...which is hugely attributed to Geometry, not materialOriginally posted by: DaShen
When you start doing centuries though, thing become a little nicer on difference types of bikes.
There are 2 components to "comfort" - the first is geometry which determines body positioning.. the 2nd is what people love to laud as dampening or absorptionOriginally posted by: JulesMaximus
I don't think a carbon seatpost makes a bit of difference on a bike. However, if you make the entire frame out of CF it will make a difference. Oh, and I do think that construction makes a difference as well. Are there aluminum bikes that have good ride qualities? I'm sure there are but I have yet to ride one. I know for a fact that there are plenty of aluminum bikes with very poor ride qualities.
And yes, I can tell a difference.
a bicyclist sits on foam-cushioned saddles, mounted with 2 pencil-thin saddle rails, on a megastiff [steel/cf/alum/ti] frame, on top of air-filled rubber tires. with all of that in mind, how much difference does the a change in frame affect the transmission of the "road" to the rider? unless the rider is like the princess and the pea...
following don vito, bike frames arent solid cubes of raw material, but rather composed of multiple tubes. so people can cite metallurgical numbers, but its meaningless unless they consider the final product. specific alloy, thicknesses , diameter , etc, can affect stiffness, strength, etc.
so an aluminum bike can be made soft (vitus) or stiff (cannondale), as can carbon fiber (old spec epic allez vs modern willier), as can steel (old 531 vs merckx mxleader)
so to say a bike is comfortable , or harsh , or stiff , or soft , due to it being simply steel/cf/ti/alum is very incorrect