I get it, it's light and quite strong, but at the same time you have to treat it like a fucking egg. Hit something? Into the bin it goes. Overtorque a screw? Into the bin it goes. Undertorque a screw? Into the bin it goes after a XK miles. Oh you were unlucky and got carbon with a manufacturing defect you can't tell without ultrasound or some other faggotry? Enjoy your bike folding under you at a random moment.I can get it with racing bikes actually used for racing by pro-racers, dedicated team of mechanics etc, but why the fuck every not-bottom-tier bike with a rigid fork, has to have that fork made out of carbon? Any damage to that that shit or too-much / too-little torque and you're fucked according to the interwebs. Steel is durable and flexible and aluminum is durable and light. Both are cheaper, why bother with carbon in consumer bikes? Also, the stiffness and bump absortion is bullshit, you get better results with lower tire pressure and tubeless really pays off and can be done for cheap.So far this is what my tiny brain deduced. So either it's a shill's world and bike manufacturers fuck the customers selling shit that will not last and can be a potential hazard, or there is something I don't get and carbon is actually magic and all the internet "better not ride it cause a dentist cost more" are the actual shill trying to convince you to buy a new part.Also carbon parts thread, I think.
>>1699115Because I'm rich and I can afford to buy a new frame every time I want.
>>1699118So am I but, but why bother and why have to deal with it? I'd rather buy a steel frame that with current tech is still quite light and will last me forever?
Manufacturing defects happen much more frequently in your gaspipe fixies, it's just that nobody notices when a poor gets injured because you don't matter. Torque wrenches aren't expensive. Broken bones are a far bigger deal to me than damage to a $3000 bike, so I don't crash into everything like some kind of drunk retard. I have tubeless and lower pressure in addition to crabon. Lastly, you should complain less and work harder so you can afford a bike that doesn't suck.
>>1699115The bicycle was perfected 30 years ago, every "innovation" since then has been worse and you have to be psyoped into buying them by youtube influencers and forum shills
>>1699126I guess you think dropper posts made MTBs worse.>>1699115Because carbon fibre is the easiest and most cost effective way to create complex shapes (aerodynamics) that are strong and offer customisable stiffness and compliance. I can you have never owned a carbon bike because of how carefully you think they need to be treated. I bomb a carbon MTB down some seriously rough hills, I have crashed my carbon road by twice and it is rides amazingly. As long as you are not doing anything stupid or careless with the bike it won't explode under you.
>>1699115because it's light and stiffbut don't clamp it or it will crack inside and fail horribly when you don't expect it
>>1699132not him, but any aero gains with the frame are dwarfed by how in-aero the rider is unless they’re wearing sci-fi gimp suits
>>1699132So how am I supposed to know whether a carbon bike is robust like yours or just a normal one? Do you expect me to buy one and just die if it breaks?
steel/alu frame, steel fork, alu drivetrain and hubs, carbon rims, titanium(not 3d printed shit) everything else/thread.
>>1699132Frame 'compliance' is a tiny factor in overall shock absorption. Tires, seatpost, and fork blades are the biggies.>>1699148On the plus side, there's a small army of lawyers out there who specialize in carbon bike injuries.
>>1699141Thanks for telling me you have never rode an aero bike. Assuming that you are doing the norm of wearing tight lycra and have a have a bike fit appropriate for a road bike, the aerodynamic advantages of an aero frame are noticable.>>1699148Literally any carbon frame from a major manufacture. >>1699192Posting a wanna be hambini who uses big words in order to appear smart. Seat post and fork blades are typically carbon and part of the frame set, so what is your point?
>>1699217Crabon fork and crabon seatpost on a prebuilt steel bike is something you normally would see on higher end products, not the kind of gaspipe shitter that the average broke steelisreal autist is usually riding (unless he stole it)
>>1699240That is irrelevant DESU. OP is asking about carbon in general. Also, building compliance into chain and seat stays is a thing. They are literally using carbon chain stays as a pivot point in suspension designs now.
