A Thing of Beauty

[musgravecycles]

Don't know how many of you here have heard of LLewellyn. He's a masters master in the craft. Anyway thought you might appreciate this.

P.S. Don't forget to get something to clean up your drool...

http://www.llewellynbikes.com/thegallery/album03?&page=1

[Ti Designs]

There are some works of art that are made mostly because the artist wanted to do them - how else can you explain the countless hours it took to craft that thing? Many artists have that one piece that was never intended on being sold, the piece that had the artist wondering "what if..."

As an artist working in titanium I have a piece that fits that description. Years back when Ibis did a hand shaped cable stop on their bikes they used a bronze casting on their titanium bikes because a titanium one couldn't be made. That sent me into my shop to make a titanium hand, and launched the slogan for Ti Designs - hand made in titanium... So when I didn't have orders I would work on this little titanium hand. I must have hundreds of hours in total in this one piece, and it's nowhere near as impressive as that frame.

[mdeeds71]

Awesome, you had had your "HAND" involved with the "Hand Job" But did you contribute to the "Hac-a-Loogie"...I lost my "MOJO" to and accident on a "MOJO" :banana:

The older Ibis mtb's were interesting to say the least.

[RichMc]

I don't think I'd ever want to build up that frame let alone ride it. That is museum only.

[Climb01742]

if louis XVI had a bike, that's what it would look like. beautiful but kinda over the top for my tastes. the craftsmanship, though, is remarkable.

[Bill Bove]

O.k. I appreciate the beauty of the frame but like Climb, it's a little too much for me, and now for the blasphamy. It's only art if it get's ridden, otherwise it's just a lot of pretty pipes. The true art of a bike is in it's ride.

[William]

I've been admireing his work since I got the itch to try framebuilding. Beautiful hand built work!

I don't care what anyone says...I'd ride it. :cool:

Just like classic cars, I've never understood the build it up and stick it in a window mentality. I'm all for restoration and fine detailing, but they are meant to be driven/ridden to really be apprecited.


William

[Too Tall]

It would look better after a muddy ride.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . but yes, it deserves to be ridden and appreciated by others.

BBDave

[dirtdigger88]

more examples from Kirk Pacenti's site

http://www.bikelugs.com/pacentigallery/llewellyn5_gallery/index.html

jason

[victoryfactory]

Sorry, I just don't get that kind of excersize. Sure, it's beautiful, and shows
the craftsman's talent but for me the real beauty in a bike is the tech.
Give me S bend chainstays, manipulated tube shapes and high tech materials
like carbon and Ti.
I'll take plain paint, no lugs, high tech any day over baroque decorated
jewelry.

Well done, though for jewelry fans

VF- with respect for the builder's art

[Jeff N.]

Not the same thing, but I'm reminded of those "low rider" bikes I've seen from time to time: Lots of chrome and detail, but totally un-rideable. Jeff N.

[Climb01742]

Sorry, I just don't get that kind of excersize. Sure, it's beautiful, and shows
the craftsman's talent but for me the real beauty in a bike is the tech.
Give me S bend chainstays, manipulated tube shapes and high tech materials
like carbon and Ti.
I'll take plain paint, no lugs, high tech any day over baroque decorated
jewelry.

Well done, though for jewelry fans

VF- with respect for the builder's art

a politically incorrect response but, IMO, true. kudos on having the balls to post it. viva debate.

[Birddog]

This kinda reminds me of custom rifles and shotguns. Owners very often at lavish expense add inticate engraving to the metalwork and fancy checkering to the stock . It does nothing for the performance of the weapon, but it does set it apart from the other regular, off the shelf and even custom (but not fancied up) choices. Personally, I'd take a good ol bolt action 30.06 or a 300 Savage lever action John Wayne special anyday, but that's me. That frame is damn pretty to look at, but I wouldn't want to ride it too often, I'm too rough on equipment. More power to those that can, and will. Markets and choices are wonderful.

