Athletes send their bikes to a shop once a year
to have the frame elasticity tested at significant cost ^^
The claim that carbon frame lifespan is reduced
due to decreased elasticity is nonsense — are athletes stupid
for getting frame elasticity tests to check how much lifespan remains?
Can you even refute that? As for regular people,
well, they don't really know what elasticity is or care about that sort of thing.
As long as there are no cracks, whether it's 10 or 20 years,
if it still rolls fine they consider it normal.
How much my time drops on the same climb every time,
whether the reason for slower times is degraded frame performance
or a problem with my fitness — regular people don't care about that.
So that's why people say things like in the comments: a 10-year-old carbon bike still rides fine.
Sure, sure.
Not just 10 years —
even after 30 or 40 years, as long as there are no cracks,
a carbon frame bike will still roll.
Sure, sure, you're all absolutely right and perfectly correct.
I'm sorry for stirring things up with my shallow knowledge.
Carbon frame bikes —
who cares about 10 years, ride them for 30, 40, 50 years
and pass them down generation to generation.
As long as there are no cracks, pass them down through the generations
and ride them for 200 or 300 years —
as long as there are no cracks, they'll keep rolling.
Sure, sure, you're right — carbon frames have no lifespan.
Take good care of them and 200 or 300 years is no problem.
Sure, sure, you're all correct, every one of you.
