Having ridden both carbon and steel bikes recently, I'd say that carbon bikes feel stiffer, but deader, when standing on hills. This I do not view as an asset. However, IN MY OPINION, carbon bikes equipped with carbon forks are much better descenders than classic steel bikes. Your experience may vary
Vlad Luskin San Francisco, CA
Ray Homiski <classicbicycle@gmail.com> wrote: Casual riders will hardly benefit from the latest and greatest carbon fiber toy. It is a matter of fitness and ability (skill). I know that I have ridden modern CF bicycles and old steel bikes and when I approach a hill it still causes the same amount of angst. I am not a fast rider by any stretch. At my skill level the weight difference between a high end CF bike and a vintage steel model is negligible. I can compensate for this by going to the bathroom before I ride or removing some clothing or just using one water bottle. I still go back to my grammar school science class. The amount of energy it takes to walk the bike up a hill or ride up a hill is the same. I cannot cheat physics. It takes me just as much energy to carry a bike up a hill as it does to ride it over that same hill.
If some one looks at me cross for riding my old bikes, I take it in stride knowing that no matter what bicycle any of us owns, it takes the same amount of energy to go over a hill for a given weight. We all experience this when we gear up to go over a hill. If we are able to go over the hill in a high gear then it is harder to pedal but uses fewer pedal strokes. If we gear it down we pedal easier but more strokes. Same amount of energy just spread out differently.
Bottom line at my level of riding, someone who can kick my butt on their CF bike will kick my butt on a steel bike. It is the fitness level not the bike.
Ray Homiski
Elizabeth, NJ
_______________________________________________
---------------------------------
Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool.