Bike Recommendations

[[email protected]]

Scott Gordo wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> > > [email protected] wrote:
> > > > Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> > > >> [email protected] wrote:
> > > >>> JD wrote:
> > > >>>> [email protected] wrote:
> > > >>>>> What's wrong with Giant?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Benjamin Spanklin
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> JD
> > > >>>
> > > >>> ... that isn't wrong with special'ed?
> > > >>>
<snip>

> > > The Giant STP series and the Specialized P series are completely
> > > different.
>
> Please excuse my ignorance, but are they really "completely different"?
> How? Other than the obvious fact that one has lots of square tubes and
> the other lots of round. The seat tube angle is a couple degrees
> different, but I'd assume that anybody buying a bike with that little
> seat tube isn't going to be riding with a lot of post showing. Is this
> a round vs. square thing? Is it something that would be perceived by
> the rider in any way other than visually? Have they been measured, side
> by side, for durability or frame flex? Is one frame significantly
> lighter than the other?
>
> Scott

The ride is probably different ... not that a lot of ppl actually take
the bikes to a point where, if set up exactly alike, they would notice
a difference in the frames. But I am sure there are ppl out there who
would notice the difference.

So it really comes down to ride what feels right to you. Funny thing is
ppl will jump all over the "all other brands are **** band wagon," and
talk up the quality of a product, and not even know what company
actually produced the bike. And thus this part of the thread started
....

Story time:

Way back in 1991 I was racing for a west coast team on a Bridgestone
package bike. Typical of Bridgestone at the time everything on the
bikes that could carry the Ritchey logo ... carried the Ritchey logo.
So, at the Nationals there would always be someone hanging around
saying "Oh bridgestone must really have a thing for Ritchey ... look at
how they knocked off that frame ... but you know they are built in
China/ROC/Japan." Truth be told they were built in the same factory
that TIG'd up the Ritchey TIG frames. The frames were made of the same
tubing, and built to the same spec's. The real difference, Tom touched
every one of his frames and added the braze-ons and the Ritcheys were
painted by D&D. Blind loyalty ... you gotta love it. Then again, the
Ritchey Downhill team was racing rebranded Santa Cruz Tazmans.

R

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

Scott Gordo wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> JD wrote:
>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> What's wrong with Giant?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Benjamin Spanklin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> JD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... that isn't wrong with special'ed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My point, if I have one is that Giant is Special' ed's number one
>>>>>> supplier. For that matter Giantis the number one volume frame
>>>>>> producer in the world (all that home market production). Soooo
>>>>>> given that the op doesn't mind an aluminium cookie-cutter frame
>>>>>> what difference does it make if the frame says (Va)Giant or
>>>>>> Special' ed on the outside. Buy what fits, ride, and be happy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whoa there, buddy... if you're going to spew forth misinformation,
>>>>> at least mention that before your post.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What misinformation?
>>>
>>> [snip irrelevant business information]
>>
>> You did not specify what "misinformation" I had "spewed."
>>
>> The business information I posted was only to clarify the point I was
>> making in the original post.
>>
>> Ride what fits and be happy ... ignore people who claim that one or
>> two brands are superior to all others.
>>
>>> Your post implies that the "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are all
>>> identical.
>>
>> Absolutely! Within any given line "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are
>> all identical.
>>
>> Cookie-cutter frames are mass produced, and with modern qa/qc there
>> is no problem with that.
>>
>> I did not, however, imply that the bikes that Giant made for SBI are
>> "identical" to bikes produced for Giant dealers.
>>
>>> The Giant STP series and the Specialized P series are completely
>>> different.
>
> Please excuse my ignorance, but are they really "completely
> different"?

Yes, in ways that you cannot judge from pictures on the Internet.

> How? Other than the obvious fact that one has lots of
> square tubes and the other lots of round.

