Search found 77 matches

by Italia50
12 Jun 2014, 1:46pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Shimano/campagnolo compatability
Replies: 27
Views: 4272

Re: Shimano/campagnolo compatability

Its even possible to run Campag ergos with Shimano rear mechs! Have two set up like that.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 9:51am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

Brucey wrote:
Italia50 wrote: From TrekCol (Trek R & D manager)

"Clunky and brant are pretty close. Trek still manufacture in Wisconsin and their entire engineering, testing, design etc are based at the same building as the carbon assembly, the 5 series and below are outsourced to two seperate Taiwanese companies. They manufacture our frames ....

Alloy prototypes and special one off pro riders frames can still be made in Wisconsin, but these are pretty expensive custom runs.".


SO.... Only prototypes and team race bikes made in the USA 'pretty expensive custom runs'. Like I said, theres outright lying, and then theres 'marketing'.. The two are mutually interchangeable.


er, no...more fairy stories I'm afraid; you have conflated statements about their ability to manufacture alloy frames and prototypes with other statements about production. 6 and 7 series frames are still US built, like the bloke said. Why do you think that is...? :roll:

cheers


The 6 and 7 series are exclsively race bikes and represent less than 1% of their total production.

Why do they make them in the US (assuming they are telling the truth,and I have my doubts,Colnago lied about the production of the C59 in Italy for ten years...) National Pride, and nothing else. And you know what they say about pride Brucey :lol:
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 9:48am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

I dont know if youve ever raced a bike Brucey, but I can tell you from experience (and long standing friendships with Team Mechanics) that racing exposes every single flaw on a bicycle in a way no other cycling does. Its mechanical stress to the limit, normally hundreds of miles a week, (nearly a thousand miles per week on large stage races). There's no 'probably' about it. Thats why novel ideas and new technlogies are tested and evaluated in racing first, if they can survive that brutal environment, only then do they go into mass market.

I dont see tens of thousands of claims for broken or accident damaged carbon frames,for why? Because its actually very rugged and practical in everyday use.How many pairs of carbon forks are in use daily...Tens of millions.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 9:36am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

Brucey wrote:
Italia50 wrote:It absolutely IS the same STUFF!!! I;ve been to Taipei and seen the A TEAM factory and it is nothing short of state of the art. 'Truly staggering' was how one journalist decribed it,they make and design over 700 different styles and varieties of CF frames. And FYI their QC puts our ISO9000 standards to shame.


ISO9000 is a box-ticking exercise; a starting point for real quality. I'd expect you to be happy with the QA if you ride the product, that goes without saying. But there is no comparison to aerospace, trust me. The man on the street (of which a Journalist is one when it comes to these things) can be impressed by all kinds of stuff that is really not exceptional in any way.

Trek PAINT their carbons and finish in the US but its a lie if they claim to be maunfactured there (Colnago have been peddling the same lie since 2004,but recently admitted the afwul truth : ALL MADE IN TAIWAN.)

And for why: because they make the best CF frames in the world. Bike companies tell lies, in their world they call this 'marketing' but its still just very expensive lying.


er, I don't know how to say this any other way; YOU ARE WRONG.

http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/03/13/trek-factory-tour-part-3-us-based-oclv-carbon-bike-production/

Believe what fairy stories you like, but Trek have their mid/low end stuff made in Taiwan etc because it is cheaper.

End of....

cheers


I'm afraid YOURE wrong!! Here's the word direct from the horses mouth on a recent TREK dealers forum:


From TrekCol (Trek R & D manager)

Clunky and brant are pretty close. Trek still manufacture in Wisconsin and their entire engineering, testing, design etc are based at the same building as the carbon assembly, the 5 series and below are outsourced to two seperate Taiwanese companies. They manufacture our frames to our precise spec and precise oclv construction method. Obviously we have full time employees checking quality and continual testing of product to keep controls high. The alloy frames are made in Taiwan by mainly giant. Again these frames are not re-badged giants! We have tight control on designs and tube shapes- and we own a lot of the machines that produce our technology. We do not currently produce in Vietnam, Malaysia etc. we also do not use Merida- who make a stack of other brands frames with great quality.
Alloy prototypes and special one off pro riders frames can still be made in Wisconsin, but these are pretty expensive custom runs.
All treks are designed, and tested by trek- we don't buy 'off the shelf' designs from far eastern companies, which is obviously the cheapest way to produce a frame.


SO.... Only prototypes and team race bikes made in the USA 'pretty expensive custom runs'. Like I said, theres outright lying, and then theres 'marketing'.. The two are mutually interchangeable.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 9:32am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

These bikes would be used ALL season, ie for every race and training in between. ZERO frame failures on the 2013 World CUp Series and Downhill bikes probably exposed to more stress in one year than your average rider does in 20k miles.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 9:17am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

meic wrote:Good, I am glad that we are now talking a more honest figure for the weight gains. :D



well,with CF Frame and CF parts 10lbs is quite a realistic weight saving. And its 4.5lbs, not 3... More like 6-7 lbs savng on a regular 531 frame and forks set.

