Road bike wheelsets

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Goose5, Jul 30, 2016.

  1. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    A little commentary on vV's crash from Chris Boardman:

    "...former Olympic champion cyclist Chris Boardman had a few choice words about the design of that particular segment of the track, which has some treacherous edges he feels put the cyclists at risk. “We knew it was way past being technical; it was dangerous,” he told the BBC. “The people who designed the course and said what safety features were needed had seen it as well and left it.”

    “We knew the descent was treacherous,” he added. “I looked at that road furniture and thought, nobody can crash here and just get up. It is really bad and that is what we have seen today.”


    "Road furniture is cyclist-speak for barriers, medians, and curbs and what not. According to physicist Diandra Leslie-Pelecky, author of the book The Physics of NASCAR: The Science Behind the Speed, curbs in particular can be treacherous for cyclists. “There’s zero run off,” she told Gizmodo. “When the front tire hits something, it stops. That creates a torque that rotates the cycle and basically bucks the rider. That’s why she landed the way she did.”


    Another observer state the obvious:
    "It looked like her rear wheel was losing traction, and as the wheel regained traction past the painted line, it began to high-side her. She had applied the brakes hard, but the force of the wobble caused her to clamp down and lock the front. High-side+pitch-over = very bad day."


    Ok...so either she just over-cooked it or...her frame asploded and tried to kill her because it was angry for not being a steel frame. You be the judge.

    Yuppers...another observer reports:
    "It seems pretty clear from this screenshot that her braking locked up the front and threw her over the bars well before the curb; hard to say if it would have been worse had she actually hit the curb instead. I was watching live and it scared the crap out of me."

    Exactly what I said up top a little. She had her CG all fucked up, was nose over the front wheel, crossed up in line correction and the rear tire was 10" off the road surface BEFORE the curb strike. Due to...CLASS!?!?!...That's right, the front brake being in panic mode and standing the damned bike up. Physic, people!!! How does it work???

    Go to the link...scroll down...LOOK AT the screen capture of the video just before the curb strike. She's already rotating.

    http://gizmodo.com/the-science-behind-the-horrific-crash-that-hospitalized-1784950831


    Coming up next on Cycling With Old Farts: Why steel frames, 32-spoke wheels and mullets will be the next big thing at the 2017 Tour!
     


  2. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    A reply from a forum member that posted on another thread in another sub-forum:

    "If you watched that girl bite the pavement in the Olympics the other day, you might think twice about riding in the rain. Just enough rain there to make the road slick from the oils."

    And here we thought it was caused by an asploding carbon fiber frame.

    Anyone able to recommend a good barber? I want to get ahead of the trend...
     
  3. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    Is the nationality of the rider whom the news announcer obviously got wrong have some sort of connection with the type of crash?

    As for the frame testing - I have covered this before didn't I? The textbook testing would be to take the frame up to or near 100% of it's strength or some agreed upon percentage of that. And to cycle it from zero to this limit and back again. Generally the cycle is reasonably low frequency.

    This IS the failure mode of steel - fatigue. But this is NOT the failure mode of resin.

    Resin is a hell of a lot more likely to begin failing from a single very sharp at or near over-load and then every time after that you have continuing degradation until such point the fiber is loose and simply tears. I was just looking at a friend's Trek 2200. Presently there is a line visible through the paint where the downtube/headtube internal lug would be situated. To me this is a rather obvious sign of degradation. Now granted that this is a really old second generation CF bike but the rider is very careful not to ride really hard. He doesn't like road rash.

    Aluminum doesn't fail for a very simple reason - they are all very much overbuilt because the material loses it's properties in the area where welds are. So the loads at which you would start having fatigue failures is probably 50% higher than the steel frames. I suppose you could build them like steel with double and triple butting but carbon fiber came along too rapidly. But I'd bet that properly designed aluminum bikes would match the weight of CF.



    None of this stuff is rocket science. People are still crashing down hills on a 1980 Bridgestone MB1 while Santa Cruz rear triangles are being replaced every six months. Talk to a steel frame builder and they simply do not get repairs on old steel bikes and the guy next door that repairs carbon fiber has more work than he can handle.

