In theory, aluminum is recyclable. However, I've never heard of anyone recycling their bike frame in the decades I've been riding. Heck, I wouldn't even know where to take it to have it recycled (in the USA).
@@buster.keaton. Any scrap metal place would take an aluminum frame. Many towns have scrap metal drop-off at their transfer stations. Any business that produces scrap metal in the course of manufacturing (or repair)would have a dumpster that they would most likely be happy to have you throw your frame into (more $$ for them!). Scrap metal is generally pretty easy to get rid of.
@@buster.keaton interesting. Scrap yards and scrap metal dealers are very common in UK. However it should be said that a single bicycle frame has very little monetary value indeed.... maybe only £5 so most folk would likely just take a bike to the local municipal recycling tip if it's no longer needed. Sad to think about it like, but yeah it would be dismembered and hopefully get a second third fourth etc life from there.
I'd much rather have the carbon bike. The weight is the least important benefit of carbon over aluminum. Also, £1000 isn't an expensive wheelset. Owning over 20 road bikes in my time, I'd rather have a middling carbon bike from the last 10yrs than the very best aluminum bike with the best components
@@Zuckler455 I don't 'feel' any difference between my carbon and aluminium bikes but that's just me and others may feel it. But by using a carbon seatpost you will get more compliance.
@@sjurk81just tyre pressure would be more effective, I got trek Emonda ALR frame sadly 54 as didn't know could buy still from trek for a 56, but estimate on my build is like 6.88kg at lightest, the SLR 9 is 6.72kg for like double the price, yes I could probably go lighter than SLR 9 but I don't want to spend like £500 more than I planning to at the moment, oh the my build is with pedals too but I bet trek claim of slr 9 is without
Last year I was facing the choice between a Tarmac SL7 comp or an Allez Sprint with upgrades for the same money. I ended up going with the Allez Sprint and I’m glad I did. I got a nice set of carbon wheels, aero carbon bars and a fancy 3D printed saddle all within the budget of the tarmac. Granted, that bike came with electronic shifting but I feel as if I’ve got a far more ‘race ready’ setup now. Plus, not having to worry about the frame material is a bonus.
Which way would I go..... well, I just bought an Emonda ALR frameset. Going to build it up with 105 Di2, carbon wheelset lightweight 35mm deep with GP5000's, and mount carbon seat post, premium saddle and premium bar and stem, and fancy bar tape. The crank length and the bar width is what I choose to put on not what the manufacturer wants to supply. So, in effect I'm up-grading in advance and not buying something knowing that I'm going to replace in short order. Just a note that the ALR is a beautiful frame, fitted with carbon forks/steerer. It's going to be a fantastic bike. I do have a Trek aluminum endurance/gravel bike which I have owned 10 years, still in great shape just a little heavy with Alpha 100 series tubes. I will still use the on gravel/rough back country roads.
good comparison and explanation. I do not know much about road bikes, I ride MTB. As mentioned, the AL bike has carbon fork, so the difference in over-all ride feel may not be that great. For years I thought that carbon is not for me, mainly because the price/value. Back in 2017 the bike I really wanted was available only in carbon (TREK Procaliber). I went for it and soon I realized what carbon is about. It simply soaks up vibrations better than AL. I felt a bit less beaten after riding our local trails than on my AL bike before. My rides became longer, fatigue came later (while I am getting older), simply a better ride experience.
I'm a simple, recession kinda guy. I see aluminum, I buy it. It's affordable Won't be that expensive to replace. I won't be worried to damage if I lean it in a wall, corner, or by looking at it. I can upgrade the components with the money I saved. I don't care much about the 500 gram weight difference, etc.
My first bike was 10 kg GT Grade with aluminium frame and wheels (carbon fork). My second bike was 8.5 kg Canyon Grail SLX 8 with carbon frame and carbon wheels and di2. I couldnt believe the difference. I am never going back. But yeah, it was 3 x more expensive.
I’d have to pick the aluminium one. I’ve got a Trek 1.5 aluminium bike, and it’s a great workhorse. It’s bombproof and the hydroformed tubes still look great after nearly 16 years of use and abuse and a £1000 would buy some great upgrades!
I have two carbon roadbikes and one made from aluminium. It’s a Canyon Endurace AL and it is as comfortable as the others with thin seat stays and a good composite seatpost. Weight penaly for that frame is 300g but its rim brakes are 400g lighter. Al is still a very good material for most bikes where aero tubing is not important.
Best video I have seen on this topic - a good description of pros & cons here.
Рік тому+40
Although my road bike is full carbon, my future gravelbike purchase will probably be aluminium. I always feel a bit anxious damaging the carbon frame in some way, and it feels easier to just get up and ride wherever, whenever I want using aluminium. Although the one thing I do like about Carbon frames, is the way they are able to be shaped, and can look quite refined. Don't underestimate the importance of looks to a lot of people!
Aluminium is not tougher than carbon, nor is it easier to repair. The only reason for riding aluminium is price - I have an aluminium mountain bike, because I don't want to pay carbon prices to replace it, if it gets wrecked, and the suspension and tyres negate dampen any difference in ride characteristics. For road bikes, carbon is superior in every way, except for cost.
If you crash hard enough on a carbon mountain bike to seriously damage the frame it's not the only thing that's going to be damaged. You're likely to sustain significant injuries yourself. Carbon mountain bikes are ridden hard by experienced riders and seem durable enough. I have a carbon gravel bike and a carbon road bike and I would never go back to aluminum. I would, however, consider titanium, having owned a titanium road bike for 17 years (albeit with a carbon fork).
Had an aluminum frame cracked can't repair, bin it. My carbon frame cracked, and it's now repaired and riding again
Рік тому+2
@@DSBSB Definitely, I believe it's just a feeling towards carbon than facts. The higher price making it feel more 'precious' and unwilling to damage it. I might feel the same having an expensive or more high end aluminium frame. For road I will always go for carbon if I can pay the price
Thank you bike radar for such a nice review. You gave me the information I needed and not beating around the bush. I’ve decided to go ahead with an aluminium road bike (trek emonda ALR 5)
One thing they don't mention in this video is that the higher end aluminum bike, like the one shown in the video, comes with a carbon fork. Can you call an aluminum bike that has a carbon fork and aluminum bike? The carbon fork makes a huge difference in soaking up vibration, compared to an aluminum fork and hence offers a very smooth ride. For me aluminum frame with carbon fork and 30mm tires offers excellent value.
Carbon wheels and carbon fork makes the difference between the two frame materials virtually meaningless. My CAAD frame only weighs a bit more than a carbon bike frame which costs 10-20% more
I like your video! I use to race when I was under 20 yrs old. I recently purchased a specialized carbon Roubaix with campy crankset 52-42 and 14-25 cassette. It is maybe 2012 age model,I love it a lot ,though I really miss my vintage basso frame with campagnolo group set. J.s.
