My CF Adventure

On Monday, March 18, 2013 9:07:36 PM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Mar 18, 4:47*pm, datakoll wrote:

On Monday, March 18, 2013 4:47:58 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:

On 3/18/2013 2:37 PM, davethedave wrote:



On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 07:32:05 -0700, Jay Beattie wrote:



This is all true, but I'm not talking about bike trucks or bicycles for



unusually sized people who, by the way, can buy custom aluminum, steel,



CF, wood or bamboo. *All of these materials are capable of being built



in to one-off frames. And like I said, there is far more ability to



change the riding characteristics of CF than steel.



I'm talking about "racing" bikes for the majority of normal-sized



people. The idea is to create something that is light and stiff and aero



-- if that's what you need. It's not to create something that is heavy



and hopefully lasts "forever." *CF seems to be pretty good for the task,



although it is still evolving as a material for use in bicycles. *It is



good enough for F1s and fighter jets and Dreamliners and just about



everything so long as it is properly designed and manufactured. I figure



it can be used successfully in a bicycle that sees maybe half a horse



power. Titanium was sloppy and fragile -- Aluminum *was sloppy and



fragile with standard diameter tubes and screwed and glued joints. Both



turned out to be good materials for bicycles once the bugs were worked



out. *Steel may always be superior for some types of work bikes or



frames.



I would agree with your sentiments.



Carbon fibre is very good for forming into rounded shapes. I had my first



carbon fibre and kevlar weave canoe when I was about 19 or so. It was



incredibly light and strong in some respects. Abrasion resistance was



it's weak point. It was however designed to be a lightweight



performance product with a fairly limited lifetime of outstanding



performance. We sadly parted company after a particularly enjoyable



thrash in some very rough sea near the end of its expected lifespan.. I



had carbon fibre paddle tubes to go with it. Outstanding weight to



stiffness. Never managed to break them.



Technology has moved on by 20 years (and a bit) since then



We find ourselves in a world with super-cars made of carbon fibre and



high performance carbon fibre bicycles. They have not displaced either



steel or aluminium bicycles just as carbon cars have not replaced your



standard ordinary steel panelled or aluminium panelled cars.



Horses for courses, I believe is the phrase. As you say all tech has



advanced and some materials are suited to different uses better than



others but if you want a really stiff bike that weighs about as much as a



fairy fart carbon is the way to go. A strong bike with a bit of flex for



load shifting maybe steel or aluminium. For those save the planet



greenies there is, of course, bamboo. None of the materials are good or



bad in themselves. dons hippie hat They just are, man. removes hippy



hat Selection of one suitable for the purpose and using it



appropriately, respecting both its strengths and weaknesses, is the key.



As with any other manufactured thing, progress advances as



you make/sell more things. For bicycles, canoes and race



cars, more iterations means engineers, techs, designers,



purchasing managers and accountants all give input into the



process of continual improvement and lower costs[1]. If they



are any good at their work, you should get higher sales



volume with better performance, more variegated models and



lower costs.



Here's something I didn't think of. The 787 now has an added



thin metal grid over the outside because lightning affects



carbon airplanes full of electronic systems differently from



the old aluminum people cans. Build more and you find/solve



these things, just like bikes.



Contrast with nuclear power plants where we never build



enough of them to achieve the hyperbolic innovations you



expect in car engines and consumer electronics. The F35 may



be another example of a flatline learning 'curve'.



[1] lower manufacturing cost may or may not relate directly



to retail price within any given time span although it



absolutely will eventually.



--



Andrew Muzi



* www.yellowjersey.org/



* Open every day since 1 April, 1971



......



well said -



http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer...qtr_4_06/artic....



all the performance Beatties having the $$$ will ride CF.



some will inspect, maintain others will give the bike to an lBS for maint...few will be stupid non maint.



Spec moves off this base into regular rider territory with a Roubaix..just enough to attract n fulfill. Excellent !



I will not. The entire affair seems a royal PITA from square one.



Further, JB who struts a history of frame breakage will break the CF.



*a nick is a nickel dime izza dime....



we could do a pool ? hahhaha a pool...



a question JB ! *is CF in Portland's dampness discussed as a problem amung P CF riders ? Remeber the B1 climataphobic dilemmas ? Is the moisture delam thru broken skin or is this old news ?



Hey, I break steel frames, so yes, the chances are that after long

enough time, I would break a CF frame . . . assuming I ever own one.

I've never had anyone complain of a rain-related delamination. None of

my friends complain about their carbon frames -- not even about benign

cracks. The last complaint I heard was that SRAM Red FDs suck. My

friends don't talk about their equipment that much. Most of our time

is spent saying things like, "hey, I just had a heart transplant, so

I'm not feeling so fast today" . . . or "where do you want to go . . .