Birddog

[victoryfactory]

Climb:

Politically incorrect?
I take that as a compliment, thanks

VF , political animal

[zank]

Let the flaming begin...but...what makes carbon and titanium high tech? Sure, titanium alloy came along later in history than the discovery of steel, and titanium alloys have some strengths over steel alloys. But, with the price increases of ti over the past 3 years, it has become as much a commodity material as steel. And where is the value-add from the mill? All you can buy off the shelf (aside from the astronomically priced Reynolds tubes) is straight gauge tubing that must then be manipulated by an outside vendor to the builder's specs. Steel tubes can be purchased in many different butting configurations off the rack, not to mention custom configurations if the builder so desires for much lower cost as compared to ti. Does titanium's lower density and its different oxidizing mechanism make it high tech? If the answer to that in everyone's mind is yes, then great. I am not bashing titanium or anyone that builds with titanium. And, I am not trying to burst anyone's bubble. It is a fantastic material to work with. But having been very close to the fabrication process of titanium bicycle frames, I would argue it is not high tech. It is still machining tubes and welding them together. The technology is more an exercise in cleanliness and proper purging during welding to achieve a structurally sound frame and it took some research to achieve this. The process and repeatability is where these builders really shine, and I admire them for that. But, it doesn't qualify as high tech with me.

And carbon. Well, having been involved in ultra-precise injection molding of carbon filled materials for aerospace applications, I would argue what bicycle manufacturers are doing is not that high tech. I would say they are doing well for a low-pressure, bladder molding process. But, try holding tolerances of ten-thousandths to hundred-thousandths (.0001" - .00001") of an inch for repeated cycles with a filled thermo-plastic. Not the easiest chore. That, to me, is high tech because of the science and engineering that went into the materials and process. Hey, someday that won't be considered high tech either. Carbon frame builders work with clamshell mold processes and materials that have been around for some time. Again, I truly admire what the high-quality carbon builders are doing from the process and repeatability standpoint, and their products are super. But, I would not call it high tech.

So, why the rant? Hey, I know that pieces of work such as what Dazza built are not everyone's cup of tea. For myself, I absolutely worship Dazza's work. But, everyone has their own opinion on aesthetics. My gripe is that it could have been implied or inferred from earlier posts that this type of building is lower tech than titanium or carbon. I would disagree whole-heartedly. I'm not a retro-grouch; I love technology. But, I think lugged steel frame building is as much high tech as any other way to build a bike. Not because it in itself is high tech, but more because what everyone else considers high tech in bicycles is not the voo doo, black magic it is perceived to be by the public. As compared to some other industries, it is quite archaic. Is it simply that ti and carbon are considered high tech because they are more expensive or are newer to the cycling industry?

OK, so I opened myself up here. I love to learn and am very open minded. I don't know why that rubbed me the wrong way, but it did. Let's hear what others have to say. Why do you think ti and carbon are high tech? Let's bust some myths.

zank

PS Dazza, if you are reading this, that bike is unbelievable.

[dirtdigger88]

I see nothing low tech about these bikes- true, I would most likely not buy one of these- they are not my "cup of tea" but neither is a Model T but I still stop to look and enjoy them for what they are- My hat is tipped to this builder and others like him- Bravo

Jason

[cpg]

I've got to second zank here. There's NOTHING hi tech in bicycles regardless of materials and or construction technique. If you believe otherwise you're understanding of bikes is limited to glossy ads spewing nonesense. Again I'll second zank, the example of dazza's work isn't for everyone. Personally I think it's over the top but as someone that has more than a little understanding in what it takes to do something like that, my hat is off to him. This is a custom frame that the customer paid a lot of money for the builder to go nuts. That's what dazza delivered.

Curt

[Big Dan]

Way to go zank.....you sure your name is not Douglas???.. :D
Amazing piece of work......

[Climb01742]

i don't see the issue as steel vs ti or carbon. or even one of technology. to me, it's like putting a louis XVI chair next to a shaker chair. both will hold your butt equally well. so which aesthetic floats your boat?

i applauded VF because i think that, on this forum, there is a prevailing group-think on the subject of lugged steel...that lugged steel is the pinnacle of frame building. it is a pinnacle, but there are others. IMO, there is no everest, but a group of 8000 meter peaks.

[terry]

i'm with zank. i don't see what's so 'hi tech' with trowing some carbon cloth in a mold (i bet that may be an oversimplification) or welding up some ti tubes (and i love ti-got 2). i believe everybody here has some appreciation of bikes for aesthetic reasons-not the sole reason they got into cycling but surely one aspect, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. the work involved in the bike at issue here is stunning and certainly much more interesting to me than the carbon layup of a ...(whatever) or the ti welds of a ... (whatever). i'm not saying i'd buy/own a bike with lugs this ornate but, i appreciate them and am glad that there are artisans who can and will do work like this. like william i think all bikes should be ridden. i would ride this one & love to show it off too.

