Ouch........Like carbon bike bits.........look here.........

Russell":2w9s551x said:
Got a torque wrench? No, didn't think so.

:oops: :oops: No.

Carbon is here to stay. The cycling industry want it and they will make sure the buyers want it. Just like disc's

I notice that the Chinese factories aren't copying my Trimble. Why??

It's the perfect carbon frame :D
 
from a hippy stand point, what environmental impact does cf production have over aluminium or steel? would of thought the resins used would be pretty mank.
 
jamabikes":1x4a9v0q said:
from a hippy stand point, what environmental impact does cf production have over aluminium or steel? would of thought the resins used would be pretty mank.

I'm not sure about the production aspect but I've heard that cf is almost impossible to recycle :cry:
 
Well I know titanium is one of the most expensive to process from ore so that wins no prizes either.
 
I really do not see what is wrong with a carbon frame. Silly blog as most bikes that are crashed in the way described will be unusable no matter what they are made off.

From a sustainability point of of view I think steel is the best material. Easily recyled and easy to extract from its ore.

Aluminium require huge open cast mines, hydroelectric powerstations and the reduction process does release plenty of CO2 as the carbon electrodes used react and burn of requiring replacements.

Infact Bamboo frames with wooden rims are probably the most sustainable.
 
Regardless of the improvements in production, (and I would suggest that there really is no such thing as a very poorly made carbon fibre based frame due to the logistics involved), there are underlying advantages in steel over carbon fibre.

For as little as a couple of pounds weight penalty you can have a frame that may need little attention and can be generally abused for many years, versus one that will leave a niggling doubt in the back of your mind every time it connects with mother earth, or the door of the car, or anything else.

I would rather blow my money on lighter gear of most kinds than carbon frames, as a non competitor the advantages just don't weigh up, or only weigh up, so to speak.
 
I wonder if carbon frames and components have maximum user weights?

I don't think they would suit a 110kg wheel breaking saddle bending crash happy downhiller :oops:
 
mass199":1j13fwm8 said:
I wonder if carbon frames and components have maximum user weights?

Of course some do, those designed to be at the extreme of the materials capability weightwise, but then (and this has been said before) so do many of the 20 year old parts that retro bikers regularly still use today.

I never fail to be amazed that there are riders here who wouldn't ride a carbon frame/bars/seatpost but who then take a bike with a 20 year old aluminium handlebar/seatpost round a Cannock trail centre.
 
Russell":374nobg3 said:
mass199":374nobg3 said:
I wonder if carbon frames and components have maximum user weights?

Of course some do, those designed to be at the extreme of the materials capability weightwise, but then (and this has been said before) so do many of the 20 year old parts that retro bikers regularly still use today.

I never fail to be amazed that there are riders here who wouldn't ride a carbon frame/bars/seatpost but who then take a bike with a 20 year old aluminium handlebar/seatpost round a Cannock trail centre.

Very good point.

That's why I would'nt ride a retro aluminium bike, and when I do go out on a retro ride I always go steady. I just don't feel as safe on old/well used bikes.
 
Back
Top