I don't know, where do you want to go?" (repeat). I often say "wait

for me at the top." Not much about my bike unless I get a flat or

something goes belly up.



-- Jay Beattie.

.....WELL DO IT THEN AND WRITE A JOURNAL OF YOUR CF TRAVELS.

people are inarticulate. we have zilch posters, the non english speakers zombied off to UTUBE. Not a negative but a condition.

When (and if) you break it establishes a critical CF benchmark.

My 78 Raleigh totes 75 pounds out of Walmart down a smooth bikepath at 25 with tail wind. I look for cracks, find none. I guess Ima weakling.

On 3/11/2013 3:56 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Mar 11, 4:09 pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
So, my friend is trying to sell his Specialized Roubaix, and he set me
up on the bike for a ride last Saturday. ... I have come
to believe that all the hyperbole in the press reduces to minor
differences, at least among similarly priced and purposed bikes.

That's the heart of the issue, I think. Makers of expensive bikes
certainly test each others' wares, and it's unlikely that any one
manufacturer is going to be miles ahead of the competition. In a
sense, I think it's like competition between makers of high-end
acoustic guitars. They all play very well. They may look, sound or
feel slightly different, and people will have preferences. But buying
a new guitar won't change a hacker into a master.

It must have been much more interesting around 1890. Back then,
different bikes were truly different. About the only thing really
settled was the optimum number of wheels!

- Frank Krygowski

Get 'bent. Then you will have a bewildering number of choices of very
different bicycles and trikes (so even the optimum number of wheels is
up for discussion).

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/11/2013 3:09 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
So, my friend is trying to sell his Specialized Roubaix, and he set me
up on the bike for a ride last Saturday. Not withstanding my status as
former Cat 3 and Masters pack-filler and renowned commuter, I had
never ridden a CF bike [...]

CF = crank forward.

CFRP = carbon fiber reinforced polymer.

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/11/2013 8:13 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Mar 11, 5:22 pm, datakoll wrote:
Jay, what auto(s) are in th garage ?

'97 Toyota 4Runner (about 60K miles). The ski car -- going to
University of Utah with my son.
2011 Subaru Outback. The wife's car and general do it all car. Why?

-- Jay Beattie.

Why does a college student need an automobile?

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/12/2013 7:17 PM, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 03/12/2013 07:32 PM, gpsman wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:06 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 03/12/2013 02:36 PM, Duane H bert wrote:

I think that the analogy doesn't quite work with a bike though. A good
fit on the bike has a lot more to do with the steering, suspension and
power than a good fit in a car seat.

Meh... I've had a lot of cars that I ought to have liked if not ruined,
at least knocked down a few notches due to inability to fit properly
behind the wheel.

Well, you're a ****wit who thinks he's arbiter of "proper" everything
he knows less than nothing about because everything he thinks he knows
is wrong.

An odd thing that I've noticed in my current car is that if I am wearing
street shoes, I can adjust the controls for a good fit, but if I'm
wearing work boots with thick soles, I can actually tell the difference.

What's odd about that?

You're like the 8 year old that over-complicates simple things to
create the delusion of greater knowledge and/or skill and/or
accomplishment.
-----

- gpsman


No, you're an idiot stalker with an inflated sense of ego and
accomplishment who knows nothing about nothing and compensates for his
complete failure at life by trying to tear down his betters.

nate

+6.02x10^23

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/13/2013 12:30 PM, wrote:
On Monday, March 11, 2013 1:09:19 PM UTC-7, Jay Beattie wrote:

I might invest in a nice, stiff CF frame, but its not like I have to.
-- Jay Beattie.

As SMS pointed out there are a lot of CF frames breaking.[...]

We find this source to be full of misinformation.

There is a spectacular new material coming out more often these days called "steel". It is stiff yet compliant.[...]

Please define "stiff yet compliant" in engineering terms.

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/16/2013 2:59 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
So what explains the cost of custom steel frames? A custom steel
frame goes for $2-3K, and more than that for some builders -- e.g.
Vanilla here in PDX. Vanilla's generic Speedvagen goes for $3-4K.
Custom Vanilla goes for $4-5K, frame and fork. I was quoted well
under $3K for a close-out 2012 Roubaix with all Ultegra. That's a
whole bike with nice components. I think that is a relative bargain --
and if it breaks, I get a new one . . . for life, and not for a year.
And I don't have to wait five years for delivery, which is the waiting
time for a custom Vanilla. I would also end up with a lighter,
stiffer and better tuned frame. You just can't customize steel in the
same way as you can CF or even hydroformed aluminum.

