Do we actually want a bike that keeps forever? I mean what about new bike day? 
6 Likes
I brought my first bike by price rather than frame material. The local shop specialised in specialized bikes and so I chose one in the middle of the range, it was a carbon frame with a Shimano 105 groups. The shop just happened to have a bike with the next groupset up, the Ultegra, on offer for a similar price so I went for that. My simple uneducated view was that if I did not go for bottom of the range then the bike would be OK, If I did not go for top of the range then I would get more bang for the buck, so a carbon frame came with the selection
2 Likes
I’ve ridden aluminum, titanium, carbon, and steel. For me, my steel custom Serotta had the absolute best road feel. It is a matter of personal preference. A good fit will do wonders to increase comfort also.
4 Likes
I‘m of the same opinion, just try a carbon road bike. Every bike has its own charm 
no matter whether aluminum, carbon or steel! 
1 Like
The second bike I ever bought was a decent kinesis Alu bike with proper mudguard fixing points for full length mudguards. Almost 15years on it is still going strong as my ‘winter bike’ (that actually gets far more use than the others).
It was mostly 105 with ok wheels and a marked step up from my entry level first bike. The fact that it was a decent set up meant it was 1. noticeably faster and better shifting etc than what I had at the time but 2. also a nice enough ride that even today it holds its own vs. better ‘summer bikes’ I’ve had.
Doesn’t really answer your carbon vs. Alu question but worth considering getting a decent all round bike that fits into your future stable (if you can imagine at some point you have more than one bike). And the ones with extra braze ons etc tend to be metal frames.
2 Likes
Thanks everyone for the tips and the nice discussion I was kind of hoping that the carbon advantage is mainly weight and my wallet would have loved that too… 
as for me this is not that important.
But I must admit that the road feel comments made me very curious. I need to try it!
2 Likes
You mention that your post is subjective. For balance, I’m choosing to go back to aluminium from carbon precisely because that “stiffness” (which with modern aluminium frames is slight) gives me a far better connection to the road. To exaggerate the difference, I found that carbon was a little like a full suspension mountain bike, comfy but unrewarding. Hardtails and aluminium road frames give me the fun experience that I love (and have sorely missed).
2 Likes
I’m 89kg. It would help my cycling more if I changed things other than my bike material. (Fewer weights sessions!). For me, aluminium is out and out fun. You stay connected to the road. My carbon bikes have never come close. PS I don’t race, but uphill or downhill, fast or slow, I just smile and enjoy.
2 Likes
If you’re a hobby/fitness cyclist who isn’t interested in racing, don’t discount a good steel bike. My Surly Long Haul Trucker is my go-to steed. Between it and my Kickr, I’ve dropped 25 pounds since Christmas - way more than I would have saved by going to a carbon bike!
I have a 30-yr-old aluminum Raleigh Supercourse I use to ride with my buddies, btw. It makes me feel faster, which helps me make them Suffer!
2 Likes
@theblackkite one thing I haven’t seen mentioned here is frame failure/repairability. I’m currently living this nightmare myself: My beloved Bianchi San Lorenzo (aluminum/“scandium” frame with carbon fork), which I’ve had for 12 years and 20k miles developed a weird squeak that turned out to be a crack in the weld where the top tube and seat tube connect. I’ve loved riding this bike, but unlike a steel or carbon frame it is not easily repairable so may need to be retired. My next bike will likely be carbon, for many of the reasons posted above. I bought a carbon gravel bike (Framed Gravier) last winter and love the light weight and responsiveness of it. It is also quite forgiving on rough roads (which is it’s purpose, of course). Weighing in at 70kg (153 lbs) and a sprinter, I appreciated the stiffness of the Aluminum frame. I may keep it as my SUF bike unless I can figure out a cost effective place to get it repaired in Minnesota (suggestions welcome!)
1 Like
Typically carbon is less repairable than aluminum (in general terms). You can hammer out dents in aluminum or steel, but not in Carbon. And aluminum welds may not be as easy to fix as steel, but you can’t re-weld carbon. Carbon is fibrous. Patching a damaged carbon frame can be tricky and expensive, and even a good patch may still not bring the bike back to 100% strength. Every material is subject to fatigue over time, but metal frames (aluminum and steel) will typically fatigue slower than carbon. That doesn’t mean that a good carbon frame won’t still give you a good 10-20 years of riding, tho.
4 Likes
@emacdoug beat me to it. “Easy to repair” and “carbon” are not two things I’d ever expect to hear in the same conversation.
3 Likes
@AlexEllermann Not gonna lie, I miss steel. I’m secretly in the lookout for a decent - non museum $$$ - Reynolds 853 frame I can build up as my SUFF/Rouvy bike, since weight won’t matter so much on the trainer, and it won’t get exposed to the elements.
I may look into a custom build. Anyone have a recommendation, send my way!
1 Like
Plenty out there but Genesis make some nice steel bikes e.g. Just In: Genesis Bikes Volare 853 frameset - steel race bike now with disc brakes | road.cc
2 Likes
Not bad! And £1000 for the rim brake version. 
Also just saw this lovely beast:
SLX, not 853, but easy on the eyes nonetheless.
1 Like
@CPT_A Independent Fabrication works with steel.
2 Likes
so does Vanilla Cycles / Speedvagen: https://www.speedvagen.com/
these are not exactly cheap i’m sure but oh my are they ever lovely
3 Likes
Yes and yes.
1 Like
853 is not stainless, what about the sufferlandrian element of holy water?
Umm, yes I realize. Didn’t mention stainless. I admit I don’t know much at all about the newer stainless builds (953 and ???). And of course liberal applications of holy water would be expected. I suppose less exposure to the elements indoors would be more accurate?