    And he refuses to even touch a carbon fiber fork. And with all of these carbon fiber bikes out there with 1" steerers no one is making that size anymore but a single Chinese builder who is insulated from American law suits by only selling through the Internet.

    While good steel bikes are failing it is rare because the same fatigue tests that make the steel bikes look less reliable simply do not mimic real life conditions very closely.

    Bob - when you're going to call me wrong at least try to be accurate. The lady racer DID low side. But she straightened it up and hit the curb before she hit the ground which then high-sided her. On a wide enough road I think she could have saved it. I hope she isn't seriously injured. I'll bet that you've come close to doing that yourself. I know I sure have. Thanks for the video so I could see what actually happened up close and personal. You should have simply passed that on immediately since the piece that was on the TV News was from a different angle and appeared totally different.
     
  4. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    WHOA, Whoa, whoa!!!

    Did you already forget that you used a SANTANA "Sweet 16" wheelset as a low spoke count wheel which is certainly strong enough for a Tandem with the weight of two riders where the inference is that a low spoke count wheel should therefore not be avoided?!?

    If you choose to use the Shimano WH-7700 based Santana wheel as an example of a low spoke wheel then it is important for others to know that regardless of how strong the wheel may be, there are limitations.*
    Based on your apparent logic, we should all be using BioPace chainrings because that's what Shimano's engineers came up with way-back-when ...

    Why would anyone use anything as primitive as a ROUND chainring?

    Can you believe that ANYONE still has cranks whose chainrings have FIVE bolt holes?

    OR certainly, shouldn't we all be migrated to either Di2 or ESP shifters-and-derailleurs?!?

    * Some people considered the WH-7700 to be laterally flexy ...

    BTW. IF a person who is not in a sanctioned road race really doesn't want to "haul all that weight around and the extra aero drag of the spokes if you don't need to" s/he would probably be better off riding on 650b wheels-and-tires.


     
  5. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126

    WTF?!?

    I'll try to be brief because this is the second time in this thread that you seem to have invoked a reply from me ...
    GIVEN: By your own declaration, YOUR Campagnolo Ultra Torque cranksets are installed whereby the Q-FACTOR is 145.5 +/- mm.

    GIVEN: MY Campagnolo Ultra Torque cranksets (yes, I actually have more than one even though I questioned the design way-back-when AND I am not fully on board with it) are installed whereby the Q-FACTOR is 144.5mm.

    Where did THAT number come from?

    Well, IF any person takes a Campagnolo UT crankset & joins the two halves together while it is not installed in the bike then s/he will be able to measure that the theoretical Q-Factor when the Hirth Coupling is securely mated as 144.5mm.

    It isn't the 145.5mm misinformation which is the silk screened on the crankarms!

    Do YOU even know how to correctly measure your cranks Q-Factor?

    So, if you can do-the-math ...

    Then, you should be able to calculate that it is YOUR UT cranksets which have been installed whereby there is roughly a 1+/- mm separation ...

    That is, if you hold the two halves of a UT crank which are securely joined AND THEN back the connecting bolt off by 1mm THEN you can wiggle the crank arms like an over-sized castanet ...

    THAT gap occurs even when the UT crank is installed in its BB and if it seems to be laterally rigid ....

    Get it?​

    Think about it.
    BTW. By MY reckoning, the 145.5mm dimension is a barely allowable, worst-case-scenario "target" measurement for an acceptable installation of a Campagnolo Ultra Torque crankset ... with the downside often being the almost ubiquitous "click" ...

    AGAIN, if you take the time to measure the Q-Factor of a Campagnolo Ultra Torque crankset when the Hirth Coupling is joined while the crankset is not laterally impeded by the BB Cups/etc. then you will see that ideal Q-Factor is 144.5mm ...

    I do NOT know if Cannondale's newest crankset includes anything like Campagnolo's Wavy Washer to compensate for imprecision in a BB shell's dimension ...

    And, I do NOT know the correct Q-Factor dimension of Cannondale's newest crank ....
     