I have had an aluminum bike for 6 years; it's a Scott Speedster. With the passage of time, I have had the opportunity to participate in some races with it. Obviously, I have changed some parts, and I recently upgraded the groupset, but the performance of the bike has been the best. In summary, there is nothing that I can't do with it that another carbon bike would do better. Greetings from Colombia
Got the ALR and got to say i love it to bits. Got it as a frameset and build it myself so i have it as i like it. If you're thinkig about it, don't! With the moey saved i've got a wheelset. Final build weight for size 50 is 7.6kg with full Ultegra R8000, Alloy bars, carbon stem, seatpost and Elite Ultralight 45mm wheelset... (I have some vids on my channel, if somoene is interested)
Back in 2016, I was looking at the Emonda SL7 and as I was chatting with the bike shop crew as I am a long time customer, they started to put together the new Emonda ALR. I took the bike for a short ride and blew off the SL and bought the ALR. I transfer the Ultegra I had on another bike, and put the 105 on that frame and sold it. I put some carbon bars and seat post on it and the bike has been a jewel of a find. I got the weight down to just under 16 lbs. Over the last couple of years I put some 50mm carbon TLR wheels on it, and late last year, I put SRAM Force eTap AXS on it and put on a more aero carbon bar on it. Some would think I am crazy to put that on this frame, but I don't care, the ride is glorious and I still put 3K miles on it a year even though I have a high end carbon frame bike as well. Both bikes are in normal rotation. My ALR is still the lower weight of both bikes, now just over 16 lbs.
I used to ride my Emonda ALR for 7 years, and loved every bit of it, but now, as I am slowly creeping into the MAMIL territory, I switched to a TCR and there is no way I would ever go back. The amount of comfort is just insane and I am just as fast (or rather slow), as I was on my Emonda.
I used to be big fan of alloy, as I like to treat my bikes s tools rather than fancy thing, BUT I bouyght one used carbon CV frame for commuting, and maan is it smooth, it feels like I'm running 45mm tyres rather than 35, and still even with bigger volume tyres, when you go through a pothole, my carbon frame feels so much smoother. Currently I changed the seatpost on my alloy road bike to carbon, and I'm prety sure it also makes a big difference. Probably next season I'll go with Carbon frame. Ps. it can be matter of the bike fit, but up to that point I was riding always alloy, and honestly the carbon frame feels different, absorbs so much of the road vibration, and smoothens the bumps.
I have the Trek Emonda ALR 5 in the coral and blue. I love it. I'm not a racer but need to tackle hills. I find the bike handles beautifully and doubt the weight difference would benefit me. I also like the fact that the aluminum is more durable. I don't have easy access to having a carbon frame inspected for damage if I take a spill. I am always a little nervous taking my bike over a bump if I am going to damage the carbon fork, but I never worry about the aluminum frame.
I still have my emonda alr 5 from 2017, tried a couple carbon ones to see if I wanted a new one. But no, I’m still too much satisfied with this one, it’s all I need. Perhaps a carbon one is just slightly more comfortable on really terrible road surfaces, but the 28mm tires took care of the roughness just enough.
I have a 2018 cannondale caadx and I’d say it feels better than any fully carbon bike. What and how I ride it differs from how a person who rides a fully carbon road bike for their fit and use. It wonderful that bikes come in many materials they all have their uses and to get the best use out of your bike consider your fit and it’s fit for the job you intend its uses for. Your bike should fit you in all the ways the term fit it used.
Recently went shopping for a carbon bike to replace a 10 year old aluminum Fuji Roubaix. Tried quite a few and they felt great but i was shocked by the weights. 20.5 pounds on a Trek Madone SL6, and my old Fuji weighed in at 19lbs with tiagra. I went home, bought about 1000 dollars worth of upgrade parts and a cheap set of superteam carbon wheels. I shaved another pound off the aluminum Fuji, made it more aero with 50mm deep carbon wheels and niw have a full 105 drive train thats bullet proof. I went from 23c tires to 25c GP5000's and it made a world of difference. I may go 28c for my next set. All in all im happy for now and im going to ride it until it falls apart. Bike price in early 2024 are insane.... hopefully things settle a bit. My only gripe with my setup is rim brakes on carbon wheels, they are terrible. Luckily i live in a flat area. If i lived anywhere there climbs and decents i would absolutely replace the bike for a newer disc brake equipped model.
Well, then better go to steel or titanium. I had two aluminium handle bars and two carbon seat posts breaking so far. All due to prior damage I must admit, but when aluminium breaks there is absolutely no warning.
Never cracked a carbon frameset. They are much harder than you think. They had some guy hit it with a metal hammer and it took quite a few good hits to get it to crack.
@brianhwang4445 I'm not scared of cracks that's visible to see as you can immediately tell the frame is done, I am more concerned of micro-cracks within the frame. Those are what worries me
@@bonbonflippers4298 I have several quality carbon road bikes close to 10 years old and have never had a concern. it takes many microfractures for carbon to give way. Anything significant will show through the paint. Plus carbon has an infinite lifespan as long as it is not stretched to the beeaking limit compared to aluminum which will eventually succumb to metal fatigue. But you should definitely ride the bike that makes you feel safer. For example i would rather have an alu gravel bike for the same reasons you mentioned.
Great breakdown. Here's the short version... Carbon: Longer rides, slightly lighter, undeniably better performance. Aluminum: More likely to survive a crash, stronger for accessorizing, much cheaper. If you race and can afford replacing crashed frames or if you ride for long rides, carbon. If you're a recreational rider that rarely puts in long rides, aluminum is an excellent choice. Or, get a magnesium and beat all of them for less money and a lot less weight and equal performance to carbon (compliance, stiffness, comfort, weight, durability, etc...).
For the Emonda, the ALR seems like the better choice as the weight savings is so minimal and rider comfort isn't really what that bike is designed for. However, for the Madone or Domane where the frame is designed to flex for rider comfort, carbon is the only way to go.
I own and ride 2015/2016 Trek Émonda SL, ALR, and SLR frames, all of which I have built up with Dura Ace/Ultegra components, Bontrager XXX carbon stems and bars, and Fulcrum Racing Zero wheels. The similarity in feel and ride quality is remarkable. The weight differences are negligible. The ALR is astonishing. The ride is only slightly harsher than the carbon Émondas. However, I appreciate the stiffness in climbs and sprints. The frame flexes far less than the SLR and SL. The ALR feels like it just wants to go. As for looks, Trek’s aluminum technology is distinct from what I have seen of the CAADs and Allez Sprints. There are no messy joints on the ALR. It looks like a carbon frame.
You can find good aluminium frames second-hand for cheap and upgrade nearly everything The result is usually a better overall bike than a new, budget-oriented carbon frame and will still be cheaper. On the other hand buying a used carbon frame is like playing russion roulette. I'll get a high-end carbon frame when I have 8-10k to splash onto one, otherwise it's just stressful
I went with carbon frame on the Cannondale Topstone 3L bike as it has a better suspension than the aluminum model. Time will tell as the bike was shipped today. I do worry about damage to the carbon frame from a simple fall or other accidents.
7 місяців тому
Canyon Endurace AL7, upgraded to high quality saddle, 165mm cranks with dual sided powermeter and TPU inner tubes. Might upgrade to carbon wheels in the future for 0.6kg less in the wheels.
The ALR Emonda is sweet. I have an SL, but almost went with the ALR (ultimately chose carbon because I have an industry discount). The biggest difference between the 2 is comfort, followed by aerodynamics. I'm a big fan if the seat mast system, as it adds a lot of compliance to an otherwise ultrastiff frame. The frame isn't as aero as some dedicated aero bikes, but it has sacrificed a good deal of weight reduction for aerodynamic tubing. And finally, the stiffness makes this bike feel like a rocket when accelerating.
