Quick check (my LBS level) shows the same profit margin between the Emonda ALR 5 & SL 5, with both having an identical spec other than seat post to seat mast difference. So based on identical margin, the higher priced SL model will bring in a greater dollar value (actual profit) per bike sale at the end of the day.
The ALR will only be a âcash cowâ if the volume of sales is high enough compared to the SL. That could be the case from the $1050 USD price delta, but that depends entirely on the market. Sadly, I donât have access to sales volume at this time to know which of those sells more units.
He has written some great stuff. Well at least good. I think he ran out of ideas a long time ago and is now just creating semi controversial takes for clicks.
From personal experience, the carbon is weak and youâre screwed if you break it narrative is total trash. A friend locally does carbon repair and itâs remarkable how many frames heâs fixed that live a big second life. Iâve seen Enduro bikes with repairs pushed to the limit, so I wonât sweat possibly losing a little compliance or some other technically measurable fault from an imperfect fix.
Carbon fails catastrophically. When itâs the fork, and youâre riding, itâs hard to recover. I know lots of people with modern carbon fiber bikes, and the rate of frame failures is bewildering. I really want one, but watching all the hassles these people have with their failures convinced me to buy titanium.
I know of exactly 0 people that have had a random carbon failure, I am sure they happen but imo any fear of it is overblown. Unless your crashing your carbon bike then not checking it in any way your fine.
If 90% of oneâs friends have a carbon frame, then the vast majority of failures one will see will be on carbon bikes.
Personally, I broke almost every steel frame I owned back in the day. My Litespeed didnât break though I heard of many people with broken welds.
I havenât had a carbon frame fail so far. Iâve seen one fail on a group ride - a Look - the seat tube just broke in half (easily repairable though).
Thatâs one good thing about carbon - itâs more easily repairable than any alloy. If you donât mind a carbon band-aid, itâs not so expensive. Paint matching can be expensive.
Having worked for a bicycle vacation company where I was managing a ridiculous fleet of hundreds of carbon bikes, I can say that seeing ~5 frames a year getting tossed was pretty common. Simple things like the wind blowing them over in a bad place caused small but structural damage to fragile parts such as seat stays which meant that we couldnât use them anymore.
Carbon is fantastic for those who make their living winning a bike race by a few seconds, but I find no reason for people like myself to ride around on a plastic bike. Carbon bikes can look pretty neat, but does that justify me having one manufactured for me to look at?
Iâve switched to high-quality steel bikes made in the USA and wonât ever go back. At one point I had one carbon bike and one steel bike and would ride them back to back to see how they felt, and I found that components such as tires and saddles made the biggest difference in feel.
I know my bike has the potential to last forever if I take care of it and if I total it, it can be recycled. Plus, I love the look of a high-quality steel bike!!!
I get your point, but it is the practically worthless level of âMaterial A is like this, Material B is like thatâ info that is not sufficiently relevant.
As I covered above, the pure material in use is only one part of the overall bike frame equation. Actual material shape, size, volume, amount, etc. are critical elements. We could build a carbon fiber bike with solid rods that would outlast a nuke, but it wouldnât be worth riding. Same for any other material.
Once you actually get around to building comparative products (shape, size, weight, performance) the picture can change dramatically. Like Eddie, I have seen carbon bikes damaged from simple falls in the garage and other places or normal use (top tube cracked by fall against a wood 2x4, blown out seat stay on MTB from a pivot to roll back with the rear brake on and others). Even beefy carbon MTB bikes can and do break, and those are likely the most durable examples in the range.
But I have also seen metal frame bikes (all materials) bent, dented, cracked and such so they are not impervious to failure either. The examples may vary where one material or specific model may survive better than a comparable one, but none are infallible.
Composite work is composite work. They are both material A. Itâs just a question of engineering and expense. And UHM carbon bike and UHM sailboat mast are no different in that regard.
