race bike, but I certainly wouldn't call it heavy. Just looking at a flare max there, it's a 130mm steel bike, hardly a comparison is it? (and more expensive than my SC was too btw!) 🙂

Sure the scales might say something but in the real world pick the bike up test the difference was not noticeable

Thats the best bit of fact avoidance i've read in ages. Ignore the actual measurement which says there is a difference, just pick the bike up and guess / feel and conclude there is no difference. Scales are not real world items. Genius.

A carbon Santa Cruz is still a chuffing heavy bike

My v1 5010 is 25.some lbs, my nomad 3 was 29lbs. I get they aren’t the absolute lightest bikes on earth, but they’re a long way from ‘chuffing heavy’. As an example, the Nomads replacement is 36lbs

they aren’t the absolute lightest bikes on earth, but they’re a long way from ‘chuffing heavy’

And the SC owners normally love their bikes. Frame failures are very rare. Sounds like the SC bikes are made for the rough stuff (I don't own one).

Worth bearing in mind the Alloy SC frames ship with the lower spec R shocks. So you may want to budget for an upgrade..

obvs doesnt relate to santa cruz directly but certainly show that allow vs carbon is negligible .

Noel Buckley is likely as skilled an engineer as you will find anywhere in the bicycle industry. He held back from doing carbon for a long time, as he would only want it if it was done right. I seem to recall him having the opinion that only SC were doing it right at the time. If Knolly are doing carbon, you can bet your backside it'll be ****ing good carbon.

I proved to myself why I’m sticking to the aluminium chameleon, last night, a bit of cheeky Pennine riding, lots of stone style’s/ farmers gates to navigate through, namely picking up the bike and squeezing through gaps or over drystone walls, managed to scrape the bike a few times

Carbon bikes don't get destroyed by scratches.

Aye, some folk have funny ideas regarding materials.

I've been riding MTB for 30 years or so, in that time I've never seen an alloy frame have it's head tube ripped off, recently I've seen two big name carbon frames separated from their forks!
No carbon for me thanks.

Ah well, thats that cleared up then, who could argue with that?.

The environmental aspect has been touched on. Carbon may actually win depending on your measure. Alloy may be easier/more useful to recycle, but is likely to need it sooner hand has horrific pollution issues at ore extraction and massive energy use all through production...

It’s really not a straight comparison.

You can't - but I could argue that a Bronson CC isn't cheaper than a Cotic in similar spec, however I can't be arsed.

Unless you are getting a deal from a shop that makes no sense! At retail a cotic rocketmax is 2k, retail on most Santa Cruz cc frames is over 3k from what I have seen?
You could take into account the free frame bearings I guess but at a push what’s that £50 a year in bearings?

Aye, fair dos, probably down to having a very good relationship with my lbs. 😊

Fair play Mr Beer👍

Sorry read that as a Bronson CC is cheaper than a cotic! I couldn’t work out how your maths worked ha ha