[Kalbi777]

hi guys
I' currently riding a 2014 gambler 30.
I'm able to get pretty good deal on norcos bike.
And my choice fell on 2 bikes
The aurum c7.3 or the a7.1
So one is carbon the other is Alu.
Wheight is almost same, carbon weights like 300 gramms less.
Both have boxxer rc and rs kage. The alu one has zee brakes and xo derailleur.
The carbon has guide r brakes and shimano zee dereilleur.
My main concern about this 2nd bike is durability. I d like to keep it as long as possible. Handling is less important but i still want to be informed about the difference between carbon and aluminium.
I started 2 years ago and do have pretty good skills, i wouldnt say i'm an expert.
If someone had experience with this bike or was able to test the same frame aluminium and carbon i would be happy to have some points from you guys.
Thanks

 

[kickstand]

All of my aluminum bikes have dented from being struck by a rock one way or another. (downtubes, chainstays, seat stays, etc.)

All of my carbon bikes have small stone chips in them from being struck by a rock.

I notice a slight improvement in small bump and vibration compliance on my carbon bikes when I go BACK to aluminum.

I ride carbon trail bike and DH bike, as does my wife, she also had a dent in both her last aluminum trail and dh bikes. For me, advantage (so far) carbon. Advantage Aluminum in the cost department.

I hate Zee components, my brakes were inconsistent and my derailuer snapped cables and wore out very quickly.

I like my guide RSC brakes far more, I don't have experience with the "r" version. I recently switched to some Sram (i think x0) DH derailuers with the new horizontal whatever gimmick, and have successfully completed 3 weekends of riding (2 races, 1 fun ride weekend) with zero complaints, zero broken cables.

I don't have any experience with the Norco, but those are my thoughts on your situation.

 

[Kalbi777]

All of my aluminum bikes have dented from being struck by a rock one way or another. (downtubes, chainstays, seat stays, etc.)

All of my carbon bikes have small stone chips in them from being struck by a rock.

I notice a slight improvement in small bump and vibration compliance on my carbon bikes when I go BACK to aluminum.

I ride carbon trail bike and DH bike, as does my wife, she also had a dent in both her last aluminum trail and dh bikes. For me, advantage (so far) carbon. Advantage Aluminum in the cost department.

I hate Zee components, my brakes were inconsistent and my derailuer snapped cables and wore out very quickly.

I like my guide RSC brakes far more, I don't have experience with the "r" version. I recently switched to some Sram (i think x0) DH derailuers with the new horizontal whatever gimmick, and have successfully completed 3 weekends of riding (2 races, 1 fun ride weekend) with zero complaints, zero broken cables.

I don't have any experience with the Norco, but those are my thoughts on your situation.

Thanks alot for your input.
If anyone has anything else to say i'm in

 

[TrumbullHucker]

in on this thread.. looking at aurum's for awhile once i drink the 650b koolaid :/

carbon frame has a press fit bb....

 

[kickstand]

in on this thread.. looking at aurum's for awhile once i drink the 650b koolaid :/

carbon frame has a press fit bb....

eff that noise.....although cheap and easy to replace (just did one on the boy's stumpjumper) mine have all been super creaky


If you want a carbon 650b frame let me know, I have a nice V10 that may go up for sale...frame or complete.

 

[TrumbullHucker]

eff that noise.....although cheap and easy to replace (just did one on the boy's stumpjumper) mine have all been super creaky


If you want a carbon 650b frame let me know, I have a nice V10 that may go up for sale...frame or complete.

gracias, buddy.. im sure ill be fine with the DHR for awhile but ill keep you in mind

 

[kickstand]

Unless you are a racer, I wouldn't upgrade to 650b just to upgrade.....

me and a buddy have experimented and have come to the conclusion that yes, the 650b does indeed roll faster, but the rest of our conclusion was that most of us are on the brakes half the trail anyway, so unless your current GEO isn't working for you, 650b upgrades are only worth it if you need a new bike or race frequently.

 

[Kalbi777]

Well i'm also not a huge fan of bigger wheels but at least its not 29".
I was lost between the desicion of going carbon or alloy.
The alloy one might also have a bit better parts on it.
I'm gonna watch the bikes. Compare both, watch wich one is in better shape. (They're test bikes ).
And then i'm gonna take one.
I'm still a bit afraid of carbon

 

[csermonet]

gracias, buddy.. im sure ill be fine with the DHR for awhile but ill keep you in mind

What would be your reason(s) for replacing the DHR? Age, to go 650b, etc I still don't feel like the geo is dated, except for reach obviously. But I just got a '14 XL with a reach adjust headset, so that's not a problem anymore. 431 reach now which i think is fine for me.

 

[TrumbullHucker]

What would be your reason(s) for replacing the DHR? Age, to go 650b, etc I still don't feel like the geo is dated, except for reach obviously. But I just got a '14 XL with a reach adjust headset, so that's not a problem anymore. 431 reach now which i think is fine for me.

yeah.. theres no real reason at all for me to ditch the DHR.. im still being fussy about my front end bar height/cockpit feel... aside from that, its a friggen blast ( recently dropped in the air upgrade for my frankenstein boxxer and it is so much better than coil imo )