Serotta Electronic

[jpw]

http://serotta.com/2012-legend-se-electronic-routing-with-f3-fork/


:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused: :confused::confused:

speak to me.

[Bruce K]

Looks like a "compact geometry" style custom frame order gone bad.

Short seat tube and a moderate top tube (my Meivici is 50 X 54.5 so this is shorter vertically and longer horizontally). Looks like it would fit someone around 5'-9" or maybe a tad taller (I am 5'-8").

No cable stops for mechanical shifting and I didn't actually see a way to mount the FD either.

If interested I would contact Serotta and see what's up.

BK

[jpw]

Why does this frame even exist?

I thought Serotta had made definitive statements against making metal frames with extra holes.

[jlwdm]

Looks like a "compact geometry" style custom frame order gone bad.

Short seat tube and a moderate top tube (my Meivici is 50 X 54.5 so this is shorter vertically and longer horizontally). Looks like it would fit someone around 5'-9" or maybe a tad taller (I am 5'-8").....


BK

Hard to say gone bad without knowing what client needed. Not huge amount of slope to frame. Built for a rider with shorter legs and longer torso than you or a rider who uses lots of drop?

Jeff

[victoryfactory]

Why does this frame even exist?

I thought Serotta had made definitive statements against making metal frames with extra holes.

Maybe because they are evolving? Their catalog in ~1999 stated that
they saw no need to go to 1-1/8" head tubes but they implied they
would do it if the customer insisted.

VF

[jpw]

http://serotta.com/bicycles/viaggio-se/

"But don’t ask for…
Internal electronic routing. We don’t recommend drilling extra holes in metal frames, particularly on a travel bike. It’s simply not a good idea to weaken a frame. Take it as a bit of wisdom from a company that has built thousands of frames over four decades. The nicest way to enjoy your bicycle is to be able to ride it with everything working. We’re not being old fashioned, just wise."

[BumbleBeeDave]

Hard to say gone bad without knowing what client needed. Not huge amount of slope to frame. Built for a rider with shorter legs and longer torso than you or a rider who uses lots of drop?

Jeff

The electronic routing, or speculation about a bad fit? We know absolutely nothing about the person who originally ordered the bike or any other circumstances of the original order or reasons they may have ended up unloading the frame in the "garage."

I am curious about the routing . . .

BBD

[jpw]

The electronic routing, or speculation about a bad fit? We know absolutely nothing about the person who originally ordered the bike or any other circumstances of the original order or reasons they may have ended up unloading the frame in the "garage."

I am curious about the routing . . .

BBD

My curiosity too is that it has internal routing, not the geometry, and not that it's in the garage.

[pbarry]

There's clearly a hole near the FD mounting area.


JPW
"Why does this frame even exist?

I thought Serotta had made definitive statements against making metal frames with extra holes."

[jpw]

There's clearly a hole near the FD mounting area.


JPW
"Why does this frame even exist?

I thought Serotta had made definitive statements against making metal frames with extra holes."

Yes.

[pbarry]

Maybe it's "the One" that survived 60,000 + 1 cycles ... :hello:

[oldpotatoe]

http://serotta.com/bicycles/viaggio-se/

"But don’t ask for…
Internal electronic routing. We don’t recommend drilling extra holes in metal frames, particularly on a travel bike. It’s simply not a good idea to weaken a frame. Take it as a bit of wisdom from a company that has built thousands of frames over four decades. The nicest way to enjoy your bicycle is to be able to ride it with everything working. We’re not being old fashioned, just wise."

Legend different tubes than the proto/fondo?

But it does 'seem' confusing, considering the above quote from the website. 'Somebody' asked and got it, plumbed for electronic, as 'unwise' as serotta says it may be.

[ergott]

Besides to obvious discussion about the holes in the frame I guess that's a tri bike. SA is way steep.

[victoryfactory]

Legend different tubes than the proto/fondo?

But it does 'seem' confusing, considering the above quote from the website. 'Somebody' asked and got it, plumbed for electronic, as 'unwise' as serotta says it may be.

Serotta also had reluctant things to say about carbon before they dove in.
It's just a long time company quirk. Initial stated distrust of new developments, followed by jumping in to the fray with both feet.

My opinion is that we are seeing the actual personality of the company founder here
and that's OK with me. I create catalogs and web pages and print for my company and I can tell you from experience that as soon as anything is finally
published, I have changed my mind about a few of the details and want to redo them. It's called innovation and growth and is a sign that the management is engaged and evolving.

VF

[Bruce K]

Gone bad = customer bailed

Nothing more than that

BK

[rustylion]

The frame set in this thread went up for sale in the Serotta Garage recently. I can see it has caused confusion out there...and even with me. So, I went ahead and circled up with Ben today to get the history on this issue and this frame set.

Let me first say that the Serotta Garage gives Serotta Factory Professionals out in the field the opportunity to keep their inventory fresh. If they have new frame sets of older product models, they can choose to replace them with newer models. The frame sets, like this one, that they return to us get inspected, refinished and then listed on the Garage.

At this moment, I don't know who returned this frame set to us recently but it was built at the time that the market was clamoring for internal routing for electronic components. I was not here then but Ben tells me the company was quickly deluged with potential customers who wanted to order new bikes for electronic components as well as existing owners who wanted us to retrofit their frame.

Ben tells me the gut check he, Patrick, Mike and others had here was that this was not a very good idea. However, the market (aka all of you) was pushing hard so Ben/Patrick took two actions: 1. send frames out to Mike Lopez in Poway for testing and 2. design a work around solution that could be implemented immediately albeit safely.

The work around solution we introduced then is to drill the frame in the seat tube for the front derailleur cabling and the chain stay for the rear derailleur cabling. We also provide mounting under the bottom bracket for the battery. What we did not do then - and still do not do - is drill the downtube. The top of the downtube is one of the highest stress points on the frame and both Ben/Patrick/Mike/others felt that introducing a hole(s) anywhere on the downtube increased the risk of frame damage and/or failure.

Subsequently, Mike's testing happened to validate those thoughts by showing that our drilled downtube frames (even if reinforced) structurally failed. Drilled seat tube and chain stay frames with non-drilled downtubes passed testing. Because of this, we have never modified their original design position on drilling Ti frames for electronic cable routing: we do not drill the downtube. Yes, of course, it is true that we could and yes, it is true that others are already doing it but that is not the point; our test data shows that just because we can does not mean we should. We are not saying we are right and everyone else is wrong. We are just offering an explaination (since you asked) why we did what we did and do what we do...

The Garage frame in question was one of the frames Patrick and the team were building concurrently while Mike's Poway testing was being conducted. It is built as described above so downtube cabling will have to be routed externally if you buy it.

Mike has posted several times on the procedure we use to test Ti frames and the results of the tests he did way back when to sort out what to do regarding electronic cabling. It makes sense because you have asked that we relook at this design issue again in 2013 and we will.

[pbarry]

Bill, thanks for the extended reply! This topic has been going around the forum a fair bit recently, so your complete take on this is much appreciated. I applaud the homework you've done, and respect your conservative approach to new technology, especially frame modifications. :beer:

[jpw]

The frame set in this thread went up for sale in the Serotta Garage recently. I can see it has caused confusion out there...and even with me. So, I went ahead and circled up with Ben today to get the history on this issue and this frame set.

