Help me decide on aluminum/carbon tradeoffs

On Sep 15, 10:07 pm, wrote:
I am looking at buying either the 2008 or 2009 Specialized Roubaix.
2008 has carbon fork, rear stays, and seat tube. 2009 is all carbon.
I can get 2008 for about $1400. I can get 2009 for about $1800. $400
extra for the all-carbon frame.

I'm a pretty casual rider. No racing. Usually do 20-30 mile rides
2-3 times/week during the summer months. All told, no more than 1000
miles/year.

$1800 seems like a LOT of money for a bike. Well so does $1400, but
my cheaper alternative is the $1250 Trek 2.1 which has Tiagra
components. Friend talked me into a 105-class bike and the Roubaix
feels good.

Any thoughts if I would be foolish not to eak out the extra $400 for
an all-carbon bike? I'm sure the carbon makes a difference for 50-
mile rides, but I'd maybe do one of two of those a year.

I currently ride an aluminum bike w/ steel fork. Frame doesn't quite
fit right and RSX STI shifter is worn out.

To be honest, I don't think you'll notice a difference at all. I
went through this with C'dale recently - the bike I wanted (Six13,
carbon/alum combo frame) turned out to be unavailable (after I was
fitted, rode it and agreed to buy it) so I ended up riding another
C’dale with the exact same geometry, but a full-carbon frame (Synapse,
I think?). I couldn’t tell the difference, but since the shop owner
offered to split the difference in cost between the two with me and
let me ride it home that day I agreed to buy it. That, and I thought
it was pretty cool, which is worth something. Of course, he then
realized I couldn’t ride that bike home either, it had different
components than he thought, and we ended up back at square one (many
hours later). I ended up with a leftover Lemond Alpe D’Huez (carbon &
alum frame) and love it. Then again, I loved the Six13. And the
Synapse. They were all 105 level bikes that fit me pretty well, were
adjusted and dialed in well, were light enough and rode well.

So to me, I couldn’t even tell the difference between the all-carbon
and carbon/alum blend frame when riding them back to back, with the
same geometry, components and settings (measured and copied from one
bike to the other). I still almost dropped a couple extra on the
Synapse, but it was more because I really wanted to ride a bike home
that day, and I was told (incorrectly) that with the Synapse I could.
Figure an extra buck and a half for the instant-gratification fee,
another buck and a half for the “100% carbon – neat!” factor and I’d
have been out the door, had they been able to sell me the bike they
said they’d sell me.

The leftover Alpe D’Huez I ended up with cost me substantially less
than the cheaper of the C’dales I tried to buy at the first shop. It
was also a combo of 2 of my favorite colors – dark blue and carbon. I
like it every bit as much as I liked either of the C’dales.

So basically, I don’t think you’ll notice any difference. However, if
you think one will make you happier than the other, but that one. The
best value is the one you’ll ride the most, and have the most fun on.
If you think a full carbon frame will inspire you to get it out onto
the road more often, go for it. If you think it’ll make you faster,
my personal opinion would be that it won’t. Not by anything you’d
notice, anyway. Maybe a couple seconds over the end of a 100+ mile
race with lots of climbing, but when was the last time you did a
competitive 100+ mile bike race? Yeah, me too.