Hi all, does anyone have any experience or knowledge of the carbon road bikes that Ribble are knocking out? The Gran Frodo at £756 or the sportive racing at 820 seem too good to be true.
I have no knowledge of roadbikes at all, would one of these be a good purchase, or would I be better getting a Caad or the starter model from Bianchi, sort of thing?
Im looking at doing some sportives, that sort of thing.
Cheers

Cheap carbon is a waste of money IMO. Far better with decent aluminium from a bigger manufacturer.
I’ve seen some test results (compliance and stiffness testing) comparing the two materials, and I’ve seen some of the problems with cheap carbon (corroding seat posts, poor tolerences) and I wouldn’t touch one with a barge pole. I’ve had one once too; so I have first hand experience.

I’d say the complete opposite ^
Got an entry level carbon boardman roadie and 456C, both are fab- far more comfy in all the right places than alloy frames I’ve ridden, whilst being lighter and probably stronger.

A few friends have got carbon roadies from dengfu bikes and they love them, coming from expensive alloy or big brands carbon alternatives

Seat posts corroding has nothing to do with it being ‘cheap’ carbon, it’s just reactions that happen between the materials and will happen with all carbon- use antisieze and move it from time to time.
All big brands will use the lower grade carbon in places on their higher end frames, they offer different properties. eg higher grade will be stiffer, so to get an equally stiff frame using lower grade means using more material. Theres obviously far more too it than that, but you get the basic idea.

I’d choose cheap carbon rather than expensive ally for most things.

I wouldn’t agree with PeterPoddy at all either, I’ve a 872 and it’s bloody ace, comfy, light, stiff, everything you could want. got mine with full Ultegra it was £1600.

Ribble were great to deal with, very easy to spec exactly the bike you want, answer emails promptly and are v friendly.

I had a Ribble Sportive Racing carbon and it was great. I’ve not ridden a ‘big brand ” carbon road bike for an extended period of time so can’t compare to that but I was completely happy with it. Smooth, comfortable, well put together, no mechanical issues. I’d happily have another.

PeterPoddy – Member

Far better with decent aluminium from a bigger manufacturer.
I’ve seen some test results (compliance and stiffness testing) comparing the two materials.

Test results can be meaningless – they highlight differences which simply don’t matter on the road.
Who commissioned the tests?
Have you seen the methodology involved?
Which frames were involved?
If a manufacturer tests 50 carbon frames, then only uses the data for the ‘worst’ performing frame, is that fair?

The vast majority of manufacturers simply choose a frame material on cost.
The marketing department are then tasked with convincing the eager punters that this years material is sooooo much better than last years.
Which is easy to do – all materials have some advantages – emphasize those, ignore the downsides.

Alloy is fashionable again because the manufacturing process has become cheaper.

Sneering at cheap carbon, now it’s widely available and not just for those in the know is a bit off.

They are cheap.
Can’t think of anything else to say about them except many people I know who have had a cheap carbon bike think it’s o.k. Until they ride a sorted carbon/steel/alloy bike then they change their minds.
You get what you pay for.

Can you explain the specification, material and construction differences that make a ‘sorted’ carbon frame better than a ‘cheap’ one?

Were all those dissatisfied with their cheap carbon frames unhappy for the same reason?

What aspects of the ‘sorted’ bikes were better?

Meaningless generalisations otherwise.

I’ve just went from a new sportive racing which I rode for nearly 4 years which was great as a first proper road bike but I’ve now swapped it for a Kinesis Aithien which is a top end alloy frame and its (IMO) a much better bike. It could be a bit of new bike placebo but it’s more comfortable, stiffer and a better climber than the Ribble. Saying that if I was in the same position again I’d still buy the Ribble as its a good bike and very good value for money if your just getting in to road bikes.

Can you explain the specification, material and construction differences that make a ‘sorted’ carbon frame better than a ‘cheap’ one?

Were all those dissatisfied with their cheap carbon frames unhappy for the same reason?

What aspects of the ‘sorted’ bikes were better?

Meaningless generalisations otherwise.

Tube to tube custom specced to the riders style/weight.
No, just wanted a new/better bike
Ride quality that they felt was better.

Tube to tube custom specced to the riders style/weight.

That’s the sole difference is it?

No, just wanted a new/better bike

So some weren’t unhappy with the cheaper bike?

Ride quality that they felt was better.

Of course, this is purely down to the frame?
I assume they swapped components between frames to check and make sure?

Of course, this is purely down to the frame?
I assume they swapped components between frames to check and make sure?

Do you want me to mail them all and ask?
Do you want a fully detailed spreadsheet or is a cut and paste email o.k?

Trust me. Just because it’s carbon doesn’t make it good. All carbon is not created equal. The cheap stuff is cheap for a reason: It’s low quality.

Cheap carbon is a waste of money IMO. Far better with decent aluminium from a bigger manufacturer.

I dunno what PeterPoddy is banging on about; surely the above is obvious? Of course you’d be better off with a decent alloy frame rather than a frame found on a seven hundred quid bike?

But for seven hundred quid, Ribble are fine for the money.

TBH PP if your judgement on carbon is based on low price = low quality, then you need to re-asses your opinion.

Rusty I think your snobbery detector is on high sensitivity today.

PP has at least owned both, I bet many cheap carbon owners/lovers haven’t.

My experience is that “bad” cheap carbon is IME/likely to be not as light, comfortable or stiff as decent carbon (or aluminium). There seems to be less of it around these days tho…

Very good frames for that money, don’t worry.

I’ve ridden one extensively and of course it’s not as nice as posh carbon (or other expensive frames), but as cheap ones go – it’s good.

Dunno about the Gran Fondo, but the Sportive is pretty racey – which I like – but bear in mind it’s not super-relaxed.

