[Sandwich]

Interesting to me that most people who already make most of their bikes in Asia are 100% behind carbon, and most people who have a US-based production system say "to hell with carbonz". I hope the chinese carbon market cuts the legs out from under them personally, as you can get a hardtail that's virtually identical to something marketed by the big boys for ~$1300 cheaper. It'll drive the market more towards US-based production, or cheaper prices, either of which I'm ok with. I still can't get over that you can get a hand-made, US built Foes frame for almost $1000 cheaper than you can get a carbon bike from a company with the very worst reputation in the industry. Oh well, at least you know 100% of your money is going to one guy in an office and not a dedicated team of fabricators and engineers.

 

[OGRipper]

Oh well, at least you know 100% of your money is going to one guy in an office and not a dedicated team of fabricators and engineers.

I love my country too but of course most of these companies are still based in the US and have dedicated teams of engineers, assemblers, sales, marketing, distribution personnel, etc., all based in the US. They create plenty of US jobs and spend their money here.

 

[Sandwich]

I know, I just like toolin' on evil.

Honestly, it's all probably for the better in the long run. Let Taiwan and China poison their lakes and rivers with delicious carbon/aluminum by-product.

 

[SkullCrack]

I am surprised nobody brings the custom aspect. It is 'easy' to get a customer a full custom steel, alu or ti frame. Try that with carbon!

http://www.parleecycles.com/custom/

Are Turner still US made? After SAPA doesn't do bicycle frames anymore?

Turner is switching manufacturing to Zen Fabrication in Portland.

 

[Vrock]

http://www.parleecycles.com/custom/

Turner is switching manufacturing to Zen Fabrication in Portland.

Custom CF Roadbikes are very expensive and they are not really 100% custom, road bikes are all pretty much the same, so building a custom is not that difficult. They also use tubes... FS carbon frames are all monocoques, so going custom is much difficult.

The main problem with CF right now IMHO, is that bike companies have a small budget for
I+D, and they are using 90% of it to develop Carbon bikes. Gearboxes, New Shocks and New suspension systems are getting delayed because of it, and it sucks.

 

[Sandwich]

I love that people are so hard over carbon. It's the 29" wheel of frame material. They're the same arguments for/against, and the same silliness, and the same industry whore-a-thon to get people to "need" new bikes.

 

[dan-o]

I love that people are so hard over carbon. It's the 29" wheel of frame material. They're the same arguments for/against, and the same silliness, and the same industry whore-a-thon to get people to "need" new bikes.

Have you ridden one?
I was a doubter until my friend upgraded to a carbon nomad after two alu versions.

Sold my US made nomad (the geo on the carbon XL fits me better than my 08, which was the main reason I upgraded) and I was blown away how much stiffer the carbon frame is. Night and difference. Weight savings is just gravy. Over the past year it's gotten plenty of east coast rox battle scars and is going strong.

I don't think carbons the end-all material but, having ridden the same model in both carbon and alu, there's no doubt in my mind about there being real advantages.

 

[Tetreault]

Have you ridden one?
I was a doubter until my friend upgraded to a carbon nomad after two alu versions.

Sold my US made nomad (the geo on the carbon XL fits me better than my 08, which was the main reason I upgraded) and I was blown away how much stiffer the carbon frame is. Night and difference. Weight savings is just gravy. Over the past year it's gotten plenty of east coast rox battle scars and is going strong.

I don't think carbons the end-all material but, having ridden the same model in both carbon and alu, there's no doubt in my mind about there being real advantages.

I rode a 2011 alu and carbon nomad back to back with an identical build and the noticeable difference isn't as large as you make it out to be, its the placebo effect of you having a massive erection due to the carbon that makes more difference then when your actually gunning the **** out of either of the bikes.

 

[OGRipper]

I love that people are so hard over carbon. It's the 29" wheel of frame material. They're the same arguments for/against, and the same silliness, and the same industry whore-a-thon to get people to "need" new bikes.

It's like a 29'er in that it's one more option in an expanding world of ways to get kicks on two wheels. What's the problem? There are pros and cons and you can make your choice.

My experience is the same as Dan-O's, only with a Blur LT: Same bike, one aluminum, one carbon. Big difference in ride quality, no durability issues at all despite my best efforts. More grins on the trail. Again, what's the problem?

Sure there is hype, and there are over-zealous fanboys - but that's true of every frame material, every wheel size, every suspension design, etc.

 

[dan-o]

I rode a 2011 alu and carbon nomad back to back with an identical build and the noticeable difference isn't as large as you make it out to be, its the placebo effect of you having a massive erection due to the carbon that makes more difference then when your actually gunning the **** out of either of the bikes.

OK, I guess the rotor rubbing on the alu swingarm and not on the carbon is my imagination.
Were those your bikes or just a test ride?
I owned the alu for 3+ years and have 1 year on the carbon. There is a real difference.

