>>1663472Aluminium is more impact proof and less fatigue proof than carbon, though, that’s a fact, just like it’s a fact steel handles fatigue infinitely better than carbon because of fatigue limit. It’s also a fact that aluminium is basically automated so it’s far cheaper than aluminium (gazzillion hours of sweatshop labour) and steel (skilled boomer welder rates), so a x usd alu frame is very likely to be notably better than x usd carbon or steel frame, so op notwithstanding, I’d advise 99,9% of people to buy aluminium.
Weight even between a quality steel frame and a quality carbon one is not particularly different for recreational non-retards, fatigue isn’t something you’re going to see become a problem before getting a new bike anyway since you’ll either want to switch stuff up at some point before it’s a concern or otherwise you won’t even ride it enough to become one, you can just get a carbon seat tube and/or fork if your vagina is too tender and the price difference means you can either get a plain better frame or use the money for better components, which I think are far more important than the frame outside of aesthetics anyway.
Which brings me to the conclusion, just pick whatever looks best 2bh, imo carbon looks like a water gun toy and alu looks like some drunken retard welded water pipes together using his feet, titanium is the only real answer, but it’s too high class for its own good