Just try outrunning the cops on steel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS_0puMJ1gQ
>>1699217The fork isn't part of the frame.Spending an extra few hundred for something with carbon (or half carbon) fork and upgrading to a carbon seatpost will improve comfort. Spending an extra three grand for something with carbon everything-else won't.
>>1699115Garbon is confirmed for retard consoomers who swallowed the marketing bullshit, of course for pro racers who treat their bikes like disposable items, one race/replace, it makes perfect sense. But for EVERYONE else garbon os the spastic choice, literally plastic for spastics.
>>1699115You're a moron, STFU faggot.
>>1699115Stop being butthurt, faggot.Don't want it? Don't buy it. Steel, alu and Ti frames still exist, hell you could even get magnesium shit or wood. Or get someone to make you a custom frame out of clay if you want.And buy a torque wrench ffs, it's good practice to use it on all materials.This thread is pointless and so are you.
>these threads still get dozens of repliesit is good to see that some things never do change
Carbon is ok for people who exclusively cycle for sports, they do miles without traffic and put it back into their shed after riding.For people commuting it's just dumb and risky.
>>1699135Any first hand experience you want to share ?
>>1699520I've got about 7k miles of commute time on different crabon bikes and you're full of shitThe one time I got into a crash bad enough to cause serious problems, it was on my steelisreal and being steel didn't prevent it from being an expensive crash
>>1699115>Why is carbon a thing in bikes?because Beryllium is toxic and prohibitively expensive.
>>1699115Lack of research and development for making cooler stuff.Even cheaper carbon fiber isn't interesting for the the Berg collective.
>>1699123baseda carbon fork is pretty much essential on a modern bike anyway, entry level aluminium road bikes have them, high end steel bikes have them, the comfort/stiffness/aero gains easily outweigh any concern that you might break it by being ridiculously clumsy
>>1699721carbon is still used a lot for things which have loads of R&Dzoomers are clueless taking it for granted, it's one of the most cutting edge materials known to man
>>1699721ignorance is blisspic is carbon wing production at Airbus
>>1699721Turbine blades made of carbon from Rolls Royce
>>1699132>I guess you think dropper posts made MTBs worse.>Paying $350 for a $15 office chair piston because you're too lazy to step off your bike for 5 seconds to undo a quick release>Now have to be super paranoid about scratching your stanchion and putting your bike in a standYeah, they made it worse
>>1699115Because it raises performance by being light (so good for the rider), && it's far less durable and can be obsolescent (so good for whoever's making it to sell you a new one).I value durability too much for it.
>>1699337Yeah. A full carbon frame is 1000-2000 AUD more (typically 1000) than the alu frame. Ao you are not paying that much for a significantly better frame. >>1700225And this is how I know you are a poor fag who has never used a dropper. While essentially the dame idea as an office chain, there is a lot more tech in it to make it work properly. Also, have you never considering the probability of changing the seat heigh as you are riding single track? I think the only time I use the dropper post when stationary is when I am mounting the bike.>>1700553I have rode second hand, ten year old carbon frames with no issue.
Carbonshitters are the audiophiles of cycling
>>1700223Those are fan blades, not turbine.
>>1700743Good analogy4chan audiophile strawman that broke NEETs seethe over: listens to $45,000 speakers through $10,000 speaker wireActual audio chad: listens to music, using speakers that cost maybe $1200, and $30 belden cables4chan carbonshitter that broke NEETs seethe over: obese 80 year old man on a $20,000 gold plated pinarello who can barely hit 18mph without having a heart attackActual carbon fiber chad: extremely fit 30 year old on a $3000 canyon who would be faster than you regardless of the bike
>>1700223>fan bladesIs there a single part under the hood of a car that needs *less* strength and durability than a fan blade?