Aluminum frame with the upgraded carbon wheelset all day long a better route. Especially since modern aluminum frames are so much lighter, stronger, and aero. And with the ability to run wider tires, I would argue the road compliance is negligible.
They can manipulate carbon better to make it stiffer where it needs to be and compliant everywhere else. I prefer a good aluminium frame because of the stiffness. I've had a GT Series 3 road bike and a Cannondale CaadX and both frames just seemed to transfer the power really well without flex. The nearest I got to a stiff carbon frame was my Cannondale Super six Evo Black Inc, but that was a 3k frame set!
Yep I have a 20 year old GT ZR.30 that I still ride alongside my carbon bikes, I feel no flex from this bike and it looks great! For longer endurance rides I use one of my carbon bikes, I can feel the flex in some of the frames in comparison, horses for courses.
As ekth many things, there are advantages to both, as well ad disadvantages My current bike is an AL and carbon mix and, at my age (62), i am not as interested in speed as i was in my younger days. Ive got a carbon seatpost and 38mm tired mkynted and i love the ride. The buke is dast enough abd ive ne er bern s climber so that us not an isdue wirh me. I am also not in a pisition to be qnle to drop 3+ grand on a bike. For me, aluminum works judt fine.
What are the wheels you show in the video? You have not reviewed the Pro level wheels from Bontrager so would be interested to see a review of the Pro 37 and Pro 51 Wheels.
A good alloy bike is fantastic, although the bottom tier carbon emonda is on the heavier side. I might be wrong, but I think it's got the iso speed on the front which is relatively heavy. Had my alloy bmc teammachine for years, it was fantastic ride, but VERY stiff. My new frame has more compliance and it's noticeably smoother.
Nothing new has been said. The winner in this video is not aluminum or carbon, it's the beautiful landscape. With lanscape like that...magnesium, titanium, steel or bamboo would do just fine.
I have a carbon domane and an aluminium emonda, both with Ultegra kit. The domane is by far the nicest when climbing, simply because it's the lightest, but on flat terrain there really isn't that much of a difference. I've had both bikes for over five years and the differences I spot are due to the geometry of the bikes and not the material.
@@langy1318 My Domane is lighter than my emonda, certainly in its 'climbing setup' with light wheels. I also fit better on its more relaxed geometry making longer climbs a lot easier. When you compare both bikes in similar setup, so both carbon or aluminium, same kind of brakes and wheels, the emonda is the 'racy climby' of the two with the domane being the 'more relaxed' one. If you fit well on the emonda, that's the faster one, if you don't the domane will probably be faster because you can keep going for longer.
IMO carbon only makes sense on high end bikes that already have fast wheels and light parts so it’s a case of scraping the last few grams. Sadly most bike brands only offer alloy as a budget option, with carbon bikes starting at around 2k which are far from light and have pretty shoddy specs. Within the same price range they could make a better performing alloy bike but are somehow convinced everyone wants carbon. Let’s hope videos like this will change the consumers’ perception, only then the brands will follow.
Reviews should based on rolling down hill without pedalling to remove power from pedalling. If aero frames are faster... They will roll down faster with same tuck in position?
9,02kg vs 8,89kg is like 1,5% heavier. But say you weigh 80kg, then the difference becomes around 0,15%. Or, imagine you didn't pee in the last hour. All I'm trying to say is... The weight difference is meaningless here, especially as an amateur.
Aluminium is a harsh ride (in my experience, but who knows the bikes improved). I know the frame doesn't impact comfort the most (tires do), but I always felt the difference and it made me prefer carbon. To defend myself against comments that think I'm just snobbish, I always prefer steel above aluminium, and even prefer steel above carbon for flat rides.
My first aluminum road bike with an aluminum fork was harsh, when the frame cracked and was warrantied the replacement had a carbon fork, 20 years later still riding it, if feels stiff when putting the power down but is by no means a harsh ride. For long distance rides I use one of two carbon bikes but note that each has their own bump taming characteristics built in, one Iso Speed, the other a 25mm carbon post and SAVE technology seat stays, neither of which feels like it transfers the power as well as the aluminum bike.
As much as I'd like to one day get a carbon framed bike, I won't. I'm on the high end for most carbon weight limits, and I'd just be too afraid of damaging it. Alu for me.
THIS particular aluminum bike cost nearly the same as similarly spec Giant TCR (8.4kg)... So, which would be better in that comparison, when money and spec are almost same, alu or carbon? ;)
Same specs and price, go for carbon. You can feel the difference riding. Not a night and day, but it is there. It is possible for aluminum to corrode. Carbon frames are repairable, aluminum isn't.
For long term safety, I personally prefer the material that could provide tell-tale signs of breakdown - alloy. I am not a fan of carbon fibre which could unknowingly break without warning. Also, the climatic-induced sustainability of carbon fibre material may be my concern especially in regions with climatic extremes (I. E. Constantly high temperature of above 50 degrees celcius with very strong UV. One could never tell how carbon might perform, if not, depreciate, when exposed to the heat and the powerful sunshine).
Lower price point carbon bikes are often not worth it (low stiffness, high weight). You are better off going Aluminium and investing the money in better parts. I also find aluminium (along with steel and Titanium) really practical for gravel or bikes you would go Bikepacking with. The materials are far less prone to scratches than a carbon frame and you get a lot of scratches in both cases even when being careful. For race bikes with decent budget I think Carbon is a no brainer and the best option.
I have a 2004 Specialized Allez, (alluminum) I looked at upgrading to a carbon bike and to get something that was sub 18lbs (8.16 kg) I would have to spend over 5K. OR for $800 I could buy a new Ultecgra R8000 groupset. I upgraded the groupset then bought a mountain bike for $1000. I saved over $3k and now I can also go mountain biking with my friends!
I ride my Rose backroad Aluminium gravel with carbon roval wheelset and sram force 1x system and its lighter and has cleaner look than my mate's Polygon carbon endurance. Even with my brooks saddle and 45c tyres
I can answer this. Imperceptible. And for most. Alu. The right Alu is just spot on. And more compliant. And better damped for winter. So all around better. Unless fast and young high watts go high quality Alu
Construction methods? Well now like geometry that allows for more seat post exposure, plus wider tires. Compliance has nothing to do with how the aluminum frame is made.
Due to the tech involved in both aluminum, carbon and titanium, the advantages between them to the novice to intermediate rider is marginal at best. Honestly, when it comes to riding on the paths, it'll come down to the eye candy effect..Heck, I've seen guys on columbus steel and rim brakes smoke riders on carbon with discs....All relative.
I have been riding for 5 decades, had dozens of different bikes, in the end you pick what works for you, that doesn't mean carbon or the most expensive, for example I don't like compact frame designs or sloping top tubes, I prefer older style frames. I have a caad 9 with older gen dura ace, really comfy ride particularly with dura ace c24 wheels. I don't like disc, that's my choice, I have never been in a situation where I needed disc brakes on a road bike and I like descending really fast, disc can be too powerful on a road bike and cause the tyres to run out of grip when braking hard, people also just rely on brakes rather than skills, always look ahead and anticipate. I also rode big motorbikes for 3 decades, helps to understand how to slow down from high speeds. N my opinion disc brakes are at best a gimmick to sell more bikes to less experienced cyclists and at worse lul you into a false sense of security and could cause you to crash
I don't like feel of the carbon bikes. It's too soft, like you don't feel road surface. i owned 2008 Cinelli Unica with Campagnolo Record groupset and it was 8kg with pedals. I loved it, and after riding it, carbon bikes feels like you sitting on rubber frame :D
I agree. I don't need all of the road feedback to be nullified. I find it useful to feel the ground under my feet a little. That said, I only ride for about 90 minutes at a time. If I did longer rides, I'd probably get a carbon endurance bike with 32mm tires at low pressure. If I'm going to ride all day then the muted ride feel is probably what I'd be going for.