Let me first say that the Serotta Garage gives Serotta Factory Professionals out in the field the opportunity to keep their inventory fresh. If they have new frame sets of older product models, they can choose to replace them with newer models. The frame sets, like this one, that they return to us get inspected, refinished and then listed on the Garage.

At this moment, I don't know who returned this frame set to us recently but it was built at the time that the market was clamoring for internal routing for electronic components. I was not here then but Ben tells me the company was quickly deluged with potential customers who wanted to order new bikes for electronic components as well as existing owners who wanted us to retrofit their frame.

Ben tells me the gut check he, Patrick, Mike and others had here was that this was not a very good idea. However, the market (aka all of you) was pushing hard so Ben/Patrick took two actions: 1. send frames out to Mike Lopez in Poway for testing and 2. design a work around solution that could be implemented immediately albeit safely.

The work around solution we introduced then is to drill the frame in the seat tube for the front derailleur cabling and the chain stay for the rear derailleur cabling. We also provide mounting under the bottom bracket for the battery. What we did not do then - and still do not do - is drill the downtube. The top of the downtube is one of the highest stress points on the frame and both Ben/Patrick/Mike/others felt that introducing a hole(s) anywhere on the downtube increased the risk of frame damage and/or failure.

Subsequently, Mike's testing happened to validate those thoughts by showing that our drilled downtube frames (even if reinforced) structurally failed. Drilled seat tube and chain stay frames with non-drilled downtubes passed testing. Because of this, we have never modified their original design position on drilling Ti frames for electronic cable routing: we do not drill the downtube. Yes, of course, it is true that we could and yes, it is true that others are already doing it but that is not the point; our test data shows that just because we can does not mean we should. We are not saying we are right and everyone else is wrong. We are just offering an explaination (since you asked) why we did what we did and do what we do...

The Garage frame in question was one of the frames Patrick and the team were building concurrently while Mike's Poway testing was being conducted. It is built as described above so downtube cabling will have to be routed externally if you buy it.

Mike has posted several times on the procedure we use to test Ti frames and the results of the tests he did way back when to sort out what to do regarding electronic cabling. It makes sense because you have asked that we relook at this design issue again in 2013 and we will.


Great communication.

[false_Aest]

Maybe because they are evolving? Their catalog in ~1999 stated that
they saw no need to go to 1-1/8" head tubes but they implied they
would do it if the customer insisted.

VF


Bike shop I worked at once called up Serotta and asked about getting a compact frame.... "We will never do that."


Also, I REALLY appreciate RustyLion's response.

[TPetsch]

Great communication.

Plus 1 :)

[oldpotatoe]

Bill, thanks for the extended reply! This topic has been going around the forum a fair bit recently, so your complete take on this is much appreciated. I applaud the homework you've done, and respect your conservative approach to new technology, especially frame modifications. :beer:

or

[mvrider]

Great response!

Am I correct that there is one exception to this rule:

What we did not do then - and still do not do - is drill the downtube. The top of the downtube is one of the highest stress points on the frame and both Ben/Patrick/Mike/others felt that introducing a hole(s) anywhere on the downtube increased the risk of frame damage and/or failure.

... for water bottle bosses?

http://modikoso.com/nav/documents/framebuildnotes/page20/Picture%20010.jpg

Perhaps these are far enough down to avoid the high-stress area?

[ergott]

The work around solution we introduced then is to drill the frame in the seat tube for the front derailleur cabling and the chain stay for the rear derailleur cabling. We also provide mounting under the bottom bracket for the battery. What we did not do then - and still do not do - is drill the downtube. The top of the downtube is one of the highest stress points on the frame and both Ben/Patrick/Mike/others felt that introducing a hole(s) anywhere on the downtube increased the risk of frame damage and/or failure.


What am I missing here? You can drill the DT and rear stay for the wires. Where do the wires go into the frame for them to exit out of those places?

[znfdl]

What am I missing here? You can drill the DT and rear stay for the wires. Where do the wires go into the frame for them to exit out of those places?

Eric, I was just about to ask the same question....

Rusty, curious if you did any testing on steel frames.

[dd74]

Great response!

Am I correct that there is one exception to this rule:



... for water bottle bosses?

http://modikoso.com/nav/documents/framebuildnotes/page20/Picture%20010.jpg

Perhaps these are far enough down to avoid the high-stress area?
Perhaps you are correct. As well, a hole for a single wire will be much smaller and on top of that, gusseted. More importantly, these holes should not be at the top of the downtube, but more likely near the first water bottle boss or between the two bosses. The wire for the shifters will be near the top of downtube, but not at the very top where, for example, cable stops are welded.

Though I'm no engineer, I would think there's less likely to be structural compromise if the holes are drilled farther from the tube ends, which is what most manufacturers do.

Additionally, I don't think drilling would be a good idea with really light carbon steels like Life or Spirit. Ti may be stronger as well as the strongest, which is stainless steel, so it's no wonder manufacturers who have been advertising that they drill their metal frames, seem to do so only with Ti and SS.

By the way, props from here as well to Rusty Lion for his response.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . "the top of the downtube" to mean the part up by the head tube junction, not the "top" as in the top side of the tube in general where the bottle bosses are.

Keep in mind I am NOT an engineer. But it made sense to me because the "top" part up by the head tube junction would seem to indeed be subjected to a lot of stress whenever you stand up and yank back and forth on the bars, as in sprinting. Or even when you're just pedaling hard sitting down the tendency is to yank back and forth on the bars, repeatedly subjecting the head tube-top tube and down tube-head tube junctions to flexing stress. The shearing forces at those two tube junctions would be pretty high and mostly bearing on the welds--and the tubing within a few inches of the junction. The stress on the tubing in general would be much less farther down the tube where the bottle bosses are and less likely to start propagation of a crack from those holes.

Considered from that point of view, it would make more sense to me to somehow drill a hole in the head tube itself and route the wire past the steerer tube and then down the interior of the downtube. The head tube is generally heavier gauge tubing and would share it's stress with the steerer tube as you yank back and forth on the bars.

BBD

[gdw]

I seem to remember the English mtb framemakers experienced problems with cracked down tubes in the early 90's when they started to add holes and bosses for Crud Guards. For those of you who only ride the road, Crud Guards are a plastic shield mounted close to the head tube that prevents mud from being kicked back into the riders face. The holes were drilled in the thinner section of the down tube beyond the thicker butted end. Apparently the area is subject to more stress than the builders realized and the down tubes cracked after very little use.

[pbarry]

Bill was speaking about the now-commonplace internal routing for electronic shifting, at the top of the down tube, near the down tube/head tube junction.

Cheers

Great response!

Am I correct that there is one exception to this rule:



... for water bottle bosses?

http://modikoso.com/nav/documents/framebuildnotes/page20/Picture%20010.jpg

Perhaps these are far enough down to avoid the high-stress area?

[pbarry]

. . . "the top of the downtube" to mean the part up by the head tube junction, not the "top" as in the top side of the tube in general where the bottle bosses are.

Keep in mind I am NOT an engineer. But it made sense to me because the "top" part up by the head tube junction would seem to indeed be subjected to a lot of stress whenever you stand up and yank back and forth on the bars, as in sprinting. Or even when you're just pedaling hard sitting down the tendency is to yank back and forth on the bars, repeatedly subjecting the head tube-top tube and down tube-head tube junctions to flexing stress. The shearing forces at those two tube junctions would be pretty high and mostly bearing on the welds--and the tubing within a few inches of the junction. The stress on the tubing in general would be much less farther down the tube where the bottle bosses are and less likely to start propagation of a crack from those holes.