 

[Sandwich]

stuff

things

I don't doubt there are or can be advantages, but I mean $800 more for 1.5lb of weight savings and a debatable increase in stiffness? Sure, if you absolutely need to have the best, because you're in a competitive field where people who can afford to pay more money WILL be faster than you, but for a f*cking trailbike you ride for jollies?

I have anecdotal personal experience with carbon (owned an STS back in the day) but not enough to say "OMG teh carbonz totally harsh my gnurrrrrr". I will say that any wonder material can still be let down by bad frame design and construction. Keep in mind you also changed sizes and geometries, it's hardly scientific to say carbon was the sole difference, as tetbro suggests, you really need to do a back to back test with the same components to say it's 100% this or that.

I'm not saying that carbon isn't better than aluminum. I just find the notion that a company will no longer be able to stay in business let alone relevant because they don't produce a carbon front triangle to be laughable at best, especially when, because they have to farm all the work out to Asia, it becomes so much easier to R+D (ripoff and duplicate). I think intense is going to shoot themselves in the foot if they abandon their ability to rapidly adapt and improve and instead start churning out carbon frames that they have to hold onto for 6 years to turn a profit on the molds.

 

[syadasti]

I don't doubt there are or can be advantages, but I mean $800 more for 1.5lb of weight savings and a debatable increase in stiffness? Sure, if you absolutely need to have the best, because you're in a competitive field where people who can afford to pay more money WILL be faster than you, but for a f*cking trailbike you ride for jollies?

There are some brands doing carbon at reasonable prices. The Pivot Mach 5.7 carbon costs $300 more than the aluminum version.

 

[Sandwich]

It's like a 29'er in that it's one more option in an expanding world of ways to get kicks on two wheels. What's the problem? There are pros and cons and you can make your choice.

My experience is the same as Dan-O's, only with a Blur LT: Same bike, one aluminum, one carbon. Big difference in ride quality, no durability issues at all despite my best efforts. More grins on the trail. Again, what's the problem?

Sure there is hype, and there are over-zealous fanboys - but that's true of every frame material, every wheel size, every suspension design, etc.

the argument is that aluminum is not irrelevant, just like 26" wheels are not irrelevant. Because a company chooses not to or cannot afford to make a carbon frame, doesn't make them irrelevant, which is what this article, and lots of commentary, suggests.

 

[syadasti]

the argument is that aluminum is not irrelevant, just like 26" wheels are not irrelevant. Because a company chooses not to or cannot afford to make a carbon frame, doesn't make them irrelevant, which is what this article, and lots of commentary, suggests.

You aren't giving the marketing enough credit, most people are sheep.

 

[Sandwich]

most people are sheep.

hey I just sold my 29er!

 

[dan-o]

There are some brands doing carbon at reasonable prices. The Pivot Mach 5.7 carbon costs $300 more than the aluminum version.

Maybe they're just overcharging for their aluminum frames?
Without knowing their costs your comparison is useless.

 

[OGRipper]

Sandwich, the argument about what people "need" is tired. We get it, most of us are not faster on more expensive bikes, and fast guys go fast on less expensive bikes. Nobody really NEEDS a $12K bike, any more than anyone needs a $1M car. This is about what people WANT.

Should people WANT a properly-made carbon bike? I'm saying yes, because despite some inevitable marketing hype, they offer the best performance right now.

As for relevancy, there is of course still a place for aluminum bikes. I read the article to be about whether the smaller guys can survive at the super high-end, boutique level if they are not using carbon. I think they can, but they need to offer something certain customers value that you can't get from carbon. (U.S. made, custom sizing, personal fitting/taint massage, etc.) It's a different kind of hype, and it's a trick smaller companies have pretty much ALWAYS used to sell their stuff.

 

[syadasti]

Maybe they're just overcharging for their aluminum frames?
Without knowing their costs your comparison is useless.

They charge less than SC's comparable Blur LT in Al and their upgrade price for going carbon is about half as much as SC at only $300. Their sales volume is significantly lower than SC so exactly as I said, their upgrade price is reasonable but your comment is useless.

 

[Tetreault]

OK, I guess the rotor rubbing on the alu swingarm and not on the carbon is my imagination.
Were those your bikes or just a test ride?
I owned the alu for 3+ years and have 1 year on the carbon. There is a real difference.

I never had an issue with rotor rubbing on my aluminium one, the 2008 nomad was a different gen the the 2011, the bikes were vastly different within the 3 years time.

