Originally Posted by terbennett .
I've currently own a steel, two aluminum and a carbon bike. Carbon is not actually a better material. First off, it's not the same carbon used in aircraft so if anyone says that, they are blowing air. Carbon bikes are carbon/plastic mix, whereas carbon airplane parts are 100% carbon. Big difference. Anyway, material has little to do with quality. An entry level carbon bike will not ride like a $5000+ carbon bike. High end aluminum will trump entry-level carbon anyday of the week. Certain models use higher quality material on their entry level carbon bikes (ala Felt F5) but most don't. Take a CAAD 10 for example. An aluminum CAAD10 Dura ace can be had for around $3000 and it will kill pretty much any $3000 carbon bike in terms of performance and comfort. It even rivals $5000+ carbon bikes in those areas. If a person thinks that a carbon bike will be always be better, it's because they bought into marketing. Most manufacturers have dinged aluminum and made it entry-level by marketing carbon bikes as higher level bikes by loading them with higher level equipment. Don't believe me? Look around and see how many manufacturers offer aluminum framed bikes with anything above 105/Rival. I only know of two- Tsunami and Cannondale. Tour riders ride carbon because the highest level bikes are made of carbon and that's what they are paid to ride. Just 5-6 years ago, they were riding aluminum. Don't buy into the " look at what the Pro Tour riders are riding" because most don't have much choice since it's what pays their salaries. If they were riding $350 GMC Denali bikes, a lot of riders would be buying their bikes from Walmart. Funny thing is, those riders could still destoy most of us on Denali bikes.