  6. dhk2

    dhk2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    39
    CB, there is no helping you here. Don't know how any cyclist could watch that descent on that dark and slippery rain-forest conditions and not relate to how treacherous it was. As Paul Sherwin said just before the Nibali crash, he was on the edge of his seat. I was feeling my upper back tense up just from watching it.

    Too bad the race organizers put the course on that road; they should have known better. Bet any serious local cyclist could have told them that descent was always greasy. Deeply shaded rain or cloud forest roads aren't for racing.
     
  7. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    All that weight = 4 ounces.
    All that aerodynamic drag = immeasurably low.
     
  8. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Alf, you're a fucking moron. you don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about. STFU.
     
    #48 CAMPYBOB, Aug 9, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2016
  9. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038

    I know. Lord, how well I know! There can be no help here in the land of illiterate and illogical idiocy.

    That descent was insane. And I know from personal experience...over and over and over...that any racer signing on for the local Cat 3-4 Demo Derby will literally slit his mother's throat to win a $5 faux gold medal or a $20 prime.

    I can only imagine the risks the pro's will take in order to win an Olympic Gold Medal.

    Why Hell! I'm told they will even ride the notorious 'Carbon Machines Of Death'!

    vV has been discharged from the hospital and I hope she fully recovers. Nibs is pretty well screwed for the next month or three.
     
  10. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    Bob - we're not feeling the love.
     
  11. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    INTERESTING ...

    Well, no matter how stupid I may-or-may-not be ...

    At least I am not confused by simple arithmetic concepts the way that you apparently are!

    You do understand that 144.5 is less than 145.5, don't you?.

    Or, is that something which you still can't grasp?!?
    OR, are you unsure about how the halves of a Hirth Coupling are supposed to engage?
     
  12. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Frankly, as an aerospace design engineer with 36 years under my belt I've found trying to educate someone that already knows everything to be a losing proposition no matter how many facts are posted that refute a position with logic.

    You're about one step shy of becoming an 'Alf'. Keep trying, you'll get there. Just tell me I can ride an UltraTorque crankset with a 1 MM "air gap" and I'll grant you the promotion.

    The DUTCH gal, vV, did NOT crash because her carbon frame failed. She crashed because she over-cooked the turn. Period. Anyone that's spent more than ten minutes on a bike would know that.

    Every witness recounted the same damned version of the crash I posted above, not some moronic diatribe about how her carbon frame attempted to kill her. That was YOUR theory...remember? No?

    For fucks sake! Care to re-write any of the bullshit you posted? Or refute the facts I posted.

    No? I didn't think so. Look, if you want to ride steel frames, feel free. No one is stopping you. If you want to ride tank wheels, go right ahead. No one cares. But, posting your pure, unadulterated bullshit is making me laugh. Hard. If steel and 32-spoke wheels were all that we would ride them. They aren't and we don't. Light wheels and bikes isn't a 'fad'. It's reality.

    There are no morgues lined with dead cyclists, killed by low spoke count wheels and plastic frames. Your distorted view of cycling is stuck on something that died a long time ago and it isn't coming back to life anytime soon. Sorry about that.

    Please. For the love of all that's Holy...keep it up. You're making yourself look absolutely brilliant.
     
  13. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    Bob, I don't think that she over-cooked the corner in the classic sense. She hit SOMETHING on the road that was slippery as hell. This couldn't have been use water because she slammed on the brakes when approaching the curb and did an endo.

    The video didn't have enough frames per second to actually see each step of what happened though I tried.

    And it wasn't the painted line because the slide began just before she hit the line and she caught traction and straightened it out but there was the turn uncompleted.

    And Bob - I'm a engineer too that has worked on many very serious projects so you aren't about to hear me coming up with the idea that the UT cranks aren't totally closed when torqued to their required limit. What's more, I've been a mechanic since I was 12.

    When you start talking about steel frames and strong wheels (I suggest that you look at the aluminum wheels offered by Campy and Miche) as if they were crushingly heavy or that you cannot carry such a heavy load when you have more on your paunch or even in the seat pack it's getting pretty ridiculous. When you say that you're an aerospace engineer and then talk about the aerodynamic loses of 32 spokes it gives me pause to wonder exactly what you did.