I had the alu nomad for a year and a friend of mine broke his frame (Norco) 2 weeks before we were heading on a week long trip and needed a replacement asap. So I sold him my nomad alu frame and got a carbon one as they were available in my size at the time. I admit that I had a boner going pretty good when it arrive and I transferred my parts over, and thought it was the absolute tits when I started riding it. But after a week, once the nostalgia wore off, and if I were to really be critical, the advantage of the same gen frames, same geo, same build, only difference being material is minimal.

If i were able to close my eyes, and ride the two frames back to back with identical builds, there is absolutly no way i could tell the difference between them. ZERO chance. The only extremely noticeable difference is the sound of the two bikes, the ping and ding sound difference with rocks coming into contact with carbon as to alu.

So in the end, if you aren't blinded by aesthetics, marketing, and a little bit of bragging, what does a carbon bike add to you for a $1000 up charge?

in the case of the nomad:
1/3lb in weight savings or 11%.
Upgraded aesthetics and bragging rights.
$1000 less money in your pocket to spend on bacon and beer.
Added headaches due to your investment and worrying about de laminating the carbon while eating **** on rocky trails.
marginal stiffness gains.

To conclude
gain 11% weight savings.
maybe a gain of similar value in noticeable stiffness.
for 150% the price.

Seems pretty ****ing insane when you ask me.

Sold the nomad due to relocating cities, and am also in the same process of selling my recently acquired undead.

 

[IH8Rice]

Maybe they're just overcharging for their aluminum frames?.

this

$2220 for the aluminum and $2600 for the plastic one

 

[OGRipper]

If i were able to close my eyes, and ride the two frames back to back with identical builds, there is absolutly no way i could tell the difference between them. ZERO chance.

I would be easier to swallow if you said you did back-to-back timed runs and there was no difference. But in terms of how the bike feels...really? Not that you care, but if that's true your opinion just lost some weight with me. My experience with the LT and the Nomad is that there is an immediate, significant difference in ride feel on the trail. And I'm not the only one, it's all been discussed before.

 

[gnarbar]

taking the marketing hype out of it, and "need V want" debate, I think people should just ride what they like, what makes them feel happy, what suits their budget, and/or makes them faster

it's mountain biking, it's not really complex. the involvement of people and marketing and polarized subjective web debates make it more complex.

buy an alu AM bike and ride the ass off it = win
buy a carbonz AM bike and have more stoke and float lines faster = win
buy a carbonz DH bike and ride it 50% more because you has a carbonz hard on = win

.....just ride

 

[Tetreault]

I would be easier to swallow if you said you did back-to-back timed runs and there was no difference

WTF is this? timed runs? is this not a 6" all mountain bike? This might be the stupidest thing that i have ever heard on here, so likewise, we have lost credibility with one another

I would think that ride time on the two frames with an identical part spec being of the highest value in actually comparison between the two. No chance that the ride characteristics of the two could be skewed due to components.

please explain to me this immediate, significant difference in ride feel on the trail because having rode both frames in some of the sketchiest trails in north america, I would have to call this B.S. Simply absurd.

Edit: Noticeable ride feel maybe, but this feel does not mean vastly increased ride quality

 

[syadasti]

this

$2220 for the aluminum and $2600 for the plastic one

I was talking about the complete bikes. Carbon completes start at $4299 (XT/SLX spec w/Float 150 and RP23 Kashima). Pivot has good value in both materials especially given SC charges more and sells considerably more units than Pivot.

 

[OGRipper]

please explain to me this immediate, significant difference in ride feel on the trail because having rode both frames in some of the sketchiest trails in north america, I would have to call this B.S. Simply absurd.

Edit: Noticeable ride feel maybe, but this feel does not mean vastly increased ride quality

Like I said, it's all been discussed before. Stiffer, lighter, and more vibration damping. Not a myth, not BS, not absurd. Whether it's a big enough difference to justify the cost is a separate question.

The point about timed runs was to agree that it won't necessarily make you faster. That makes more sense to me than saying you can't tell the difference in how it feels. If that's the stupidist thing you've read here, well, look around a little bit.

 

[no skid marks]

Carbon is the best material fro frame manufacture.
Carbon at this point is probably one of the easiest materials to stuff up with in frame manufacture and design.
Add the weight weenie hype to a small knowledge base, and carbon becomes quite a gamble IMO.
All other materials will carry on as they were with their own characters and benefits.
I'd buy steel frames if I could,purely because I "think" they're the most environmentally friendly, and they feel good. Design is still way more important than material as far as riding goes IMO.

 

[norbar]

You aren't giving the marketing enough credit, most people are sheep.

This though I wouldn't call them sheep. They just don't give a damn to spend much time on research. They buy what they know. I'm quite sure there are products in your life you buy without writing 9k posts on a web forum about them and that doesn't make you a sheep. I did that with floors for my apartment, my roadbike probably many other things I can't remember. If we spend that much time on our every purchase we would have to be unemployed


Though I agree for marketing. Every product has certain marketability and it is much more important than the marketing, ads, pr or whatever you do after you release the product. Carbon is a huge marketability plus and for a casual user it will probably be a separating factor between the "good/high end" and "bad" companies. Even though it won't be true. Carbon will be a defining factor in market positioning if it really takes over.

