[Closed] CF - too risky?

Thinking about a Tallboy then?

I reckon they would be more resilient than a light alloy / steel frame to dents.

I've crashed mine at high speed. I broke, it didn't.

[img] http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yab9ed&outx=800&quality=70 [/img]

Is there a crash replacement policy? As with any frame- factor in the buy-price to how much you are willing to lose.

Say you bought a carbon frame for £1100 and damaged it on rocks and the manufacturer offered you a replacement for 40% off RRP- I'd go for it. If there isnt one be repaired to lose £1100 if you do fall and it bounces ahead over rocks or into a tree. Same with anything really- all frames can have this happen. Difference with a full susser is you can replace the arm or front triangle for relatively cheapily as they tend to be alu.

singlespeedstu - Member

Thinking about a Tallboy then?

Walked into Two Wheels Thursday and Andy flung himself at me evangelically proclaiming he's found the bike I need (I know, broken & record comes to mind).

Gave me a Blur LT frame with shock to hold. It certainly is very lightweight, but I don't think I would buy a bike just because it's light. I know SC are also known for having dialed bikes when it comes geo and suspension platforms...

But hey, I've only just bought a FS Lenz, and I WOULD be worried about damage, despite SC saying this is their strongest yet. What's SC's replacement warranty like?

They're pretty good on crash replacement stuff.

I'm going to wait till they're actually available and test ride one.

ive got a enduro carbon, crashed several times in the alps, again damaged myself, but not the bike. seems durable, but i know what you mean, i worried about the carbon/rock impact thing for a while

I know someone who had a carbon Anthem. Was standing holding the bike and accidentally let it drop away and down to his side. It hit a rock and tore a gash in the DT.

He was proper gutted as he hadn't had it long. IIRC he bought it second hand, so no warranty. Ended up repairing it.

It's stories like that that would worry me.

I haven't ridden a super light weight bike, does it really make that much difference, or is it a feel thing?

*Reads title, opens thread, is disappointed*

😉

I'm going to have a word at work and see if we can do a bit of a CF destruction test (very unscientific of course) on some of the sample stuff we got sent. that should put a few worries to rest.

I have a 9 year old carbon Scott Strike. the frame is fine, read my name. You have no need to worry.

Carbon is generally much better under impact than, say alu, and it's pretty good against steel. Scott did some tests on their super light strike frame and it was bombproof compared to some alu and steel frames they tested.

Mine is the Team Issue and has hit a tree in the middle of the top tube at about 25mph. Result? A small chip. Will it spread? It hasn't in the last 6 years

What's it like to ride compared to steel and alu?

there was a vid i saw not too long back where a guy is really laying into a carbon frame (looks like a development frame as they have cut the bb out of it and all other frames there) with a good sized hammer to show the difference in the beatings it took against the same style alloy frame,
but sadly Cant for the life of me remember what it was called! (will have a nose on the forum i saw it on incase it pops up)

*EDIT*
found it!

Can't tell the difference to be honest. makes a funny 'Clack' noise when it hits trees. Less flexy I think but it is hard to tell.

my CF dale Rush is cracked half way up 't seat tube:

[img] [/img]

lord knows how that happened?

but I aye put off, personally speaking I think the advantage of Cf is wasted on Full sus, in a hardtail yes it makes sense, but in FS its just for posing.

I shall be keeping a close eye on this one when I start to use it in anger!

[img] [/img]

CF wasted on full suss?

Why so: strong light and durable works well on full suss

that hammer vid is great, i saw a interview once with a top man at scott, he said when people are going fast and crash and break a cf bike they say bloody bike, when they go fast and break al or steal they say wow i was lucky i didnt get really hurt.
i have a stupid light carbon bike and will never go back,
i once put a huge dent in a pace alu on its third ride i was gutted but thats mountain biking.

CF is great for a full sus, lets you make the odd shapes you need easily.

(Mr MC posting) CF cannondale vs mallett all very impressive. If you routinely crash your top tube into a mallet. Youre more likely to hit, ooh, lets say a sharp-edged rock which WILL put a scratch/gouge in it.
I would like to have seen him put a gouge in it and then beat the hell out of it.

As a former professional materials scientist, the one thing that puts me off CF frames (and drove me from buying an Ibis to a Nomad) is the "notch sensitivity", ie. how much weaker it gets after a notch or scratch. One of the few things I remember from my undergrad composites lectures (I specialised elsewhere) was the headline number "90%". Thats a lot of strength to lose in an otherwise innocuous trial-riding incident.

What I WOULD like to hear is what SC, Ibis etc have done in their manufacturering to circumvent this problem-multiple layers, different lay-ups etc, as I'm with WCA in that CF is ideal for full suspension- builds a really light and stiff structure joining the suspension components. SC are hyping the CF Blur to be tough and I am keen to be convinced with something other than marketing speil.

plastic is for tupperwear, not for bikes.............. 😉