Considered from that point of view, it would make more sense to me to somehow drill a hole in the head tube itself and route the wire past the steerer tube and then down the interior of the downtube. The head tube is generally heavier gauge tubing and would share it's stress with the steerer tube as you yank back and forth on the bars.

BBD

You got it. There are already purge holes in tig welded frames, and lugged frames have the complete I.D. of the tubing to work with.This is Rob English's solution:

[dd74]

Bill was speaking about the now-commonplace internal routing for electronic shifting, at the top of the down tube, near the down tube/head tube junction.

Cheers
Neither of which I've seen. The drilling has taken place near the water bottle bosses on the down side of the down tube and nowhere near the the top of the down tube, but some centimeters down from the top. That's "now-commonplace" in almost every frame, regardless of material.

[oldpotatoe]

Neither of which I've seen. The drilling has taken place near the water bottle bosses on the down side of the down tube and nowhere near the the top of the down tube, but some centimeters down from the top. That's "now-commonplace" in almost every frame, regardless of material.

they are still searching for their place in the sun..still searching.

[Tim Porter]

Just for reference, because this isn't an all titanium frame, here's where Serotta is putting the holes in its Ottrotts (new bike, delivered two days ago, so current):

http://i1285.photobucket.com/albums/a583/porterphoto1/file_zps8a0463af.jpg

[oldpotatoe]

Just for reference, because this isn't an all titanium frame, here's where Serotta is putting the holes in its Ottrotts (new bike, delivered two days ago, so current):

http://i1285.photobucket.com/albums/a583/porterphoto1/file_zps8a0463af.jpg

but, but, but, isn't that lug titanium? Top of 'downtube', high stress area?

[Tim Porter]

It's a puzzle . . . . I kinda don't think my new bike's going to self-destruct, however.

[victoryfactory]

Presumably they judged the Ti lug backed up by the
carbon (thicker) differently from a regular steel or Ti tube (thinner)

VF

[oldpotatoe]

It's a puzzle . . . . I kinda don't think my new bike's going to self-destruct, however.

This has been an interesting thread. I don't think your frame will have any problem, nor the frame in the serotta garage that's plumbed for electronic nor any of the scads of frames out there of various materials(including titanium horrors, how exotic!), plumbed for electronic. It's a few reinforced holes, small to boot, in a very tough material.

But their insistence that drilling the down tube will cause almost certain failure..then showing various frames drilled in various places, including on the downtube..well, it's a confusing message in this age of information.

[soulspinner]

[QUOTE=victoryfactory;1303476]Presumably they judged the Ti lug backed up by the
carbon (thicker) differently from a regular steel or Ti tube (thinner)

I think Victory Factory hit this one dead on. Its likely the Serotta test exceeds needs of most cycling applications real world. Makes me happy to stick with mechanical components.

[pbarry]

The information age is grand; the hard part is paying close attention to detail. The Ottrott is not a "metal frame". As VF said: it has carbon tubes with Ti lugs.

Besides the Huang image of the Eriksen in another thread, here's another example of DT routing. There were many "metal" frames with similar placement at the show.

[BumbleBeeDave]

This has been an interesting thread. I don't think your frame will have any problem, nor the frame in the serotta garage that's plumbed for electronic nor any of the scads of frames out their of various materials(including titanium horrors, how exotic!), plumbed for electronic. It's a few reinforced holes, small to boot, in a very tough material.

But their insistence that drilling the down tube will cause almost certain failure..then showing various frames drilled in various places, including on the downtube..well, it's a confusing message in this age of information.

. . . that your comments seem almost as much about nitpicking on Serotta as they are about whether drilling tubes for electronic really is a good idea or not. Would you be making these same comments if this thread was about any other manufacturer?

As others have commented, Serotta has traditionally had a conservative approach to new technical developments, but then jumped in trying to do it better once the basic concept had been proven sound. They are not early adopters, but I don't think that's a bad thing. I also don't tend to be an early adopter personally. Let the other guys hit the big potholes first.

I'm no engineer. Nor do I own a bike company. So take the following for what they are worth in that context . . . ;)

--Without careful analysis, it seems like a bad idea on its face to start drilling holes in tubes under prolonged flexing stress--beyond bottle boss holes, whose efficacy has been long ago proven in relation to long-term failure. I would think additional such holes could create stress risers that could lead to long term failure no matter how they are reinforced. I'd want to be REAL careful before starting to do this willy-nilly.

--If I owned a bike company--particularly one that is not flush with extra cash right now--I would be very careful about jumping on some feature bandwagon that might result in my getting a large number of warranty repairs coming in the door suddenly a couple of years down the road.

--As a rider, if I'm spending $4-7k on a frame I would rather not have it fail a couple of years down the road because of what it seems is essentially a cosmetic feature.

BBD

[znfdl]

. . . that your comments seem almost as much about nitpicking on Serotta as they are about whether drilling tubes for electronic really is a good idea or not. Would you be making these same comments if this thread was about any other manufacturer?BBD

Dave: I would not say nit-picking but looking for a consistent message.

I know that my steel frame (drilled for Di2) was reinforced. The builder also said that they would not retrofit a frame, bacuse they cannot reinforce the area around the drilled hole. This is a consistent message, new frames yes, old frames no.

[oldpotatoe]

. . . that your comments seem almost as much about nitpicking on Serotta as they are about whether drilling tubes for electronic really is a good idea or not. Would you be making these same comments if this thread was about any other manufacturer?

As others have commented, Serotta has traditionally had a conservative approach to new technical developments, but then jumped in trying to do it better once the basic concept had been proven sound. They are not early adopters, but I don't think that's a bad thing. I also don't tend to be an early adopter personally. Let the other guys hit the big potholes first.

I'm no engineer. Nor do I own a bike company. So take the following for what they are worth in that context . . . ;)

--Without careful analysis, it seems like a bad idea on its face to start drilling holes in tubes under prolonged flexing stress--beyond bottle boss holes, whose efficacy has been long ago proven in relation to long-term failure. I would think additional such holes could create stress risers that could lead to long term failure no matter how they are reinforced. I'd want to be REAL careful before starting to do this willy-nilly.

--If I owned a bike company--particularly one that is not flush with extra cash right now--I would be very careful about jumping on some feature bandwagon that might result in my getting a large number of warranty repairs coming in the door suddenly a couple of years down the road.

--As a rider, if I'm spending $4-7k on a frame I would rather not have it fail a couple of years down the road because of what it seems is essentially a cosmetic feature.

BBD

Thanks to the above poster-nitpick vs. consistent message.

Yep. But take a trip over to the Moots vs Legend thread to the 2 or 3 gents that were 'in the market', and one other(shop guy). But I feel so special. I think because I'm a Moots dealer had something to do with what you just said. See post 43..below.
Same for any company, whether flush with cash or not, whether new or old.
Same for any rider of any frame.

In your mind, they are being careful, in some minds it looks like they can't figure out how to plumb w/o it breaking...since almost(all?) other ti frame makers are doin' this and none seem to be failing, many with tubesets manipulated/butted/swagged extensively.

