>>2026346>>2026356I dunno if this really has anything to do with the material though. I've ridden a nice Cannondale caad8 with 25's and a carbon fork that was "smoother" than my steel cx bike with 38's.
By smoother I mean the Cannondale had a more fluid ride on the road. Going over a traffic speed bump don't jolt me as much. It was faster, more predictable. It felt like ~~~ vs ^^^ like
>>2026356 said
That being said, taking the Cannondale on gravel and the like was measurably worse than the cx bike. The big tires smoothed things out when there were literal obstructions in the road.
So what was it?!? I guess it was geometry? The cx bike is definitely not as stiff as the Cannondale, I don't think it was stiff at all desu. Maybe the fork was bent some dumb way and it fucked up the ride?
My point is, I've never personally seen a tight correlation between ride quality and frame material. And yes I've ridden plenty of bikes, maybe I've never ridden your Columbus tubed colnago but I've been on your carbon fred sled, triple butted miyatas, steel rim brake trek touring bikes, cheap hydro formed rigid mtbs, the whole lot with tires between 19mm-60mm.
Personally I think it's geometry mostly. I'm retarded tho so FUCK if I know