[Climb01742]

i think there is low-tech steel, ti, carbon and alu. and i think there is high-tech steel, ti, carbon and alu. and each rider can decide whether technology improves things.

but i also think you could argue that how parlee bonds their tubes involves more application of technolgy than joining, say, reynolds 525 tubes with lugs. while the lugs involve more artistry. and as for while rides better, ain't touching that. :rolleyes: technological differences exist, they just aren't the sole possession of one material.

[e-RICHIE]

i disagree.


(about the hypothetical argument, that is)

[Big Dan]

Climb are you saying that bonding tubes tubes is more advanced than brazing tubes.......????............ :confused:

[Kirk Pacenti]

Curt and Mike,

For obvious reasons this one hits a little close to home. But, I completely agree there is nothing 'high tech' about Ti/ carbon in bicycle production at all ( I have seen my share of it). Maybe compared to the level of technology available to the one man shop, but only by degree.

I have been around manufacturing for a long time, a lot of that time in the bicycle industry. Some of the stuff that passes as high tech in our business would be considered a joke, or at least down right crude in most others.

Take a tour through any aerospace manufacturer, Sikorsky, Boeing, etc. you'll see some high tech mfg. Heck, take a tour of the Hershey or Mars candy factory, they have more high tech than any half dozen bike companies you can think of combined!

To be fair, I guess, there is a bit of "relativity" at work here. I can think of LOTS of ways to improve bicycle manufacturing techniques and add real technology to the mix. But, the cost of the technology is just too high for a product like bicycles. Besides, as e-richie says, "technology is a poor substitute for experience".

For my money, I'd much rather have a hand built (maybe not as ornate as Darrell's) frame from a true craftsman, than any supposed 'high tech' rig with this years latest and greatest Ti/carbon technology. Not that there is anything wrong with those bikes, it's just not what I value in bicycle frames.

Best regards,

[Climb01742]

big dan, i'm saying that how parlee bonds their tubes involves some pretty sophisticated technology, involving heat and pressure. but that's like saying: communicating via cell phone involves more technology than land line. it's a simple statement of fact. it is NOT a statement of worth, value or quality. to say there aren't technological differences is, i think, simply not true. but...to say that one is inherently better than the other is, i think, equally untrue.

and richie, which argument do you disagree with? there are a few floating thru this thread.

[e-RICHIE]

this one:
"but i also think you could argue that how parlee bonds their tubes involves more application of technolgy than joining, say, reynolds 525 tubes with lugs. while the lugs involve more artistry."

[e-RICHIE]

"Heck, take a tour of the Hershey or Mars candy factory, they have more high tech than any half dozen bike companies you can think of combined!"



kirk-issimo,
tell me they still make twizzlers the old fashioned way.
i'm beggin' ya', man!
sincerely -
e-RICHIE

[Climb01742]

this one:
"but i also think you could argue that how parlee bonds their tubes involves more application of technolgy than joining, say, reynolds 525 tubes with lugs. while the lugs involve more artistry."

ok, why? and please, a real rebuttal, not a cryptic hiaku.

[Climb01742]

Curt and Mike,

For obvious reasons this one hits a little close to home. But, I completely agree there is nothing 'high tech' about Ti/ carbon in bicycle production at all ( I have seen my share of it). Maybe compared to the level of technology available to the one man shop, but only by degree.

I have been around manufacturing for a long time, a lot of that time in the bicycle industry. Some of the stuff that passes as high tech in our business would be considered a joke, or at least down right crude in most others.

Take a tour through any aerospace manufacturer, Sikorsky, Boeing, etc. you'll see some high tech mfg. Heck, take a tour of the Hershey or Mars candy factory, they have more high tech than any half dozen bike companies you can think of combined!

To be fair, I guess, there is a bit of "relativity" at work here. I can think of LOTS of ways to improve bicycle manufacturing techniques and add real technology to the mix. But, the cost of the technology is just too high for a product like bicycles. Besides, as e-richie says, "technology is a poor substitute for experience".

For my money, I'd much rather have a hand built (maybe not as ornate as Darrell's) frame from a true craftsman, than any supposed 'high tech' rig with this years latest and greatest Ti/carbon technology. Not that there is anything wrong with those bikes, it's just not what I value in bicycle frames.

Best regards,

kirk, would you agree, though, that there are more and less "advanced" or technologically sophisticated tubing? that all steel pipes, all ti pipes, all carbon pipes and all alu pipes aren't the same?

