# Ritchey WCS carbon vs WCS aluminum



## El Caballito

Just out of curiosity, why do most pro riders use Ritchey aluminum stems and bars as oppose to Ritchey carbon? cost ? I know the WCS carbon is slightly lighter than WCS aluminum, but the WCS carbon looks totally sweet. Are they worried about the carbon failing on them?


----------



## Addicted

*For riding after a crash*

I have heard that they are not so much worried about failing during riding, but failing during crashing. Carbon bars smacked in a crash would be more often not rideable where aluminum has a better chance of being usable with a dent or bend.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

El Caballito said:


> Just out of curiosity, why do most pro riders use Ritchey aluminum stems and bars as oppose to Ritchey carbon? cost ? I know the WCS carbon is slightly lighter than WCS aluminum, but the WCS carbon looks totally sweet. Are they worried about the carbon failing on them?


On reason may be that framesets and wheels have gotten so light that _potentially_ failure prone CF components are not needed to save weight.


----------



## cdhbrad

Crashworthiness of the bars is the "theory", but a friend I ride with was recently in a crash..... the WCS aluminum stem cracked, but his Easton carbon bars were fine. I was in a bad crash last summer and had just the opposite occur on my bike. I think a lot depends on the forces applied in the crash.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

CF can be tough. Al can snap. In a crash, all bets are off.


----------



## El Caballito

*Why I went with carbon*



PeanutButterBreath said:


> CF can be tough. Al can snap. In a crash, all bets are off.


My reason for posting is that when I built up my bike in December, I got a killer deal on WCS Evolution stem and bars. At the time I thought I scored, but over the past months I started noticing pro riders were using aluminum instead of carbon. I've used aluminum Ritchey in the past without problems, so I thought carbon would have been an upgrade. I at times wonder if I was led astray by the looks instead of the quality. But I think Mr. peanut butter breath sums it up best, "in a crash, all bets are off".


----------



## drewmcg

Don't know, but I really like my WCS aluminum stem. Just a sweet piece of engineering--extremely light but confidence-inspiring..


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

*Stem weights in QBP*

FWIW

WCS 4-Axis: 111g
WCS 4-Axis Carbon: 135.0g


----------



## cyclust

Pros don't ride carbon bars and stems because they don't care about "bling".


----------



## phoehn9111

Carbon stems actually use aluminum internals and are heavier. Stick
with WCS aluminum stem. I think, maybe carbon bars might deaden
vibration a wee bit, but the difference is very slight. I use carbon bars
because mine are ergo and have solve my numb hands problem.


----------



## PigmyRacer

phoehn9111 said:


> Carbon stems actually use aluminum internals and are heavier. Stick
> with WCS aluminum stem. I think, maybe carbon bars might deaden
> vibration a wee bit, but the difference is very slight. I use carbon bars
> because mine are ergo and have solve my numb hands problem.


I absolutely agree about the carbon stem. My general rule of thumb with bars is that I would rather use aluminum bars unless I cannot find one that suits my needs. Carbon bars don't tend to be significantly lighter (some are, some aren't, I'm generalizing, I know) and you always have to keep in mind the fact that they can fail. For me, they are not necessary, but if I were looking to build up a bike for centuries or comfortable riding, I would certainly consider carbon.


----------



## airs0ft3r

Ritchey Carbon is actually the worst carbon you can buy. There was an extreme stress test with many different manufactorers about carbon bars and Ritchey always was in the bottom in everything, including weight, stiffness, and especially durability. The test was posted on MTBR but I forgot what it's called now.


----------



## PigmyRacer

airs0ft3r said:


> Ritchey Carbon is actually the worst carbon you can buy. There was an extreme stress test with many different manufactorers about carbon bars and Ritchey always was in the bottom in everything, including weight, stiffness, and especially durability. The test was posted on MTBR but I forgot what it's called now.


Are you sure MTBR was testing Ritchey's road components and not their MTB components?


----------



## airs0ft3r

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. They were MTB components, but I'm sure the carbon process is similar, to say the least, between the two categories.

The testing firm was an independent company. To be honest, I think it was either Easton or Thompson but I'm pulling those names out of my ass, because Easton and Thompson had very good bars. The review struck me as very fair, as they had numbers and nothing more or less than numbers. I will never use Ritchey carbon, just as I'll never use Scott Carbon (different reason, apparently a 6" bike broke 3 times on one owner).

Edit: It was Raceface

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=317116

Read about 5 posts down.

Note, the actual link doesn't work. You need to read. I was wrong about the weight/stiffness. I guess I saw it on another thread. Sorry for posting negative about that, I must have gotten confused.


----------



## DrSmile

I know the WCS carbon stem is aluminum covered by CF, but there are pure CF stems. Are any of them good? My problem is I start corroding the aluminum under the CF after a while at the stem / spacer interface.


----------