[happycampyer]

My understanding from speaking to folks at Serotta is that the carbon/ti bond in the lugs of the Ottrott have tested to be stronger than ti alone. Serotta has been building Ottrotts with electronic drilling for two or so years.

I agree that clarity directly from the company would be helpful. I have been asking for a Legend with EPS for about a year or so, and as a result have had a number of one-off conversations.

My understanding is that the issue relates only to ti frames that Serotta has tested, and perhaps more specifically to Legends. That is, I'm not sure if Serotta has tested a straight-gauge tubed frame drilled for Di2/EPS (such as an eFondo or ePronto). The Legend is triple butted, swaged, etc., and it's that tube manipulation that makes a Legend ride like a Legend. A mechanical Legend passes the stress tests, but the same frame drilled for Di2/EPS makes it to say, 90k cycles. The impression I get is that Serotta can (fairly easily) build a ti frame drilled for Di2/EPS that would survive the tests, it's just that it would ride more like a Classique than a Legend.

[Climb01742]

oldpotatoe's viewpoints have, over time, added a lot to this forum. his experience lends credibility to his views. my 2 cents is, he's never crossed a line with his comments. but beyond that, since this is now 'the paceline' forum and not the serotta forum, is there even a line to cross? i hope peter keeps calling 'em like he sees 'em. his views reflect a reality in the market, maybe an uncomfortable reality, but real nevertheless.

[oldpotatoe]

oldpotatoe's viewpoints have, over time, added a lot to this forum. his experience lends credibility to his views. my 2 cents is, he's never crossed a line with his comments. but beyond that, since this is now 'the paceline' forum and not the serotta forum, is there even a line to cross? i hope peter keeps calling 'em like he sees 'em. his views reflect a reality in the market, maybe an uncomfortable reality, but real nevertheless.

Thanks but the previous 'life' of this forum is alive and well.

[crownjewelwl]

you should work for the company...that actually makes sense

My understanding from speaking to folks at Serotta is that the carbon/ti bond in the lugs of the Ottrott have tested to be stronger than ti alone. Serotta has been building Ottrotts with electronic drilling for two or so years.

I agree that clarity directly from the company would be helpful. I have been asking for a Legend with EPS for about a year or so, and as a result have had a number of one-off conversations.

My understanding is that the issue relates only to ti frames that Serotta has tested, and perhaps more specifically to Legends. That is, I'm not sure if Serotta has tested a straight-gauge tubed frame drilled for Di2/EPS (such as an eFondo or ePronto). The Legend is triple butted, swaged, etc., and it's that tube manipulation that makes a Legend ride like a Legend. A mechanical Legend passes the stress tests, but the same frame drilled for Di2/EPS makes it to say, 90k cycles. The impression I get is that Serotta can (fairly easily) build a ti frame drilled for Di2/EPS that would survive the tests, it's just that it would ride more like a Classique than a Legend.

[dd74]

The information age is grand; the hard part is paying close attention to detail. The Ottrott is not a "metal frame". As VF said: it has carbon tubes with Ti lugs.

Besides the Huang image of the Eriksen in another thread, here's another example of DT routing. There were many "metal" frames with similar placement at the show.
That's exactly where the hole shouldn't be drilled, IMO. It should be drilled farther down. In fact, I've never seen the hole on any other frame drilled so close to the weld.

[pdmtong]

. . . that your comments seem almost as much about nitpicking on Serotta as they are about whether drilling tubes for electronic really is a good idea or not. Would you be making these same comments if this thread was about any other manufacturer?

As others have commented, Serotta has traditionally had a conservative approach to new technical developments, but then jumped in trying to do it better once the basic concept had been proven sound. They are not early adopters, but I don't think that's a bad thing. I also don't tend to be an early adopter personally. Let the other guys hit the big potholes first.

I'm no engineer. Nor do I own a bike company. So take the following for what they are worth in that context . . . ;)

--Without careful analysis, it seems like a bad idea on its face to start drilling holes in tubes under prolonged flexing stress--beyond bottle boss holes, whose efficacy has been long ago proven in relation to long-term failure. I would think additional such holes could create stress risers that could lead to long term failure no matter how they are reinforced. I'd want to be REAL careful before starting to do this willy-nilly.

--If I owned a bike company--particularly one that is not flush with extra cash right now--I would be very careful about jumping on some feature bandwagon that might result in my getting a large number of warranty repairs coming in the door suddenly a couple of years down the road.

--As a rider, if I'm spending $4-7k on a frame I would rather not have it fail a couple of years down the road because of what it seems is essentially a cosmetic feature.

BBD

Peter (and I ) would say the same thing about any company that took the same hands on hips position. The reason they are deservedly getting banged on is because they stood up and shouted to the world their singular position on drilling and now we find conflicting messages. But, let's give Bill some more time, I am sure he will fix this (messaging).

You can stop the Serotta flag waving and defending Serotta tradition. Lethargy is not the recipe to get the company we love (I own an ottrott) out of it's tailspin. People want ti Di2/EPS bikes. Figure out how to do it or surrender sales to FF and Moots and KE etc.

[pdmtong]

My understanding from speaking to folks at Serotta is that the carbon/ti bond in the lugs of the Ottrott have tested to be stronger than ti alone. Serotta has been building Ottrotts with electronic drilling for two or so years.

I agree that clarity directly from the company would be helpful. I have been asking for a Legend with EPS for about a year or so, and as a result have had a number of one-off conversations.

My understanding is that the issue relates only to ti frames that Serotta has tested, and perhaps more specifically to Legends. That is, I'm not sure if Serotta has tested a straight-gauge tubed frame drilled for Di2/EPS (such as an eFondo or ePronto). The Legend is triple butted, swaged, etc., and it's that tube manipulation that makes a Legend ride like a Legend. A mechanical Legend passes the stress tests, but the same frame drilled for Di2/EPS makes it to say, 90k cycles. The impression I get is that Serotta can (fairly easily) build a ti frame drilled for Di2/EPS that would survive the tests, it's just that it would ride more like a Classique than a Legend.

Bill, this is very insightful. thanks.

[nahtnoj]

My understanding from speaking to folks at Serotta is that the carbon/ti bond in the lugs of the Ottrott have tested to be stronger than ti alone. Serotta has been building Ottrotts with electronic drilling for two or so years.

I agree that clarity directly from the company would be helpful. I have been asking for a Legend with EPS for about a year or so, and as a result have had a number of one-off conversations.

My understanding is that the issue relates only to ti frames that Serotta has tested, and perhaps more specifically to Legends. That is, I'm not sure if Serotta has tested a straight-gauge tubed frame drilled for Di2/EPS (such as an eFondo or ePronto). The Legend is triple butted, swaged, etc., and it's that tube manipulation that makes a Legend ride like a Legend. A mechanical Legend passes the stress tests, but the same frame drilled for Di2/EPS makes it to say, 90k cycles. The impression I get is that Serotta can (fairly easily) build a ti frame drilled for Di2/EPS that would survive the tests, it's just that it would ride more like a Classique than a Legend.

Like button?

/thread.

[pdmtong]

1) As others have commented, Serotta has traditionally had a conservative approach to new technical developments, but then jumped in trying to do it better once the basic concept had been proven sound. They are not early adopters,

2) If I owned a bike company--particularly one that is not flush with extra cash right now--I would be very careful about jumping on some feature bandwagon that might result in my getting a large number of warranty repairs coming in the door suddenly a couple of years down the road.

