Here we go again-

  • Thread starter Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
  • Start date



"jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>
>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,
>>

>
> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame.
> different lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be
> comparatively stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given
> position and loading mode. seems simple enough to me.


For a rigid frame on its own, the difference in vertical compliance
between a comparatively stiff or elastic frame is miniscule. However,
lateral stiffness can be significantly different and is manifested in
handling qualities or lack thereof.

Phil H
 
>>>"Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,


>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> Which ad or bike are you referring to, Peter? Just curious.


> "Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-US/bikes/road/1237/29254/


[email protected] wrote:
> In your endless battle against progress, you omitted an important
> detail about the description. The seamless integration of aluminum and
> carbon is the unique element that gives this bike the stiffness and
> compliance.


'Seamless integration' is indeed a leap forward.
Lesser alu/carb frames are glued.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
 
In article
<[email protected]>, Leo
Lichtman <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Chalo" wrote: (clip) The frames are "stiff, yet rigid, while at the same
> time surprisingly inflexible".
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> The above statement is mutually self-consistent.


Birthed in the Department of Repetitive Redundancy Division.

D.
 
"jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>
>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,
>>

>
> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
> mode.


HAHAHA! Show us the math, beamboy. Do some of those sketches and put them
on your little flickr site.

> seems simple enough to me.


You seem simple enough for us.
 
datakoll wrote:

> i am eteranlly conflused.


the hell you say.
 
On Oct 5, 6:38 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote:

> Hmm. Seat stays are primarily in tension and compression on an
> unpatented non-Cannondale bicycle


The patent even says "The vertical loads are transmitted
primarily by tension and compression forces in the frame members".
Yet it goes on to say "the present invention provides relatively
greater flexibility in the vertical direction... the rear triangle
is less stiff in the vertical direction for better absorption of
shock loads coming from the road..."

I only mentioned the patent as a piece of bicycle history;
I wasn't saying I believed the oval stays really gave a plusher ride.

Tom Ace
 
On 2007-10-06, Tom Ace <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 5, 6:38 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote:
>
>> Hmm. Seat stays are primarily in tension and compression on an
>> unpatented non-Cannondale bicycle

>
> The patent even says "The vertical loads are transmitted
> primarily by tension and compression forces in the frame members".
> Yet it goes on to say "the present invention provides relatively
> greater flexibility in the vertical direction... the rear triangle
> is less stiff in the vertical direction for better absorption of
> shock loads coming from the road..."
>
> I only mentioned the patent as a piece of bicycle history;
> I wasn't saying I believed the oval stays really gave a plusher ride.


What exactly have they patented? Oval stays or putting CF seat stays on
an otherwise Al bike?
 
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 05:54:59 -0700, Qui si parla
Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:

> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...


No need to brag here, thanks. Way TMI.
 
On Oct 5, 11:39 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
> > i am eteranlly conflused.

>
> the hell you say.


here's an example: "However,
lateral stiffness can be significantly different and is manifested in
handling qualities or lack thereof. "

so where's the I-beam tubing ?

at the contact patch?

that's not to say a noodle is not a noodle or is it?
is the ad lingo discussing noodlery or advanced frame technology?
 
On Oct 5, 7:55 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>
> > 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...

>
> > big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,

>
> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
> mode. seems simple enough to me.


I guess that you are sensitive enough to be able to distinguish
between bikes that are stiff yet compliant and those that are not. can
you also tell the difference in ride between those that have seamless
integration of carbon, aluminum?

last weekend I cracked and got dropped in the weekend warriors
expedition. My bike did not advertise being stiff yet compliant.
Everybody else is riding the latest model madone, lightspeed, giant,
etc. they all have bikes that are stiff, yet compliant with seamless
integration of fartanium and shitnubium. I don't feel as bad now. It
is not my lack of shape. It is that my bike is not stiff yet compliant
with seamless integration.

Andres
 
On Oct 5, 9:55 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>
> > 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...

>
> > big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,

>
> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
> mode. seems simple enough to me.


jockeying for position determines reality
jockeying for position has no bearing on reality
reality defines jockeying for position
yeah it is. Agreed, until eternal carbon surfaces, all refinements are
minor. But my known unknown: do frame refinements exceed the contact
patch enginnearing department's contribution? Or worser, what
peercentage degrade thru useage at the suspension obviates frame
refienments?
A way of looking at "new and improved"
One big deal is finding a "new and improved" doesn't cost an arm and a
leg.
 
