View Full Version : importance of carbon frame, if fork/stays are carbon?
hi, i am looking at the specialized roubaix line, and am curious how much added benefit is realized from the carbon frame models (pro and comp), over the aluminum frame models, when all have carbon fork, seat stays and seat post.
it would seem that those 3 areas cover most of what influences "comfort." is the primary benefit of a full carbon frame weight reduction? if so, i'm definately not in great enough shape (or low enough body weight) to appreciate that benefit, and the aluminum model would be sufficient, and save a significant amount of money.
thanks for your thoughts,
phil
Originally posted by philbert
hi, i am looking at the specialized roubaix line, and am curious how much added benefit is realized from the carbon frame models (pro and comp), over the aluminum frame models, when all have carbon fork, seat stays and seat post.
it would seem that those 3 areas cover most of what influences "comfort." is the primary benefit of a full carbon frame weight reduction? if so, i'm definately not in great enough shape (or low enough body weight) to appreciate that benefit, and the aluminum model would be sufficient, and save a significant amount of money.
thanks for your thoughts,
phil Try em and see.
Originally posted by philbert
hi, i am looking at the specialized roubaix line, and am curious how much added benefit is realized from the carbon frame models (pro and comp), over the aluminum frame models, when all have carbon fork, seat stays and seat post.
it would seem that those 3 areas cover most of what influences "comfort." is the primary benefit of a full carbon frame weight reduction? if so, i'm definately not in great enough shape (or low enough body weight) to appreciate that benefit, and the aluminum model would be sufficient, and save a significant amount of money.
thanks for your thoughts,
phil
Frame material choices have provided this forum with some of the most oddly charged and personal debates in memory, so let's keep this short before it mushrooms into combat.
There is no definitive, quantifiable benefit to any given material over another, only strongly suggested tendencies given the right application. In the broadest, most general terms, aluminum and carbon both lend themselves well to lighter-weight construction. Also, in general, aluminum tends to leave riders with an impression of stiffness, coupled with road chatter. Titanium and steel have reputations for suberb road feel, and carbon, for vibration-dampening. You don't have to look hard to find designs which defy these notions, though, often for the worst.
Because these are general perceptions and not solid rules, it's sort of impossible to answer your question with confidence. Here's one way of looking at it, though. If you're selecting a carbon fork (pretty standard), a carbon seatpost, and carbon stays, all because you're assuming carbon offers characteristics you're interested in, it follows that the more aluminum you can replace with carbon, the better -- within the logic of this purchase, at least.
Nearly every modern road bike involves a kiss of carbon here or there, and the stuff has some solid applications, but don't be fooled into thinking that carbon bikes on the whole ride better than metallic ones. There are lousy carbon frames, and world-class aluminum frames.
I think the bottom line here, though, is that yes -- unless you're an incorrigable carbon-phile, that Roubaix is probably a fine choice to look into. That line has built a good reputation for smooth riding; assuming it feels good to you, fits properly, and fits your budget, you should give it a shot.
No..no .. Al is definately more rigid, and CF does flex .. and steel does live .. just pulling your leg lokstah .. I am getting also sick and tired of this material never ending feud ..
Weight difference between Al tubes and CF tubes would be minimal unless you are a serious racer don't bother.
Handling depends more on the way they are manufactured than the material itself.
Comfort : don't forget wheels and tire pressure (yep most people just put too much, 140 psi is useless for most people ..110-115 for normal built is usually perfect and has a huge impact on handling but its not a very sexy subject ..
Originally posted by little_chicken
No..no .. Al is definately more rigid, and CF does flex .. and steel does live .. .. You forgot Ti,the magic, do everything,most desirable....blah,blah,blah.
Originally posted by philbert
hi, i am looking at the specialized roubaix line, and am curious how much added benefit is realized from the carbon frame models (pro and comp), over the aluminum frame models, when all have carbon fork, seat stays and seat post.
it would seem that those 3 areas cover most of what influences "comfort." is the primary benefit of a full carbon frame weight reduction? if so, i'm definately not in great enough shape (or low enough body weight) to appreciate that benefit, and the aluminum model would be sufficient, and save a significant amount of money.
thanks for your thoughts,
phil Philbert,
I have a 2004 Specialized Sequoia Elite which has the carbon fork and rear stays. It soaks up the bumps in the road very nicely. I've never ridden a full carbon bike and doubt that I'll ever be willing to spend the extra potatos to get one. That's alota beer!
The Roubaix Elite and Comp models are both nicely stacked with Ultegra components. The only real difference is the frame material. So you would have to make a decision as to whether it is worth working at your job the extra time (after taxes) to get the carbon frame over the al frame with carbon fork & stays.
Actually, it seems you have answered your own question.
... i'm definately not in great enough shape (or low enough body weight) to appreciate that benefit, and the aluminum model would be sufficient, and save a significant amount of money...
Originally posted by Doctor Morbius
Philbert,
I have a 2004 Specialized Sequoia Elite which has the carbon fork and rear stays. It soaks up the bumps in the road very nicely. I've never ridden a full carbon bike and doubt that I'll ever be willing to spend the extra potatos to get one. That's alota beer!
The Roubaix Elite and Comp models are both nicely stacked with Ultegra components. The only real difference is the frame material. So you would have to make a decision as to whether it is worth working at your job the extra time (after taxes) to get the carbon frame over the al frame with carbon fork & stays.