3) As a rider, if I'm spending $4-7k on a frame I would rather not have it fail a couple of years down the road because of what it seems is essentially a cosmetic feature.
BBD


I'm too lazy to append multiple quotes so I numbered my comments

1) Ui2/Di2 and EPs are here. Four years ago you could claim early adoption. Not any more.

2) Feature bandwagon? Hardly. Internal wiring goes hand in hand with the premise of electronic. cleaner bike. better aesthetics.

3) lets see
- electronic is here
- there is a market for $4-7k framesets
- the people who can afford $4-7k framesets can also afford electric
- so, the market is dictating it's needs. saying this is a cosmetic feature IMHO under-acknowledges the market share of this design element. Mfgs can choose, or not to facilitate those needs. to the victor goes the spoils so to speak.

ok if serotta doesnt want to address this part of the market and lose share as long as it is a conscious decision. But, to lose share due to a tradition of "ho-hum we arent ready to tackle that one yet" is inexcusable. If I was Bill I would tell engineering to figure out a way to do it (and, you have six weeks)

out here in silicon valley if you walked into a meeting with that attitude you would be canned on the spot. all the technology we enjoy was built from a mantra of innovate (and quickly). Those that fell behind are gone poof out of here (example: motorola, nokia, palm).

I also wonder what the stress cycles the tested tubes equate to in real life. let's say you rode 5k miles a year. for 10 years. so 50,000 miles. If the bike lasted that long I'd say I got my money out of it. In reality anyone with a bike like this has more than one bike. and most people are not riding 5k miles a year. so perhaps the longevity benchmark needs to be more realistic.

[54ny77]

a bit off topic but related story: good friend (now an elderly guy) was a professional draftsman, used all the usual hand tools of the day in the 60's/70's/early 80's. lots of pencils, big blueprint printers, that sort of thing.

along came this thing called computers and computer aided design (in its infancy stages, mind you). always heard him say, "ahh, you just can't replace experience. i'll be fine"

guess what? in but a few more years, bam, obsolete. probably 30 years of experience designing by hand, using geometry & math & electrical systems knowledge to make things that helped keep the nation's power grid humming along, now replaced by a computer and some young punks in blink of eye....and an unwillingness to learn to use the new new things.

kinda funny but inside my tarmac carbon fork in small white lettering is the phrase, "innovate or die."



out here in silicon valley if you walked into a meeting with that attitude you would be canned on the spot. all the technology we enjoy was built from a mantra of innovate (and quickly). Those that fell behind are gone poof out of here (example: motorola, nokia, palm).

[aaronf]

kinda funny but inside my tarmac carbon fork in small white lettering is the phrase, "innovate or die."

Nice. Specialized has used that phrase on-and-off since at least the early 90's.

[pbarry]

Nice. Specialized has used that phrase on-and-off since at least the early 90's.
What a self aggrandizing phrase from a company that is based singularly around design/marketing and contracts all their production overseas.

[54ny77]

i think you just described the majority of american business that involves the production of goods, from apple computer to levi's to sram, and all points in between. ;)

What a self aggrandizing phrase from a company that is based singularly around design/marketing and contracts all their production overseas.

[dd74]

I think at some point, fairly soon in fact, Serotta will realize it has to adapt to Di2/EPS, particularly as the price point drops. In some places, EPS is already $1,500 less than when it first came out. :eek:

[nahtnoj]

I'm too lazy to append multiple quotes so I numbered my comments

1) Ui2/Di2 and EPs are here. Four years ago you could claim early adoption. Not any more.

2) Feature bandwagon? Hardly. Internal wiring goes hand in hand with the premise of electronic. cleaner bike. better aesthetics.

3) lets see
- electronic is here
- there is a market for $4-7k framesets
- the people who can afford $4-7k framesets can also afford electric
- so, the market is dictating it's needs. saying this is a cosmetic feature IMHO under-acknowledges the market share of this design element. Mfgs can choose, or not to facilitate those needs. to the victor goes the spoils so to speak.

ok if serotta doesnt want to address this part of the market and lose share as long as it is a conscious decision. But, to lose share due to a tradition of "ho-hum we arent ready to tackle that one yet" is inexcusable. If I was Bill I would tell engineering to figure out a way to do it (and, you have six weeks)

out here in silicon valley if you walked into a meeting with that attitude you would be canned on the spot. all the technology we enjoy was built from a mantra of innovate (and quickly). Those that fell behind are gone poof out of here (example: motorola, nokia, palm).

I also wonder what the stress cycles the tested tubes equate to in real life. let's say you rode 5k miles a year. for 10 years. so 50,000 miles. If the bike lasted that long I'd say I got my money out of it. In reality anyone with a bike like this has more than one bike. and most people are not riding 5k miles a year. so perhaps the longevity benchmark needs to be more realistic.

.....

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m41kk1ag9v1qbygev.gif

[rustylion]

As you know I dropped steel from our line back in November. I don't know if we did testing on steel (I will ask Mike) but, at the moment, it (steel) is not on our radar at all.

Thanks.

Eric, I was just about to ask the same question....

Rusty, curious if you did any testing on steel frames.

[rustylion]

Yes, you are correct: the Ottrott frames passed testing. BTW: it is not necessarily anything to do with "judging" on our part. Sure, we do lots of stuff when we prototype but when deciding what to release to the market, we just follow the test results, i.e., either it passes or fails.

Thanks.

Presumably they judged the Ti lug backed up by the
carbon (thicker) differently from a regular steel or Ti tube (thinner)

VF

[rustylion]

I will give you that perhaps our messaging on this (and some other) topic may have been confusing. One of my jobs is to clarify internally and externally; I will continue to do so.

All we have said on Ti/electronic (and all I have been saying in a couple of recent threads) is that when we tested Ti frames (Legend) with downtubes drilled for electronic routing (we tried a number of ways to drill and reinforce the holes), the frames failed. We tested those internally (Poway) and externally (Los Angeles); frames failed in both testing facilities. Conclusion: we won't drill Ti for electronic routing.

Ottrott and MeiVici frames passed. Conclusions: we will drill carbon and carbon/Ti for electronic routing.

I will only comment on what Serotta does as far as testing goes and will confirm that right or wrong, it guides our decisions on what products we commercialize.

If other builders have found superior Ti raw materials and/or manufacturing technology, can document that they have tested this technology according to indsutry standards and can then provide you with a safe product, more power to them. We are fully aware that we have tough, smart competition.

Please don't think our heads are in the sand. We are aware that electronic components are here to stay. Same for Ti bikes. So, it would be silly for us to ignore both the competition and the market by not giving you what you want if, in fact, we could somehow find a way to do so within our safety and performance guidelines.

We have not achieved that yet but have not stopped trying.

Finally, I think rather than drag this issue further through the forum (a few have opinioned the thread is too much Serotta), I (or Ben) will write a blog post on this subject (Ti/electronic, hands on hips, ignoring the market trends, too conservative, not using real world testing, confusing) in a day or two. Lots of good inout from all of you, well worth specifically addressing but can probably respect the forum better by doing so off-forum.

Always happy to address issues and concerns. Thanks.