ITT: people with too much time on their hands over-complicate thingsIt's a fucking bike, you pedal, it goes forward. I'm with OP on this one, small gains in performance are crucial thing in sports. The 40-year old engineer on his weekend ride isn't doing Tour de France except maybe in his head. If somebody wants to spend loads of money on a good carbon bike them do that by all means but keep that shit in that niche and develope more practical frame materials for people who just want a bike.
>>1700753It doesn’t matter
>>1700791Do these blades look like parts of some random shit cage? Those are fan blades of the largest hi-bypass airplane engine in civil use today. They are literally designed to withstand hail / bird strikes at 100s of mph.
>>1700779thisand some /n/ anons are very insecure about people who have money to spend like they're very young or very low in the social ladder like there are literal homeless people that post here. it's not an astronomical difference in price between a $1000 babby's first road bike (+ tools, accessories, maintenance) and a $3000 cycling enthusiast bike, it's not like it's a $10k car vs a $3 million car. and the $1000 name brand road bike alone is a pretty nice bike but people are so reluctant to spend just a bit more than what they spend on their craigslist/bikesdirect specials.
>>1700794I was with you in the first sentence but then you lost me. Carbon bikes aren't expensive or niche anymore, and practicality is application specific not based on what a dutch person thinks is good for riding 3 blocks on perfectly flatland to the nearest marijuana bart. commutes on carbon
>>1700868>everyone who disagrees with me is poor, fat, and slow/n/ever change
>>1700925>>everyone who disagrees with me is poor, fat, and slowThis but unironically
>>1700868"I have $X so I must spend $X" is a peak poorfag mindsetYou are just a poorfag who now has moneyBillionares like Bezos and Zuckerberg just drive around in $1000 shitboxes because they buy things on what they think they are worth, not based on how much money they have. A car is not worth more than $1000 to them so they don't pay any more than that.It's only mid tier wagecucks and ex-poorfags that blow $70k+ on flashy cars. Same thing with bikes.I could buy a $10k bike right now. Actually I could buy about 12 of them. Yet I ride a $450 bike because a bike isn't worth more to me than that.
>>1700930those billionares are actively trying to deconstruct the narrative that they're not 'regular people' it's not that they're behaving normally
>>1700930>>1700932Wow I didn't know having a 2 wheeler I bought online with paypal made of non-NEET-approved materials makes me worth billions of dollars, how do I access my portfolio?
>>1701004what is he coping about? because you saved a youtuber's cage video? do you consider yourself to be as fancy as a youtuber, anon?
>>1701011even at $1000 you aren't hitting diminishing returns on a bike. a tire upgrade alone is like $100+ for tires and tubes. what's the point in spending hours a day on this shitty board if you think you're satisfied with a $450 bike.
>>1701013I wouldn't know, I have a $3000 bike and a $1500 bike. I was asking about your random youtube link, do you consider yourself to be on the same "team" as lamborghini meme guy?
>>1701019anon was suggesting that flashy cars are a waste of money and he thinks he's smart for being a cheapskate. but actually people have their reasons for buying nice things. it's one thing not to be wasteful but it's another to be so frugal that you end up being a sad fucking loser who rides a hobo tier bike and dies a virgin. warren buffett's relatives resent him for hoarding his wealth, it's not something to look up to. i'm not there yet to be able to buy fancy cars but buying a high tier but good value car or a few is something i would like to do in the future.
>>1701013>you think you're satisfiedDamn you have some weird ass worldviewI guess no human for the entirety of history every felt satisfied until we invented two thousand dollar carbon bicycles
>>1701029c o p e
>>1701027>gets called out for having a poorfag mindset>copes and seethes for multiple posts>eventually reveals himself as a poorfagpottery
For me, it's a steel frameset with rim brakes on 28 mm tires. Don't care what you're riding, simple as.
