Vibration damping

Dan said:

One day I was riding my bike here in Morgan Hill and encountered some of the
guys from Specialized. I asked one of them about the Zertz they had on their
bikes and he went into marketing speak telling me how great they are. I
asked if he was in engineering or marketing and he said marketing. I was and
am skeptical.

Looong debates about this exact topic have occurred on this topic.
Expect another flame war to erupt...

Quoted message said:

Their website
http://www.specialized.com/bc/techlab_zertz.jsp?a=b
provides a spectral chart (click "how it works" and then "see chart"😉 which
compares axle vibration to seat post vibration.

The main problem that I see with the chart is that it compares vibration at
two locations on the bike rather than vibration with and without the Zertz.
I would like to see a comparison between vibration at the seat clamp and
handlebars (maybe even at the pedals) with and without the Zertz. I would
think that there will be less vibration, as shown in their chart, at the
seatpost compared to the axle whether or not there are Zertz.

You're looking for insertion loss; they've given transmission loss. They
could even compare transmission loss for the Zertz and non-Zertz case.
But without a baseline, the chart is not informative.

The chart is also misleading due to the omission of other primary
vibration isolating components (the saddle and the tyre). Even if the
Zertz help isolate axle -> seatpost transmission, their effects are
probably swamped by the effect of tyre and saddle.

Quoted message said:

My opinion is that the inserts are market hype. Does anybody have an opinion
or better yet, additional objective information?

Sorry, no test data on their claims. Heck, I haven't even ridden a
Zertz-equipped bike, although I have been very happy with the two
Specialized bikes I have owned and I've been very happy with their
customer service. But the claims they make and the way they present the
data instill scepticism.

PS. The earlier thread can be seen at:

http://tinyurl.com/d4f94 (points to Google groups archive)

And the entire Witchcraft paper from Specialized, which includes a fuzzy
copy of the chart that you found, can be found at:

http://www.specialized.com/OA_MEDIA/pdf/Witchcraft.pdf

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

dvt said:

And the entire Witchcraft paper from Specialized, which includes a fuzzy
copy of the chart that you found, can be found at:

http://www.specialized.com/OA_MEDIA/pdf/Witchcraft.pdf

Interestingly, one of the pagan cyclists I know finds the Zertz
marketing hype unconvincing to say the least. His principle objection
is the same as mine: Unless you know that the range of frequencies
for which the Zertz are effective will really be present in a given
bike when it's ridden, it's impossible to even state if they have
something to do...and neither the effectiveness range nor any test to
see if that range was present on some bikes in actual usage was
provided. Even if they do something, it's still not clear that their
effect will produce any benefit for the rider.

All that Specialized has provided is smoke and mirrors. My instincts
tell me that when smoke and mirrors are being employed, there's
something being hidden...and it's usually fungible with a big sign
that says "scam".
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Werehatrack <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

dvt said:

And the entire Witchcraft paper from Specialized, which includes a
fuzzy copy of the chart that you found, can be found at:

http://www.specialized.com/OA_MEDIA/pdf/Witchcraft.pdf

Interestingly, one of the pagan cyclists I know finds the Zertz
marketing hype unconvincing to say the least. His principle objection
is the same as mine: Unless you know that the range of frequencies
for which the Zertz are effective will really be present in a given
bike when it's ridden, it's impossible to even state if they have
something to do...and neither the effectiveness range nor any test to
see if that range was present on some bikes in actual usage was
provided. Even if they do something, it's still not clear that their
effect will produce any benefit for the rider.

All that Specialized has provided is smoke and mirrors. My instincts
tell me that when smoke and mirrors are being employed, there's
something being hidden...and it's usually fungible with a big sign
that says "scam".

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers really don't have
the right story. Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and should be
severely disciplined.

So, who is the taker out there to make the bold step forward and put his/her
reputation on the line, expertise on the table, and undress this falsehood.

Don't you brave souls all run to the phone, now ...
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine
*******

La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.

Sandy said:

Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and should be
severely disciplined.

Not in the US. Defrauding the public is the common path to fame and
fortune... whether in business or politics.

Still, I'd be willing to give it a go... so long as you pay for the
legal expenses.

Sandy said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam".

The data is not a lie, as far as I can tell.

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

Sandy said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Werehatrack <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

dvt said:

And the entire Witchcraft paper from Specialized, which includes a
fuzzy copy of the chart that you found, can be found at:

http://www.specialized.com/OA_MEDIA/pdf/Witchcraft.pdf

Interestingly, one of the pagan cyclists I know finds the Zertz
marketing hype unconvincing to say the least. His principle objection
is the same as mine: Unless you know that the range of frequencies
for which the Zertz are effective will really be present in a given
bike when it's ridden, it's impossible to even state if they have
something to do...and neither the effectiveness range nor any test to
see if that range was present on some bikes in actual usage was
provided. Even if they do something, it's still not clear that their
effect will produce any benefit for the rider.

