I am moving on from a 9 year old Salsa Casseroll with barcon shifters and a 9-speed Mtn Derailleur on a 11-36 10-speed cassette with a 53/39 front.
I will be keeping the Casseroll for commuting and my main requirements are a relaxed geometry, a minimum of 40mm clearance, and hydraulic brakes. My current bike has been great for many gravel races, and even a 170 mile paved ride I did a couple years ago, but everything is wearing out and I want something shiny. Any bike I purchase will need a dynamo hub I expect to purchase separately.
There are multiple things that prevent this from being an easy decision.
I will be running 44mm Snoqualmie pass tires on pagement/ dry packed gravel, and something like the Schwalbe G-One which I think will affect ride quality much more than frame material.
If I need to sell parts it would be easier to sell the (Aluminum) HED Cockpit, and if I later choose to sell a frame the Carbon frame will be easier to sell
The differences in weight is less than a water bottle ~21 vs 20lbs
The Aluminum frame has external / exposed cable routing vs internal closed for the carbon
The savings of not buying a carbon bike would make buying a "fancy" frame later much easier
Current leaders in my search: Diamondback Haanjo Trail Carbon - $2170 - Ultegra, DB cockpit, tires I would use Diamondback Haanjo Trail Aluminum - $1455 - Ultegra, HED cockpit, tires I would not use
Upcoming Rides: Standard Minnesota Spring Gravel Centuries, DaMN 240 Gravel, Minneapolis->Madison (1/2 gravel 1/2 rail trail)
Which one would you guys choose? My budget with all extra accessories is lightly set at around $3k, am I wrong to value such a deal so much? I'm torn between getting the carbon frame which I like slightly more even though I don't think it has the "cool factor" and the aluminum model with the assumption that I could upgrade to a boutique bike after a year if I wasn't happy.
I own and rode the Hanjo Comp Alu for most of last Spring and summer. I did upgrade the stock tires to 40mm tubeless Ramblers. Very good bike at an excellent price. In the fall I switched to a Ritchey Swiss Cross Canti CX bike running 35 mm GK Tubeless for dirt and gravel, and 28mm Conti 4000 II S with Vittoria latex tubes for pavement. Once you get on a bike like the Swiss Cross, you begin to see the limitations of the Haanjo, which by comparison has a much harsher ride, less responsive handling, and just a clunkier feel. How much of this difference is due to the frame material - Alu. for the Haanjo, Triple butted steel for the Ritchie, the geometry of the bikes - the Ritchie is designed to be raced, or to the other components -- wheels, tires, drive train -- is hard to say. But my guess is that a lot of the Haanjo Comp's roughness comes from the mass produced hydro-formed Alu. frame. The Haanjo Comp Alu is still a damn good buy for the money. But if you have the cash, the carbon frame is probably a very good upgrade.
Aluminum is a great choice for a full suspension mountain bike, but for a rigid bike its just too harsh. Even with big tires it will be noticeable. For a Gravel bike I prefer steel or titanium, they really do ride so much smoother. Carbon is better than aluminum and is fun and fast. But in my opinion most carbon bikes are pretty stiff too and are not much fun after a few hours in the saddle. FYI I have a Niner BSB (carbon) for short after work rides, and a Lynksey Cooper (Titanium) for all day weekend rides. I also have an aluminum Planet X London Road that is a loaner/backup bike and the ride quality is noticeably lower than my other bikes,