>>1701031since you spend all day on this board, you're clearly a neet, maybe you get welfare checks for your mental disability. meanwhile people are making 6-7 figures off of their businesses and the stock market etc. if someone makes $100k and spends $1k on a bike, they're better off than someone who makes $10k and spends $450 on a bike. the $450 bike is a fucking joke and you're a delusional pathetic loser.
>>1701027they are a waste of money, and you seem to be saying a basic carbon fiber road bike is like a lamborghini, which is dumb and makes carbon fiber bikes sound extravagant and impractical, exactly the argument being made by the whiny NEETsalso, zuckerberg drives a pagani that costs $1.4 million, according to google. that's not even a rounding error for someone like that. and you are drawing the wrong conclusions about the rich, when a rich person drives a cheap car they're doing it to make a statement, not because it's "practical" or "frugal". it's the money version of being a hot chick wearing shitty fucked up clothes and still being smoking hot, it's the ultimate "fuck you" to the plebs who try so hard to impress. it's saying "I don't have to try and the rules don't apply to me".
>>1701038clearly they aren't a waste of money when people enjoy driving them and even make a profit by buying the right cars at the right price. $1000 used cars are a gamble, you basically need to be a mechanic or expect to have reliability issues and drive it into the ground, and the gas, taxes, insurance, maintenance costs are disproportionate to the price you paid for the car.
>>1701037>since you spend all day on this boardNice projection lmaoI make $140k yearly as a programmer and I ride a $450 bike. Gonna cry some more about it?
>>1701044you said you could buy 12 $10k cars implying you have $120k, so where is that $140k a year going, either you're full of shit or you're spending money on fancy things just not your bike because you somehow post on /n/ but you don't care about cycling? or you just don't know what you're missing with nicer bikes
>>1701041all the coke my coworker puts up his nose isn't a waste of money to him because it "keeps him sharp" for "the deal" and all that crap, but objectively, it is a waste of money, much like a lamborghini. if owning a lamborghini was a fiscally sound choice most people would be driving lamborghinis and not toyotas and hondasI'm starting to think you're a falseflag for the anti-crabon brigade
>>170104812 $10k bikes*>>1701049cope
I bet everyone here arguing about frame materials is weak as fuck
>>1701051he said he's a programmer so yeah
>>1701050what am I coping about? because I didn't save a youtube about meme lamborghini guy?what kind of bike do you ride? is it a lambo? bet you get mad pussy with that thing
>>1701053mental illness: the post
>>1700930>Billionares like Bezos and Zuckerberg just drive around in $1000 shitboxesno they don'tall the while Bezos was bragging baout keeping his Honda shitbox he bought when he was significantly less rich he already had a very impressive supercar collection, having spent probably tens of millions on carsoutside of internet pull yourself by the bootstrap fairytales I've never met a rich person who didn't drive at least a somewhat fancy car
>>1701054https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QyZkqG6XGgcopeam I doing it right?
>>1701056you're missing the point. the exotic car hacks guy is all about the money, he's not just some strawman newmoney zoomer. you can't say in good faith that he's pissing his money away when he makes money like that $77k on the pista.
>>1701057how old are you?
>>1701058what does it matter lmao? the cope is strong in this one
>>1701059because I'm feeling more and more like I'm arguing with a child and it feels kinda bad
>>1701056Several Saudis holding hands like gay couples in that video, amazing. Isn’t that illegal there?
>>1701062being gay is illegal but handholding is not seen as as intimate in arab culture as it is in western and does not indicate them being gay
>>1701060nice ad hominem. enjoy being a cheapskate (lol $450 bike in this day and age with inflation, accessible information about the advantages of nicer bikes etc) and taking your money with you into the grave
>makes $140k/year>doesn't care about cycling enough to think a bike is worth more than $450, yet posts on /n/ for some mysterious reason>claims smart people are incredibly frugal to the point of driving a $1000 car even if they're billionaires>has a grating incel personality, inability to empathize with other people etc>thinks he's the smartest asshole ITT
>>1701075Damn that's a lot of rent free seethe and projection compacted into a single postI haven't even posted in this thread for over an hour. You've been seething for an hour straight.>Gonna cry some more about it?Guess you've answered my question lmfao
>>1701083thanks for the (You) copefag
>>1701075Wow bro that image is so trueI frequently see enlightened 200IQ monks riding around town on $3k carbon bikes.I really hate those midwits who just ride on cheap bikes and are content and at peace with life. They're too low IQ to reach enlightenment and realise life is all about buying expensive cars and flashy carbon road bikes.