This has been an interesting thread. I don't think your frame will have any problem, nor the frame in the serotta garage that's plumbed for electronic nor any of the scads of frames out there of various materials(including titanium horrors, how exotic!), plumbed for electronic. It's a few reinforced holes, small to boot, in a very tough material.

But their insistence that drilling the down tube will cause almost certain failure..then showing various frames drilled in various places, including on the downtube..well, it's a confusing message in this age of information.

[TPetsch]

I also wonder what the stress cycles the tested tubes equate to in real life. let's say you rode 5k miles a year. for 10 years. so 50,000 miles. If the bike lasted that long I'd say I got my money out of it. In reality anyone with a bike like this has more than one bike. and most people are not riding 5k miles a year. so perhaps the longevity benchmark needs to be more realistic.

True, (1) year or (20) years, Serotta still has it's -Legend- lifetime warranty to consider.

[rustylion]

Last week, I was helping one of our very first Legend customers return his frame for analysis of a recent crack (if I remember, at a weld) and possible repair. The frame has over 150k miles on it. No, it is not internally routed but building frames that can be passed on to the next generation(s) was part of Ben's DNA then and Serotta's today.

True, (1) year or (20) years, Serotta still has it's -Legend- lifetime warranty to consider.

[dd74]

Bill -- Do Serotta steel frames still have a lifetime warranty? If Serotta is no longer building steel frames, and one of their older frames develops problems, what will Serotta do in that case for the customer?

[SPOKE]

Give it a couple years, all this Di2/EPS wired stuff will be replaced with wireless and no one will want holes in their frames...;)

[54ny77]

http://www.atwistedspoke.com/dcotrs-confirm-rasmussen-has-hole-in-head/

"After Michael Rasmussen’s increasingly bizarre statements and erratic behavior, the source of all this madness has been located: the Dane has a hole in his head."

http://www.atwistedspoke.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Rasmussen-hole.jpg



Give it a couple years, all this Di2/EPS wired stuff will be replaced with wireless and no one will want holes in their frames...;)

[pbarry]

Give it a couple years, all this Di2/EPS wired stuff will be replaced with wireless and no one will want holes in their frames...;)

+1
:beer:

[MadRocketSci]

Sounds like we're just seeing the downside to all the internal tube manipulation (triple butting) of a legend. Thinner sections = more stress. Would be interesting to see if a classique ti passes the tests, or perhaps just lengthen the butt in the downtube?

[54ny77]

Can't go wrong with double butted. Keep it simple.

http://www.phatcycles.com/images-phundamental/Bicycles-HuntingtonBeach-Babes.jpg

Sounds like we're just seeing the downside to all the internal tube manipulation (triple butting) of a legend. Thinner sections = more stress. Would be interesting to see if a classique ti passes the tests, or perhaps just lengthen the butt in the downtube?

[oldpotatoe]

+1
:beer:

And that worked so well.

Batteries in the levers, and both derailleurs..think it's gonna be while before they sacrifice function and reliability for a few wires, IMHO.

[pbarry]

And that worked so well.

Batteries in the levers, and both derailleurs..think it's gonna be while before they sacrifice function and reliability for a few wires, IMHO.

The image was meant to be a j.o.k.e. Let's lighten up. :)

[BumbleBeeDave]

Give it a couple years, all this Di2/EPS wired stuff will be replaced with wireless and no one will want holes in their frames...;)

. . . is that this is where SRAM is going and they are going to "make the leap" right over Campy and Shimano. It's why they have not released an electronic group of their own--yet.

Long life lithium batteries in the derailleurs and levers--replace them once a year. Or some sort of micro-generator involving a spoke magnet on the rear wheel and a pickup on the chainstay wired to the front and rear derailleurs. ANT+ or Bluetooth signal transmission.

Bingo.

BBD

[SPOKE]

Wait!..... Thanks for the reminder about the Mavic Mektronic stuff. Just remembered that I have a Merckx built with the stuff. Had to buy two kits to get one that worked....:)

[dd74]

Sounds like we're just seeing the downside to all the internal tube manipulation (triple butting) of a legend. Thinner sections = more stress. Would be interesting to see if a classique ti passes the tests, or perhaps just lengthen the butt in the downtube?
I wouldn't even worry about it. Like what was said, wireless will be here before you know it. Then it'll be time for a new frame and groupset. Make sure the fork can handle a disc brake, because that will be commonplace as well.

[54ny77]

I'm waiting for EM brakes.

;)

Make sure the fork can handle a disc brake, because that will be commonplace as well.

[93legendti]

I wouldn't even worry about it. Like what was said, wireless will be here before you know it. Then it'll be time for a new frame and groupset. Make sure the fork can handle a disc brake, because that will be commonplace as well.

Yeah, it's a bit of a stretch to say a crack in a weld, as stated in the OP, is a result of triple butted titanium tubes- tubes which are known for their strength and resiliency.

[MadRocketSci]

holes are stress risers, thinner tube section means more stress rising in hole....

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/materials-science-and-engineering/3-11-mechanics-of-materials-fall-1999/3-11f99.jpg

[CaptStash]

No holes no worries. I'm waiting for maglev! Now that bike would PLANE!

CaptStash....

[rustylion]

If the frame cannot be repaired, we would offer the customer a comparable replacement from a product model we do make currently.

Thanks.

Bill -- Do Serotta steel frames still have a lifetime warranty? If Serotta is no longer building steel frames, and one of their older frames develops problems, what will Serotta do in that case for the customer?

[happycampyer]

The thing to bear in mind is, it's not clear that any of the other builders are even testing their frames. Serotta has, and has had for many, many years, a very strict testing protocol. If they design something new, or adopt a new industry design or feature, they don't introduce a product with that feature without building prototypes, riding them, and then lab testing them. They could just assume that the person buying the frame already has 5 bikes and will never ride it to failure anyway, but they don't.

As it relates to Di2, Serotta wasn't exactly slow to adopt it. Out of curiosity, I dug up an old thread (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=82646) from December of 2010 discussing the introduction of Di2 into Serotta's line-up. I had started to see Di2-equipped MeiVicis at Signature Cycles in Greenwich (which has been the largest dealer for Di2 bikes, building well over 100 Di2-equipped bikes in the first year alone—talk about a demanding clientele). Scott Hock posted (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=860121&postcount=12) that Serotta is "currently offering the DI2 internal routing on the Meivici AE and the Meivici SE. The Ottrott is currently in the works..." What I know from talking to Soren at Signature at the time is that the reason it took until December for Serotta to start offering Di2 on the MeiVici is that Serotta needed to test various drilling patterns (and possible reinforcement, I can't recall specifically) to make sure the frames held up. Ironically, in that thread, Serotta was criticized for jumping on the bandwagon by making the frames Di2 specific, rather than incorporating backward compatibility.

