Ad nauseum, life of composites

[meic]

My CF bike is TEN pounds lighter

That can hardly be the 531 steel frame's fault can it? Mine only weighs 5 lbs and it is the largest frame I have ever seen (though it may weigh a bit less due to all the metal that has rusted away. ).

[recordacefromnew]

The George Hincapie bars snapping off is probably the more relevant to this thread though stuff happens in the Paris Roubaix and the way those guys ride.

I thought the cf steerer broke in this incident?

As a matter of fact it was indeed Hincapie's steerer that broke, but it was not a cf steerer, it was alloy, and after an earlier crash. See http://velonews.competitor.com/2006/07/bikes-and-tech/technical-qa-with-lennard-zinn-landiss-drivetrain-hincapies-steerer-thomson-stem-and-chain-pin-replacement_10369

Nevertheless I am with Brucey on this. What puts me off cf is its anisotropic property. The fibre is stronger than steel under tension, but unfortunately behaves like spaghetti under compression. Sure they can make a cf part withstand a certain amount of compression, as experienced by e.g. seatposts, BUT not only do you still have to be ultra careful with clamp torque, it is then also no lighter than alloy for all intent and purpose - I have a Campag Record 27.2/250mm cf post weighing 190g in front of me, but also a 80's vintage alloy Super Record at only 215g. I also have a Controltech Scandium 27.2/350mm at 240g, and a Raceface Turbine alu 30.9/400mm at 250g - both of these have oval sections, which the Record doesn't/can't seem to have.

With light cf frames/parts, no failure statistics are required to convince me that they are fragile beasts, when professional cf bike repairers say so (see e.g. http://www.carbonbikerepair.co.uk/), and when manufacturers say so. Hell Trek even tells you not to squeeze the frame tubes of one of their frames with your fingers! (see http://www.trekbikes.com/pdf/owners_manuals/Trek_2014_Speed_Concept_Service_Manual.pdf).

The other problem cf has of course is its poor resistance to cut and abrasion. Anyone who has worked on more than a few commuters which have seen a couple of winters will know that scars are common and plentiful. CF trickling down to entry-level bikes? Sure It will probably happen, but I hope not as currently designed and constructed, for safety's sake.

[Italia50]

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.

[[XAP]Bob]

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.

[meic]

The other problem cf has of course is its poor resistance to cut and abrasion. Anyone who has worked on more than a few commuters which have seen a couple of winters will know that scars are common and plentiful.

That can be dealt with in much the same way as you touch up a steel frame to prevent it rusting. However people know how to deal with steel (because you have to or it rusts away in front of your eyes) but unfamiliar with CF and how to treat it.

My bike has reflective material taped onto the forks, it makes me stand out on night rides and protects the forks from abrasion. I dont have to bother cleaning and waxing as I would if I had fitted new steel forks.

[Italia50]

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!!!

[meic]

This accident for example wasnt a fault of steel it was Gentlegreen's fault for failing to look after his bike properly.

viewtopic.php?f=41&t=45176&hilit=steerer

Apologies Gentlegreen, I dont mean it, I am just trying to make a point about double standards wrt the materials.

Though to be fair my CF forks have only done 8,000 miles, so there is time yet for his forks to have outlived mine.

[meic]

is just plain head in the sand Ludditism!!!

You can call me a Luddite any day, I see it as a compliment.

However this is a (disputably) touring forum and reliability and ruggedness tends to trump racing advantages.

Horses for courses, I can not see anybody doing top end racing on steel but the title of the thread is about longevity.

[Italia50]

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.

[[XAP]Bob]

[quote="Italia50"][quote="[XAP]Bob"][quote="Italia50"][quote="[XAP]Bob"]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...[/quote]

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.[/quote]
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.[/quote]

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!!![/quote]

Gravity isn't a tough foe. air is much harder, it doesn't give you back the effort on the other side...

And I'm sure than on a grand tour a fewnpounds will make a small percentage difference up a hill - about 5% (I.e. the actual weight penalty on the road - on the road includes a rider), but actually at tour speeds air resistance is stoll in play going uphill, so drop that 5% even further.

For anyone not in that elite what is the benefit of CF? There is generally more weight to be lost from the rider than the frame, there is always a thermos of soup to carry...

It needs a serious advantage to compensate for the failure modes and the risk of incidental, and invisible, damage causing said failure.

"get me home" repairs on CF aren't really an option either, so make sure you have a team car following.... viewtopic.php?f=5&t=86093

[Italia50]

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'

[meic]

I still do not see how you can save ten pounds in weight by changing from a steel frame to a CF frame when a steel frame only weighs five pounds in the first place.

[Dave W]

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.

[Dave W]

Three of us rode together last Sunday - I rode Carbon, the other two were on steel and aluminium. Strangely, we've ridden together for years and not once has the snobbery of frame material ever reared its ugly head - we just go out and enjoy the ride. I'm normally last up the hills my mate with the steel bike is normally first we are all happy with what we ride. Too much talk and not enough riding if you ask me.

PS all three bikes were built in Taiwan.

[Italia50]

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!!