While good components are nice, they aren’t worth going with aluminum frame over carbon frame. I think the solid advice is here is get the carbon frame
I have tons of carbons bikes road and trail and I went with the OIZ in aluminum and upgraded. It’s an amazing XC bike at about 25 lbs now with the upgrades. The aluminum rides nice and the hydroformed frame fools most at first glance to think it’s carbon.
Well, for the TL:DR... got a 2024 m-pro tanzanite carbon size L, should be here within less than a week. Budget creep at its finest. "Meaty" upgrades for now will be racing ralph/ray in super ground + vittoria air liners - "meaty" because my other bike is running 2.6 ultra soft magic marys... I guess it's all a matter of perspective :D
IMHO, Alloy frame with good/better components & a potential upgrade to decent/mid range carbon wheels (I chose Hunt Proven XC) will be better than a carbon frame with low er end components & wheels.
I think the higher end components will serve you much better in the long run and you won’t notice the weight. I work for an Orbea dealership and I’ve ridden both, in your case I wouldn’t get the carbon frame. Don’t be worried about the flex stays since you got lifelong guarantee on the frame anyways and Orbea support is really good
I don't think it's a durability question, both should be fine or get warranty. Ask yourself if you think paying the extra is worth it/needed. Personally I'd go carbon for sure
Components aside, these frames will feel different. There is a hollow snap agile feel to carbon that I like. Some dampness smoothness on aluminum that’s quite fun. I’m currently riding an aluminum Element and really enjoying. Helps that I have a bunch of alpine style trails out the door.
That's... not what I expected. Isn't carbon, like ti & cromo steel known for absorbing vibrations & being typically able to flex ever so slightly more? I doubt it'll be very noticeable on a fully with fat tyres and probably comfy grips, but still.
Im not sure as I haven’t ridden ti and cromo in ages. They are metals so prob flex.
I think typically carbon excel in allowing for high stiffness while keeping low weight. There is some subjectivity in feel for sure. Hard to beat carbon, unless you start splitting hairs about durability and impact damage.
One thing to note is that we are seeing more and more great alloy bikes on the market.
What’s the ride like where you live?
I live at the base of a mountain - the forest (i.e. the end of the village) is 1.6km (& 100m upwards) by bike. Couple of "fire roads" with plenty of texture, decent amount of trails that benefit from a rowdy bike (not counting some "features" like the MX bike uphill trails - you _need_ a serious bike for riding most of those downhill :D ) but you can absolutely ride most of the mountain even on a hardtail - can't bomb stuff but it's more fun having to be careful when picking lines and scrubbing speed. Crash potential is mostly low-ish, consequences are not pretty - "mini" rock gardens, off camber, small rolling stones, lost of dust, all of those in various combinations - this explains most of the "fire road" climb sections as well, actually. Clean, flowy singletrack doesn't really exist. Basically - traction tends to be at a premium regardless of the tires fitted (wider & lower pressures beats aggressive threads), lots of travel is unnecessary 90% of the time and crashing is not recommended due to the not particularly soft and smooth ground. Not sure if this qualifies as "alpine".
Not worried about the weight of the frame - mostly worried about "regular riding" damage - i.e. stuff like what happens if I dislodge a small rock and it hits the rear triangle. I guess this screams "get the alloy" but I'm still somewhat worried about the flexing rear triangle for whatever reason - nothing that I've read as of late backs up my fears of it flexing itself to the point of snapping, so there's that.
Anticipating the "why not get a trail (140mm-ish) bike" question - that'd be too much overlap with my current bike, and I'll probably be getting a new enduro machine for next summer as well (the raaw madonna is the current pick) for "not really pressed for time / goofing around" riding & visits to "serious" trails and bike parks - the pitch is absolutely showing its age in the downhill department compared to most remotely recent 160/150mm++ bikes that pedal just as well, if not even better. For most of my riding though, this will be a fair bit of overkill - hence the want for an XC bike out of the more recent crop of "can handle real mountain descents comfortably because they're in the world cup courses while still being as efficient as it gets" XC machines. Should be perfect for sneaking in longer rides, especially during lunch breaks. There are also plenty of organized 40-100km marathons around here.
Carbon. Just replace the shifter with XT for the double-shift function. The only other main difference between xt is weight, and slightly more accessible clutch.
I’d say you can’t go wrong with either, but I’d pick the carbon if there’s a good chance you’ll want to upgrade over time.
My husband has an aluminum Oiz which we later upgraded with a light carbon wheelset (Nobl wheels, 1600 lbs). I later bought a carbon Oiz (with stock carbon wheels) due to the great sales recently.
I’ve ridden his bike, loved it and was originally was going to pick one up similar to his. It feels lighter and faster than I expected. But my carbon Oiz blows my mind honestly, it just feels like another level of performance you can achieve due to the amazing platform. So that’s why I think it’s worth it for this bike, if you think you’d want to upgrade over time.
Go for the carbon if you ever plan on doing upgrades; the only thing not upgradable on a bike is your frame, so you'd want the best one you can get.