    You love your super light carbon bike and light wheels? So did I and over the last 7 years have had nothing but failure after failure. I am permanently crippled from one of those - I have to take a medication that's both expensive and interferes with my balance and memory. And then when reported here I get the BS that it was just me..
     
  14. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    The prime advantage of a hirth joint is that there is no lag. That means that the teeth are FULLY engaged.
     
  15. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Tom, save your breath. Alf has NO FUCKING CLUE when it comes to how a Hirth joint or a Campy UltraTorque crankset is installed, how it functions, what is the cause of the infamous 'UltraTorque Click' (aka creak, tick, clunk, etc.) or what actually cures it.

    I do. As does site member Colnago C50. As you have alluded to, tightening the bolt anywhere close to torque spec eliminates any possible gap. Furthermore, riding...or should I say...attempting to ride with the bolt loose enough to allow Alf's moronic "1 MM air gap" would result in a floppy spindle that would quickly break either the spindle fixing bolt, the spindle bolt head boss or threaded portion. This would resuly in the loss of the left side crank arm in a hurry and damned near guarantee serious injury. In Alf's case, he stated he removed the spring wire retaining clip on the drive side...so the moron could suffer the loss of BOTH crank arms in his case. Not surprising at all.

    Debate vV's crash all you like. She did a typical slide out on a wet road caused by a velocity that exceeded traction coefficients which was compounded by a line not even a rookie would miss as being wrong, wrong and wrong.

    Her crash...and Porte's and Nibali's and Haneo's and Thomas's were all caused by pretty much the same factor. A wet, slippery, steep descent through a rain forest.

    To repeat myself for at least the third time in an attempt to bring just a tiny bit of sanity into this discussion...THERE WAS NO FRAME FAILURE!

    vV was an unguided missile once the handling and traction parameters had been exceed.

    Oy...spoke drag...here toy go! Maybe you don't give a flying fuck about spokes, drag or speed or Watt savings. Some of us most certainly do. Myself and the original poster included. To dismiss the savings as minor shows your bias. Many riders are VERY much concerned with spoke/rim/tire drag components and the Watt numbers associated with them.

    If it doesn't matter to YOU, fine. No biggee. But to say they are insignifiant is moronic.

    All of the information regarding spoke drag losses, both in spoke profile, size and count is easily found on the web. Just for a quick example when comparing a CX-Ray to a Laser there's a 2 Watt difference at 30 MPH. 6 seconds over 40 Km from just changing or selecting a certain profile of spoke over another and gaining 6 seconds? That's huge. Cutting your spoke count in half...even more savings and less mass to carry up every foot of elevation climbed.

    My advice to you is to go study the numbers. I don't have my own wind tunnel, but I do believe the experts and I do go faster on my light weight, low spoke count wheels. To argue that any device that has increased drag or mass is somehow faster or even as fast as a device with lower drag and mass...is incomprehensible to me.

    And to get back to original durability issue...I have never heard of anyone having major issues with their wheels (no name Chicom carbon crap could be excluded here) and certainly nothing catastrophic in nature. Mavic Ksyrium's enjoy a great rep in my AO and after training and sometimes racing on my even less worthy Aksium's since 2007 I can definitively say they have held up to my abuses as well or better than the factory built, custom built and home built 32 and 36 hole clincher and sew-up wheels I've used since the first day I threw a leg over my first road bike.

    Paunch? At 156 this morning and 6' 1" I carry...very, very little. Seat bags violate Rule 31 and in any event all spares are to be kept to the absolute minimum. Otherwise, THIS mass is an unavoidable parasitic loss (except when racing, of course) UNLIKE wheel mass. Which can easily be reduced by NOT being a cave man.

    I've ridden 46 seasons now. I've got tons of old steel and Ti bikes (never owned an aluminum bike, but I have ridden a few). I have cracked a steel road frame...a Colnago. No big deal. I am NOT all down on steel because I killed a frame. I've also killed steel freewheel bodies. An aluminum Campy Record crank arm snapped in two (that one damned near got me killed, but I'm not all fucked up stoopid when it comes to using aluminum components today!). I've seen multiple steel frames cracked.