The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section tubes,
meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of the frame. In
other words, you could fill the left half of the frame with water and leave
the right half dry if it were sealed up. The Giant STP doesn't have that,
but it has seatstays that are bent in a u-shape at the top tube, which
extends past the seat tube. It also has a disc brake gusset for trials.
The P frame weighs in at around 5.5 lbs and the STP frame just tips the
scales at 4.0 lbs. The P frame is far beefier and withstands much more than
the STP does.

> The seat tube angle is a
> couple degrees different, but I'd assume that anybody buying a bike
> with that little seat tube isn't going to be riding with a lot of
> post showing.

I did. My STP worked double-duty as a 23-lb XC race bike.

> Is this a round vs. square thing?

Pegs? Where are we going with this?

> Is it something that
> would be perceived by the rider in any way other than visually?

When your face meets the pavement when the frame fails, it would definitely
be perceived.

> Have
> they been measured, side by side, for durability or frame flex?

On an urban ride a couple of months ago, yes. Mine was much flexier than my
buddy's P-bike.

> Is
> one frame significantly lighter than the other?

By 37.5%, yes.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

[email protected] wrote:
> Scott Gordo wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> JD wrote:
>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> What's wrong with Giant?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Benjamin Spanklin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> JD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ... that isn't wrong with special'ed?
>>>>>>>
> <snip>
>
>>>> The Giant STP series and the Specialized P series are completely
>>>> different.
>>
>> Please excuse my ignorance, but are they really "completely
>> different"? How? Other than the obvious fact that one has lots of
>> square tubes and the other lots of round. The seat tube angle is a
>> couple degrees different, but I'd assume that anybody buying a bike
>> with that little seat tube isn't going to be riding with a lot of
>> post showing. Is this a round vs. square thing? Is it something that
>> would be perceived by the rider in any way other than visually? Have
>> they been measured, side by side, for durability or frame flex? Is
>> one frame significantly lighter than the other?
>>
>> Scott
>
> The ride is probably different ... not that a lot of ppl actually take
> the bikes to a point where, if set up exactly alike, they would notice
> a difference in the frames. But I am sure there are ppl out there who
> would notice the difference.
>
> So it really comes down to ride what feels right to you. Funny thing
> is ppl will jump all over the "all other brands are **** band wagon,"
> and talk up the quality of a product, and not even know what company
> actually produced the bike. And thus this part of the thread started

Absolutely. I don't bash any brands, not even the Windsor, Dawes, or
Motobecane bikes sold on eBay. All those frames are most definitely
identical.
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

[email protected] wrote:
> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> JD wrote:
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> What's wrong with Giant?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Benjamin Spanklin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JD
>>>>>
>>>>> ... that isn't wrong with special'ed?
>>>>>
>>>>> My point, if I have one is that Giant is Special' ed's number one
>>>>> supplier. For that matter Giantis the number one volume frame
>>>>> producer in the world (all that home market production). Soooo
>>>>> given that the op doesn't mind an aluminium cookie-cutter frame
>>>>> what difference does it make if the frame says (Va)Giant or
>>>>> Special' ed on the outside. Buy what fits, ride, and be happy.
>>>>
>>>> Whoa there, buddy... if you're going to spew forth misinformation,
>>>> at least mention that before your post.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What misinformation?
>>
>> [snip irrelevant business information]
>
> You did not specify what "misinformation" I had "spewed."

My mistake.

> The business information I posted was only to clarify the point I was
> making in the original post.
>
> Ride what fits and be happy ... ignore people who claim that one or
> two brands are superior to all others.
>
>> Your post implies that the "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are all
>> identical.
>
> Absolutely! Within any given line "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are
> all identical.
>
> Cookie-cutter frames are mass produced, and with modern qa/qc there is
> no problem with that.
>
> I did not, however, imply that the bikes that Giant made for SBI are
> "identical" to bikes produced for Giant dealers.

You said, "Soooo given that the op doesn't mind an aluminium cookie-cutter
frame what difference does it make if the frame says (Va)Giant or Special'
ed on the outside." This leads one to believe that a cookie-cutter frame is
sold by both Giant and Specialized. Is this not obvious?