Carbon in dh bikes is a bit like 3D in movies.

 

[woodsguy]

I'd buy steel frames if I could,purely because I "think" they're the most environmentally friendly, and they feel good.

There's a Canadian company that makes fs bikes with a cromo rear triangle. I forget the name but they've been at the Vermont Mountain Bike Festival the past few years. I didn't get around to demoing one but the people that did seemed to like them.

 

[MrPlow]

I haven't actually read through this entire thread but thought I would chime in anyway.
IMO for mountain bikes carbon is a bit of a game changer for 3 reasons.
1) Durability. Look unless you are really pshing the weight limits like the roadies are, and you don't crash, dip it in thinners, or leave it exposed to heat and sunlight constantly your carbon frame is going to last forever. 2) If you bin it, you can have it repaired (by me ) . Yes you can argue that you need to scan it or whatever, but reality is at this stage there is enough FOS in a frame to withstand a few broken fibers anyway. Potentially you could snap your frame at Whistler, and be back riding it the next day really. I would imagine that the likes of Santa Cruz etc are using a layup that protects them more from impact failure rather than actually pushing anywhere near the strength of the frame in normal conditions.
3) There is so much you can do with this stuff that simply isn't possible with metals, ferrous or otherwise. There is no way I could make my bike economically from alloy. I don't think we have really even started to use the flexible aspect of composites in MTB yet.

More than steel, there are so many ways to make a frame. Look at the likes of Cyfac or Calfee, these guys are pretty well using raw tube like an ally bike and bonding them together. Nothing stopping this happening in a DH bike either, that's what BCD did... And how most alloy frames are made. So there would be nothing stopping a manufacturer from getting a tube set made, bonding and stratifying the joins and making their frames this way, still lighter, still stronger..
Then you go onto pinarello, more of a monocoque. And what seems to be what most mtbs are striving for. Perfect for the big guys. But as I said above, not the only way...
Sorry if this has been repeated.

 

[syadasti]

This though I wouldn't call them sheep.

Nope most are sheep - they take up whatever trend designed to move more product the industry makes. The masses more than not will elect the jellyfish politicians with the largest campaign, buy total garbage from infomercials, consume the garbage food or beer the food industry wants to sell them, watch whatever horse**** Hollywood shovels their way, listen to industry manufactured popular "music", or buy whatever overpriced widget is popular at the time regardless. A large portion still have brand loyalty even there are mountain of very accessible resources to inform them and many modern practices make that a pretty unreliable strategy. It requires a modicum of effort to suss out these trends they are selling, not a lot.

 

[norbar]

Nope most are sheep - they take up whatever trend designed to move more product the industry makes. The masses more than not will elect the jellyfish politicians with the largest campaign, buy total garbage from infomercials, eat the garbage food or beer the food industry wants to sell them, watch whatever horse**** Hollywood shovels their way, or buy whatever overpriced widget is popular at the time regardless. A large portion still have brand loyalty even there are mountain of very accessible resources to inform them and many modern practices make that a pretty unreliable strategy. It requires a modicum of effort to suss out these trends they are selling, not a lot.

To be honest I shouldn't argue with you when I'm the crap shoveling from Hollywood business. Especially after what I've learned at my job.

I just think people too often assume if someone doesn't make a well researched buy he automatically becomes a sheep, even though he did that because of lack of time and focusing his energy on other tasks.

 

[dropmachine]

For most riders, research is whatever MBA tells them to buy, and that is scarier then waking up next to Paris Hilton with no condom wrapper in sight.

 

[MrPlow]

For most riders, research is whatever MBA tells them to buy, and that is scarier then waking up next to Paris Hilton with no condom wrapper in sight.

I think you are over exaggerating there a bit mate...

Nothing could be scarier than waking up next to Paris Hilton.

 

[norbar]

I think you are over exaggerating there a bit mate...

Nothing could be scarier than waking up next to Paris Hilton.

Waking up and realizing you are Justin Bieber. Though that's kinda like waking up and finding MBA next to your bed.

 

[gemini2k]

no condom wrapper in sight.

Seriously? Who ever wears rubbers?

 

[ianjenn]

Seriously? Who ever wears rubbers?

IV=H.I.V. need I say more. They are still ranked as the #1 school right? Okay back to carbon, carbon condoms then?

 

[iRider]

IV=H.I.V. need I say more. They are still ranked as the #1 school right? Okay back to carbon, carbon condoms then?

You always should use rubber to protect your carbon rimz from east coast rocx!