This review is spot on. Aluminum framesets have gone a long way and the performance does not fully justify the price. But when you add up things like road feel, looking cool on your local bunch ride, and stiffness, for me at least its justified because I would love the bike more if it were carbon. Its the big TV argument, once you have a bigger one you cant ever go back and look at the smaller one. Once you have a good carbon frameset its hard to imagine without it due to the enjoyment factor. But if you have always ridden aluminum bikes and are happy keep doing so. Just doing ride carbon because you might be tempted to switch over. Been riding carbon framesets for over 10 years, cant imagine going back. Sorry. And is it just me but does 9kg sound incredibly heavy for a new bike??
@@cycleoflife565 no but i understand the sentiment since all these new carbon bikes are so heavy. 6.8 kg will allways be the standard. pro bikes are in the 7.2 kg range. im fortunate enough to ride bikes in the 7-8 kg range with pedals but have never hit the 6.8 kg mark
…my takeaway from this video is that my 7kg S-Works SL6 is better value than this carbon Emonda, which costs approx £7.5/g saved while my S-Works is merely about an extra £5 per gram saved vs the alloy! 😅
When the first really good emonda alr came out, they sold an emonda slr, sl, and s. The alr weighed less than the s 😂. And I think that was the last year they sold the s.
Carbon vs alu is similar to mechanical vs electronic shifting ., Alu frames and mechanical shifters don't need to be "upgraded" to carbon because there is nothing wrong them . They have proven themselves for many decades to be strong and reliable , so moving to a carbon frame is not because it is so much better , it's not , but it is more of a prestige thing or it appeals to those that live in a world of splitting hairs or have a thing for micro techy talk which turns into hyperbole , If you like carbon then by all means enjoy your purchase but don't try to justify your purchase on the basis of it being ' better ' .
alloy for me. I heard some pretty horrible stories of people riding a carbon bike and the bike totally fell apart all of a sudden under normal riding conditions then the cyclist riding it suffered neurological damage.
The aluminium bike looks a whole lot better too. That carbon Emonda looks terrible compared to the alu version and has all the iso nonsense you don't need. That alu Emonda is the best looking bike Trek has produced for a long time.
Buy the aluminum frame instead of the complete bike and you can spec better components all around for the same price (or less) than the complete carbon bike. Somehow fixing carbon is easy but aluminum is hard? In either case, you'll be sanding off some paint. With carbon, you are going to bond in some new fabric with new resin, but the fibers won't be continuous with the original frame layup, so either you over build the repair or it will be weaker - a carbon repair will never be the same strength *and* dimensions as the original. Aluminum, you can try to pop dents, but the area will be work hardened and you will need to use some body filler to smooth it out. Or, if you have a crack, you can grind and weld over. If you have an autobody shop in your area, you should be able to find someone locally who can fix aluminum. If you need to repair carbon, I wouldn't trust anyone who wasn't a card-carrying wizard. In either case, I'd expect the repair to add some grams of weight but nothing significant. Source: I used to design aircraft parts, wings, etc. and we chose to use aluminum over carbon because it was cheaper and easier to repair. Oh, and it's pronounced pre-"preg" - as in pre-impregnated with resin.
Aluminium is for many the best. Material. It's less stiff so it compensates beter for rider fatigue. Rougher terrain, cobbles material flex is preferable so you don't need compensators Carbon is an indicator. In cheap production and high upsel and creating new problems. That needs to be fixed by worse technology. Take for example tru axle wich is thechnicly. Worse than quickrelease. Carbon fibre has a lifespan of 3 tears and isn't recyclable. Al has an lifespan of 5 years and is 100% recyclable. I know. My choices...
You have carbon bikes break unexpectedly without crashing ? I just bought a carbon bike , I love it to bits compared to my aluminum, but I’m scared lol.. I got an amazing deal so couldn’t pass it up
Worth considering that the aluminum frame is recyclable too. Carbon is going to landfill. 💚
Though carbon theoretically has a longer lifespan so unless you damage it you should be able to keep it going longer.
you can now also recycle carbon
In theory, aluminum is recyclable. However, I've never heard of anyone recycling their bike frame in the decades I've been riding. Heck, I wouldn't even know where to take it to have it recycled (in the USA).
@@buster.keaton. Any scrap metal place would take an aluminum frame. Many towns have scrap metal drop-off at their transfer stations. Any business that produces scrap metal in the course of manufacturing (or repair)would have a dumpster that they would most likely be happy to have you throw your frame into (more $$ for them!). Scrap metal is generally pretty easy to get rid of.
@@buster.keaton interesting. Scrap yards and scrap metal dealers are very common in UK. However it should be said that a single bicycle frame has very little monetary value indeed.... maybe only £5 so most folk would likely just take a bike to the local municipal recycling tip if it's no longer needed. Sad to think about it like, but yeah it would be dismembered and hopefully get a second third fourth etc life from there.
103 grams difference! For the nearly £1000 price difference, you could fit an expensive wheelset and it’d be lighter AND more aero.
I'd much rather have the carbon bike. The weight is the least important benefit of carbon over aluminum. Also, £1000 isn't an expensive wheelset. Owning over 20 road bikes in my time, I'd rather have a middling carbon bike from the last 10yrs than the very best aluminum bike with the best components
Switch the seatpost for the carbon one Trek offers and the bikes have the same weight.
Its not just about the weight, carbon also eliminate the vibration.
@@Zuckler455 I don't 'feel' any difference between my carbon and aluminium bikes but that's just me and others may feel it. But by using a carbon seatpost you will get more compliance.
@@sjurk81just tyre pressure would be more effective, I got trek Emonda ALR frame sadly 54 as didn't know could buy still from trek for a 56, but estimate on my build is like 6.88kg at lightest, the SLR 9 is 6.72kg for like double the price, yes I could probably go lighter than SLR 9 but I don't want to spend like £500 more than I planning to at the moment, oh the my build is with pedals too but I bet trek claim of slr 9 is without
Last year I was facing the choice between a Tarmac SL7 comp or an Allez Sprint with upgrades for the same money. I ended up going with the Allez Sprint and I’m glad I did. I got a nice set of carbon wheels, aero carbon bars and a fancy 3D printed saddle all within the budget of the tarmac. Granted, that bike came with electronic shifting but I feel as if I’ve got a far more ‘race ready’ setup now.
Plus, not having to worry about the frame material is a bonus.