>> The Giant STP series and the Specialized P series are completely
>> different.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> Who makes them has no bearing on whether or not it is
>> desireable.
>
> Are you suggesting that the desireability of a bike is just marketing?
> It seems to me that the quality of contruction plays a role in making
> a bike "desireable."

Read my reply to Scott for more details.

> The post I was replying to was prompting the OP to look only at
> Specialized and Yeti with all other makes being "****." There is
> nothing about a Specialized, that makes it inherently better than a
> Giant. My answer to the OP was "ride what fits."

Great, sounds good.

>> In other words, please stay on topic.
>
> On topic in alt .... that could happen.
>
> Then again, I see nothing OT about pointing out that the quaility of
> product from Specialized, in most cases, does not vary from the
> quality of brands like Giant.

But again, they're not cookie-cutter. That implies identical, as in two
cookies from the same cutter are exactly the same. Giant/Specialized bikes
are not the same in construction, features, and intended use.

> Seems to me that you misunderstood what I wrote and labled it an
> "misinformation."
>
> I stand by what I wrote, "Buy what fits, ride, and be happy."

We're clear here.

>> --
>> Phil, Squid-in-Training
>
> BTW Oury motorcycle grips are distributed by Western Power Sports,
> Tucker-Rocky and Hap Jones. Any motorcycle shop should be able to
> order them, and a good bicycle shop might be able to play the game
> and get on with Hap.

I was going to call and pose as a moto dealer...

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section tubes,
>meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of the frame. In
>other words, you could fill the left half of the frame with water and leave
>the right half dry if it were sealed up.

Just out of curiosity, what is it about that down tube construction
that they claim makes it worthwhile?

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Scott Gordo]

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> Scott Gordo wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> >>> [email protected] wrote:
> >>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> >>>>> [email protected] wrote:
> >>>>>> JD wrote:
> >>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
> >>>>>>>> What's wrong with Giant?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Benjamin Spanklin
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> JD
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ... that isn't wrong with special'ed?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My point, if I have one is that Giant is Special' ed's number one
> >>>>>> supplier. For that matter Giantis the number one volume frame
> >>>>>> producer in the world (all that home market production). Soooo
> >>>>>> given that the op doesn't mind an aluminium cookie-cutter frame
> >>>>>> what difference does it make if the frame says (Va)Giant or
> >>>>>> Special' ed on the outside. Buy what fits, ride, and be happy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Whoa there, buddy... if you're going to spew forth misinformation,
> >>>>> at least mention that before your post.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> What misinformation?
> >>>
> >>> [snip irrelevant business information]
> >>
> >> You did not specify what "misinformation" I had "spewed."
> >>
> >> The business information I posted was only to clarify the point I was
> >> making in the original post.
> >>
> >> Ride what fits and be happy ... ignore people who claim that one or
> >> two brands are superior to all others.
> >>
> >>> Your post implies that the "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are all
> >>> identical.
> >>
> >> Absolutely! Within any given line "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are
> >> all identical.
> >>
> >> Cookie-cutter frames are mass produced, and with modern qa/qc there
> >> is no problem with that.
> >>
> >> I did not, however, imply that the bikes that Giant made for SBI are
> >> "identical" to bikes produced for Giant dealers.
> >>
> >>> The Giant STP series and the Specialized P series are completely
> >>> different.
> >
> > Please excuse my ignorance, but are they really "completely
> > different"?
>
> Yes, in ways that you cannot judge from pictures on the Internet.
>
> > How? Other than the obvious fact that one has lots of
> > square tubes and the other lots of round.
>
> The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section tubes,
> meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of the frame. In
> other words, you could fill the left half of the frame with water and leave
> the right half dry if it were sealed up. The Giant STP doesn't have that,
> but it has seatstays that are bent in a u-shape at the top tube, which
> extends past the seat tube. It also has a disc brake gusset for trials.
> The P frame weighs in at around 5.5 lbs and the STP frame just tips the
> scales at 4.0 lbs. The P frame is far beefier and withstands much more than
> the STP does.
>
> > The seat tube angle is a
> > couple degrees different, but I'd assume that anybody buying a bike
> > with that little seat tube isn't going to be riding with a lot of
> > post showing.
>
> I did. My STP worked double-duty as a 23-lb XC race bike.
>
> > Is this a round vs. square thing?
>
> Pegs? Where are we going with this?
>
> > Is it something that
> > would be perceived by the rider in any way other than visually?
>
> When your face meets the pavement when the frame fails, it would definitely
> be perceived.