    And despite your also strange attempt to assert that "Aluminum doesn't fail for a very simple reason - they are all very much overbuilt... "...well, frankly, you are nuts. There's no other word for it.

    I Google'd up hundreds of cracked, split, snapped off...WHATEVER!...trashed alloy frames in a couple of seconds. I've had friends have everything from derailleur hangers snap off to head tube splits to...awww...forgeddabouddit! I'm getting nowhere. Let's just say aluminum frame may have the highest failure rate of all the common materials (Magnesium is also up there) and it is all WELL DOCUMENTED. Alloy fails at the welds (see: Scandium added to prevent HAZ failures), no where near the welds and in short...everywhere carbon, steel and Ti frame fail. Stress areas is stress areas...duh.

    Yes, I am an aerospace design engineer and yes, I know more than a little about material science and bicycles in general. I assume you do also. However, unlike you, I am not so biased when it comes to what materials and configurations yield improved performance, more focus tuned ride properties, what weight and aero do to improve performance and risk analysis.

    Yeah, carbon tried to kill you? So what? Aluminum tried to kill me. Big deal.

    I learned the vanity groove in a Campy crank and the ball mill that sat and sank at the end of the cut created a stress riser. NOT that aloooominum was bad bad bad.

    Maybe...although I'm not holding out much hope...you will learn something too.
     
  16. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Heheh! Read the moronic 10-page thread linked in my signature and you'll learn all you need to know about Alf and his whacktarded ideas.

    After THAT idiocy I just tell him to go fuck himself. Debate, logic and facts are useless in his case. he spews out the same irrelevant BS every time and other than ignoring him there is little that can be communicated that he will comprehend.

    Colnago C60 is a P.E. and I've got 36+ years under my belt as an aerospace engineer working with turbines, blades, vanes, rotors, stators, bliscs, discs, shafting, tooling to include gages, jigs, fixtures, metrology, tribology and materials, testing procedures and the design of all of the above. I carry several letters after my name, but am not a P.E. I respect them highly.

    Colnagoc60 is also a masters level racer, as am I. I have a racing career I could bore you to tears with for hour after hour relating my adventures, finishing positions, mishaps and proud moments with...but, let's leave those details out for now. You're not really interested and I don't have the time...

    If my bona fides plus 46 years of road racing and training are NOT good enough to augment the facts and data I post, please feel free to refute it, but DO use facts. Not BS or opinions without stating them as such. We all have opinions and I don't mind sharing mine either. I will not try to pass them off as fact. Yuo like steel. You trust steel. Good for you! That does not in any way make it better than another material or frame in any way other than what the voices in your head tell you. You are ignoring the facts of the matter.

    As to your admonishment about not attributing vV's crash as a simple 'too fast for the conditions + poor line + wet road' explanation vs. your incredible 'her carbon frame tried to kill her!!!1one!' reply put you solidly in the fast lane for going from a Fred to an Alf at 100 MPH.

    Your defense of steel frames, touring type wheelsets and the claim the aluminum frames don't fail in the face of facts and anecdotal evidence does astound me. OK. and cycling forums for over 25 years I guess I'm prepared to believe anything can appear on my screen...

    It all comes down to...it's not that i 'love' or don't love' any individual on the internet. I just see the weird opinions, incorrect pronouncements and old school 'logic' (and at 63 I'm PLENTY old school, myself) posted without substantiation. I've backed up everything I stated with the expert commentary and data developed by others.

    Think I'm mistaken? Just plain wrong? Out in left field? Go ahead and prove it. All of it's out there on the web for everyone to find. Be assured my response will be backed up with (since the forum's picture/video hosting functions are fubar) pics, vids, links, reports, test results and yes...the 'opinions' of industry experts that do NOT have a vested interest in a particular material, rim contour, spoke count or such.
     
  17. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    Bob - again I'm not feeling the love. This is a discussion and not a war.