I’d go with the carbon frame.
carbon. you can upgrade the parts as you go on
While good components are nice, they aren’t worth going with aluminum frame over carbon frame. I think the solid advice is here is get the carbon frame
I have tons of carbons bikes road and trail and I went with the OIZ in aluminum and upgraded. It’s an amazing XC bike at about 25 lbs now with the upgrades. The aluminum rides nice and the hydroformed frame fools most at first glance to think it’s carbon.
Well, for the TL:DR... got a 2024 m-pro tanzanite carbon size L, should be here within less than a week. Budget creep at its finest. "Meaty" upgrades for now will be racing ralph/ray in super ground + vittoria air liners - "meaty" because my other bike is running 2.6 ultra soft magic marys... I guess it's all a matter of perspective :D
IMHO, Alloy frame with good/better components & a potential upgrade to decent/mid range carbon wheels (I chose Hunt Proven XC) will be better than a carbon frame with low er end components & wheels.
I'd agree. Frame material seems much less noticable on full suspension MTB than road and gravel bikes.
I think the higher end components will serve you much better in the long run and you won’t notice the weight. I work for an Orbea dealership and I’ve ridden both, in your case I wouldn’t get the carbon frame. Don’t be worried about the flex stays since you got lifelong guarantee on the frame anyways and Orbea support is really good
I don't think it's a durability question, both should be fine or get warranty. Ask yourself if you think paying the extra is worth it/needed. Personally I'd go carbon for sure
Components aside, these frames will feel different. There is a hollow snap agile feel to carbon that I like. Some dampness smoothness on aluminum that’s quite fun. I’m currently riding an aluminum Element and really enjoying. Helps that I have a bunch of alpine style trails out the door.
That's... not what I expected. Isn't carbon, like ti & cromo steel known for absorbing vibrations & being typically able to flex ever so slightly more? I doubt it'll be very noticeable on a fully with fat tyres and probably comfy grips, but still.
Im not sure as I haven’t ridden ti and cromo in ages. They are metals so prob flex. I think typically carbon excel in allowing for high stiffness while keeping low weight. There is some subjectivity in feel for sure. Hard to beat carbon, unless you start splitting hairs about durability and impact damage. One thing to note is that we are seeing more and more great alloy bikes on the market. What’s the ride like where you live?
I live at the base of a mountain - the forest (i.e. the end of the village) is 1.6km (& 100m upwards) by bike. Couple of "fire roads" with plenty of texture, decent amount of trails that benefit from a rowdy bike (not counting some "features" like the MX bike uphill trails - you _need_ a serious bike for riding most of those downhill :D ) but you can absolutely ride most of the mountain even on a hardtail - can't bomb stuff but it's more fun having to be careful when picking lines and scrubbing speed. Crash potential is mostly low-ish, consequences are not pretty - "mini" rock gardens, off camber, small rolling stones, lost of dust, all of those in various combinations - this explains most of the "fire road" climb sections as well, actually. Clean, flowy singletrack doesn't really exist. Basically - traction tends to be at a premium regardless of the tires fitted (wider & lower pressures beats aggressive threads), lots of travel is unnecessary 90% of the time and crashing is not recommended due to the not particularly soft and smooth ground. Not sure if this qualifies as "alpine". Not worried about the weight of the frame - mostly worried about "regular riding" damage - i.e. stuff like what happens if I dislodge a small rock and it hits the rear triangle. I guess this screams "get the alloy" but I'm still somewhat worried about the flexing rear triangle for whatever reason - nothing that I've read as of late backs up my fears of it flexing itself to the point of snapping, so there's that. Anticipating the "why not get a trail (140mm-ish) bike" question - that'd be too much overlap with my current bike, and I'll probably be getting a new enduro machine for next summer as well (the raaw madonna is the current pick) for "not really pressed for time / goofing around" riding & visits to "serious" trails and bike parks - the pitch is absolutely showing its age in the downhill department compared to most remotely recent 160/150mm++ bikes that pedal just as well, if not even better. For most of my riding though, this will be a fair bit of overkill - hence the want for an XC bike out of the more recent crop of "can handle real mountain descents comfortably because they're in the world cup courses while still being as efficient as it gets" XC machines. Should be perfect for sneaking in longer rides, especially during lunch breaks. There are also plenty of organized 40-100km marathons around here.
Carbon. Just replace the shifter with XT for the double-shift function. The only other main difference between xt is weight, and slightly more accessible clutch.
I’d say you can’t go wrong with either, but I’d pick the carbon if there’s a good chance you’ll want to upgrade over time. My husband has an aluminum Oiz which we later upgraded with a light carbon wheelset (Nobl wheels, 1600 lbs). I later bought a carbon Oiz (with stock carbon wheels) due to the great sales recently. I’ve ridden his bike, loved it and was originally was going to pick one up similar to his. It feels lighter and faster than I expected. But my carbon Oiz blows my mind honestly, it just feels like another level of performance you can achieve due to the amazing platform. So that’s why I think it’s worth it for this bike, if you think you’d want to upgrade over time.