That's funny. I thought you were recommending the STP....?

>
> > Have
> > they been measured, side by side, for durability or frame flex?
>
> On an urban ride a couple of months ago, yes. Mine was much flexier than my
> buddy's P-bike.

Same wheels? Same tire pressure? Same fork and stem and bars and bb and
etc?

>
> > Is
> > one frame significantly lighter than the other?
>
> By 37.5%, yes.
>
> --
> Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

Scott Gordo wrote:
> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>> Scott Gordo wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> JD wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> What's wrong with Giant?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Benjamin Spanklin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> JD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ... that isn't wrong with special'ed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My point, if I have one is that Giant is Special' ed's number
>>>>>>>> one supplier. For that matter Giantis the number one volume
>>>>>>>> frame producer in the world (all that home market production).
>>>>>>>> Soooo given that the op doesn't mind an aluminium
>>>>>>>> cookie-cutter frame what difference does it make if the frame
>>>>>>>> says (Va)Giant or Special' ed on the outside. Buy what fits,
>>>>>>>> ride, and be happy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whoa there, buddy... if you're going to spew forth
>>>>>>> misinformation, at least mention that before your post.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What misinformation?
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip irrelevant business information]
>>>>
>>>> You did not specify what "misinformation" I had "spewed."
>>>>
>>>> The business information I posted was only to clarify the point I
>>>> was making in the original post.
>>>>
>>>> Ride what fits and be happy ... ignore people who claim that one or
>>>> two brands are superior to all others.
>>>>
>>>>> Your post implies that the "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames are all
>>>>> identical.
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely! Within any given line "aluminum cookie-cutter" frames
>>>> are all identical.
>>>>
>>>> Cookie-cutter frames are mass produced, and with modern qa/qc there
>>>> is no problem with that.
>>>>
>>>> I did not, however, imply that the bikes that Giant made for SBI
>>>> are "identical" to bikes produced for Giant dealers.
>>>>
>>>>> The Giant STP series and the Specialized P series are completely
>>>>> different.
>>>
>>> Please excuse my ignorance, but are they really "completely
>>> different"?
>>
>> Yes, in ways that you cannot judge from pictures on the Internet.
>>
>>> How? Other than the obvious fact that one has lots of
>>> square tubes and the other lots of round.
>>
>> The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section
>> tubes, meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of
>> the frame. In other words, you could fill the left half of the
>> frame with water and leave the right half dry if it were sealed up.
>> The Giant STP doesn't have that, but it has seatstays that are bent
>> in a u-shape at the top tube, which extends past the seat tube. It
>> also has a disc brake gusset for trials. The P frame weighs in at
>> around 5.5 lbs and the STP frame just tips the scales at 4.0 lbs.
>> The P frame is far beefier and withstands much more than the STP
>> does.
>>
>>> The seat tube angle is a
>>> couple degrees different, but I'd assume that anybody buying a bike
>>> with that little seat tube isn't going to be riding with a lot of
>>> post showing.
>>
>> I did. My STP worked double-duty as a 23-lb XC race bike.
>>
>>> Is this a round vs. square thing?
>>
>> Pegs? Where are we going with this?
>>
>>> Is it something that
>>> would be perceived by the rider in any way other than visually?
>>
>> When your face meets the pavement when the frame fails, it would
>> definitely be perceived.
>
> That's funny. I thought you were recommending the STP....?
>
>>
>>> Have
>>> they been measured, side by side, for durability or frame flex?
>>
>> On an urban ride a couple of months ago, yes. Mine was much flexier
>> than my buddy's P-bike.
>
> Same wheels? Same tire pressure? Same fork and stem and bars and bb
> and etc?

