Polo Bikes

it's all about 1.16 in the second video

Carbon totally depends on the manufacturing process. Cheap carbon is fool's gold.

Is expensive carbon stronger than steel? Doubtful.

Tapping it with a hammer, not the really the same thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDVpRSNtcPQ

With context of how it's made and where it's used completely ignored, carbon is stronger than steel.

However, steel showing its faults is probably a good thing. I like to know when my bike is likely to fail.

I'm skeptical, they're ads after all.

I guess I am talking from what I have experienced of both carbon and steel, and that's not exactly scientific. imo expensive carbon doesn't have the same properties of strength to steel, but maybe i wasn't careful enough with expensive carbon.

Totally depends.

Carbon road bike = built for weight saving, strength not so much.

Carbon DH bike = built for serious strength with marginal weight saving.

With context of how it's made and where it's used completely ignored, carbon is stronger than steel.

However, steel showing its faults is probably a good thing. I like to know when my bike is likely to fail.

This. Unless you want to xray your bike every time after a crash, i'd avoid carbon and get super stiff and light steel like a sweet donahue or something.

Totally depends.

Carbon road bike = built for weight saving, strength not so much.

Carbon DH bike = built for serious strength with marginal weight saving.

hmm, true, maybe my experience was that of the former.

but what is the benefit of the latter? fashion? the sweet tight weave pattern?

carbon dh bikes are stronger than steel dh bikes, that's the point..

Cody in seattle rides crabon for polo, apparently the bike has been in polo servoce for 6 years

Get off the internet, Max!

It seems so crumply.

So, I need to adjust my views of carbon to:

Strong/Expensive carbon = strong and allegedly stronger than its steel counterpart
Cheap carbon - fool's gold
High end carbon made for fancy road bikes = fool's gold.

Waiting for a ride to seattle!

Carbon road bikes are awesome. Lighter, stiffer, more comfortable. Win-win-win!

they are super comfortable , light , stiff , responsive etc etc, but it's so annoying how easily they get damaged, become chipped, hide stress fractures, spontaneously burst into flames if fancy components aren't put on them etc.

All good points.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Columbus-Cyclox-cyclocross-frame-/120773925591?pt=UK_sportsleisure_cycling_bikeparts_SR&hash=item1c1eafdad7

Started a nice little argument there

I'm still not convinced, but I will reserve my doubts for the time when I get to say 'I told you so' to Jack.

carbon faults < unnecessary carbon haters

carbon haters < carbon

carbon faults < unnecessary carbon haters

carbon faults are less likely to occur than the existence of carbon haters?

carbon haters < carbon

carbon haters are less likely to occur than the existence of carbon?

wtf do those thingies even mean?

#srsquestion

Less than/greater than.

Unnecessary carbon haters are greater than carbon faults.

Carbon is greater than carbon haters.

Proper empirical studies and design work > glib forum comments

greater numerically?? or quality-wise?