On Oct 5, 2:23 pm, "Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 5, 9:13 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > On Oct 5, 7:54 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com"

>
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...

>
> > > big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,

>
> > Which ad or bike are you referring to, Peter? Just curious.

>
> > Smokey

>
> http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-US/bikes/road/1237/29254/


maybe Gene Daniels wrote that. It made as much sense as some of his
other posts

Andres
 
Jambo wrote:
> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com wrote:
>>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>>
>>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,
>>>

>> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
>> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
>> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
>> mode.

>
> HAHAHA! Show us the math, beamboy. Do some of those sketches and put them
> on your little flickr site.
>
>> seems simple enough to me.

>
> You seem simple enough for us.
>
>


"us"? you need to take your meds, moron.
 
datakoll wrote:
> On Oct 5, 11:39 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> datakoll wrote:
>>> i am eteranlly conflused.

>> the hell you say.

>
> here's an example: "However,
> lateral stiffness can be significantly different and is manifested in
> handling qualities or lack thereof. "
>
> so where's the I-beam tubing ?


damned fine question!!!


>
> at the contact patch?
>
> that's not to say a noodle is not a noodle or is it?
> is the ad lingo discussing noodlery or advanced frame technology?
>


indeed.
 
datakoll wrote:
> On Oct 5, 9:55 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>>
>>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,

>> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
>> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
>> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
>> mode. seems simple enough to me.

>
> jockeying for position determines reality
> jockeying for position has no bearing on reality
> reality defines jockeying for position
> yeah it is. Agreed, until eternal carbon surfaces, all refinements are
> minor. But my known unknown: do frame refinements exceed the contact
> patch enginnearing department's contribution? Or worser, what
> peercentage degrade thru useage at the suspension obviates frame
> refienments?
> A way of looking at "new and improved"
> One big deal is finding a "new and improved" doesn't cost an arm and a
> leg.
>


how much "new and improved" can one get from a dumpster bike? it sure
won't cost an arm and a leg. unless you have to wrestle an alligator
for possession. and lose.
 
"jim beam" wrote:
> datakoll wrote:
>> On Oct 5, 9:55 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>>>
>>>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,
>>> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
>>> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
>>> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
>>> mode. seems simple enough to me.

>>
>> jockeying for position determines reality
>> jockeying for position has no bearing on reality
>> reality defines jockeying for position
>> yeah it is. Agreed, until eternal carbon surfaces, all refinements are
>> minor. But my known unknown: do frame refinements exceed the contact
>> patch enginnearing department's contribution? Or worser, what
>> peercentage degrade thru useage at the suspension obviates frame
>> refienments?
>> A way of looking at "new and improved"
>> One big deal is finding a "new and improved" doesn't cost an arm and a
>> leg.
>>

>
> how much "new and improved" can one get from a dumpster bike? it sure
> won't cost an arm and a leg. unless you have to wrestle an alligator
> for possession. and lose.


Since gene lives in Florida, the alligator wrestling is not out of the
question.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
> On Oct 5, 9:55 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>>
>>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,

>> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
>> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
>> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
>> mode. seems simple enough to me.

>
> jockeying for position determines reality
> jockeying for position has no bearing on reality
> reality defines jockeying for position
> yeah it is. Agreed, until eternal carbon surfaces...


Tetrahedral carbon lattices? A well known advertising campaign claims it
is so.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
> On Oct 5, 9:55 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:
>>
>>> 'Ultra stiff yet vertically compliant'...
>>> big, yet small, tall yet short, black yet white,

>> why the confusion? there are 8 tubes on a traditional frame. different
>> lengths, thickness, diameter, shape, etc. one tube can be comparatively
>> stiff, another comparatively elastic, for its given position and loading
>> mode. seems simple enough to me.

>
> jockeying for position determines reality
> jockeying for position has no bearing on reality
> reality defines jockeying for position
> yeah it is. Agreed, until eternal carbon surfaces...


Tetrahedral carbon lattices? A well known advertising campaign claims it
is so.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
A Muzi wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> In your endless battle against progress, you omitted an important
>> detail about the description. The seamless integration of aluminum and
>> carbon is the unique element that gives this bike the stiffness and
>> compliance.

>
> 'Seamless integration' is indeed a leap forward.
> Lesser alu/carb frames are glued.


Well, some of the frames they integrate by parts, but others are done
only with partial fractions.

Mark J.