Oops, I forgot to mention it was a lateral deflection test: push sideways on
a pedal with a foot.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section
>> tubes, meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of
>> the frame. In other words, you could fill the left half of the
>> frame with water and leave the right half dry if it were sealed up.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what is it about that down tube construction
> that they claim makes it worthwhile?

It's like an I-beam with closed sides. In addition, the tube diameter
increases from the seat tube to the headtube. From mechanics of materials:

Ix=(bd^3-h^3(b-t))/12 for the P3 (plus the moment of inertia from the closed
sides)

versus

Ix=pi/4*(D^2-d^2) for the STP

Isn't it obvious? Look at h for the P3... it varies to the third power
while the STP varies to the second power.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[[email protected]]

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> >> [email protected] wrote:
> >>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> >>>> [email protected] wrote:
> >>>>> JD wrote:

<snip>

Miscommunication resolved ... no more need to tell each other to ****
up a rope.

> > BTW Oury motorcycle grips are distributed by Western Power Sports,
> > Tucker-Rocky and Hap Jones. Any motorcycle shop should be able to
> > order them, and a good bicycle shop might be able to play the game
> > and get on with Hap.
>
> I was going to call and pose as a moto dealer...

There are many ways to get a bike shop opened up for motorcycle
accessories.

Personally, I would just go direct if this is a one time thing. GIve
tham a call on the old 1800333 .... line and tell them something like "
I work for an IBD and just love your products, but I also ride moto's
and I would really like to get (insert product name and part number
here) but my local dealer doesn't carry your products and I don't want
to use an online dealer ... being and IBD and all ....

The worst that happend is they say "no" or point you to a distributor
that can resolve the problem.

BTW if you decide to try and open up with a wholesaler through your
bike shop, don't start with Tucker-Rocky they are a large distributor
and very demanding when it comes to opening new accounts ... start with
a small accessory dealer and move up.

Not that I ever did any thing like that ...

R

 

[[email protected]]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section tubes,
> >meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of the frame. In
> >other words, you could fill the left half of the frame with water and leave
> >the right half dry if it were sealed up.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what is it about that down tube construction
> that they claim makes it worthwhile?

Aaaaaaggggghhhhhhh ... here we go again. Phil no disrespect but ... The
P.2 and P.3 for 2005 used "centerfold technology" for the top tube, the
down tube was a standard round A1 tube with minimal shaping at the
ends. The Centerfold toptube was made from a sheet of A1, that is
formed into a 6 sided tube and welded down the centerline on the
underside of the tube. There is only one seam, unlike the hydroformed
halves of a Stumpjumper or Epic. There is no interior centerwall to a
Centerfold frame, and yes we have sectioned one (same day we sectioned
a Saint crankarm ... oh the tears of saddness).

What was the supposed advantage?

"The centerfold toptube is highly shaped and provides significant
increase in surface area for the headtube/toptube weld, and there by
increasing the strength of the joint."

More probable ...

It was a really distinctive look ... that helped boost sales and brand
recognition.

But ... and there is always a but ... for 2006, Centerfold has been
dropped and the P.2/P.3 6061 T-6 frames come with shaped "ORE" down and
top tubes (similar to the Rockhopper). The P.2 is also available as a
CR-MO frame, although they have already been recalled because the first
batch doesn't have the propper (for a P bike) 6mm offset for the reaer
end.

R
Currently destroying a chi-ti frame and some prototype shoes ...