CF stands up very well to abuse,its exclusive use at the World CUp Series Downhill and XC is testament to that,with ZERO fram failures.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 8:49am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

meic wrote:It just so happens that I have it dismantled right now to try and save it from rusting to dust.
Did I mention that steel has a weakness in that respect, it is very vulnerable to attack from water.

On the scales 3.184kg or 7lb 0.3oz.

This is possibly the largest frame you will ever meet.


Thats 4.5lbs of heavy I could do without!! :wink:
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 8:37am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

I'm talking about Reynolds 531 as a baseline, not gas pipe. A Thorn 531 frame and forks weighs 9.4lbs. Thats a 7lb weight penalty on carbon. I would be very surprised if you steel F+F plus headset weighed under 8lbs... Its a fantasy to imagine the strength and rigidity are still present in a 33 year old frame which degrades mechanically very quickly over time. CF on the other hand remains largely mechanically intact, ie rigid over even long time spans.


Of course the secondary benefit of CF are parts like Seat post/saddle/stem/bars/chainset and even hubs. This can easily save another 1-1.5 kg from a bike build,or 2.5-4lbs.... So a 10lb weight saving is really a minimum, add in a lightweight set of carbon spoked wheels and you could be looking at over 13lbs weight saving on an 'old school' build.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 8:25am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

Dave W wrote:How many people on here could actually repair their steel bike roadside should it break? Nobody I would guess absolutely no one. Do you carry a welding torch in your saddllebag?

I have nothing against steel, aluminium, titanium or unobtanium so why is carbon singled out time and time again on this forum?

Disc brakes and carbon fibre, A headsets - work of the devil! - must write thousands of words against them at all costs.


Haha! You just dismantled the Luddites arguments in one sentence. Progress is just better. I cant think of a single cycling advance in the last 30 years I would rather do without. Cassette hubs, STI shifting, lightweight wheels, puncture proof tyres, stainless steel spokes (remember chrome!!!) LED lighting... The list is virtually endless. You can bet your guts that when CF comes down to entry level bikes in less than 2 years time, all these haters will be flexing the plastic to buy one :D

And composite repairs really are a doddle..! I couldnt repair a steel frameto save myself,and it would likely cost more than the thing is worth. Complete carbon repair kit: CF wrap, structural bond, shrink tape and eight grades of sandpaper to make it neat, £15. I even repaired CF BB last month,took me an hour and I expect the repair to last indefinitely. Damaged steel BB threads - more expensive to fix likely than the frame is worth.
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 8:17am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

Steel frame normally 2-3kg, steel fork 0.7-1kg. Total: 3-4kg. Or up to 9lbs in old money 1kg =2.2lbs

Thorn 531 steel fork: 1.25kg, ie heavier than a complete carbon frame and fork set.

Good carbon frame and forks: 1.2kg, or 2.5lbs. Theres 6.5 lbs saving straight away.

Add carbon seat post/saddle/chainset and a lightweight set of wheels and you could really be looking at a plus 13lbs saving on a traditional 531 25-26lb steel/aluminium parts racing/touring bike.

Its a no brainer. The king is dead, long live the new king!!
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 7:57am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

Try this test: put 10lbs of extra weight on your lightest bike ( in a bag perhaps) and ride around with it for a week, then take the weight off again. You'll be amazed at the difference. The science is compelling, CF benefits anyone who wants to go further, ride with less effort and conserve more energy for when it matters. And it's that solid science which is driving huge sales of CF bikes while steel dwindles away to only the ' Hardened enthusiast ' market. And what price modern steel frames: £800-2000. The nails are well into the coffin for steel.

And that's just the huge mechanical advantage of significantly less weight (you will notice ten pounds immediately.)

The advantages of a hugely stiffer bottom bracket area and rear triangle, superior power transmission, all day comfort and no deterioration via rusting, denting, or the 'aging' process of steel frames are equally compelling for ANY cyclist. Carbon is also infinitely more repairable than steel,and with numerous home repair kits online from £15, very much cheaper. My friend had a steel chainstay (broken) repaired recently at the cost of £180, more than he paid for the original frame. I repaired a carbon fibre chainstay for said £15,with the aid of Youtube videos. All in it took me 40 minutes with no help. ONe year later and it is still perfect, did not need repainting and likely as strong if not stronger than the original tube. The same is definitely not true for steel repairs. CF is a new material, compared to steel. You'll get used to it,trust me !

