Innovations that weren't...

[93hero]

CF layers should only move against each other if there had been some sort of damage or a huge f?!k up in manufacturing.

I wonder how many CF frames are damaged by users not realising that they need to treat them differently, arguably with more respect than a ‘metal’ frame?

CF is good enough for propshafts on sports cars and suspension arms on F1 cars. I’m very comfortable riding well designed CF frames from reputable manufacturers.

 

[bikeworkshop]

A lot of the damage to carbon happens when you're not riding it.
It's not a great material for shared hallways, bike racks, public transport...

 

[LeeDevelopment]

I am sure this was all blown well out of proportion though, by haters. My understanding was there was an issue, very early on with the aluminium frames, where a small number of frames cracked. Might have been one batch and I think it was a heat treatment post welding, or something not right with the supplied tubes. After that was understood they haven't had any more problems than any other manufacturer, but the shit stuck. I am sure i read this written by an ex employee, but it is the internet so it could just have been a fanboi.

Maybe i am wrong?

Crack-n-fail....

 

[Cloverleaf]

CF layers should only move against each other if there had been some sort of damage or a huge f?!k up in manufacturing.

I wonder how many CF frames are damaged by users not realising that they need to treat them differently, arguably with more respect than a ‘metal’ frame?

CF is good enough for propshafts on sports cars and suspension arms on F1 cars. I’m very comfortable riding well designed CF frames from reputable manufacturers.

It is, but if you jumped on an F1 wishbone it would snap pretty easily. Carbon's great for things where you know what forces are going to be applied, and where you can control the damage, but a lot less good when it's open to all manner of customer misuse combined with gram counting. In road and xc bikes carbon's used for weight but in the bigger hitting end of the MTB spectrum it's so you can stick more material where you need it, and build in a degree of resilience to damage that would be pretty hard to do in an aluminium frame without going back to the early '00's with frame weight. Some manufacturers go too light, predominantly the direct to consumer brands, but a lot of the bigger ones are fairly risk averse and so you do end up with a pretty strong frame that can deal with a lot of abuse. I remember chatting to one of the SC designers years ago and he was bemoaning that he'd had to beef up that first carbon V10 frame so much because they couldn't afford any breakages as it would instantly be compared to the problems of all the old thermoplastic bikes like the GT STS etc. As a result it wasn't any lighter than the aluminium version, but it was spectacularly tough.

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

CF layers should only move against each other if there had been some sort of damage or a huge f?!k up in manufacturing.

I wonder how many CF frames are damaged by users not realising that they need to treat them differently, arguably with more respect than a ‘metal’ frame?

CF is good enough for propshafts on sports cars and suspension arms on F1 cars. I’m very comfortable riding well designed CF frames from reputable manufacturers.

F1 stuff only has to last the race, if reused it will be x-rayed/ultrasound. I'm glad you are comfortable, I personally wouldn't use one. Also the noise they make is horrendous.