Dunno about the Gran Fondo, but the Sportive is pretty racey

😯 ???? Huge head tubes! Racey? Maybe if you have a paunch and race to the chippy. 😆

cynic-al – Member

Rusty I think your snobbery detector is on high sensitivity today.

🙂

Huge head tubes!

No.

But don’t let that spoil your fun.

chakaping – Member
Huge head tubes!
No.

But don’t let that spoil your fun.

Seem on the tall side to me

No.

But don’t let that spoil your fun.

Yes. To tall for me, and I don’t even race, I would say I was flexible but no way athletic/pro flexible. I don’t have a beer gut though.
I’m between sizes on their chart (M/L) for my effective top tube but 17.5 and 20! cm headtubes are huge.
Need a 16.5 and then a low headset top cover with no spacers (the headset cap is the spacer) and a 7° stem flipped the right way. And yes I use the drops a lot and don’t sit on the tops

TL/DR they are too tall for somebody with average flexibility and not ‘racey’

‘Cheap carbon is crap’ appears to have become the fashionable cry du jour.

It’s such a generalisation, always presented without meaningful evidence by people who wouldn’t accept such nonsense if it was spouted about steel or alloy.

I’d like some evidence.
Not ‘my mate’s a happier puffin because he’s bought a more expensive bike’.

Aren’t Ribble frames bought from deda, therefore same as the De Rosa frames?

Expensive carbon can also be crap, with the big brands you are paying for their marketing teams and brand managment.
Not sure I would spend on the no name chinese frames but Ribble are excellent and stand up well to Spech, Giant etc run of the mill frames.
It comes down to pride of ownership through, a good rider on a 500 quid allez will drop an only marginally less good rider on a 10k Stork everyday so your mostly buying something to look at and talk about.

People who own cheap carbon bikes think are great and defend them? Shocking 😉

They are not all bad but nowhere near the same as a proper brand decent bike. I’ve seen cheap carbon frames that were supposed to be race ones which I could make the chainstay touch the wheel they were that flexy (not to mention the one that sheered at the head tube…)

Cheap carbon uses haphazardly aligned fibres embedded in a lot of resin. It’s all splodged into a mold and allowed to cure at room temperature.

High quality carbon is all about minimizing the amount of glue needed to lock carefully aligned fibers together.

Top notch carbon is pre-impregnated with resin, kept in a freezer, laid by skilled workers and cured under high pressures and temperatures.

Continued massive misunderstanding about direct sales models vs some globally distributed brands offering quite similar products at vastly different price points.

Margins in the distribution chain are a bigger differentiator in pricing than material or end product quality.

However, in terms of true innovation, the big brands continue to lead. The recently launched Trek and Specialized bikes are simply awesome in the tech they have in them.

And testing? Yes. Those Chinese factories like their testing.

https://goo.gl/photos/SRxYRmvyqwrVEFnA6

Cheap carbon uses haphazardly aligned fibres embedded in a lot of resin. It’s all splodged into a mold and allowed to cure at room temperature.

I’ve never seen this. What’s your source for that?

I’ve only visited 8 carbon factories around the world though so can’t speak for all of them.

This is how the monocoque frames I have worked with are made
https://goo.gl/photos/ebPFHyTVFpxWBF2j8

Who is it paying you again Brant?

As someone else said, they are cheap and if that is all you every rode then you’d probably be happy. They are fairly unlikely to spontaneously combust

I had an entry carbon Ribble and it was floppier than a floppy thing. Some might describe it as “comfortable” but it was like riding an XC full sus frame with shot bearings. Ok so that is a bit of an exageration but it isn’t far off 😀

cynic-al – Member

Who is it paying you again Brant?

Remind me again, which brands does your shop stock Al?
And yours PP?
😉

I expect he’s just made it up to suit his prejudices.

I was going to say something about cheap carbon being cheap because you’re not paying for large marketing departments rather than anything to do with the quality, but you said it much better than I could.

Some cheap carbon might be rubbish, but most of it isn’t. Some expensive carbon frames might have marginal advantages over cheap carbon due to higher tech (if I had enough money I’d be buying a branded frame to take advantage of that), but not all of them do.

It’s not so much the case any more, but not so long ago some expensive carbon was simply rebranded versions of cheap carbon – the cheap carbon frame I have was also sold with Litespeed stickers on for more than twice the amount I paid.

So I measured my Ribble sportive 365 head tube when I was in the garage earlier.

145mm. Same as a specialized tarmac and 5mm less than a giant TCR.

This debate has been cropping up a bit more on here recently and the ally frame thing has gone full circle. I’ve always liked ally frames, but a few years back, on hear they became out of fashion, were too stiff, uncomfortable, and would snap because that’s what ally does 😆 Now apparently it’s better than cheap carbon….

I know someone who is currently looking for a new road bike and is looking at a Giant Defy 1, and I was going to suggest a Carbon Ribble as above. Both similar prices…

I moved to a Ribble carbon frame from a Caad8 last year (generally considered one of the better aluminium frames). Im marginally quicker on the Ribble and it is far far comfier over poorly maintained roads and on bigger distance rides.

I’m no lightweight either and I haven’t noticed any undue flex on this “low end” carbon frame. I’m not saying that a carbon frame from a major brand won’t be nicer to ride but IMO there’s absolutely nothing wrong with Ribbles products for the price.

Can we go back to the “all carbon frames come from the same factory and are exactly the same” fact that used to be standard around here ? It made these threads a lot easier.

I had a Ribble gran fondo and found the front flexible and not very stiff. I also had a Storck and this was much stiffer. I also had a Columbus mud-x which was in the middle for stiffness and price. I realise this hasn’t helped at all.