Which way would I go..... well, I just bought an Emonda ALR frameset. Going to build it up with 105 Di2, carbon wheelset lightweight 35mm deep with GP5000's, and mount carbon seat post, premium saddle and premium bar and stem, and fancy bar tape. The crank length and the bar width is what I choose to put on not what the manufacturer wants to supply. So, in effect I'm up-grading in advance and not buying something knowing that I'm going to replace in short order. Just a note that the ALR is a beautiful frame, fitted with carbon forks/steerer. It's going to be a fantastic bike. I do have a Trek aluminum endurance/gravel bike which I have owned 10 years, still in great shape just a little heavy with Alpha 100 series tubes. I will still use the on gravel/rough back country roads.
good comparison and explanation. I do not know much about road bikes, I ride MTB. As mentioned, the AL bike has carbon fork, so the difference in over-all ride feel may not be that great. For years I thought that carbon is not for me, mainly because the price/value. Back in 2017 the bike I really wanted was available only in carbon (TREK Procaliber). I went for it and soon I realized what carbon is about. It simply soaks up vibrations better than AL. I felt a bit less beaten after riding our local trails than on my AL bike before. My rides became longer, fatigue came later (while I am getting older), simply a better ride experience.
I'm a simple, recession kinda guy. I see aluminum, I buy it. It's affordable Won't be that expensive to replace. I won't be worried to damage if I lean it in a wall, corner, or by looking at it. I can upgrade the components with the money I saved. I don't care much about the 500 gram weight difference, etc.
BTW did Trek work on the script with you guys? That ugly weld bit nod to the Allez Sprint was unnecessary lol.
Well said. I do run carbon but like you said you can’t leave it out of your sight for fear it will get stolen.
My first bike was 10 kg GT Grade with aluminium frame and wheels (carbon fork). My second bike was 8.5 kg Canyon Grail SLX 8 with carbon frame and carbon wheels and di2. I couldnt believe the difference. I am never going back. But yeah, it was 3 x more expensive.
@@ianpurcell7266 Very true, but you cant leave an aluminum bike out there either...
@@tomasiskooo But those are gravel bikes and the difference is much more pronounced, the difference in comfort is negligible on a road bike.
I’d have to pick the aluminium one. I’ve got a Trek 1.5 aluminium bike, and it’s a great workhorse. It’s bombproof and the hydroformed tubes still look great after nearly 16 years of use and abuse and a £1000 would buy some great upgrades!
Go for it. Absolutelly a brilliant aluminium bike! Already doe 5K with it ad love it. (I bought it as a frameset ad build it to taste...)
@@Stefanosinf I think that is where my money is going! Thanks for the additional input
I have two carbon roadbikes and one made from aluminium. It’s a Canyon Endurace AL and it is as comfortable as the others with thin seat stays and a good composite seatpost. Weight penaly for that frame is 300g but its rim brakes are 400g lighter. Al is still a very good material for most bikes where aero tubing is not important.
Best video I have seen on this topic - a good description of pros & cons here.
Although my road bike is full carbon, my future gravelbike purchase will probably be aluminium. I always feel a bit anxious damaging the carbon frame in some way, and it feels easier to just get up and ride wherever, whenever I want using aluminium. Although the one thing I do like about Carbon frames, is the way they are able to be shaped, and can look quite refined. Don't underestimate the importance of looks to a lot of people!
Aluminium is not tougher than carbon, nor is it easier to repair. The only reason for riding aluminium is price - I have an aluminium mountain bike, because I don't want to pay carbon prices to replace it, if it gets wrecked, and the suspension and tyres negate dampen any difference in ride characteristics.
For road bikes, carbon is superior in every way, except for cost.
If you crash hard enough on a carbon mountain bike to seriously damage the frame it's not the only thing that's going to be damaged. You're likely to sustain significant injuries yourself. Carbon mountain bikes are ridden hard by experienced riders and seem durable enough. I have a carbon gravel bike and a carbon road bike and I would never go back to aluminum. I would, however, consider titanium, having owned a titanium road bike for 17 years (albeit with a carbon fork).
Had an aluminum frame cracked can't repair, bin it. My carbon frame cracked, and it's now repaired and riding again
@@DSBSB Definitely, I believe it's just a feeling towards carbon than facts. The higher price making it feel more 'precious' and unwilling to damage it. I might feel the same having an expensive or more high end aluminium frame. For road I will always go for carbon if I can pay the price
You may consider to rather go for steel ;)
I have a Cannondale CAAD12. I've test ridden carbon bikes that cost way more, but honestly I prefer my cheaper aluminum/alloy bike.
In which respect do you prefer it?
0:17 caad12 is a rocket.join the club
Thank you bike radar for such a nice review. You gave me the information I needed and not beating around the bush. I’ve decided to go ahead with an aluminium road bike (trek emonda ALR 5)
One thing they don't mention in this video is that the higher end aluminum bike, like the one shown in the video, comes with a carbon fork. Can you call an aluminum bike that has a carbon fork and aluminum bike? The carbon fork makes a huge difference in soaking up vibration, compared to an aluminum fork and hence offers a very smooth ride. For me aluminum frame with carbon fork and 30mm tires offers excellent value.
Agreed. The wider tires made a big difference in comfort.
I get what you're saying but in practice the point is pretty irrelevant. Virtually every decent aluminum Roadbike comes with a carbon fork today
Carbon wheels and carbon fork makes the difference between the two frame materials virtually meaningless. My CAAD frame only weighs a bit more than a carbon bike frame which costs 10-20% more
You're exactly right, this is why so many ALU bikes come with carbon forks
You can barely find bikes with aluminum forks these days.
I like your video! I use to race when I was under 20 yrs old. I recently purchased a specialized carbon Roubaix with campy crankset 52-42 and 14-25 cassette. It is maybe 2012 age model,I love it a lot ,though I really miss my vintage basso frame with campagnolo group set. J.s.
I have had an aluminum bike for 6 years; it's a Scott Speedster. With the passage of time, I have had the opportunity to participate in some races with it. Obviously, I have changed some parts, and I recently upgraded the groupset, but the performance of the bike has been the best. In summary, there is nothing that I can't do with it that another carbon bike would do better. Greetings from Colombia
Got the ALR and got to say i love it to bits. Got it as a frameset and build it myself so i have it as i like it.
If you're thinkig about it, don't! With the moey saved i've got a wheelset.
Final build weight for size 50 is 7.6kg with full Ultegra R8000, Alloy bars, carbon stem, seatpost and Elite Ultralight 45mm wheelset...
(I have some vids on my channel, if somoene is interested)
"Repairing aluminium frame is a complex job" is an understatement. You can't repair an aluminium frame without costing more than a new frame
Probably also the same with carbon, titanium and steel. Who repairs anything these days?
Yes you can I welded alloy tubing for 25 years it's a piece of piss.
Back in 2016, I was looking at the Emonda SL7 and as I was chatting with the bike shop crew as I am a long time customer, they started to put together the new Emonda ALR. I took the bike for a short ride and blew off the SL and bought the ALR. I transfer the Ultegra I had on another bike, and put the 105 on that frame and sold it. I put some carbon bars and seat post on it and the bike has been a jewel of a find. I got the weight down to just under 16 lbs. Over the last couple of years I put some 50mm carbon TLR wheels on it, and late last year, I put SRAM Force eTap AXS on it and put on a more aero carbon bar on it. Some would think I am crazy to put that on this frame, but I don't care, the ride is glorious and I still put 3K miles on it a year even though I have a high end carbon frame bike as well. Both bikes are in normal rotation. My ALR is still the lower weight of both bikes, now just over 16 lbs.