The more I have spoken with folks at Serotta (or people very familiar with their operations, like Grant and Soren, both of whom used to work at Signature) over the years, or read what employees or former employees have said about Serotta here and eslewhere, the more impressed I am with how they manufacture their frames and forks. One of the company's biggest omissions is that that information isn't more widely available, which omission leads to a lot of confusion, misinformation, and ultimately criticism online. And the situation isn't helped by glib statements on their website about not asking them to drill metal frames. I have suggested more than once to folks at Serotta that they should provide in-depth FAQs—or better yet white papers—about their design philosophy, testing, etc., like Calfee and a few others have done. There actually is a fair amount of detail about Serotta's exacting fabrication standards and testing protocols, but unfortunately most of that information was posted anecdotally by Dave Kirk and others. Just a couple of examples: Dave blogs about extensive product testing here (http://www.kirkframeworks.com/blog/2012/02/27/product-testing-or-not/), particularly as it related to the development of the F1 fork. There was another interesting discussion in this thread (http://www.velocipedesalon.com/forum/f2/fatigue-testing-bikes-4701.html) on vsalon, and I recall Dave provided more details in his Smoked Out thread. It's not as if the company stopped innovating and testing after Dave left, but you wouldn't know it without talking directly to people at the company or to people who are close to the company. They need to get that word out, and not from customers or former employees, but from the source.

[Climb01742]

The more I have spoken with folks at Serotta (or people very familiar with their operations, like Grant and Soren, both of whom used to work at Signature) over the years, or read what employees or former employees have said about Serotta here and eslewhere, the more impressed I am with how they manufacture their frames and forks. One of the company's biggest omissions is that that information isn't more widely available, which omission leads to a lot of confusion, misinformation, and ultimately criticism online. And the situation isn't helped by glib statements on their website about not asking them to drill metal frames. I have suggested more than once to folks at Serotta that they should provide in-depth FAQs—or better yet white papers—about their design philosophy, testing, etc., like Calfee and a few others have done. There actually is a fair amount of detail about Serotta's exacting fabrication standards and testing protocols, but unfortunately most of that information was posted anecdotally by Dave Kirk and others. Just a couple of examples: Dave blogs about extensive product testing here (http://www.kirkframeworks.com/blog/2012/02/27/product-testing-or-not/), particularly as it related to the development of the F1 fork. There was another interesting discussion in this thread (http://www.velocipedesalon.com/forum/f2/fatigue-testing-bikes-4701.html) on vsalon, and I recall Dave provided more details in his Smoked Out thread. It's not as if the company stopped innovating and testing after Dave left, but you wouldn't know it without talking directly to people with the company or to people who are close to the company. They need to get that word out, and not from customers or former employees, but from the source.

^ this. Very well reasoned and stated.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Nothing at all against any of the builders at NAHBS. But just because they are drilling the holes doesn't mean they have done the testing--or ANY testing--that back up the efficacy of the modifications they are making by putting more holes in the frames.

Serotta should indeed have a whole page on their web site with in-depth information from Mike Lopez or whoever else contributes on exactly how extensive their technical development and testing is. While it might not be of interest to everyone, it's one of the ingredients in establishing the value proposition and why Serotta may cost more. That's one of the aspects that Serotta has neglected in recent years--why the bikes cost more and why it's worth it.

BBD

The thing to bear in mind is, it's not clear that any of the other builders are even testing their frames. Serotta has, and has had for many, many years, a very strict testing protocol. If they design something new, or adopt a new industry design or feature, they don't introduce a product with that feature without building prototypes, riding them, and then lab testing them. They could just assume that the person buying the frame already has 5 bikes and will never ride it to failure anyway, but they don't.

As it relates to Di2, Serotta wasn't exactly slow to adopt it. Out of curiosity, I dug up an old thread (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=82646) from December of 2010 discussing the introduction of Di2 into Serotta's line-up. I had started to see Di2-equipped MeiVicis at Signature Cycles in Greenwich (which has been the largest dealer for Di2 bikes, building well over 100 Di2-equipped bikes in the first year alone—talk about a demanding clientele). Scott Hock posted (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=860121&postcount=12) that Serotta is "currently offering the DI2 internal routing on the Meivici AE and the Meivici SE. The Ottrott is currently in the works..." What I know from talking to Soren at Signature at the time is that the reason it took until December for Serotta to start offering Di2 on the MeiVici is that Serotta needed to test various drilling patterns (and possible reinforcement, I can't recall specifically) to make sure the frames held up. Ironically, in that thread, Serotta was criticized for jumping on the bandwagon by making the frames Di2 specific, rather than incorporating backward compatibility.

The more I have spoken with folks at Serotta (or people very familiar with their operations, like Grant and Soren, both of whom used to work at Signature) over the years, or read what employees or former employees have said about Serotta here and eslewhere, the more impressed I am with how they manufacture their frames and forks. One of the company's biggest omissions is that that information isn't more widely available, which omission leads to a lot of confusion, misinformation, and ultimately criticism online. And the situation isn't helped by glib statements on their website about not asking them to drill metal frames. I have suggested more than once to folks at Serotta that they should provide in-depth FAQs—or better yet white papers—about their design philosophy, testing, etc., like Calfee and a few others have done. There actually is a fair amount of detail about Serotta's exacting fabrication standards and testing protocols, but unfortunately most of that information was posted anecdotally by Dave Kirk and others. Just a couple of examples: Dave blogs about extensive product testing here (http://www.kirkframeworks.com/blog/2012/02/27/product-testing-or-not/), particularly as it related to the development of the F1 fork. There was another interesting discussion in this thread (http://www.velocipedesalon.com/forum/f2/fatigue-testing-bikes-4701.html) on vsalon, and I recall Dave provided more details in his Smoked Out thread. It's not as if the company stopped innovating and testing after Dave left, but you wouldn't know it without talking directly to people at the company or to people who are close to the company. They need to get that word out, and not from customers or former employees, but from the source.

[jpw]

Give it a couple years, all this Di2/EPS wired stuff will be replaced with wireless and no one will want holes in their frames...;)

Yes, this is the road map of Shimano, Campag and Sram.

Why would they invest in electronic R&D and then limit their market to frames built for Di2/ EPS? The plan is to go wireless so that all those 'retro' frames out there can be made instantly compatible with their electronic gears. That's a much bigger market than new purpose built frames.

If I were a frame builder I wouldn't be investing in internal routing solutions or structurally risky port holes.

[dd74]

Yes, this is the road map of Shimano, Campag and Sram.

Why would they invest in electronic R&D and then limit their market to frames built for Di2/ EPS? The plan is to go wireless so that all those 'retro' frames out there can be made instantly compatible with their electronic gears. That's a much bigger market than new purpose built frames.

If I were a frame builder I wouldn't be investing in internal routing solutions or structurally risky port holes.
Yeah, but no one knows how long it will be before wireless. Until then, by not drilling, a manufacturer could lose market share.

[pbarry]

Yeah, but no one knows how long it will be before wireless. Until then, by not drilling, a manufacturer could lose market share.
Courtesy of awesomegifs.com

[DukeHorn]

I'm too lazy to append multiple quotes so I numbered my comments
out here in silicon valley if you walked into a meeting with that attitude you would be canned on the spot. all the technology we enjoy was built from a mantra of innovate (and quickly). Those that fell behind are gone poof out of here (example: motorola, nokia, palm).



Seriously, you're comparing bike building to software/electronic hardware? Do you think that works in Silicon Valley biotech (hey, you have 6 weeks to get this drug past the FDA.)? You have six weeks to "fix" the preclinical data. You think that works in Silicon Valley?? Hell no....

Do you think there's physical liability in using Facebook, Palm, Google compared to the actual physical liability in frame breakage? Really??? Horrible analogy to a limited segment of SV.

