Dec 16, 2003 2:06 PM
|Can anyone tell me the difference in ride between two ti bikes one with carbon seat stays one without?? Thanks
|Having ridden both...I would say looks only||spookyload|
Dec 16, 2003 3:13 PM
|I rode two litespeeds. The new ultimate, and a vortex. There was no indication the carbon was even there.|
|depends on the bike.||hackmechanic|
Dec 16, 2003 3:35 PM
|Bikes will have ride charactoristics that are a derivative of the materials they are made of. Cheap aluminum is typically stiff and harsh, light guage aluminum can be stiff and not so harsh. Ti can range in ride quality as well depending on tube profiles, dimensions, alloys, and configurations. Litespeed generally makes a pretty decent bike and for Spookyload to suggest there's no noticable difference between a carbon stayed one and an all ti one is probably fair. Where you might notice a difference is in cheaper bikes made of low grade aluminum. Unfortunately the cheaper the bike the cheaper the carbon insert usually is and in the end there may be no discernable difference there either.
Higher end shaped carbon stays may do a better job of filtering out different frequencies of vibration and may shine in one particular condition but not seem a whole lot different than traditional stays on a quality bike for the majority of riding conditions.
|re: Carbon Seatstays||gtx|
Dec 16, 2003 4:05 PM
|Unless the geometry and tube selection is otherwise identical on the two frames there is no way to make a valid comparison. Someone above compared an Ultimate to a Vortex--last time I checked the Ultimate had much shorter c-stays which will place your butt more squarely over the rear wheel and thus you get a "harsher" ride. Basically I think it's a gimmick and not worth the additional expense--I'd spend more time and energy thinking about tires and tire pressure. If you search the archives you'll see this one has come up a lot.|
|re: Carbon Seatstays||russw19|
Dec 16, 2003 4:37 PM
|I ride a Pinarello Paris, which is full aluminium. The Price that replaced it (when it first came out) was essentially the same frame with Carbon seat stays. It rode the same to me, but it was lighter. I have also riden a few steel bikes that were identical to their carbon stay versions outside of the stays... the ride is so close to being equal that I can not find much benefit from it to justify the cost. But there is a weight difference. The carbon stay bikes are lighter. I have also riden a Colnago Dream and a Dream B-Stay... couldn't tell any real world difference.
There are reasons to use carbon stays... you can make a frame lighter by doing so, as well as being able to tailor some of the ride characteristics. How you orient the fiber weave pattern of carbon dictates how it will ride. But the same can be done with tube manipulation of steel, titanium, or aluminium stays.
The biggest two reasons that bikes have them are simply fashion (they look good and new and modern, so they must be better) and costs. I have gotten into this arguement on this board in the past, but the truth is that it is cheaper to bond in a carbon wishbone stay into a frame than it is to weld together a rear triangle. (Now, that said, let me qualify that statement to be dealing with difficult to work with tubing like Reynolds 853, Titanium, or high end Aluminium, and not the crap materials that are used for Wal-Mart bikes. But I will bet that 5 years from now you will see carbon hybrid frames at Wal-Mart type stores...)
The process to make the carbon wishbone stays is pretty simple for the companies that make them (mostly done in the same factory that FSA makes their carbon cranks in over in China) and because of it's design there are very few sizes made. Then they are simply bonded into the recepticle in the frame at the seat tube end and bolted to the frame at the dropouts. They are cheap to make.. they make the bike lighter, and they certainly don't adversely affect the ride quality, but ultimately, they look cool. And the kicker is that bike companies can charge $100 to $300 more for a frame with carbon stays that cost them less to make. Which is ultimately good for the bike industry and you, as better products do make it to your local shop.
|... in the ''depends'' corner...||Akirasho|
Dec 16, 2003 5:05 PM
|... got two bikes with CF stays.
Airborne titanium Manhatten Project = stiff rear triangle... better power transfer...
Klein aluminium Q Pro Carbon Team = compliant rear end... "supple" aluminium...
Obviously, there's a bit of hype to wade through with respect to CF stays... but there's probably a bit of tangible merit in some applications.
Be the bike.