    If you look at http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-15505311.html you will see that spoke count is not very important to aerodynamic drag but that perhaps rim depth and shape is FAR more important. But that the best possible savings is only 10 W per wheel under the most stressing conditions. While this most assuredly is a lot of power remember that I've been trying to stress that this is when riding near 30 mph and VERY few people ride at this speed on the flats and even fewer on a downhill turning section. In other words - these differences only have an effect on pro racers.

    Way back when, I did a cruder test of drag between a 36 spoke and a 24 spoke using levers and an electronic scale and what I discovered was that in most cases there was no difference in drag at all. It was all in the rim shape and very little change at that.

    If you want more strength, fewer failures and a third or more cheaper pricing at the same weight you can get a titanium bike. And you get a lifetime frame warranty. That's a hell of a lot different than the two or three year warranty on CF bikes.
     
  18. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Know how I know you haven't raced in a long while?

    Most crits and many RR's in the amateur class are almost that fast. And we're discussing a guy that wants to go faster, not slower.

    I've got a Ti bike. It's too flexible for me. Smooth as silk over crap roads, but not stiff enough. My cracked carbon Wilier was replaced under warranty. Just as my cracked Colnago was. 'Lifetime' doesn't mean much to me. They're trashed or replaced pretty quickly. Just like the tires, the chains, the shifter cables, the brake pads, the chainrings, the cassettes, the bearings...

    I did ride my first carbon bike for 5 years and somewhere around 25K-30K miles. I still take it out every now and again. Should I be prepared for it to asplode?

    I've got to ask, how many miles do you do in a year and at what speeds?
     
  19. cyclintom

    cyclintom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,243
    Likes Received:
    95
    I used to do 10,000 miles a year at average speed for that total of 14 mph. Since my injury I'm down to 6,000 at about 12.5. That means about 6 to 10 mph up the hills and 35 to 50 mph downhill. I'm not racing anyone anymore. And I am 6'4" and 185 lbs.

    And if I recall correctly you're in your 50's so I have to wonder what you would think you're achieving by "racing"? I'm approaching 72 and am still doing any rides I want to do. I happen to be extremely strong and do not break bones but very large area bruising is not a lot of fun nor is road rash that needn't have happened.

    I keep hearing that "steel fails too" but when you look on the Internet you can find examples of practically all materials failing but NOT a good steel frame. I'm sure they're out there but not in sufficient numbers for owners to post steel failures like CF.

    And while the testing procedure of Manfred Otto was a good starting point unfortunately it does not mimic the actual failures in the field. What's more, the failures he showed for metal frames were in general non-catastrophic in nature while the failures of carbon fiber frames and forks are almost entirely catastrophic.

    Truthfully I am not impressed that a steel frame with welded joints fails at a weld since I consider a high end frame to have lugs and brazed or silver soldered together.

    Now I'm finding out that professional riders are using a CF bike for a SINGLE RACE and tossing them. Why wouldn't that cause you concern?
     
  20. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    I'm 63. What am I achieving? WTF? The highest level of fitness I can, going as fast as I can and having a metric shit ton of fun. And a silver medal at the Ohio Senior Olympic Games road race. Yeah, I'll brag a little!

    For fucks sake! I had a Colnago fail! I've had team mates and friends break high end Kellogg's, Quintana Roo, Basso, Motobecane, Gitane, Paramount, Gios, Raleigh...Jeezus. I'm loosing it...exactly 'what' does a guy have to buy to get steel not fail?

    So...using that thing called the intarwebz...

    I can type in almost any manufacture's name and the words crack or failure or split or...whatever and come up with pages of data and pictures of 'good' steel lugged frames that were silver solders and ended up in the trash pile.

    No. You're right. It's not a war. It's a slaughter. Guess 'who' the lamb is. Really, Tom... maybe there's more carbon frames busted because...oh...that's about all that gets sold these days. and for the last 15 years or more. OK...there are some aluminum and Ti stuff going out the doors, but the numbers for steel? Statistically insignificant?

    Good for you for still riding at 72!

    531 lugged (investment cast BB shell) touring frame popped up on one search...first image. LOL!

    http://pardo.net/bike/pic/fail-001/frame-trek-1985ish-seat-tube-at-bb-IMAG0079.jpg

    Yeah...steel is real...about that...
     
Loading...
Loading...