All that Specialized has provided is smoke and mirrors. My instincts
tell me that when smoke and mirrors are being employed, there's
something being hidden...and it's usually fungible with a big sign
that says "scam".

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers really don't have
the right story. Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and should be
severely disciplined.

So, who is the taker out there to make the bold step forward and put his/her
reputation on the line, expertise on the table, and undress this falsehood.

Don't you brave souls all run to the phone, now ...
--

The American courts ruled long ago that advertisers were allowed a
certain amount of "puffery"; i.e., claims made without "proof". "Tastes
just like butter", "best tasting", etc., are examples of this. So long
as Specialized doesn't make claims that fall outside of this (e.g.,
"Zertz vibration reduction has _proven_ health benefits"😉, they are on
safe legal ground.

All that doesn't mean I (and others) can't yell "[censored]!" when we see
it.

"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

One day I was riding my bike here in Morgan Hill and

encountered some of the

Quoted message said:

guys from Specialized. I asked one of them about the Zertz they

had on their

Quoted message said:

bikes and he went into marketing speak telling me how great

they are. I

Quoted message said:

asked if he was in engineering or marketing and he said

marketing. I was and

Quoted message said:

am skeptical.

Their website
http://www.specialized.com/bc/techlab_zertz.jsp?a=b
provides a spectral chart (click "how it works" and then "see

chart"😉 which

Quoted message said:

compares axle vibration to seat post vibration.

The main problem that I see with the chart is that it compares

vibration at

Quoted message said:

two locations on the bike rather than vibration with and

without the Zertz.

Quoted message said:

I would like to see a comparison between vibration at the seat

clamp and

Quoted message said:

handlebars (maybe even at the pedals) with and without the

Zertz. I would

Quoted message said:

think that there will be less vibration, as shown in their

chart, at the

Quoted message said:

seatpost compared to the axle whether or not there are Zertz.

Secondly, when I think of road buzz I think of frequencies

below 50 Hz and

Quoted message said:

the chart shows little if any damping in this range. I know

that higher

Quoted message said:

frequencies can cause problems but I have always associated

higher

Quoted message said:

frequencies with things like the numb hands I get when using a

palm sander.

Quoted message said:

This tone generator:
http://www.world-voices.com/software/nchtone.html
can give you a good "feel" for the frequencies involved.

I would guess that the higher frequencies could be more

effectively

Quoted message said:

controlled with the tires than with the inserts.

My opinion is that the inserts are market hype. Does anybody

have an opinion

Quoted message said:

or better yet, additional objective information?

The animation on the website was enough to convince me. Those
50Hz vibrations have always been a problem, and the Zerts will
make it so I don't have to strap 4' TubeTraps to my frame
anymore.

I often wonder how I can ride my very conventional bike for more
than a few miles without being pounded to death by the road. I
did a one day Seattle-to-Portland many years ago on a first
generation Cannondale with steel forks and a rock-hard frame.
The kind of frame that makes the CF crowd cower in fear. The
only thing that hurt at the end of the day was my butt where the
seams from my shorts wore holes in my flesh. I wore better
shorts the next time around. -- Jay Beattie.

Quoted message said:

Sandy said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers really don't have
the right story. Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and should be
severely disciplined.

Or, maybe it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference, but the company
can get either buyer testimonials or "test data" to justify their claims.
Companies can get such data and testimonials for all sorts of products,
from cancer cures to miracle carburetors.

Caveat emptor.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Some people used to claim that, if enough monkeys sat in front
_`\(,_ | of enough typewriters and typed long enough, eventually one of
(_)/ (_) | them would reproduce the collected works of Shakespeare. The
internet has proven this not to be the case.

Sandy said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers really don't have
the right story. Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and should be
severely disciplined.

So, who is the taker out there to make the bold step forward and put his/her
reputation on the line, expertise on the table, and undress this falsehood.

Don't you brave souls all run to the phone, now ...

The FTC only cares if claims are fraudulent, not if the item sold is
merely useless or worthless. Specialized has cleverly avoided
actually saying anything substantive in their description of the
feature, and (at least for the fork and stay versions) they don't
supply it as a part that can be added to a different bike and tested
independently as far as I can tell. Even for the seapost and stem
versions, you'd need to have identical Zertz-less components to swap
in and out for comparison in order to test it, and I rather doubt that
Specialized is going to supply those bits. As a result, the claims
made on their website are hard to either verify or disprove.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

dvt said:

Sandy said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam".

The data is not a lie, as far as I can tell.