[Kirk Pacenti]

"Heck, take a tour of the Hershey or Mars candy factory, they have more high tech than any half dozen bike companies you can think of combined!"



kirk-issimo,
tell me they still make twizzlers the old fashioned way.
i'm beggin' ya', man!
sincerely -
e-RICHIE



e-R,

Rest easy,Twizzlers are still lovingly hand twistd one at a time by little old laddies. ;)

[dirtdigger88]

e-R,

Rest easy,Twizzlers are still lovingly hand twistd one at a time by little old laddies. ;)

I thought they made twizzlers a different way

Jason

[e-RICHIE]

Quote:
Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
this one:
"but i also think you could argue that how parlee bonds their tubes involves more application of technolgy than joining, say, reynolds 525 tubes with lugs. while the lugs involve more artistry."

ok, why? and please, a real rebuttal, not a cryptic hiaku.


one of my pet peeves involves the misunderstanding that
lugs=artistry, and all that touchy-feely stuff. lugs "constitute"
a joining process, albeit one that no longer is mainstream.
it has been side-stepped because ther are more efficient
methods with which to join pipes. it was once the only
acceptable method, and now it is just another method.

being proficient in lug "use" is, er, artistry perhaps. but
i am sure your opinion and statement (above) is more
rooted in what the lug can offer as a canvass for someone
who's interested in creating their own picture.

[cpg]

i don't see the issue as steel vs ti or carbon. or even one of technology. to me, it's like putting a louis XVI chair next to a shaker chair. both will hold your butt equally well. so which aesthetic floats your boat?

i applauded VF because i think that, on this forum, there is a prevailing group-think on the subject of lugged steel...that lugged steel is the pinnacle of frame building. it is a pinnacle, but there are others. IMO, there is no everest, but a group of 8000 meter peaks.

I don't see it as an either or thing at all. You're right some think lugged steel is the only thing. But I'd say VF's spin on high tech is just as slanted and quite frankly grounded in hype. Again, one doesn't have to love the aesthetic of something to appreciate the skill in which it takes to hand craft something.

Curt

[Climb01742]

richie, you make a good point. that you see lugs one way, as the person who uses them. and customers see lugs another. most often, when people comment on lugs, they comment on their beauty and, er, artistry. rarely is the discussion about the fiunctionality of joining tubes with lugs.

let me ask you...are there tubes -- be they steel, ti, carbon, alu -- that are more advanced and some less advanced? put another way, has steel progressed from 525? or 835? if so, wouldn't that represent technology advancing frames?

[cpg]

i think there is low-tech steel, ti, carbon and alu. and i think there is high-tech steel, ti, carbon and alu. and each rider can decide whether technology improves things.

but i also think you could argue that how parlee bonds their tubes involves more application of technolgy than joining, say, reynolds 525 tubes with lugs. while the lugs involve more artistry. and as for while rides better, ain't touching that. :rolleyes: technological differences exist, they just aren't the sole possession of one material.

I think you're equating bonding technique (brazing, welding, glueing, etc.) as a measurement of technology. It's not. Parlee bonds their tubes with adhesive and pressure. That's cool but not unique. It's how you do it. I guess you can call it technology but the use of glue in conjunction with pressure is hardly a new technique. What makes the bikes and any bikes special is the care in which the frames are stuck together, geometry to which they're built, appropriate materials in the right places and the resultant alignment. Let's look at our gracious host's bikes. Why buy a Serotta when you can get an Airborne ti bike for less? Well, because the Serotta will be better designed and constructed. Do the Serotta's have more technology in them compared to the Airborne? No. They're both welded ti. They're both made of ti drawn to they're specs. It comes down to the human element i.e. how and who makes it. This is not a US vs. Chinese labor thing either so don't bother going there.

Curt

[cpg]

richie, you make a good point. that you see lugs one way, as the person who uses them. and customers see lugs another. most often, when people comment on lugs, they comment on their beauty and, er, artistry. rarely is the discussion about the fiunctionality of joining tubes with lugs.

let me ask you...are there tubes -- be they steel, ti, carbon, alu -- that are more advanced and some less advanced? put another way, has steel progressed from 525? or 835? if so, wouldn't that represent technology advancing frames?

I'm not richie but do have a similar hairline. I'd answer your question regarding tubing yes and no. Tubing has "progressed" in that it's gotten stronger so the thinking is then the tubing can be drawn thinner. Seems reasonable but frame weights haven't changed dramatically in decades so where's the advance? As so many people have said in the past, it doesn't make a big difference what tubing is used. What matters is how that material is built into a frame and this applies to all materials.