I used to ride my Emonda ALR for 7 years, and loved every bit of it, but now, as I am slowly creeping into the MAMIL territory, I switched to a TCR and there is no way I would ever go back. The amount of comfort is just insane and I am just as fast (or rather slow), as I was on my Emonda.
same, ive rode the first gen emonda alr back in 2016, it was great, but the TCR is something else. comfort ,speed ,twitchy, smiles for miles
I used to be big fan of alloy, as I like to treat my bikes s tools rather than fancy thing,
BUT
I bouyght one used carbon CV frame for commuting, and maan is it smooth, it feels like I'm running 45mm tyres rather than 35, and still even with bigger volume tyres, when you go through a pothole, my carbon frame feels so much smoother.
Currently I changed the seatpost on my alloy road bike to carbon, and I'm prety sure it also makes a big difference. Probably next season I'll go with Carbon frame.
Ps. it can be matter of the bike fit, but up to that point I was riding always alloy, and honestly the carbon frame feels different, absorbs so much of the road vibration, and smoothens the bumps.
I have the Trek Emonda ALR 5 in the coral and blue. I love it. I'm not a racer but need to tackle hills. I find the bike handles beautifully and doubt the weight difference would benefit me. I also like the fact that the aluminum is more durable. I don't have easy access to having a carbon frame inspected for damage if I take a spill. I am always a little nervous taking my bike over a bump if I am going to damage the carbon fork, but I never worry about the aluminum frame.
I still have my emonda alr 5 from 2017, tried a couple carbon ones to see if I wanted a new one. But no, I’m still too much satisfied with this one, it’s all I need. Perhaps a carbon one is just slightly more comfortable on really terrible road surfaces, but the 28mm tires took care of the roughness just enough.
I have a 2018 cannondale caadx and I’d say it feels better than any fully carbon bike. What and how I ride it differs from how a person who rides a fully carbon road bike for their fit and use. It wonderful that bikes come in many materials they all have their uses and to get the best use out of your bike consider your fit and it’s fit for the job you intend its uses for. Your bike should fit you in all the ways the term fit it used.
Recently went shopping for a carbon bike to replace a 10 year old aluminum Fuji Roubaix. Tried quite a few and they felt great but i was shocked by the weights. 20.5 pounds on a Trek Madone SL6, and my old Fuji weighed in at 19lbs with tiagra. I went home, bought about 1000 dollars worth of upgrade parts and a cheap set of superteam carbon wheels. I shaved another pound off the aluminum Fuji, made it more aero with 50mm deep carbon wheels and niw have a full 105 drive train thats bullet proof. I went from 23c tires to 25c GP5000's and it made a world of difference. I may go 28c for my next set. All in all im happy for now and im going to ride it until it falls apart. Bike price in early 2024 are insane.... hopefully things settle a bit. My only gripe with my setup is rim brakes on carbon wheels, they are terrible. Luckily i live in a flat area. If i lived anywhere there climbs and decents i would absolutely replace the bike for a newer disc brake equipped model.
I loved my alloy emonda .. carbon seatpost is a big help but my carbon Madone is way smoother
Iso Speed Madone?
I would go aluminum over carbon. I just cant shake off the thought of cracking the frame.
Well, then better go to steel or titanium. I had two aluminium handle bars and two carbon seat posts breaking so far. All due to prior damage I must admit, but when aluminium breaks there is absolutely no warning.
@@alphaniner3770thats a complete crock
Never cracked a carbon frameset. They are much harder than you think. They had some guy hit it with a metal hammer and it took quite a few good hits to get it to crack.
@brianhwang4445 I'm not scared of cracks that's visible to see as you can immediately tell the frame is done, I am more concerned of micro-cracks within the frame. Those are what worries me
@@bonbonflippers4298 I have several quality carbon road bikes close to 10 years old and have never had a concern. it takes many microfractures for carbon to give way. Anything significant will show through the paint. Plus carbon has an infinite lifespan as long as it is not stretched to the beeaking limit compared to aluminum which will eventually succumb to metal fatigue. But you should definitely ride the bike that makes you feel safer. For example i would rather have an alu gravel bike for the same reasons you mentioned.
Great breakdown. Here's the short version...
Carbon: Longer rides, slightly lighter, undeniably better performance.
Aluminum: More likely to survive a crash, stronger for accessorizing, much cheaper.
If you race and can afford replacing crashed frames or if you ride for long rides, carbon. If you're a recreational rider that rarely puts in long rides, aluminum is an excellent choice.
Or, get a magnesium and beat all of them for less money and a lot less weight and equal performance to carbon (compliance, stiffness, comfort, weight, durability, etc...).
I got lucky! Found an Emonda SL5 on clearance at my LBS for $1650. Best of both worlds :)
I've literally been debating these exact bikes thank you
For the Emonda, the ALR seems like the better choice as the weight savings is so minimal and rider comfort isn't really what that bike is designed for. However, for the Madone or Domane where the frame is designed to flex for rider comfort, carbon is the only way to go.
I own and ride 2015/2016 Trek Émonda SL, ALR, and SLR frames, all of which I have built up with Dura Ace/Ultegra components, Bontrager XXX carbon stems and bars, and Fulcrum Racing Zero wheels. The similarity in feel and ride quality is remarkable. The weight differences are negligible. The ALR is astonishing. The ride is only slightly harsher than the carbon Émondas. However, I appreciate the stiffness in climbs and sprints. The frame flexes far less than the SLR and SL. The ALR feels like it just wants to go. As for looks, Trek’s aluminum technology is distinct from what I have seen of the CAADs and Allez Sprints. There are no messy joints on the ALR. It looks like a carbon frame.
A technical brilliant welding-mark is like art!
Ive got a canyon endurace al and its pretty great. If i were to go full weenie i could go sub 6.8 easily.
You can find good aluminium frames second-hand for cheap and upgrade nearly everything
The result is usually a better overall bike than a new, budget-oriented carbon frame and will still be cheaper.
On the other hand buying a used carbon frame is like playing russion roulette.
I'll get a high-end carbon frame when I have 8-10k to splash onto one, otherwise it's just stressful
Those russions, eh.
I went with carbon frame on the Cannondale Topstone 3L bike as it has a better suspension than the aluminum model. Time will tell as the bike was shipped today. I do worry about damage to the carbon frame from a simple fall or other accidents.
Canyon Endurace AL7, upgraded to high quality saddle, 165mm cranks with dual sided powermeter and TPU inner tubes. Might upgrade to carbon wheels in the future for 0.6kg less in the wheels.
Love my 2019 Specialized Allez Sprint Sagan with Red etap, Enve SES 6.7 wheels.
The ALR Emonda is sweet. I have an SL, but almost went with the ALR (ultimately chose carbon because I have an industry discount).
The biggest difference between the 2 is comfort, followed by aerodynamics. I'm a big fan if the seat mast system, as it adds a lot of compliance to an otherwise ultrastiff frame.
The frame isn't as aero as some dedicated aero bikes, but it has sacrificed a good deal of weight reduction for aerodynamic tubing.
And finally, the stiffness makes this bike feel like a rocket when accelerating.
Aluminum frame with the upgraded carbon wheelset all day long a better route. Especially since modern aluminum frames are so much lighter, stronger, and aero. And with the ability to run wider tires, I would argue the road compliance is negligible.