Bros, is this a real carbon Shimano wheel?
>>1701096Can't tell without a cross section. Do you have a Dremel, angle grinder, or hacksaw available?
>>1701064try again, I'm >>1701019 >>1700880>>1700779you still haven't answered the questions about your age, or what bikes you have, so I'm going to assume you're 15 and you're LARPing as a youtube influencer. or maybe tiktok since that seems to be the career aspirations of the average zoomer
>>1701096I don't think shimomo ever made a carbon brake track rim brake wheel of any kind, or any carbon product with a 3k weave, but what do I know I'm just a shitposter on /n/
>>1700799>They are literally designed to withstand hail / bird strikes at 100s of mph.lol no they’re not
>>1700223Aerospace carbon is on a completely different level of quality and cost to anything you can find in a consumer bicycle.Anyone who has worked in aerospace and also works on bikes will tell you that there is no comparisonhttps://youtu.be/-qsLYlVWkbQ?t=273https://youtu.be/dW4aIatRP34?t=447
>>1701141wow do you mean to say that a 20 foot carbon fan blade that spins at 12,000 RPM for thousands of hours a year and needs to have a 0% chance of failure because it will kill hundreds of people is different from a 30 inch long piece of carbon that only has to support 150 pounds going 18mph and even if it doesn't someone might fall down and break their arm?next thing you'll tell me the warranty support isn't the same either, god we're being scammed by Big Bicycle!
>>1701146You were the one trying to imply they were equivalent
>>1701147yes in fact everyone who disagrees with you ITT is the same person, I also have the $450 bike right?
>>1701148>randomly jump into someone else's conversation on a board without ids>hur dur why did you think I was the person that you replied to?
>>1701135Of course they did and still do, question is if that wheel set is a real Shimano.
>>1701152>anonymous randos replying anonymously on an anonymous boardWho could ever have predicted such an event could occur?
>/n/igger unracers and /n/igger carbon shills spend their entire weekend calling each other poor, fat, and slow as one side tries to rationalize their $25 hobo shitheaps and the other side tries to rationalize their $5,000 plastic deathtraps
>>1701205>"At least I don't look poor"
>>1700868why are rich people always mean assholes?
>>1701027>reasonsalso known as peer pressure
>>1700880I laughed so hard at that
>>1701204why do this shit when you could be riding your bike instead? doesn't matter what kind of bike it is if you are enjoying it.
>>1701262where and what else will I shitpost while I'm off the saddle recovering?
>>1701141the top of the line top brand bikes use premium quality fibers, advanced layups etc but then the salty entitled poorfags complain that they're too expensive and they use the top of the line bike that's meant to compete in the tour de france as a strawman when they also offer a mid tier version of the same design that's just a couple of hundred grams heavier
>>1701321>PREMIUM QUALITY plasticOh well that's totally different.