Curt

[e-RICHIE]

richie, you make a good point. that you see lugs one way, as the person who uses them. and customers see lugs another. most often, when people comment on lugs, they comment on their beauty and, er, artistry. rarely is the discussion about the fiunctionality of joining tubes with lugs.

let me ask you...are there tubes -- be they steel, ti, carbon, alu -- that are more advanced and some less advanced? put another way, has steel progressed from 525? or 835? if so, wouldn't that represent technology advancing frames?


1) no one discusses the "fiunctionality" of any joining process;
why start now, with lugs?
2) steel for bicycle frames has progressed exponentially. you
can use less of it now and still have a reliable, stiff, compliant*
bicycle with no penalties.

*sp?

[csb]

if a blonde shaves his head will he
still get high at those moments?

[Climb01742]

curt,
thank you for being willing to engage in an exchange. yes, craftsmanship and design matter the most in how well a frame rides. but, i can't really believe that the advances in tubing haven't had some impact on improving ride quality. why else would someone like dario pegoretti work closely with tubing makers to push the envelop on what's possible with tubes? again, i'm not saying tubes are king, but i do believe that they have a real impact, and that they have advanced, not just in weight, but in performance characteristics. i grant you that i'm basing this on what i've read. i don't have first hand experience/knowledge. but what i've read makes sense...to me anyway! :rolleyes:
climb.

[Climb01742]

steel for bicycle frames has progressed exponentially.

don't tell this to some of the steel-is-real crowd. they don't believe that progress exists or that tubing matters. now i know you're cute, smart and honest. :beer:

[bcm119]

I'll hang my *ss out here...I've never considered bike frames art. I regard them as tools, machines, etc. How much artistic creativity do you have when designing a bike frame? Well, you have the paint scheme, and on lugged frames the option to use ornate lugs. Outside of that, its all function.

I agree that some frames are aesthetically pleasing, but I don't think that makes them art. Snowflakes are aesthetically pleasing (and more ornate than any bike frame), and all they are is a manifestation of the laws of physics.

[e-RICHIE]

snipped:
"don't tell this to some of the steel-is-real crowd. they don't believe that progress exists or that tubing matters."

huh?
who are these folks you're citing?

[victoryfactory]

Guys;

How about "Old Tech" vs "New Tech"

The term "High Tech" is always problematic because people assume
I mean better, which I don't, I just mean "newer"

We are always coming up with new materials and techniques for what we
build. It's human nature. Some of the new stuff makes sense, some is
marginal and some is hogwash. To play on this field, we need to be prepared
to sort out the difference, and discard the crap periodically.

I prefer to live in that place where we are constantly striving for a new developement, a new standard, some increase in performance, that's what
floats my boat.

I can't stand the thought of drawing a line in the sand and saying "That's it,
this particular design cant be improved", only covered in jewels.

But just because "New Tech" appeals to me, it doesn't mean that I can't
appreciate "old tech" as well. I am sure that Erichie can tell you that there
have been numerous improvements in steel frame tech since he started out.
so really he is dealing with new tech as well. It's partly an attitude.

"Old Tech" doesn't mean less, it just means something that works and has
proven value, not a dishonorable thing, not unlike the fine lugged steel frame
that started this thread.

But I see this fierce defense of existing technology sort of like getting a
tattoo. Isn't it possible that 10 years from now you won't still have a girlfriend
named "Gloria"

VF, That's why I don't get tattoos

[Kirk Pacenti]

Climb,

To a large extent it is due to marketing. There always needs to be some 'imporvement' to grow markets and sustain industry.

There are 'lesser' materials that simply perform better in certain applications.
For instance, normalized chainstays have a much longer fatigue life than heat treated ones do. I can't speak for Serotta but the as far as I know all the other top end Ti bike makers actually use annealed tubes for their rear ends.

Who would try to market annealed or normalized tubes over heat treated ones??? Materials are secondary to design and 'craftsmanship'.

[Climb01742]

snipped:
"don't tell this to some of the steel-is-real crowd. they don't believe that progress exists or that tubing matters."

huh?
who are these folks you're citing?

who am i citing? are we on the same forum? dude, look around. :crap:

[e-RICHIE]

who here, on this board, thinks that progress doesn't exist?

[William]

who here, on this board, thinks that progress doesn't exist?

Progressimo exists! It's a soup and I'm hungry


William :p ;) :D

[flydhest]

who am i citing? are we on the same forum? dude, look around. :crap:

climb,

As a card-carrying member of the steel-is-real crowd, I gotta say . . . huh? I don't think any of us thinks that steel hasn't changed. We may put different value on the changes, but that's not the same thing. To the extent that the new steel is lighter, that's clearly progress, but people in the steel-is-real camp are unlikely to be weight weenies to begin with. Weight, of course, is but one example of the progress you might make.

