Ti vs. Carbon Fiber

....and it would seem that nowhere can they find a sympathetic ear,
e.g. one that does not turn and walk away everytime, but here on the
usenet, where they somehow are able to delude themselves into thinking
that everyone here "hangs on their every word."

Cal


On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:05:49 -0600, "Pat" wrote:

These people are just dripping with self-satisfaction and a certain "I know
better than you--no matter what you say." type of personality.

On the OP's topic, allowing for wind drift...

I currently own and ride two bicycles, a Litespeed Classic and a Trek
5500. I have ridden each of them a couple of times in the last week.
I like the ride of both. Is it different? Very much so. The 5500 is
lighter and I can feel it when I'm riding. It's also more gentle on
its 60 year old rider. By gentle, I mean a road with rough pavement
is less punishment on me and less tiring. The weight doesn't make a
lot of difference in the mountains, but I'm not racing either.

The titanium is more durable, as someone pointed out. It has never
shown the little nicked scratched places that seem to appear on the
carbon fiber frame, from little stone hits, and more likely from rider
carelessness taking it in and out of a car, or the closet.

The Classic is stiffer, I can feel it when I am out of the saddle
climbing or sprinting. I'm not certain of the overall value of this
additional stiffness, but I do feel it. A place where the Litespeed
has the edge, in my experience, is on fast descents. It seems to
follow my intended line in the curves, as opposed to "wandering"
slightly to the right and left of my intended line. I don't mean
wobble, it's slower and controllable, not an oscillation effect. It
may be that I am just "over controlling" the bike, but I've been
trying to not do it for several thousand miles and have not yet
succeded completely. I have gained enough knowledge of the Trek,
though, to be confident that its "wandering" is not likely to ever
suddenly turn "ugly" at speeds around 50 miles per hour.

Both bikes are excellent. I could gladly ride either one for the rest
of my riding life. I would credit both with being far more bicycle
than I am rider.

Which would I chose, if I had to pick one to ride from now on? The
Trek for its ride comfort. At the century mark, I'm less tired. One
qualifying comment to that choice. If choosing one meant that I had
to ride that particular frame for the rest of my riding life, without
being able to replace it with another, in case of damage, I would
choose the Litespeed Classic.

Cal

"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
m...
I am starting to shop around for my next (and hopefully
last) road
bike. I have an aluminum bike now, and want get something
pretty nice.
Any thoughts on titainium vs. carbon fiber. Any input
would be
appreciated...thanks

The best bike is the one that makes you want to ride it
every time you see
it. Best bet is to find a shop that has samples of each that
you can ride,
in the right size and set up similarly, and see what you
think. I'm partial
to Trek carbon fiber, but since I make a living selling them
(huge numbers
of them at that), you should consider me totally biased and
an entirely
unreliable source of information. :)

I was having lunch with a business acquaintance from another
city earlier in the week. He bought one of the Trek carbon
fiber bikes last year -- one that's half a pound too light for
the Tour de France. He's started light touring (300 miles in 3
days), thinks he is 15% faster than on his old road bike [I
tried not to look too skeptical, but since getting the bike
he's lost 20 pounds, so...]. He was extremely enthusiastic
about the bike.

I was having lunch with a business acquaintance from another
city earlier in the week. He bought one of the Trek carbon
fiber bikes last year -- one that's half a pound too light for
the Tour de France. He's started light touring (300 miles in 3
days), thinks he is 15% faster than on his old road bike [I
tried not to look too skeptical, but since getting the bike
he's lost 20 pounds, so...]. He was extremely enthusiastic
about the bike.

Which is why "bike porn" is a fine excuse for buying something. He's
full of **** if he thinks that the bike makes him 15% faster - itself.
but, if seeing that shiny new bike out there makes him more inspired to
ride it, makes him therefore get stronger, therefore he becomes 15%
faster and 20 lbs lighter - let's hear it for bike porn!

In article .com,
Velo Psycho wrote:


I was having lunch with a business acquaintance from another
city earlier in the week. He bought one of the Trek carbon
fiber bikes last year -- one that's half a pound too light for
the Tour de France. He's started light touring (300 miles in 3
days), thinks he is 15% faster than on his old road bike [I
tried not to look too skeptical, but since getting the bike
he's lost 20 pounds, so...]. He was extremely enthusiastic
about the bike.

Which is why "bike porn" is a fine excuse for buying something. He's
full of **** if he thinks that the bike makes him 15% faster - itself.
but, if seeing that shiny new bike out there makes him more inspired to
ride it, makes him therefore get stronger, therefore he becomes 15%
faster and 20 lbs lighter - let's hear it for bike porn!