>>1701344>not pictured at far bottom left, the shit they make bicycles out of
>>1701401Good carbon + shitty glue job by suicidal chinese sweatshop worker = big hospital bill
>>1701392>further to the bottom lefthow much they pay people to assemble the carbon by hand
>>1699123>Manufacturing defects happen much more frequently in your gaspipe fixies,I'm pretty sure brazing or welding is way more fool proof than making complex shape out of weird fiberglass. Aluminium isnt as fool proof but still good enough. Carbon fiber is fucking hard. >>1700062You don't need carbon at all. You are not performing well enough to notice 500 gram difference between steel and fiber. You're not a fucking airplane to need carbon fiber everything when possible
>>1701438>blah blah blah I'm poor and only trust technology that existed in 1820This is all I could hear
>>1701438>You're not a fucking airplanewell excuuuse me mr you're not a fucking airplane
>>1701441>if I call them poor enough times maybe the delamination gods will look favorably upon me and spare me
>>1701679>chink Giant isn't liable because they're not the retailer>burger Giant isn't liable because they're not the manufacturer
>>1701679> new to herIt was a second hand bike and she tried to sue giant because the previous owner rode it into the ground. Second hand, old carbon is a dice roll
>>1701726>carbon is totally safe>a 6 year old carbon bike inspected and sold by a bike shop is a fatal accident waiting to happenpick oneGiant settled to avoid trial.https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/Illinois_State_Cook_County_Circuit_Court/2018-L-003118/JANET_KOWAL_v._GIANT_BICYCLE_INC_et_al/
I will never ride carbon again. I had it, it wasn't special. I crashed on my carbon fork (alloy steerer) drunk at least four times and there was no problem. Still, why the fuck would I care about an extra 200 grams?? for what??Steel forks are best. Also fuck disc, fuck tubeless, fuck clipless, fuck you. No I'm not poor, no I'm not scared. Carbon is delicate, lame, not worth the money, not cool, not fun, just shit. If you ride carbon, you're fucking clueless, or a poser, or desperate to feel faster and better than you are. humble thyself. stop being a doofus. stop it. Steel is real.. Steel is strong, flexible, and durable. It will outlive you in most cases. Carbon is disposable junk. Bike shaped resin with charcoal weave inside. Ridiculous. If grams matter so much why haven't you replaced all your bolts with Ti? where are your veloplugs? why aren't you running latex tubes? rene herse tires? why haven't you go carbon saddle? hmmmm? mmmmmmmmmhhmmmmmm? muh grammmmmzzzzzzz? what about those? what about those grams anom? you'll go fast
>>1699115shut up and go get a job so you can afford nice things poorfag
>>1701205Post a webm of the one that failed during the tokyo olympics.
>>1701441Eh, I'd trust Boeing or Airbus more with fibergla- carbonfiber than some bike manufacturer.I'd not trust a bike manufacturer with aluminium to be honest...
>>1701747Most based man on /n/
>>1701776that was 3d printed titanium
>>1701861no.... my narrative....
>>1701861Not him, but the consistent pattern here is that any material that isn't welded or cast metal is a meme, and is going to snap
>>1701792>Eh, I'd trust Boeing
>>1701877> 3 webms on a Chinese carbon self-help forum > consistent pattern
>>1701897>this has only ever happened 3 times goyIt happens so often than GCN has to make a specific video to tell you whether its safe to ride home when you plastic frame snaps mid ride
>>1701881They have to pass certification process. Bike manufacturer - no, as nobody gives a fuck about cyclists and their fragile resins
>>1701959>he doesn't know
>>1702001While process of certification isn't perfect (eg 737 max, nuff said), they still do pressurization tests and such. And then you get such news. So I'm pretty sure structure wise they meet some standards for sure.
>>1701906Wow GCN, the holy grail of grails for knowledge seeking zoomers. Ever heard of click-bait?
>>1701906well can you?
>bike from exhaust emissions >not getting a titanium onengmi
>>1702465I'd get a titty frame if they fucking painted them.
>>1702465What is the point of a titanium frame if you get a carbon fork? Speaking of which full titanium framesets have nearly all disappeared in favor of the Ti frame / carbon fork combo. I know a Ti fork is much harder to make than a Ti frame but it's surprising it's not more often offered as a higher-end option.
>>1702505>What is the point of a titanium frame if you get a carbon fork?The pudgy boomers who buy Ti need to save that extra pound from the frameset.