To answer the first question, the cost of custom steel frames is based
upon what the market will bear, and has much more to do with how highly
the bike rates as a status symbol than actual measurable qualities or
manufacturing costs.

Why does paying a Chinese teenager $0.09/hour to sew on a $0.01 designer
label double the price of a piece of clothing?

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/16/2013 11:15 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
It's true that fine custom steel frames are currently expensive. I
don't think custom steel has to be as expensive as it is, though. I
think the prices are driven partly by the trendiness (in certain
quarters) and by the tendency to make these bikes as objets d'art. By
keeping fancy lugwork to a minimum (or using MIG welding) and doing
only as much finishing as needed for good appearance at ten feet, I
think a good steel frame could be sold for much less than $1000. Even
with American labor.

Custom sized Gunnar frames typically range from $1,250 to $1,350. TIG
welded, straight gauge, powder-coated custom geometry 4130 steel frames
could likely be made by a small shop in the $700 to $900 range.

http://gunnarbikes.com/site/order/ordering/

--
T0m $herm@n

On 3/17/2013 4:59 PM, James wrote:
On 17/03/13 15:15, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Mar 16, 3:59 pm, Jay wrote:

So what explains the cost of custom steel frames? A custom steel
frame goes for $2-3K, and more than that for some builders -- e.g.
Vanilla here in PDX. Vanilla's generic Speedvagen goes for $3-4K.
Custom Vanilla goes for $4-5K, frame and fork. I was quoted well
under $3K for a close-out 2012 Roubaix with all Ultegra. That's a
whole bike with nice components. I think that is a relative bargain --
and if it breaks, I get a new one . . . for life, and not for a year.
And I don't have to wait five years for delivery, which is the waiting
time for a custom Vanilla. I would also end up with a lighter,
stiffer and better tuned frame. You just can't customize steel in the
same way as you can CF or even hydroformed aluminum.

Hmm. I think that last sentence is precisely backwards.

What you can do with CF or hydroformed aluminum is mass produce bikes
with specially shaped tubes. But to me, "custom" means built to fit
the exact desires of the individual customer. That's where steel
excels, at least within its range of capabilities. A smart guy with
an oxyacetylene set and some simple tools can build a steel bike to
fit almost any person and almost any intended application.

IOW, if you want a special bike to fit a 4'9" woman and let her carry
100 pounds of ceramic vases over the front wheel, it's going to have
to be steel. If you have 1000 women that size who want the same exact
thing, you can begin negotiating with a Chinese company to have them
done in hydroformed aluminum - but even 1000 will be high priced, due
to tooling costs.

It's true that fine custom steel frames are currently expensive. I
don't think custom steel has to be as expensive as it is, though. I
think the prices are driven partly by the trendiness (in certain
quarters) and by the tendency to make these bikes as objets d'art. By
keeping fancy lugwork to a minimum (or using MIG welding) and doing
only as much finishing as needed for good appearance at ten feet, I
think a good steel frame could be sold for much less than $1000. Even
with American labor.

I thought most steel frames that were not lugged were welded with a TIG
welder. [...]

Correct. Only case of MIG welded bicycle frames I can think of was some
RANS models from the 1990's, since that is also how they weld up 4130
steel aircraft frames. A MIG weld will be just as strong as a proper
TIG weld, but not as pretty.

--
T0m $herm@n

On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 5:25:39 AM UTC-4, T0m $herman wrote:
On 3/11/2013 3:56 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Mar 11, 4:09 pm, Jay Beattie wrote:

So, my friend is trying to sell his Specialized Roubaix, and he set me

up on the bike for a ride last Saturday. ... I have come

to believe that all the hyperbole in the press reduces to minor

differences, at least among similarly priced and purposed bikes.



That's the heart of the issue, I think. Makers of expensive bikes

certainly test each others' wares, and it's unlikely that any one

manufacturer is going to be miles ahead of the competition. In a

sense, I think it's like competition between makers of high-end

acoustic guitars. They all play very well. They may look, sound or

feel slightly different, and people will have preferences. But buying

a new guitar won't change a hacker into a master.



It must have been much more interesting around 1890. Back then,

different bikes were truly different. About the only thing really

settled was the optimum number of wheels!



- Frank Krygowski



Get 'bent. Then you will have a bewildering number of choices of very

different bicycles and trikes (so even the optimum number of wheels is

up for discussion).



--

T0m $herm@n

.....

and a good use for the grey masks

in the bentosphere