I like this guy's videos as they're very thorough but not daunting. It's not exactly anything super controversial though. Basically all frames have close to 0 vertical compliance by themselves before factoring in seatposts, tires, etc. Totally checks out, frames use the same tech as bridges for Pete's sake. Now he's including a lot of footage of carbon yet the title is only steel vs. aluminum...perhaps that's due to his touring background though.
Vertical compliance is only one part of the equation though. These people in the comments saying they've gone from steel to alloy to carbon and back to steel, defending it as the most comfortable are missing the point of the video. There are other factors that play into why you might prefer one over the other. Hell, if I had the money, the eye for carbon and murdered-out componentry, and rode bikes for no purpose other than to ride a bike, I probably would prefer the ride quality of an Open U.P.(P.E.R.) with the fattest Rene Herse EL tires, over some vintage Trek 720 on 700 x 23s. But I don't have that kind of money for bikes, I like the way lugged steel looks more, and I can 650b that trek, add racks and bags to transport me and things, crank that quill stem up to the sky, and ride equally as comfortable as the Open at a fraction of the cost and at a fraction of the speed ;) On Wednesday, August 19, 2020 at 9:06:46 PM UTC-5 tc wrote: > Well-presented study of what affects comfort: > https://youtu.be/Lb4ktAbmr_4 > > Tom > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/5adc880f-c829-44ae-b7e7-0866df502449n%40googlegroups.com.