Precisely. I could legally and truthfully claim my frames "damp 50%
more vibration than Brand X". The fact that this makes no difference
wouldn't enter into the equation - other than on a moral basis, which
is what keeps me from doing so (better to sleep well than to sell the
occasional extra frame due to hype).

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

David L. Johnson said:

Quoted message said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am
truly surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice
little call to put an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the
naysayers really don't have the right story. Either the stuff
works, and Specialized is entitled to market it as they see fit, or
they are defrauding the public, and should be severely disciplined.

Quoted message said:

Or, maybe it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference, but the
company can get either buyer testimonials or "test data" to justify
their claims. Companies can get such data and testimonials for all
sorts of products, from cancer cures to miracle carburetors.

I was given a set of Bontrager handlebar dampers that look like
elongated bar end plugs made of soft rubber with "swirl" spokes
between inner and outer mass. The demo was that a bare set of
handlebars dropped on the concrete floor clanged loudly and with the
plugs in, only the high frequencies remained.

What was overlooked is that my bars with a full wrap of Cinelli bar
tape don't clang at all, high or low frequency. I'm amazed how these
marketing guys come up with this stuff. These bar plugs are claimed
to insulate the rider from road texture generated buzz as in:

http://tinyurl.com/7xxok

This is probably the same spiel they give for the damping of carbon
fiber frames.

Jobst Brandt

Sandy said:

Quoted message said:

All that Specialized has provided is smoke and mirrors. My instincts
tell me that when smoke and mirrors are being employed, there's
something being hidden...and it's usually fungible with a big sign
that says "scam".

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers really don't have
the right story. Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and should be
severely disciplined.

So, who is the taker out there to make the bold step forward and put his/her
reputation on the line, expertise on the table, and undress this falsehood.

Don't you brave souls all run to the phone, now ...

The FTC has nothing to say about this issue.

Specialized's claims were carefully crafted by crafty wordsmiths, and
they make no fraudulent claims or deceptions as the FTC defines them.
If they say that their Zertz damp some vibration at the top of the seat
tube, compared to the source in the BB, I believe them. Of course, that
may not have any effect on the vibrational spectrum that the rider
meets. The rider always wears pants (with some notable exceptions
http://www.barewitness.org/worldnakedbikeride04.html ) and often gloves,
usually seated on a flexible saddle.

Certainly, Specialized manages to convey the impression that their bikes
are more comfortable than others. That is safe because comfort is a
highly subjective matter. It is fraudulent in a different sense, a lie
of the second kind. If it was possible to prohibit this and yet retain
free speech (and it is not) virually all advertising firms would vanish
in a puff of smoke and a crashing of breaking mirrors.

Doesn't this sort of thing happen in France, Sandy? I don't think you
have to think long or hard to come up with an example of misleading
puffery in L'Express.

--
Ted Bennett

Mark Hickey said:

dvt said:

Sandy said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am truly
surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little call to put
an end to this "scam".

The data is not a lie, as far as I can tell.

Precisely. I could legally and truthfully claim my frames "damp 50%
more vibration than Brand X". The fact that this makes no difference
wouldn't enter into the equation - other than on a moral basis, which
is what keeps me from doing so (better to sleep well than to sell the
occasional extra frame due to hype).

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

Oh, man am I happy to see this. I might even consider purchasing one of
your frames now. If only other sellers would adopt this attitude, we
could free up a lot of marketers for productive work.

--
Ted Bennett

Jay Beattie said:

The
only thing that hurt at the end of the day was my butt where the
seams from my shorts wore holes in my flesh. I wore better
shorts the next time around. -- Jay Beattie.

I'd recommend shorts without dampening.

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

Ted Bennett said:

Oh, man am I happy to see this. I might even consider purchasing one of
your frames now. If only other sellers would adopt this attitude, we
could free up a lot of marketers for productive work.

I have one of Mark's frames, and am very happy with it -- except that it
keeps wanting to veer right on me....

So, Mark, is that why you don't sell track frames, that they have to turn
left all the time?

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "Business!" cried the Ghost. "Mankind was my business. The
_`\(,_ | common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance,
(_)/ (_) | and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my
trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my
business!" --Dickens, "A Christmas Carol"

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David L. Johnson said:

Quoted message said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am
truly surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice
little call to put an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the
naysayers really don't have the right story. Either the stuff
works, and Specialized is entitled to market it as they see fit, or
they are defrauding the public, and should be severely disciplined.

Quoted message said:

Or, maybe it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference, but the
company can get either buyer testimonials or "test data" to justify
their claims. Companies can get such data and testimonials for all
sorts of products, from cancer cures to miracle carburetors.