I rode with a few friends last weekend and watched the rear triangle/bb area of a bespoke steel bike flex and wobble and generally dissipate energy before my eyes. The carbon bike next to it did not budge, absolutely rock solid power transmission. At the end of the ride the steel rider looked considerably less fresh than those on CF. We are all roughly the same fitness, so the only variable left is the weight of a 'heavy' steel bike. CF is just better, at everything. Very soon you too will buy your way into the 'dark side' :lol:
by Italia50
11 Jun 2014, 12:28am
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

I have a Reynolds 708 touring frame. It is frankly rubbish,I have dented it three times because the tube walls are so thin, the back end sways about wasting limitless energy and I doubt very much it will be mechanically viable in even a few years time. Steel frames lose their 'whip' within even a few years, the rigidity just goes out of them,and with that every watt you put in at the pedals delivers less and less over time at the wheels. This doesnt happen to carbon frames, they remain essentially mechanically static. Given the choice for touring or racing I would pick CF over any other material at every turn.

As for longevity, the Trek 5500 I have from 1996 is as lively and dramatic as it was when I bought it nearly 20 years ago.All my steel frames ride like a comfortable old settee in comparison.I have a full carbon off road 700c bike with discs all round.It is without doubt the best bike I have ever owned. 16.5lbs in weight with mudguards and after four years heavy use on some very rough tracks and XC routes, essentially as good as new. Ive also toured on it with panniers and well loaded.

The mechanical properties of CF are fantastic, theres no getting away from it. Like I said, within even a few years I predict nearly all new bikes will be full CF in some guise or other.
by Italia50
10 Jun 2014, 11:56pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

[XAP]Bob wrote:
Italia50 wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:It's not 50% lighter, because you weight the same.

Add your (guess) 80kg to the 10 of youe steel frame. 90kg.
Add that same rider to a 5kg CF confection. 85kg

just over 5%, not 50%

Of course if you want to take any drink with you...


The difference between the bikes is 10lbs, I dont know where you did your maths but thats on the road to 50 percent lighter .My weight is a constant,mostly. And believe you me,I can ride away from EVERY rider on a steel bike up a hill, simply because of the dramatic power to weight advantage I have. Unless youve tried riding a very light CF you have no idea the real world difference it can make. And thats just the weight difference, the difference in rigidity, power transmission and comfort is dramatic.

The bike isn't making that much difference. if you weight 80kg then it is a 5% weight difference acheieved by knocking 5kg off the frame. Elae you'd go up hill infinitely fast without a bike...

Try climbing on a steel bike, maybe you're just a stronger climber than those you ride with?

PS Froome would likely beat you on steel. By a huge margin.


If Froome rode a steel bike against Wiggo, and say 5 kg weight penalty, he'd be left for dust.

To say that 10lbs doesnt make a dramatic difference to performance, especially uphill when you are fighting one of natures toughest foes: gravity, is just plain head in the sand Ludditism!!!
by Italia50
10 Jun 2014, 11:45pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

[XAP]Bob wrote:It's not 50% lighter, because you weight the same.

Add your (guess) 80kg to the 10 of youe steel frame. 90kg.
Add that same rider to a 5kg CF confection. 85kg

just over 5%, not 50%

Of course if you want to take any drink with you...


The difference between the bikes is 10lbs, I dont know where you did your maths but thats on the road to 50 percent lighter .My weight is a constant,mostly. And believe you me,I can ride away from EVERY rider on a steel bike up a hill, simply because of the dramatic power to weight advantage I have. Unless youve tried riding a very light CF you have no idea the real world difference it can make. And thats just the weight difference, the difference in rigidity, power transmission and comfort is dramatic also.
by Italia50
10 Jun 2014, 11:33pm
Forum: Bikes & Bits – Technical section
Topic: Ad nauseum, life of composites
Replies: 535
Views: 30367

Re: Ad nauseum, life of composites

CREPELLO wrote:
horizon wrote:
Italia50 wrote: in two years I predict nearly all road bikes sold will be full carbon.



I agree, if it hasn't already happened. But why just road bikes?
Good question. Out of interest, does anyone know what the % of MTB frames made of carbon, compared to other materials is? Or does anyone here regularly use a carbon MTB? I would have thought that MTB use of carbon would really highlight how fragile or not the material is. And it's popularity or not would also be an indicator of something perhaps?



My pal who works in my LBS worked on the World Cup Series last year as a team mechanic. ALL of the XC and downhill bikes were CF. They are tested to the absolute limits of mechanical stress failure. He had only one failure in 30 bikes, and that was a bottom bracket which was cross threaded by a previous mechanic.

He's with me now, having a quiet chortle to himself with some of the posts 8)

I have a steel bike for work, in 531. It weighs 23.5lbs with no mudguards. My CF bike is TEN pounds lighter. Almost 50 percent lighter again. That is an awful lot of extra lard to be lugging up a hill!!