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Mark Hickey wrote:
>> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section
>>> tubes, meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center of
>>> the frame. In other words, you could fill the left half of the
>>> frame with water and leave the right half dry if it were sealed up.
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, what is it about that down tube construction
>> that they claim makes it worthwhile?
>
>It's like an I-beam with closed sides. In addition, the tube diameter
>increases from the seat tube to the headtube. From mechanics of materials:
>
>Ix=(bd^3-h^3(b-t))/12 for the P3 (plus the moment of inertia from the closed
>sides)
>
>versus
>
>Ix=pi/4*(D^2-d^2) for the STP
>
>Isn't it obvious? Look at h for the P3... it varies to the third power
>while the STP varies to the second power.

According to reco_diver, there is no "center wall", so the discussion
is probably moot.

OTOH, look at the stresses on a down tube.

There are tension and compressive forces (depending on whether you're
JRA or braking), and it's clear that just about any down tube will
satisfy this demand. Look at the Slingshot (anyone seen one of those
lately?) and that's obvious.

The important thing a down tube does is to keep the bottom bracket and
head tube in relative alignment. It does this by reisisting torsional
forces (ie it doesn't twist). From a mechanical standpoint, if you're
trying to do this with a minimum amount of material in a given tubing
diameter, you'll want to move all the material to the tubing wall.

Or to put it another way, if the P3's down tube DID have an interior
wall, and the exterior wall was the same thickness as another "hollow"
down tube of the same diameter, it would be stiffer.

However, if you were to move the material from the ineterior wall to
the exterior wall (making the tube's walls thicker), you'd have a tube
that's the same weight as the "P3 downtube" but it would be stiffer
from a torsional perspective.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Oops, I forgot to mention it was a lateral deflection test: push sideways on
>a pedal with a foot.

This is a VERY inaccurate way to test frame deflection, unless you're
measuring chainring to FD cage clearance or somehow mic'ing the actual
deflection of the down tube. The flex in the tires, wheels and even
crank will swamp any actual frame deflection visually otherwise.

That's not to say that you can't induce frame flex this way - just
that it's virtually impossible to determine how much the frame is
actually flexing in the presence of much larger deflections in the
rest of the bike.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Mark Hickey wrote:
>>> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section
>>>> tubes, meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center
>>>> of the frame. In other words, you could fill the left half of the
>>>> frame with water and leave the right half dry if it were sealed up.
>>>
>>> Just out of curiosity, what is it about that down tube construction
>>> that they claim makes it worthwhile?
>>
>> It's like an I-beam with closed sides. In addition, the tube
>> diameter increases from the seat tube to the headtube. From
>> mechanics of materials:
>>
>> Ix=(bd^3-h^3(b-t))/12 for the P3 (plus the moment of inertia from
>> the closed sides)
>>
>> versus
>>
>> Ix=pi/4*(D^2-d^2) for the STP
>>
>> Isn't it obvious? Look at h for the P3... it varies to the third
>> power while the STP varies to the second power.
>
> According to reco_diver, there is no "center wall", so the discussion
> is probably moot.
>
> OTOH, look at the stresses on a down tube.
>
> There are tension and compressive forces (depending on whether you're
> JRA or braking), and it's clear that just about any down tube will
> satisfy this demand. Look at the Slingshot (anyone seen one of those
> lately?) and that's obvious.
>
> The important thing a down tube does is to keep the bottom bracket and
> head tube in relative alignment. It does this by reisisting torsional
> forces (ie it doesn't twist). From a mechanical standpoint, if you're
> trying to do this with a minimum amount of material in a given tubing
> diameter, you'll want to move all the material to the tubing wall.
>
> Or to put it another way, if the P3's down tube DID have an interior
> wall, and the exterior wall was the same thickness as another "hollow"
> down tube of the same diameter, it would be stiffer.
>
> However, if you were to move the material from the ineterior wall to
> the exterior wall (making the tube's walls thicker), you'd have a tube
> that's the same weight as the "P3 downtube" but it would be stiffer
> from a torsional perspective.
>
> Mark Hickey
> Habanero Cycles
> http://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame

Torsion is not a concern on a P-bike. Dirt jumps and trials depend on
longitudinal stiffness, not lateral stiffness. The 100m sprint before the
finish doesn't matter here.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

[email protected] wrote:
> Mark Hickey wrote:
>> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The P-series' downtube is welded together from two closed-section
>>> tubes, meaning there is a center reinforcing line down the center
>>> of the frame. In other words, you could fill the left half of the
>>> frame with water and leave the right half dry if it were sealed up.
>>
>> Just out of curiosity, what is it about that down tube construction
>> that they claim makes it worthwhile?
>
> Aaaaaaggggghhhhhhh ... here we go again. Phil no disrespect but ...
> The P.2 and P.3 for 2005 used "centerfold technology" for the top
> tube, the down tube was a standard round A1 tube with minimal shaping
> at the ends. The Centerfold toptube was made from a sheet of A1, that
> is formed into a 6 sided tube and welded down the centerline on the
> underside of the tube. There is only one seam, unlike the hydroformed
> halves of a Stumpjumper or Epic. There is no interior centerwall to a
> Centerfold frame, and yes we have sectioned one (same day we sectioned
> a Saint crankarm ... oh the tears of saddness).
>
> What was the supposed advantage?
>
> "The centerfold toptube is highly shaped and provides significant
> increase in surface area for the headtube/toptube weld, and there by
> increasing the strength of the joint."
>
> More probable ...
>
> It was a really distinctive look ... that helped boost sales and brand
> recognition.
>
> But ... and there is always a but ... for 2006, Centerfold has been
> dropped and the P.2/P.3 6061 T-6 frames come with shaped "ORE" down
> and top tubes (similar to the Rockhopper). The P.2 is also available
> as a CR-MO frame, although they have already been recalled because
> the first batch doesn't have the propper (for a P bike) 6mm offset
> for the reaer end.
>
> R
> Currently destroying a chi-ti frame and some prototype shoes ...

Thanks for the info. I'm behind the times.
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Oops, I forgot to mention it was a lateral deflection test: push
>> sideways on a pedal with a foot.
>
> This is a VERY inaccurate way to test frame deflection, unless you're
> measuring chainring to FD cage clearance or somehow mic'ing the actual
> deflection of the down tube. The flex in the tires, wheels and even
> crank will swamp any actual frame deflection visually otherwise.
>
> That's not to say that you can't induce frame flex this way - just
> that it's virtually impossible to determine how much the frame is
> actually flexing in the presence of much larger deflections in the
> rest of the bike.

I figured that seeing the rear dropouts stay relatively steady, and seeing
the BB shell move relative to it, was enough for me. But I see where you're
coming from... we've all seen the r.b.t. debates.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

[email protected] wrote:
> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> JD wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Miscommunication resolved ... no more need to tell each other to ****
> up a rope.
>
>>> BTW Oury motorcycle grips are distributed by Western Power Sports,
>>> Tucker-Rocky and Hap Jones. Any motorcycle shop should be able to
>>> order them, and a good bicycle shop might be able to play the game
>>> and get on with Hap.
>>
>> I was going to call and pose as a moto dealer...
>
> There are many ways to get a bike shop opened up for motorcycle
> accessories.
>
> Personally, I would just go direct if this is a one time thing. GIve
> tham a call on the old 1800333 .... line and tell them something like
> " I work for an IBD and just love your products, but I also ride
> moto's and I would really like to get (insert product name and part
> number here) but my local dealer doesn't carry your products and I
> don't want to use an online dealer ... being and IBD and all ....
>
> The worst that happend is they say "no" or point you to a distributor
> that can resolve the problem.
>
> BTW if you decide to try and open up with a wholesaler through your
> bike shop, don't start with Tucker-Rocky they are a large distributor
> and very demanding when it comes to opening new accounts ... start
> with a small accessory dealer and move up.
>
> Not that I ever did any thing like that ...

Hehe... thanks for the info.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training