Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 49 Posts

DannyHuynh

· Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
I've been riding since 2011 and I remember "back in the day" people were a little hesitant to have carbon bikes because they break. Back then carbon parts would snap on people all the time. I also remember people saying that carbon frames absorbed more trail chatter and felt more comfortable to ride than alloy bikes. Fast forward to current times, Alloy bikes are pretty much a niche category. Only a few companies make nice alloy bikes with high end components.

I watched a few alloy bike reviews on the Freehub Magazine's YouTube channel and the reviewer was saying how the ride characteristic of the alloy bikes he was testing felt more comfortable than its carbon version. Basically the opposite of the old opinion that carbon was more dampening.

I have been on a 2009 alloy bike that I bought used in 2014 and I have put this bike through the ringer. It's been hucked, jumped, tossed, dropped, thrown down, crashed, all the things. Never broken, just lots of scratches and a few shallow dents. I find it hard to believe that a carbon bike would have survived such abuse. That being said, I think whenever I have the means to buy myself a new mountain bike, it will be an alloy bike that will last me another decade or more of abuse. Yes people have broken alloy bikes but I see way more broken carbon bikes. The 2 lbs of weight savings doesn't seem worth the extra $$$ or worry to me.

What do you guys think? Is alloy making a resurgence? Transition and Commencal are selling a ton of alloy bikes these days. Maybe the bikes companies will start offering nice alloy options again.
 
Sounds like that reviewer has "wine tasting syndrome" - making up stuff that may or may not be there. If you can somehow feel frame material through the suspension, tires, and all the alloy stuff that's typically on a carbon bike anyway - rims, spokes, hub, axle, fork, steerer tube, stem, handlebars, grips as the bumps on the ground travel to your wrists -- well you're more in tune with tiny vibrations than a ham radio.

Buy whatever you prefer. Well engineered carbon bikes should hold up fine. If you want a high end alloy bike, get a allan key and unbolt the budget parts on there, sell them on eBay and buy high end stuff. Parts aren't welded on.
 
2011 and "back in the day", that is funny. Anyway the time you are talking about, pretty much the primary goal with anything carbon was stupid light weight. That is not so these days and especially for the vast majority of carbon frames. The capability of bikes now and what is being done with them, many frames, and even carbon tend to be overbuilt with an emphasis on durability. I do believe carbon still does offer an advantage of strength to weight ratio over aluminum. Considering how many people I know, and on here at MTBR, that ride carbon frames, I'll question anybody that tells me, all things being equal and current production, their aluminum frame is stronger than the carbon version. What aluminum has going for it, is cost. Go to the Santa Cruz website, pick a model that offers both an aluminum and carbon version. As you mentioned, that little bit of weight savings compared to the significant additional cost, is a hard pill to swallow for many people, including me.
 
I own Trek Fuel EX 7, 8, and 9.8 . The 9.8 is carbon, the other two are aluminum. I find the difference between the 7 and 8 to be far more significant than the difference between the 8 and the 9.8, because of components and gearing. Based on this, when I shop for bikes, I'm way more interested in the components than the frame material.
 
OP says the weight difference between aluminum and carbon frames is @ 2lbs. Does that sound right?

I may be leaning towards aluminum for my next ride for the same reasons stated above unless I find a killer deal on a demo bike.
 
When I started riding Aluminum was almost an exotic. In the early to mid 80 in BMX there was very little aluminum and the one frame that was was practically unobtainium because of the price. Then I got into MTBing and AL was still the rare compared to steel. I bought a Cannondale in ‘90 and could not believe how light it was. Then I bought a Lightspeed Ocoee Titanium frame in 94 and wish I had kept it because it would be a killer gravel bike now. Then back to aluminum. Finally I went carbon with an Epic Evo then I sold that and bought a Stumpjumper frame a couple of months ago. In all that time alloy went from the high end to the low end. That is a shame really. A friend just bought the alloy comp SJ and I was looking at the pictures of it. It dawned on me how stupid it is that that bike isn’t available with one step up to GX or maybe XT. I’m not savvy in marketing so there must be a reason but the bike would be excellent and maybe a couple of pounds more and a thousand or more dollars less than the carbon version.
 
I have steel bikes, aluminum bikes and carbon bikes. All are great, and the frame material is one of the smallest differences when it comes to performance. At the end of the day most people walking into their LBS with a big budget are looking for the "best", which is currently believed to be carbon. Therefore the bikes with the expensive build kits are overwhelmingly carbon.

I am thankful for companies like Transition, Ibis, Propain, Bird, and others that are building truly top of the line bikes from aluminum to keep the cost down and make that highest level of performance more accessible.
 
Discussion starter · #15 ·
Sounds like that reviewer has "wine tasting syndrome" - making up stuff that may or may not be there. If you can somehow feel frame material through the suspension, tires, and all the alloy stuff that's typically on a carbon bike anyway - rims, spokes, hub, axle, fork, steerer tube, stem, handlebars, grips as the bumps on the ground travel to your wrists -- well you're more in tune with tiny vibrations than a ham radio.

Buy whatever you prefer. Well engineered carbon bikes should hold up fine. If you want a high end alloy bike, get a allan key and unbolt the budget parts on there, sell them on eBay and buy high end stuff. Parts aren't welded on.

This is the review I referenced. He seems to have experience with a wide array of bikes if you check out the channel.
 
Depends on the characteristics that are most Important to you.
The SJ Evo Alloy appears to be a smidgen plusher than the CF version, however
for climbing, I've found nothing better than CF for power transfer.
 
Alloy's comeback is usually in the lower end of some brands. I personally don't like alloy frames, but I do find alloy rims to be more comfortable, especially on gravel bikes and road bikes. I build custom wheels there. Wider alloy MTB rims tend to be a bit too flexy, so I stick with carbon. Some are way too stiff so I now look for carbon rims that are more compliant. Lately, these have been available.
 
A buddy purchased a carbon Specialized HT same time I got a Specialized alu HT. He promptly punched a hole in his downtube with a stick. Sent the frame to Calfee, they fixed it for a lot less then the cost of a carbon replacement frame. Had I done the same on my aluminum, I probably would have dented beyond repair, and it would have cost me more for a replacement frame then what he paid for a carbon repair. Just a thought.
 
I like my aluminum alloy frames, my steel alloy frames, and my titanium alloy frames just as much as my carbon frame. The carbon frame has been strong and has ridden fine for close to 4000 trail miles, even with a hole in the seat stay. I am still riding dented aluminum alloy, steel alloy, and titanium alloy frames, and at least one cracked ti and steel frame (though not as hard once I identified the cracks). I would be afraid to ride a cracked aluminum frame at all. The cost to repair the steel, titanium, and carbon frames is less than what it would cost me to get an aluminum frame repaired, and I would have less confidence in riding the repaired aluminum frame.
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts