Clydesdales and carbon fiber-bad idea?

I would like to pick the collective brain of the forum (except for roadhouse if he's out there), is carbon fiber a suitable frame material for us big-uns? Given it's propensity for not-so-gradual failure, I've always been afraid to buy a carbon fiber framed bike, especially given the cost. $2000-4000 every two years outstrips my commitment to the sport (or at least my wife's). I try to "ride light" but at 230 that's always going to be a matter of degree. I even check the welds regularly on my alu framed bike. Since the benefit of the weight difference starts to pale into insignificance as a percentage of my body weight, would that $4000 be better spent on a Waterford I can leave to my son? Thoughts?

this is the way I think of it...

I weigh 220#...the difference bw an aluminum frame and a cf frame is what, 3-5lb? so lets say my al frame weighs 21# (not a clue what it really weights, just a number for example), so thats 241lb total with me on it. Take me on a cf frame that might weigh 17#, or 237 with me on it. The weight difference is less than 1% of the total weight with me on the bike. for me, no the 2-4g pricetag for cf just isnt worth it to me yet. id say maybe when im under 200#, I could consider it, but theres a lot more things making me slow than my bike

Your point is all the stronger because I think that the difference in weight between a cf frame and an aluminum one is more like a couple of pounds. My entire aluminum frame/ cf fork bike weighed 23 lbs. as equipped from the manufacturer. So the same equipment on a cf frame would weigh maybe 20 lbs? Check out the discussion of failure modes at Rivendell Bicycle Works: Frame Materials

interesting article... its amazing what the companies can make you believe is benefiting you. Reminds me of a story my dad told me when working on some chips for a home audio company. They wanted to test how beneficial certain aspects were from other companies' claims, and in 95% of test subjects, they couldnt tell even the slightest difference, but as soon as you told them they were listening to Bose over brand X, the same music all of a sudden "sounded better".

Cycling is a sport with HUGE claims from companies, and you have to be able to discern which are true and which are bogus...I see people all the time shell out an extra $100 for pedals that are 50g lighter...seriously, take a piss before the ride and you lost that 50g 4 fold. Cycling is starting to sound as mathematically illiterate as the lottery these days

The weight reduction gained (you are not buying to look cool are you ) is meaningless. Just the weight of the 2 water bottles is more than the weight saving. Add to that your sadlebag with cell phone and house keys and tools and the gains mean nothing. Carbon is for the guys that are held back by their bikes, the average cyclist is not held back at all by the equipment but by themselves.
But the look......

Yeah. its gonna take more than a bike to make me look cool. But the high tech look is pretty attractive. Light is good, but what kind of life expectancy would a cf frame have under someone my weight? Do bikes have max weight ratings or recommendations, like cars and m/cs have GVWRs? I've never had a salesman say "Sorry sir, you're just too damn fat for that bike" (or even the same thing more politely.) The minimal weight savings is definitely not worth any trade-off, but my question is, is there any trade-off? Other than price, I mean. If a bike would last me 20 years, I would have far less problem paying $3000-4000 for it. I look at high-end steel bikes all the time that cost that much, but is my uneducated perception that a steel bike would last me a lot longer than a cf one accurate? How about aluminum? Is it somewhere in between, or is my bike going to be ready for the scrapheap in a couple of years?

I dont know about longevity per se but i can tell you that one big fall on a cf frame will be the end of the frame. They are much more fragile than al/ti/steel. As far as just "wearing out" i really dont know

Um, sorry to butt in, but there's a lot of crap being talked here.

First, the material used to build a frame is only one of many factors to consider. There is no inherent weakness that will prohibit you from using carbon fibre. Crap frames can be built from any material. I can think of lots of steel, aluminum or titanium frames that would be unsuitable for you for reasons that have nothing to do with the material (i.e. poor design, poorly-drawn tubing, bad welds, etc.).

Second, there are reasons for choosing carbon other than weight savings. You are all correct in stating that to a large extent it is the weight of your bodies - not your bikes - that is the limiting factor in your riding. But anyone who says that carbon does not offer a different ride characteristic than other materials - not necessarily better, but certainly different - has never ridden a carbon fibre frame.

I currently own steel bikes and a carbon fibre bike, I have had aluminum (but would never buy again - worst rides I have ever experienced), and I have had titanium. In three years I have ridden over 12000km on some pretty rough roads (our cobblestones are world-famous), most of which was on my carbon fibre bike, and it is still in fine fettle. It was even x-rayed three weeks ago to ensure that there were no problems.

I bought carbon because in my country, on my rides, carbon offers better absorption than aluminum, better stiffness than steel or aluminum. I think you need to think long and hard about what you want from your bike, and if carbon is the best material for you, then don't hesitate. Just make sure you buy quality, irrespective of the material.

Good luck!

HW

No specifics here, but I ride a C50 with carbon bars, seat post, and campy super record (all carbon). I have CarbonSports Lightweight carbon rims, and I weigh 250lbs.. I have been on carbon everthing for the last 8 yrs or so, and I have never broken anything or had any problems..

I tend to agree with Harry Walnut. I haven't been riding nearly as long as I'm sure the bulk of you folks have; only being at it a little over a year and a half. I moved from a relatively heavy Novara GT MTB when I found it difficult to keep up with friends on road bikes. I had a couple of grand to invest and bought a Specialized Roubiax Elite Triple and since purchasing it in June I've done about 1600 miles on it. And it's performed flawlessly. I'm 6'6" tall and tip the scales at 5 lbs either side of 245 lbs. I know it's somewhat subjective and I know and I may be a little biased due to spending what I consider a fairly major sum of money, but I believe this bike's ride is actually smoother than my MTB. And it has some minimal suspension in the front forks which the Roubiax does not. I'm not saying that a catastrophic failure couldn't occur, but I think if there was a history suggesting that it's a common occurrence the carbon bikes wouldn't enjoy the popularity that they have.

In addition I do believe that from day 1 this bike is very noticeably easier to ride and significantly faster at the top end and especially faster on acceleration than was my MTB even though I had fitted it with intermediate tires running at 100 psi. So my belief is that 3 or 4 pounds DOES make a difference. Now maybe I would have noticed the same performance difference between my MTB and a steel framed road bike. I can't say, because I haven't experienced that. But to say that CF is somehow inferior to steel, aluminum, or titanium I think demonstrates a certain bias towards your own agenda (which in the case of article referred to in the link fatandslow provided is meant to sell steel bikes). Don't get me wrong, the author of that article has every right to do that, but take those comments with a grain of salt.

Another factor is that at least for me there is a mental advantage. On a bike like this I “feel” like a more serious rider and as such I’m paying more attention to getting better at my sport/hobby. And that’s a good thing the way I see it. At 67 years of age it’s helped me rejuvenate my life. Two years ago my goal was to have another birthday. Now two years later, my goal is to do 2 back to back century rides in the (S)eattle (T)o (P)ortland ride and I’m pretty confident I’ll make that goal. Three weeks ago I did a hilly 75 mile ride in 5hrs and 5 minutes for an average of 14.7 mph. Could I have done another on the next day. NO. But I’ll get there.

So my advice (which should also be taken with a grain of salt – some would say a whole shaker of salt) is that, if the CF gets you excited, go for it. If you get a recognized top brand you shouldn’t experience an inordinate risk of failure due to it being carbon or to your weight.