I was given a set of Bontrager handlebar dampers that look like
elongated bar end plugs made of soft rubber with "swirl" spokes
between inner and outer mass. The demo was that a bare set of
handlebars dropped on the concrete floor clanged loudly and with the
plugs in, only the high frequencies remained.

What was overlooked is that my bars with a full wrap of Cinelli bar
tape don't clang at all, high or low frequency. I'm amazed how these
marketing guys come up with this stuff. These bar plugs are claimed
to insulate the rider from road texture generated buzz as in:

http://tinyurl.com/7xxok

This is probably the same spiel they give for the damping of carbon
fiber frames.

Jobst Brandt

I think you are onto something good here Jobst. If anybody is tempted to
fork out big bucks for a frame with gimmicky dampers they should wrap the
chainstays and seatpost of their old bike with bar tape and see if they can
detect a difference. The bar wrap will probably damp more vibrations than
Zertz.

Dans le message de
news:[email hidden],
Ron Ruff <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Sandy said:

Either the stuff works, and Specialized is entitled to
market it as they see fit, or they are defrauding the public, and
should be severely disciplined.

Not in the US. Defrauding the public is the common path to fame and
fortune... whether in business or politics.

Still, I'd be willing to give it a go... so long as you pay for the
legal expenses.

I'll cover the dime to call the FTC - they take it from there. No legal
expenses involved, unless you were to make defamatory statements you can't
prove.
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine
*******

La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.

Dans le message de
news:[email hidden],
Ozark Bicycle <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Sandy said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Werehatrack <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 12:36:36 -0500, dvt <[email hidden]> wrote:

> And the entire Witchcraft paper from Specialized, which includes a
> fuzzy copy of the chart that you found, can be found at:
>
> http://www.specialized.com/OA_MEDIA/pdf/Witchcraft.pdf

Interestingly, one of the pagan cyclists I know finds the Zertz
marketing hype unconvincing to say the least. His principle
objection is the same as mine: Unless you know that the range of
frequencies for which the Zertz are effective will really be
present in a given bike when it's ridden, it's impossible to even
state if they have something to do...and neither the effectiveness
range nor any test to see if that range was present on some bikes
in actual usage was provided. Even if they do something, it's
still not clear that their effect will produce any benefit for the
rider.

All that Specialized has provided is smoke and mirrors. My
instincts tell me that when smoke and mirrors are being employed,
there's something being hidden...and it's usually fungible with a
big sign that says "scam".

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am
truly surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little
call to put an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers
really don't have the right story. Either the stuff works, and
Specialized is entitled to market it as they see fit, or they are
defrauding the public, and should be severely disciplined.

So, who is the taker out there to make the bold step forward and put
his/her reputation on the line, expertise on the table, and undress
this falsehood.

Don't you brave souls all run to the phone, now ...
--

The American courts ruled long ago that advertisers were allowed a
certain amount of "puffery"; i.e., claims made without "proof".

Long ago is exactly right. Before the legislation and regulation (US Code,
CFR, myriad individual state control). Your short course in business law
gave you an inadequate grasp of this subject - sorry.

Quoted message said:

"Tastes just like butter", "best tasting", etc., are examples of
this. So long as Specialized doesn't make claims that fall outside of
this (e.g., "Zertz vibration reduction has _proven_ health
benefits"😉, they are on safe legal ground.

All that doesn't mean I (and others) can't yell "[censored]!" when we
see it.

But, where's the expert here to disprove it ? Disprove, not comment.
There's a significant difference.
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine
*******

La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Werehatrack <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Sandy said:

With all the disbelief expressed this thread, and previously, I am
truly surprised no one is brave enough to give the FTC a nice little
call to put an end to this "scam". Unless, of course, the naysayers
really don't have the right story. Either the stuff works, and
Specialized is entitled to market it as they see fit, or they are
defrauding the public, and should be severely disciplined.

So, who is the taker out there to make the bold step forward and put
his/her reputation on the line, expertise on the table, and undress
this falsehood.

Don't you brave souls all run to the phone, now ...

The FTC only cares if claims are fraudulent, not if the item sold is
merely useless or worthless. Specialized has cleverly avoided
actually saying anything substantive in their description of the
feature, and (at least for the fork and stay versions) they don't
supply it as a part that can be added to a different bike and tested
independently as far as I can tell. Even for the seapost and stem
versions, you'd need to have identical Zertz-less components to swap
in and out for comparison in order to test it, and I rather doubt that
Specialized is going to supply those bits. As a result, the claims
made on their website are hard to either verify or disprove.

Looking at your last sentence, it seems that we simply don't know the
answer, right ? That the /opinions/ offered against the Specialized claims
are no more substantial than the claims themselves. And, that they are not
untrue, false, misleading, etc. OK.
--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine
*******

La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.