I thought steel was supposed to be more absorbant than carbon?
Carbon Frames Are they really needed.
- Thread starter miremare
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I thought steel was supposed to be more absorbant than carbon?
hmmmmm...... my Italian steel is 9.8 kilos and my pal's carbon bike that he races is about 7.5 kilos.
it's about resonance. Steel resonates and carbon doesn't.
I'm with Raindog on the weight, although I accept that the frame is but a small part of the bike, and that the weight of the wheels is probably more important.
John the Monkey
Frivolous Cyclist
- Location
- Crewe
Depending on the tubing, geometry, you can make a pretty harsh riding steel bike if you've a mind to. Stick high pressure narrow tyres on it too, and you can probably shake some fillings out.
GrasB
Veteran
- Location
- Nr Cambridge
Not quite correct, while the headline specs are the same the SL has higher spec cranks & chain plus lighter seat post, stem & bars. If you go by the list numbers the frame is about 150-200grm heaver but the lighter weight components push the weight advantage to the SL (it is an SL after all).
Not really, it's more about what blend of characteristics you want. As a general rule aluminium is typically stiffer, carbon gives a more forgiving ride.
Baggy
Cake connoisseur
- Location
- Where the chevrons are
My Canadian steel roadie is about 7.5kg, and my colleague's Giant Advance Carbon doesn't weigh much less.
We could both do with losing about 7.5kg of body weight.
That seems unbelievable - you must have fabulous gear on it.
brockers
Senior Member
- Location
- hollowed out volcano
Perfectly doable with a 1600g steel frame and decent wheels.
My Carbon is a Spesh Roubaix Elite, my Alu is a Spesh Secteur Elite.
They share the same geometry and have near the same components. (105).
The Alu jobbie however is a much stiffer ride. For my commute it's fine. For much longer journeys however, I can really feel it after. It feel's like I have been put through through the grinder. The carbon jobbie I can ride all day. It's as comfy as my favourite old armchair, has less road buzz and is a much smoother ride.
They share the same geometry and have near the same components. (105).
The Alu jobbie however is a much stiffer ride. For my commute it's fine. For much longer journeys however, I can really feel it after. It feel's like I have been put through through the grinder. The carbon jobbie I can ride all day. It's as comfy as my favourite old armchair, has less road buzz and is a much smoother ride.
endoman
Senior Member
- Location
- Chesterfield
So why have the Alu?
Baggy
Cake connoisseur
- Location
- Where the chevrons are
No, a mix of Tiagra and 105. Her bell must weigh quite a bit though!
They are both small frames, I wonder if as the sizes increase carbon is proportionally lighter, as in her bike seems to look as if it's made of all the "chunky" bits of carbon with very little tubing.
As I said in my post... for my commute. It's fine for that.
endoman
Senior Member
- Location
- Chesterfield
Yep, I have an alu hybrid for commuting, but would much rather go on the carbon, only really ride the alu on towpaths etc now.
Hacienda71
Mancunian in self imposed exile in leafy Cheshire
- Location
- Wilmslow, Cheshire
Come on now no one has mentioned titanium!