And yes, there is nitpicking (and poor reading) occurring throughout this thread. The origin of the Serotta statement about drilling referenced "particularly in a travel bike". The garage section Legend isn't a travel bike. Oooops. When does a metal frame constitute carbon tubes and ti lugs? Ooops.

[dd74]

Courtesy of awesomegifs.com
Say/post what you like. There's a reason manufacturers are drilling their frames. That's because buyers are buying their drilled frames. I was in a bike store not too long ago where half the customers were asking about electronic shifting. They were steered toward Colnago, Trek and Cannondale.

[jpw]

Yeah, but no one knows how long it will be before wireless. Until then, by not drilling, a manufacturer could lose market share.

When the well dries up they'll open the flood gates.

Those who drill could be storing up a legacy of warranty claims.

[pbarry]

Say/post what you like. There's a reason manufacturers are drilling their frames. That's because buyers are buying their drilled frames. I was in a bike store not too long ago where half the customers were asking about electronic shifting. They were steered toward Colnago, Trek and Cannondale.

Once again, you confuse drilling carbon with drilling Ti. You've been repeating the same refrain throughout the discussion and seem intent on making your point. Please, have the last word.

[pdmtong]

Seriously, you're comparing bike building to software/electronic hardware? Do you think that works in Silicon Valley biotech (hey, you have 6 weeks to get this drug past the FDA.)? You have six weeks to "fix" the preclinical data. You think that works in Silicon Valley?? Hell no....

Do you think there's physical liability in using Facebook, Palm, Google compared to the actual physical liability in frame breakage? Really??? Horrible analogy to a limited segment of SV.

And yes, there is nitpicking (and poor reading) occurring throughout this thread. The origin of the Serotta statement about drilling referenced "particularly in a travel bike". The garage section Legend isn't a travel bike. Oooops. When does a metal frame constitute carbon tubes and ti lugs? Ooops.

My point is that aggressive innovation results in market share gain. Have you ever worked in a start-up? let me tell you, the clock is ticking 24x7. Serotta is losing market share to others. We have not heard of anyones FF, moots, etc blowing up. One of my friends is a pretty aggressive and powerful rider, no issues with his Di2 RSL after almost 3 years now. may not last a lifetime but evidently Moots is willing to cover that risk to original owners via warranty.

I have to agree with you about physical liability, but note Serotta has said NOTHING about failure mode and failure time/cycle. If the tubes fail catastrophically in a 3 year equivalent use, then yea, let's not drill. if the frame starts hairline cracking after the equivalent of 25 years usage that is a different story. and, since we do not know the story, all I can conclude is Serotta has a marketing opportunity to put some colour on their position.

meanwhile, as I said, clock is ticking....

[dd74]

Once again, you confuse drilling carbon with drilling Ti. You've been repeating the same refrain throughout the discussion and seem intent on making your point. Please, have the last word.
Do you have even the slightest bit of acumen toward what it takes to maintain a business through innovation and advancement, or are you posturing from your soap box simply because it makes you feel good?

Others drill in their metals, Serotta doesn't. It does not make the others wrong because they do drill and Serotta does not. And as time goes on and electronics go down in price, those who drill will gain market share while Serotta might not.

My note about the bike store comes from the fact that c/f manufacturers who drill are gaining market share because electronic is what the people want. If Moots, Firefly or IF frames were at the shop, and customers knew electronic could be run internally on those frame, they probably would have sold as well.

[pdmtong]

it's completely fine if serotta is not delivering a solution for this part of the market. it would not be fine if they were simultaneously lamenting the loss of that revenue stream.

someone found a corner case frame in the garage and now we all have our opinions. truth is, i bet saratoga springs is working on it.

[Serotta_Carbon]

My point is that aggressive innovation results in market share gain. Have you ever worked in a start-up? let me tell you, the clock is ticking 24x7. Serotta is losing market share to others. We have not heard of anyones FF, moots, etc blowing up. One of my friends is a pretty aggressive and powerful rider, no issues with his Di2 RSL after almost 3 years now. may not last a lifetime but evidently Moots is willing to cover that risk to original owners via warranty.

I have to agree with you about physical liability, but note Serotta has said NOTHING about failure mode and failure time/cycle. If the tubes fail catastrophically in a 3 year equivalent use, then yea, let's not drill. if the frame starts hairline cracking after the equivalent of 25 years usage that is a different story. and, since we do not know the story, all I can conclude is Serotta has a marketing opportunity to put some colour on their position.

meanwhile, as I said, clock is ticking....

Actually, we have made some statements regarding our testing protocol in this thread as well as some others...

I mentioned that we test the frames & forks per CEN 14781 which another member said they found available for review online. I also mentioned that the test is a pass/fail test and is not intended to simulate a specific number of miles. Until the frames have the ability to pass the entire 100k cycles duration we're not satisfied with the results. "Close enough" is not acceptable...

Further specifics regarding failure modes and such would generally be considered proprietary by most manufacturers but I will go so far as to say that cracks initiated on the edge of the holes close to the end of the 100k cycles. Some might call that close enough. Others may not test at all.

We choose to do the testing and follow the protocol to the letter. Otherwise why bother?

[dd74]

Actually, we have made some statements regarding our testing protocol in this thread as well as some others...

I mentioned that we test the frames & forks per CEN 14781 which another member said they found available for review online. I also mentioned that the test is a pass/fail test and is not intended to simulate a specific number of miles. Until the frames have the ability to pass the entire 100k cycles duration we're not satisfied with the results. "Close enough" is not acceptable...

Further specifics regarding failure modes and such would generally be considered proprietary by most manufacturers but I will go so far as to say that cracks initiated on the edge of the holes close to the end of the 100k cycles. Some might call that close enough. Others may not test at all.

We choose to do the testing and follow the protocol to the letter. Otherwise why bother?
Have you studied other manufacturers' frames to see if they have failed? Do you know of other manufacturers' frames that have failed? As a PSA, it would be good to pass that along only for the safety of the consumer/cyclist.

[Serotta_Carbon]

Have you studied other manufacturers' frames to see if they have failed? Do you know of other manufacturers' frames that have failed? As a PSA, it would be good to pass that along only for the safety of the consumer/cyclist.

We have not done any mechanical testing of other mfg's DI2 related products. If you'd like to send us your frame I'd be happy to test it for you! ;)

Seriously though....When we sent some of our frames out to an independant lab to verify our results the same failures occured at roughly the same number of cycles. The technician wouldn't mention names but told me that numerous other brands were struggling with the same issue.

Does this mean it's a bad test or a bad idea...? Hard to say but the holeless Prontos I've tested breezed right on through with no problems...

[54ny77]

drill it, baby!

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mL_G-doO1bg/UK-K5ObkfCI/AAAAAAAAqyM/MhUNvqbrxbw/s1600/Drill-Powered+Bike.gif

[93legendti]

Have you studied other manufacturers' frames to see if they have failed? Do you know of other manufacturers' frames that have failed? As a PSA, it would be good to pass that along only for the safety of the consumer/cyclist.

You're joking right? Serotta should spend the money "studying" OTHER MANUFACTURERS' bikes AND issue PSA's as to their failures?

Wow. Great way to go bankrupt and invite lawsuits from, among others, competitors. Wow.

[Ahneida Ride]

This one is getting a bit stale... :help:

Please feel free to start another thread.