It depends on also where is he coming from the last bike.. I recently
did a little bike shopping of my own and followed Mike J's advise of
the 4 miles course evaluation of different bikes. I was just as
skeptical as you do when it comes to new bikes as I believe what
matters really is the motor, which means the rider. But when I test
rode the Cannondale R1000 and the Trek 5000, both great bikes over the
4 miles course (lots of steep uphills), my perception changed! On a
long steep grade, I was able to maintain a 39-18 chain combo with
relative ease, whereas on my heavier 40lbs touring bike, the same grade
would drop me down to a 32-32 (probably due to very heavy wheels and
fat tires). To a strong rider, a Trek 5000 or the Cannondale R1000
does help. For those who just started out, it probably won't help very
much.

By the way, the Trek 5000 is a fine well oiled machine. Very nice and
smooth ride and stiff enough on steep ascents without flexing..
Compared that to my 6 year old aluminium touring bike which is starting
to flex a bit when I'm mashing down bigger gears.

David.

On 7 Mar 2005 03:30:42 -0800, "Velo Psycho" wrote:



I was having lunch with a business acquaintance from another
city earlier in the week. He bought one of the Trek carbon
fiber bikes last year -- one that's half a pound too light for
the Tour de France. He's started light touring (300 miles in 3
days), thinks he is 15% faster than on his old road bike [I
tried not to look too skeptical, but since getting the bike
he's lost 20 pounds, so...]. He was extremely enthusiastic
about the bike.

Which is why "bike porn" is a fine excuse for buying something. He's
full of **** if he thinks that the bike makes him 15% faster - itself.
but, if seeing that shiny new bike out there makes him more inspired to
ride it, makes him therefore get stronger, therefore he becomes 15%
faster and 20 lbs lighter - let's hear it for bike porn!

The main factor on the bike is the motor. That motor is psychologically
motivated. If it feels faster, lighter, zippier, better you will pedal more and
stronger and that's all there is to it.

Some of the scientific cycling types will try to insist that weight is weight an
bike weight unimportant, that heavy wheels are no worse than say a heavy bottom
bracket and that a full water bottle negates a lighter bike - but it doesn't
FEEL that way. And when your lungs are coming loose on the next to last interval
of the day or half way up a climb, what your body feels is a hell of a lot more
important than a calculation your brain is too oxygen depleted to understand at
the moment. Except for Jobst of course, he just keeps motoring upward and onward
his forward progress impeded only to the extent that a spreadsheet would
predict.

Ron

David wrote:

But when I test
rode the Cannondale R1000 and the Trek 5000, both great bikes over
the
4 miles course (lots of steep uphills), my perception changed! On a
long steep grade, I was able to maintain a 39-18 chain combo with
relative ease, whereas on my heavier 40lbs touring bike, the same
grade
would drop me down to a 32-32 (probably due to very heavy wheels and
fat tires).

Um... I think the explanation better include a strong tailwind, plus a
heavy dose of placebo effect. You're talking about twice as much speed
(assuming identical cadence) using the lighter bike. The weight you're
lifting (you plus bike) has not been cut in half, and the touring tires
won't have _that_ much more rolling resistance.

The placebo effect can be pretty powerful. Especially when the placebo
is bike-shaped.

By the way, the Trek 5000 is a fine well oiled machine. Very nice
and
smooth ride and stiff enough on steep ascents without flexing..
Compared that to my 6 year old aluminium touring bike which is
starting
to flex a bit when I'm mashing down bigger gears.

If your Cannondale is getting less stiff with age, either the crank
bearings need adjusting, or you've discovered some new effect unknown
to metallurgists.

(Edward) wrote:
snip
I am starting to shop around for my next
(and hopefully last) road bike.
/snip

What universe does he live in? LOL!!!

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

Michael Warner wrote:
On 27 Feb 2005 20:45:38 -0800, Edward wrote:

I am starting to shop around for my next (and hopefully last) road
bike.

There is no last bike :-)

--
bpo gallery at http://www4.tpgi.com.au/users/mvw1/bpo


Just as there is no last "GREAT PAIR OF SHOES." Or last fabulous
accessory. ;-)
All good things,
Maggie

But when I test
rode the Cannondale R1000 and the Trek 5000, both great bikes over
the
4 miles course (lots of steep uphills), my perception changed! On a
long steep grade, I was able to maintain a 39-18 chain combo with
relative ease, whereas on my heavier 40lbs touring bike, the same
grade
would drop me down to a 32-32 (probably due to very heavy wheels and
fat tires). To a strong rider, a Trek 5000 or the Cannondale R1000
does help. For those who just started out, it probably won't help
very
much.

Well jeez... yah! If you're comparing a Trek 5000 to a 40 lb bike, I
guess you are right... bike weight can matter when it is a matter of
more than 20 lbs!!!