>>1702505carbon forks are objectively better, it's not just the weight it helps against road vibrations and it's laterally stiff as well. the frame doesn't matter as much as the fork so it can use meme materials like steel or titanium for those contrarian faggot boomers who insist on it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CTjg1TFHDc
>>1701062in many muslim countries holding hands is what good friends do, it doesn't have a homosexual meaning
>>1699126Most was figgured out in the 60s
>>1702908Why does that head angle look slacker than modern enduro bike?
>>1702908Looks like a creaky miserable nightmare useful for coasting a few blocks on perfectly flat ground and nothing more
>>1701136They are tested with pressurized turkeys
>>1702908Someone dragged this piece out of a museum and in front of a camera for those precious Instagram-likes, awesome.
>this threadI have owned my garbon bike for 6 years now, using it in the city, where I hit pavement edges and potholes often.I even had a crash where my front wheel got destroyed as well as my skull, but the garbon is still fine, 1 year later. You people are paranoid.. .
>>1701211>>1701205I bet he didn't factor that faceplant
>>1701052That office looks comfy
why is anything even a thing
>>1706046my fredsled is from 2006, it has a garbon fork complete with literally GLUED "alloy" crown and dropouts... before I bought a mountain bike, I even took this thing offroading. by /n/'s logic I should have died and/or "got shards of carbon up my ass" several times. but in reality I've never had any problems, because I'm not fat.
>>1706376I had an early 1990s aluminum-carbon monstrosity that I treated like absolute shit as a beater/commuter and what finally killed it was the failure of a proprietary steel fastener that pinned the garbon parts to the alu parts and that wouldn't even have happened if I didn't ride it every winter and get it doused with salt slush almost every day
>>1699118let me guess, you own OLED TVs too
>>1706564Of course, vastly superior video quality is worth slightly shorter life span
>>1706566>slightly shorterso half the lifespan of a not-OLED display is "slight shorter" huh?also QLED BTFOs OLED in every way. Get with the times son.
>>1706567>also QLED BTFOs OLED in every wayhere's a short comparison:>viewing anglesoled>black levelsoled>bloomingoled>screen uniformityoled>color accuracyoled>pixel response timeoled>peak brightnessqledlcds are competitive in bright rooms simply due to superior peak brightness but in a dark room even the best lcd on the market the Samsung Neo QLED QN90A simply cannot compete on any level vs an entry level oled from 4 years agopic related is a good demonstration, this is a scene from Gravity and you'll notice how bloomy and glowy the Samsung is, there simply is no LCD that can accurately reproduce these scenes with bright stars on a pitch black background>so half the lifespan of a not-OLED display is "slight shorter" huh?in the grand scheme of things, yestvs have an inherently limited useful lifespan and within like 7-10 years you want to be upgrading anyway, modern oleds should last at least 5 years so the difference isn't that bigof course if you're willing to suffer inferior image quality qleds will last longersimilar to carbon, nothing competes with carbon on performance and at some point you'll just have to decide whether performance is more important to you or whether it'll last 10 years vs 20
>>1706384god that's hilarious."steal is reel"
>>1706587fuck you, CRTs are still better.
>>1706725that failure isn't something you'd ever have on a steel frame though
>>1706747The level of NEET dumpster diver cope in this post is off the charts, all you're missing is the word "cagetroll"
>>1699115>Both are cheaperThey are not. In reality carbon is cheap as fuck no matter what the manufacturer says.
>>1706767you defending a proto-typical screwed together 90s carbon/allum abomination is refined neet dumpster dive cope
>>1706032The factory those were made is im my town.Its actually an Audi Plant now. So you still see many boomers driving those around.
>>1707954it's not impressive. modern bikes perform much better.
>>1707954Let’s just hope that these kind of old school brakes will not become trendy anytime soon
>>1708002The main breaking is done with the rear hub brake
>>1699115Either you go out and spend few thou on reputable bike or you end up with chinesium crap that is just a shitty epoxy and weave that is soft and flexible as fuck.