Titanium or Carbon Fibre frame?

[Phil]

I've got carbon forks on my Bob Jackson audax bike cause that's what the LBS had in stock after my little accident on the '07 dun run.  They were also insistent that I should have carbon forks 'because they're stronger'.  Personally, I'm rather glad the steel forks bent and absorbed the impact rather than breaking my foot!  They've been perfectly good, although as MV says I haven't noticed a huge difference between them and the steel forks I had before. 

Anyway, I trust carbon enough to ride a bike made from it without worrying, and similarly if I bought a Ti frame I would put carbon forks on it.  I was more concerned about whether one material had significant benefits over the other within a particular price bracket. 

[dasmoth]

Carbon forks also seem to be a relatively cheap expendable piece of equipment these days.

I guess my big concern when I hear that is how you know when to replace them?  Opinions on the longevity of carbon parts seem to vary so much depending on whom you ask.

Has anyone tried Reynolds 953 fork blades?

[border-rider]

I guess my big concern when I hear that is how you know when to replace them?  Opinions on the longevity of carbon parts seem to vary so much depending on whom you ask.

Depends what the steerer's made of.  If it's Al then change them when you change your bars - every couple of years if you ride a lot, or routinely after an accident.  If it's a full carbon fork, or has a steel steerer, I'd be less worried and maybe just change after a crash.

I'm pretty relaxed about the longevity of carbon itself under normal use.

[andygates]

I have to say, my fears about carbon have been nixed by the tough and very good fork on my race bike, it's just fine thanks.  It's a mature and good material.

If I was racing hard for time, I'd get carbon.  Planet X would be on my list, they consistently review well, are very very well priced, and are BRITTISH! [tm].

If I was more about sportives and long races for comfort, plush Ti sounds wise.

[Torslanda]

torslanda, you'll get into the same trouble I did!

My aversion to carbon comes from two things and the main one is jealousy. The other is the aversion to parting with stupid amounts of money to buy a frame made of a material that won't survive falling over outside the news agents.

On this very forum (IIRC) the owner of a Dolan was bemoaning just such a calamity that destroyed the integrity of his frame. I also remember from the highlights of this year's Tour seeing a rider in the peloton collide with a piece of street furniture. He was left with a massive pain in the goolies and a very expensive Airfix kit.

OK, probably extreme examples. Probably don't happen very often. Granted, 653 builds a 'cracking' frame but at least steel gives the illusion of being able to be repaired.

luv'n'stuff

J

[valkyrie]

I ride an Airborne Valkyrie (Ti Audax Bike) and a Look 565 (Carbon "best" bike). For what you want to use it for, I'd certainly recommend the Look or a similar carbon framed bike. You'll probably save about 300-500g in weight difference between the two frames. But having a lighter bike for daylight rides in better weather means that -

• I don't need a rack or mudguards on it
• I don't need lights or dynohub on it
• I'm aware that I spent a lot of money to get a lighter bike, so I don't weight it down carrying the kitchen sink

The overall effect is that my Carbon bike is a good few pounds lighter than my Titanium bike and much quicker to ride. Ride wise the Carbon bike isn't quite as soft as the Ti, but then again it's got completely different components/wheels/saddle so I couldn't say it was the material that made the difference. Still plenty comfy enough for 200km rides.

[hatler]

If you do head Ti-wards, this thread lists all the Ti manufacturers that this forum could come up with.