They can manipulate carbon better to make it stiffer where it needs to be and compliant everywhere else. I prefer a good aluminium frame because of the stiffness. I've had a GT Series 3 road bike and a Cannondale CaadX and both frames just seemed to transfer the power really well without flex. The nearest I got to a stiff carbon frame was my Cannondale Super six Evo Black Inc, but that was a 3k frame set!
Yep I have a 20 year old GT ZR.30 that I still ride alongside my carbon bikes, I feel no flex from this bike and it looks great! For longer endurance rides I use one of my carbon bikes, I can feel the flex in some of the frames in comparison, horses for courses.
I.have the Emonda carbon bike with 35inch carbon wheels. Im looking at getting the aluminum ALR 5 bike for training as well
I think I'd rather go for the aluminum frame and a better group set. For these bikes, jump to the Integra group set.
As ekth many things, there are advantages to both, as well ad disadvantages
My current bike is an AL and carbon mix and, at my age (62), i am not as interested in speed as i was in my younger days.
Ive got a carbon seatpost and 38mm tired mkynted and i love the ride.
The buke is dast enough abd ive ne er bern s climber so that us not an isdue wirh me.
I am also not in a pisition to be qnle to drop 3+ grand on a bike.
For me, aluminum works judt fine.
Get a second hand alloy bike and put a second hand carbon finishing kit, second hand carbon wheels and second hand ultegra 11 speed Di2 on it
What are the wheels you show in the video? You have not reviewed the Pro level wheels from Bontrager so would be interested to see a review of the Pro 37 and Pro 51 Wheels.
Good video!!! When should I change my carbon frame? What is the useful life of a carbon frame?
A good alloy bike is fantastic, although the bottom tier carbon emonda is on the heavier side. I might be wrong, but I think it's got the iso speed on the front which is relatively heavy.
Had my alloy bmc teammachine for years, it was fantastic ride, but VERY stiff. My new frame has more compliance and it's noticeably smoother.
The isospeed is on the Domane sl not the emonda sl
@@BAdewale721 interesting, thought the front iso speed was on all three?
@@twatts4436Only the Domane has it, the Émonda and Madone never have it.
@@sbccbc7471 ah, you're right. They both had rear iso speed at one point and I've gotten them the wrong way around.
Nothing new has been said. The winner in this video is not aluminum or carbon, it's the beautiful landscape. With lanscape like that...magnesium, titanium, steel or bamboo would do just fine.
That paint job is a winner, I don't care about the material anymore.
I have a carbon domane and an aluminium emonda, both with Ultegra kit. The domane is by far the nicest when climbing, simply because it's the lightest, but on flat terrain there really isn't that much of a difference. I've had both bikes for over five years and the differences I spot are due to the geometry of the bikes and not the material.
You say your Domane is nicer when climbing, what does nicer mean? Asking because I’m not sure which model to go for. Is the domane a fast bike?
@@langy1318 My Domane is lighter than my emonda, certainly in its 'climbing setup' with light wheels. I also fit better on its more relaxed geometry making longer climbs a lot easier. When you compare both bikes in similar setup, so both carbon or aluminium, same kind of brakes and wheels, the emonda is the 'racy climby' of the two with the domane being the 'more relaxed' one. If you fit well on the emonda, that's the faster one, if you don't the domane will probably be faster because you can keep going for longer.
Steel all the way!!
IMO carbon only makes sense on high end bikes that already have fast wheels and light parts so it’s a case of scraping the last few grams. Sadly most bike brands only offer alloy as a budget option, with carbon bikes starting at around 2k which are far from light and have pretty shoddy specs. Within the same price range they could make a better performing alloy bike but are somehow convinced everyone wants carbon. Let’s hope videos like this will change the consumers’ perception, only then the brands will follow.
Reviews should based on rolling down hill without pedalling to remove power from pedalling. If aero frames are faster... They will roll down faster with same tuck in position?
Excellent info well presented
8.89kg for a carbon bike that price is actually outrageous...
And the Emonda is marketed as "lightweight" climbing bike lmao
Yeah the carbon Treks are not very light.
@@gregmorrison7320 most non pro level carbon bikes are heavy.
9,02kg vs 8,89kg is like 1,5% heavier. But say you weigh 80kg, then the difference becomes around 0,15%. Or, imagine you didn't pee in the last hour. All I'm trying to say is... The weight difference is meaningless here, especially as an amateur.
Aluminium is a harsh ride (in my experience, but who knows the bikes improved). I know the frame doesn't impact comfort the most (tires do), but I always felt the difference and it made me prefer carbon. To defend myself against comments that think I'm just snobbish, I always prefer steel above aluminium, and even prefer steel above carbon for flat rides.
My first aluminum road bike with an aluminum fork was harsh, when the frame cracked and was warrantied the replacement had a carbon fork, 20 years later still riding it, if feels stiff when putting the power down but is by no means a harsh ride. For long distance rides I use one of two carbon bikes but note that each has their own bump taming characteristics built in, one Iso Speed, the other a 25mm carbon post and SAVE technology seat stays, neither of which feels like it transfers the power as well as the aluminum bike.
I have a custom built aluminum bike that weighs 7.06 kg. and I love the ride.
As much as I'd like to one day get a carbon framed bike, I won't. I'm on the high end for most carbon weight limits, and I'd just be too afraid of damaging it. Alu for me.
THIS particular aluminum bike cost nearly the same as similarly spec Giant TCR (8.4kg)... So, which would be better in that comparison, when money and spec are almost same, alu or carbon? ;)
Same specs and price, go for carbon. You can feel the difference riding. Not a night and day, but it is there. It is possible for aluminum to corrode. Carbon frames are repairable, aluminum isn't.
For long term safety, I personally prefer the material that could provide tell-tale signs of breakdown - alloy. I am not a fan of carbon fibre which could unknowingly break without warning.
Also, the climatic-induced sustainability of carbon fibre material may be my concern especially in regions with climatic extremes (I. E. Constantly high temperature of above 50 degrees celcius with very strong UV. One could never tell how carbon might perform, if not, depreciate, when exposed to the heat and the powerful sunshine).
But the aluminum emonda has a nicer paint job
Lower price point carbon bikes are often not worth it (low stiffness, high weight). You are better off going Aluminium and investing the money in better parts. I also find aluminium (along with steel and Titanium) really practical for gravel or bikes you would go Bikepacking with. The materials are far less prone to scratches than a carbon frame and you get a lot of scratches in both cases even when being careful. For race bikes with decent budget I think Carbon is a no brainer and the best option.
I like the "enter some events" hehehe.
The welds on the Trek aluminium bike are astonishingly nice. Compare that to the infamous Specialized Allez...
I have a 2004 Specialized Allez, (alluminum) I looked at upgrading to a carbon bike and to get something that was sub 18lbs (8.16 kg) I would have to spend over 5K. OR for $800 I could buy a new Ultecgra R8000 groupset. I upgraded the groupset then bought a mountain bike for $1000. I saved over $3k and now I can also go mountain biking with my friends!
Would like a re-release of the special edition 2011 Specialized Allez Double Steel bike.
I only choose alloy over carbon because of its price. If i am rich enough to buy carbon bikes, then i will buy carbon frames
I always go for metal bikes. Be it aluminium or steel bikes
What will replace carbon. I’m running carbon since 2001 and would like to buy the next step after carbon.
The next step above carbon is custom steel or titanium.