Actually, it seems you have answered your own question.
the sequoia elite has a suspension seat post, correct? can you sense the fork is still absorbing some of the vibration?
i don't think i could spend the money on the roubaix comp... the only magazine reviews i've found have been of the pro and comp, so i was trying to determine how much of what they mention is attributable to the frame vs. the other carbon parts.
i'm actually leaning towards the base roubaix, as from what i've read, there is only a subtle difference between 105 and ultegra, and not having ever ridden a modern road bike, 105 will probably feel amazingly smooth... the wheels are different as well, but not sure it will make a difference at my level.
the sequoia elite has 105 and the same wheels as the base roubaix. did you compare the sequoia comp with the r-540 wheels and ultegra? do you like the wheels?
thanks,
phil
Agree you've got to test ride some bikes. Just remember to have tire pressures set up the same, since that makes a major difference in ride quality.
Last fall I test rode a Trek 2300, a 5200, and then a 1000. Tires were set to 100 psi as I requested. You could probably do the same comparison with the Specialized range. Suggest this would be a good way for you to compare ride qualities vs price.
Originally posted by philbert
the sequoia elite has a suspension seat post, correct? can you sense the fork is still absorbing some of the vibration?
i don't think i could spend the money on the roubaix comp... the only magazine reviews i've found have been of the pro and comp, so i was trying to determine how much of what they mention is attributable to the frame vs. the other carbon parts.
i'm actually leaning towards the base roubaix, as from what i've read, there is only a subtle difference between 105 and ultegra, and not having ever ridden a modern road bike, 105 will probably feel amazingly smooth... the wheels are different as well, but not sure it will make a difference at my level.
the sequoia elite has 105 and the same wheels as the base roubaix. did you compare the sequoia comp with the r-540 wheels and ultegra? do you like the wheels?
thanks,
phil Ok, I'm sorry, I misunderstood your post.
The seatpost shock on my Sequoia Elite is a joke. I'd rather have the carbon/zert post on the base Roubaix or higher model Sequoia. Even if the seatpost is helping, which I doubt, I can still tell a difference in my hands and shouders from the dampening from the carbon front fork. It does help smooth out the ride.
On the 105 vs. Ultegra, I've read serveral places that there was a minimal difference between the two. I know some will say otherwise and will be quite vocal about it but I bought my bike for me so they can shove it. I test rode the Sequoia Comp with the Ultegra but I just couldn't tell the difference, especially when you factor in the price increase. I'm sure there is a weight difference but big whoop. If I were a weight weenie I wouldn't have bought a Sequoia to begin with.
As far as the Alex ALX-290 rims & hubs, I'm quite pleased. I thought I'd have to true them frequently but so far notta. I have to true up the wheels (ZAC19 & Joytech) that came stock on my Raleigh M60 MTB every couple of weeks! So I'm suprised that they are holding up. I did buy some different tires. The 700x25's weren't cutting it. I replaced them with a pair of Kenda Kwests. They're much heavier but they're also smoother at only 80 psi.
Originally posted by Doctor Morbius
snip...The seatpost shock on my Sequoia Elite is a joke. I'd rather have the carbon/zert post on the base Roubaix or higher model Sequoia. Even if the seatpost is helping, which I doubt, I can still tell a difference in my hands and shouders from the dampening from the carbon front fork. It does help smooth out the ride.
....
Hi, I am currently trying to decide between the sequoia elite and the trek 1800c. Did you consider the Trek? Are you happy with the Sequoia?
I have test rode them both briefly and found a slight difference in handling (the sequoia wants to turn more easily when leaning) I think perhaps due to the head angle. Otherwise its hard to tell much different for a quick 15 minute spin.
Anyway, just interested in hearing from anyone who faced the same choice.
"Hi, I am currently trying to decide between the sequoia elite and the trek 1800c. Did you consider the Trek? Are you happy with the Sequoia?
I have test rode them both briefly and found a slight difference in handling (the sequoia wants to turn more easily when leaning) I think perhaps due to the head angle. Otherwise its hard to tell much different for a quick 15 minute spin.
Anyway, just interested in hearing from anyone who faced the same choice."
Biking_olywa,
I faced the same choice this spring and found the Sequoia Elite to have a smoother ride. I think the lower angle and carbon rear seat stays make the difference. The Specilaized also uses a butted AL frame and I think it is a bit lighter than the Trek.
I chose to go with what I felt was the better frame (Elite) over the 1800c with Ultegra. Tough choice, but I'm really happy with the Sequoia. I will agree with Doctor Morbius about the seat and suspension post. I'm going to upgrade my seat to a Terry and adjusted the post a little stiffer than the original setting. It still has a ride that rivals my old Specialized Expedition tourer with 38c tires.
Bob
Philbert,
my take on the difference between a full CF bike and a CF-aluminum combo like the 105 Roubaix -- with regards to the vibration dampening there are probably diminishing returns. Will the full-CF frame (all other things being identical) have a more forgiving ride? Yes, but not much. I think the convential wisdom is that the fork, seat stays, and seat post are the areas that return the most 'benefit' of the vibration-dampening qualities of CF.
When my wife bought her "pretty" bike, the 105 Roubaix, I rode a couple in my frame size (the 105 and an ultegra version) and couldn't tell a difference btwn the two, liked them both a lot (if you are into a stable, easy-to-ride, comfortable bike...which I'm actually not). 1 thing - the saddle was pretty hard for her, she replaced it with a gel model.
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
