Ottrott with carbon seat tube? (*makes Dr. Evil pinky in mouth gesture).

[lnomalley]

I am wondering out loud if they (Serotta) might make an Ottrott ST with a carbon seat tube? Thinking it might nip a little weight (silliness) and maybe add a little lateral stiffness. The old and i'm sure sincere 'marketing' was that a carbon seat tube wasn't up to the forces put on it by a front der., but now that the Meivici exisits, I wonder if that might be rethought.
The only ti would be the chainstays and the lugs.... hmmmmmmm. Anyone? Bueller?

I might bite for that.....

Still seeing Sierra Nevada dudes on their Serottas.. I guess the Eddy's aren't in yet. I liked them on Ottrotts..... :( you can see the merckx here

www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=8806

[Argos]

This is one of the reasons the six-13 swapped back to a Full Aluminum Rear triangle [read: they got rid of the Carbon Seattube]. I believe the guys on the team (Gilberto and Damiano) wanted lighter and stiffer.

It's a lighter construction method to not be multi material, because then you do not need the overlap of the Lugs and the Tube, plus the bonding agent.

So instead of adding carbon (and weight) to make it stiffer, if that's even a problem, they could oversize the Seattube, and all of its Colorado-Concept Goodness...

Would probably look cool though [monty burns finger tip thing].

[Grant McLean]

This is one of the reasons the six-13 swapped back to a Full Aluminum Rear triangle [read: they got rid of the Carbon Seattube]. I believe the guys on the team (Gilberto and Damiano) wanted lighter and stiffer.

It's a lighter construction method to not be multi material, because then you do not need the overlap of the Lugs and the Tube, plus the bonding agent.

So instead of adding carbon (and weight) to make it stiffer, if that's even a problem, they could oversize the Seattube, and all of its Colorado-Concept Goodness...

Would probably look cool though [monty burns finger tip thing].


Ex-cel-ent post.

-g

[vaxn8r]

This is one of the reasons the six-13 swapped back to a Full Aluminum Rear triangle [read: they got rid of the Carbon Seattube]. I believe the guys on the team (Gilberto and Damiano) wanted lighter and stiffer.

It's a lighter construction method to not be multi material, because then you do not need the overlap of the Lugs and the Tube, plus the bonding agent.

So instead of adding carbon (and weight) to make it stiffer, if that's even a problem, they could oversize the Seattube, and all of its Colorado-Concept Goodness...

Would probably look cool though [monty burns finger tip thing].
Yeah, CDale found the CF seat tube only added weight and since it's a vertical tube did almost nothing for ride quality. Think about how little a seat tube is going to flex.

[lnomalley]

oh.. if we are talking functionality here i'll just stick with my nearly perfect starship aluminum bike.... i'm talking about something else (aren't we all?).

cunego often spends his time on a optimo 8 (which works just as well as a six 13). and me.. i'll be racing on a six 13 pro this year (thank you c-dale).

but i'd still like to see the option on the ottrott. purely emotionally driven.. and for the price.. why not? even thopugh the lowly seat tube is largley the master of compressive force... it do connect to the bb and is more than just plumbing.

[yeehawfactor]

Yeah, CDale found the CF seat tube only added weight and since it's a vertical tube did almost nothing for ride quality. Think about how little a seat tube is going to flex.
can this be expounded on a bit? :beer:

[lnomalley]

can this be expounded on a bit? :beer:


rumors (chance of truthiness 35%):
1) c-dale felt they could make the frame stiffer by removing the carbon seat tube (was there a problem we didn't know about stiffy wise?). simoni weighs nothing.
2) they removed the carbon seat tube but also added gussets in the aluminum which actually increased the manufacturing cost and made a stiffer bike (just shut up and ride the aluminum one)...
3) removing the carbon allowed them to keep the cost per frame down in manufacturing the frame (see the contrary rumors here?)
4) the marketplace is hungry for weight conscious bikes and removing the carbon seat tube allwoed for a lighter frame.
5) no one alive can discern the difference.
6) every year you have to do something to the model from the year before
7) c-dale puts a lot of money and energy into R&D and maybe they know their stuff (race rig wise)

i'll leave it to the frame builders here.. but some folks consider some of the tubes on a bike to just be plumbing with no function but to connect one tube to another (popular bike store chucklehead myth with maybe a kernal of truthiness in there, i ask)..... me thinks every tube has its value.... i think the ottrott i'm talking about would look cool. heck.. the IF's look cool and their carbon tubes aren't even swaged. and all that matters at this price point is that it looks cool ;) (and works flawlessly and fits like a glove). me.. i love aluminum so what do i know?

[yeehawfactor]

it is true that many riders up here had issues with brake flex with the three carbon tubed six-13. if that is the case, then it must have been interesting at saeco training camp.........

seems like this may have been an overengineered bike

[Argos]

This was the portion of the release that caught my attention:

The yet to be released 'Dale no longer uses a carbon seat tube, although the front triangle is largely unchanged, still using carbon top and down tubes. The reversion back to an all-aluminium rear triangle has presumably been done to save weight, as the rear end can now be manufactured in one piece without lugs. But with the company carrying on with the 'Legalise my Cannondale' campaign at the 2003 Giro and Tour de France, and a frame weighing no more than 1000 grams, one wonders if this steed will indeed pass the UCI weight limit of 6.8 kilograms without the need for additional weights, like a heavier set of wheels.

Which I read here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2005/probikes/?id=simoni_lampre_cannondale

And the rest came from a quick call over to my man on the inside over at Cannondale.

[vaxn8r]

rumors (chance of truthiness 35%):
1) c-dale felt they could make the frame stiffer by removing the carbon seat tube (was there a problem we didn't know about stiffy wise?). simoni weighs nothing.
2) they removed the carbon seat tube but also added gussets in the aluminum which actually increased the manufacturing cost and made a stiffer bike (just shut up and ride the aluminum one)...
3) removing the carbon allowed them to keep the cost per frame down in manufacturing the frame (see the contrary rumors here?)
4) the marketplace is hungry for weight conscious bikes and removing the carbon seat tube allwoed for a lighter frame.
5) no one alive can discern the difference.
6) every year you have to do something to the model from the year before
7) c-dale puts a lot of money and energy into R&D and maybe they know their stuff (race rig wise)

i'll leave it to the frame builders here.. but some folks consider some of the tubes on a bike to just be plumbing with no function but to connect one tube to another (popular bike store chucklehead myth with maybe a kernal of truthiness in there, i ask)..... me thinks every tube has its value.... i think the ottrott i'm talking about would look cool. heck.. the IF's look cool and their carbon tubes aren't even swaged. and all that matters at this price point is that it looks cool ;) (and works flawlessly and fits like a glove). me.. i love aluminum so what do i know?
Pretty funny stuff...but probably all true, especially point (6). I know a guy who bought a 3 CF tube Six-13 and thought maybe it was too flexy compared to his old CAAD5. So he bought a CAAD 8 and switched all his components over. After riding the CAAD8 for a month or two he decided he couldn't tell the difference between the Six-13 and the CAAD8 so he's back on his Six 13 and has now sold the CAAD 8.