3 d printed LOL
I ride my Rose backroad Aluminium gravel with carbon roval wheelset and sram force 1x system and its lighter and has cleaner look than my mate's Polygon carbon endurance. Even with my brooks saddle and 45c tyres
I can answer this. Imperceptible. And for most. Alu. The right Alu is just spot on. And more compliant. And better damped for winter. So all around better. Unless fast and young high watts go high quality Alu
A “heavy” carbon bike (thought the emonda was meant to be light!) is not what I would choose. I would go alu here and buy some light carbon wheels.
I have had both. Carbon all the way. Or if you want to feel every bump in the road, go aluminum.
Construction methods? Well now like geometry that allows for more seat post exposure, plus wider tires. Compliance has nothing to do with how the aluminum frame is made.
Due to the tech involved in both aluminum, carbon and titanium, the advantages between them to the novice to intermediate rider is marginal at best. Honestly, when it comes to riding on the paths, it'll come down to the eye candy effect..Heck, I've seen guys on columbus steel and rim brakes smoke riders on carbon with discs....All relative.
Better is too broad a term. Better in which metrics?
I have been riding for 5 decades, had dozens of different bikes, in the end you pick what works for you, that doesn't mean carbon or the most expensive, for example I don't like compact frame designs or sloping top tubes, I prefer older style frames. I have a caad 9 with older gen dura ace, really comfy ride particularly with dura ace c24 wheels. I don't like disc, that's my choice, I have never been in a situation where I needed disc brakes on a road bike and I like descending really fast, disc can be too powerful on a road bike and cause the tyres to run out of grip when braking hard, people also just rely on brakes rather than skills, always look ahead and anticipate. I also rode big motorbikes for 3 decades, helps to understand how to slow down from high speeds. N my opinion disc brakes are at best a gimmick to sell more bikes to less experienced cyclists and at worse lul you into a false sense of security and could cause you to crash
I don't like feel of the carbon bikes. It's too soft, like you don't feel road surface. i owned 2008 Cinelli Unica with Campagnolo Record groupset and it was 8kg with pedals. I loved it, and after riding it, carbon bikes feels like you sitting on rubber frame :D
I agree. I don't need all of the road feedback to be nullified. I find it useful to feel the ground under my feet a little. That said, I only ride for about 90 minutes at a time. If I did longer rides, I'd probably get a carbon endurance bike with 32mm tires at low pressure. If I'm going to ride all day then the muted ride feel is probably what I'd be going for.
The aluminum Trek is nice except where the cable exits the frame for the rear derailleur! Who thought of that! Looks terrible IMO.
Bought an ultegra CAAD12 recently with plenty of upgrades for £800. It’s hardly been ridden, only 7.2kg and feels amazing.
I prefer aluminium, less things to worry about and lets you focus on the most important thing, enjoying the ride
This review is spot on. Aluminum framesets have gone a long way and the performance does not fully justify the price. But when you add up things like road feel, looking cool on your local bunch ride, and stiffness, for me at least its justified because I would love the bike more if it were carbon. Its the big TV argument, once you have a bigger one you cant ever go back and look at the smaller one. Once you have a good carbon frameset its hard to imagine without it due to the enjoyment factor. But if you have always ridden aluminum bikes and are happy keep doing so. Just doing ride carbon because you might be tempted to switch over. Been riding carbon framesets for over 10 years, cant imagine going back. Sorry. And is it just me but does 9kg sound incredibly heavy for a new bike??
9 kg is heavy for the aluminum bike but 8.89 for the carbon isn’t?
@@cycleoflife565 no but i understand the sentiment since all these new carbon bikes are so heavy. 6.8 kg will allways be the standard. pro bikes are in the 7.2 kg range. im fortunate enough to ride bikes in the 7-8 kg range with pedals but have never hit the 6.8 kg mark
…my takeaway from this video is that my 7kg S-Works SL6 is better value than this carbon Emonda, which costs approx £7.5/g saved while my S-Works is merely about an extra £5 per gram saved vs the alloy! 😅
9 kg - both are TANKS
I have an ALR5 trek checkpoint for commuting and a carbon one for off road. You don’t need carbon. Bought both used
Im still happy with my old steel frame bikes.
If you're on a tight budget, spending an extra £1000 to save 130g doesn't seem like the best investment.
Aluminum for the long run and up grade parts along the way.
When the first really good emonda alr came out, they sold an emonda slr, sl, and s. The alr weighed less than the s 😂. And I think that was the last year they sold the s.
Empanada??? That sounds delicious. I guess this was a typo. :)
@@okayest_amateur 😂
Carbon vs alu is similar to
mechanical vs electronic shifting .,
Alu frames and mechanical shifters don't need to be "upgraded" to carbon because there is nothing wrong them . They have proven themselves for many decades to be strong and reliable , so moving to a carbon frame is not because it is so much better , it's not , but it is more of a prestige thing or it appeals to those that live in a world of splitting hairs or have a thing for micro techy talk which turns into hyperbole ,
If you like carbon then by all means enjoy your purchase but don't try to justify your purchase on the basis of it being ' better ' .
alloy for me. I heard some pretty horrible stories of people riding a carbon bike and the bike totally fell apart all of a sudden under normal riding conditions then the cyclist riding it suffered neurological damage.
The aluminium bike looks a whole lot better too. That carbon Emonda looks terrible compared to the alu version and has all the iso nonsense you don't need. That alu Emonda is the best looking bike Trek has produced for a long time.
Buy the aluminum frame instead of the complete bike and you can spec better components all around for the same price (or less) than the complete carbon bike.
Somehow fixing carbon is easy but aluminum is hard? In either case, you'll be sanding off some paint. With carbon, you are going to bond in some new fabric with new resin, but the fibers won't be continuous with the original frame layup, so either you over build the repair or it will be weaker - a carbon repair will never be the same strength *and* dimensions as the original. Aluminum, you can try to pop dents, but the area will be work hardened and you will need to use some body filler to smooth it out. Or, if you have a crack, you can grind and weld over. If you have an autobody shop in your area, you should be able to find someone locally who can fix aluminum. If you need to repair carbon, I wouldn't trust anyone who wasn't a card-carrying wizard. In either case, I'd expect the repair to add some grams of weight but nothing significant. Source: I used to design aircraft parts, wings, etc. and we chose to use aluminum over carbon because it was cheaper and easier to repair.
Oh, and it's pronounced pre-"preg" - as in pre-impregnated with resin.
The aluminum one is pretty 😍
I went for the aluminum Emonda.
Aluminium is for many the best. Material. It's less stiff so it compensates beter for rider fatigue. Rougher terrain, cobbles material flex is preferable so you don't need compensators
Carbon is an indicator. In cheap production and high upsel and creating new problems. That needs to be fixed by worse technology. Take for example tru axle wich is thechnicly. Worse than quickrelease.
Carbon fibre has a lifespan of 3 tears and isn't recyclable.
Al has an lifespan of 5 years and is 100% recyclable.
I know. My choices...
What wheels & tires did u upgrade to on the Emonda aluminum bike? Which deep dish wheels?
How does Trek make such a heavy carbon bike?
Have 10 bikes & gotta say aluminum if ur gonna keep a bike for a long time as I have already done,carbon is a throw away material
You have carbon bikes break unexpectedly without crashing ? I just bought a carbon bike , I love it to bits compared to my aluminum, but I’m scared lol.. I got an amazing deal so couldn’t pass it up