We steel-minded folk might be slow, but we ain't dumb.

[Climb01742]

fly, i never said anyone was dumb. but i do believe there is a sentiment or vibe often expressed here that basically goes...steel is real, classic, substantative, subtle, and the choice of knowledgeable experienced riders...while other materials are mostly hype and marketing, and are the choice of those easily swayed or not as experienced. i don't think that sentiment is fair. and this comes from a guy who has steel by serotta, merckx and pegoretti. i'm not anti-steel. i simply believe all materials deserve a fair shake.

[flydhest]

I assume you realize that I didn't think you called anyone dumb. I was funnin'.

You did, however, say that the steel is real crowd don't believe there's been progress. I disagree with that.

There are two types of people, those in the know and those that aren't. The ones in the know get to choose who is in which group.

;)

[terry]

..."steel is real, classic, substantative, subtle, and the choice of knowledgeable experienced riders"... i think this comes from the manufacturers/marketers themselves. they continue to compare the ride of their bikes to the 'ride like steel' mantra. heck, even the well respected dario in his catalog insert in the latest VN describes the ride of his fina as 'rides like steel'. ben uses his CSI as the standard for what he wants his bikes to feel like and i think everyone on this board uses their experience with steel as a basis for comparison, i know i do.

[Kane]

I keep visualizing all the people on the respective waiting lists sleeping poorly tonight. Tossing and turning ... it will take one extra day because of this thread. Absolutely delightful to have the masters gather under a virtual roof.

By the way I looked at all 39 pictures of lewellyn's frame and that is a stunning piece of work. I also looked at the frame R. Sach's made for the guy who runs the Campy lovers board. Frankly, the process was fascinating. It probably added a day to construction time to take all the photos, but it was absolutely delightful.

As a chiropractor, I live in a world of 'five' minute specialists (3 times a week forever). It takes me a minimum of 30 minutes and 60 minutes is not unusual to do the work that I do. Recently, I started working on a woman who has been is serious back pain for three years. She was addicted to Valium for a while during her recovery. The anti-inflammatories that she was taking gave her GI bleeding and an ulcer. Ultimately, the drugs never changed the problem. It took me six visits and she has gone from constant pain rated a seven on a 1 to 10 scale down to no pain in the last three weeks.

In my BNI weekly networking group with other business owners in S.F. our weekly topic was, "Whom do you pattern your business style on." My answer was Richard Sachs, because he epitomizes my goal which simply stated is excellence. To be fair of course, I should include the other frame builders who run a one person company. Thanks for the inspiration.

Cheers,


Kane

[csb]

'... basis for comparison...'

well steel got there first, but to constantly use
it to compare frames or what you want IT to feel
like is a tad odd to me. if carbon had been there first
you can bet ben would be using it as THE measure.

i desire my frame materials to be true to their form
while functioning in their man made design. i do not
expect my steel frame to feel like my ti frame.

[e-RICHIE]

"well steel got there first, but to constantly use
it to compare frames or what you want IT to feel
like is a tad odd to me."

steel "got there first" but was displaced when other
materials proved easier to work with in production
environments from which profits must be taken.
===============================
"i desire my frame materials to be true to their form
while functioning in their man made design."

what does this mean?

[csb]

it means

i do not expect a lugged ti frame

[e-RICHIE]

that's not logical; ti is welded, not brazed.
regardless, the joining process would not
change how your bike "feels".

[csb]

on a MORE humorous note its like calling
pork the other white meat.

after further review i realize i've stated something
very stuffy in thought (bad, very bad)... that one shall not use
materials in an illogical manner. while i would not want a
bamboo bike i have to submit that it is an interesting project.
i would much prefer a lugged ti frame _ it has been done, no?

oh what was the question, yes something about the feel
of one material against the next.
if you want a steel bike _ buy a one, if you want a carbon
bike to feel like a steel bike _thats illogical. if we've entered the
territory of H+H Racing making us identical bikes, then eh.

[chrisroph]

Concerning advances in steel, does anyone really like any frames made of reynolds 853? I find my one frame made out of it a little harsh riding. In contrast, I've been spending a lot of time riding my circa-1987 spectrum steel made out of older "low tech" ishiwata and columbus and its one of the finest bicycles I've ever ridden including bikes by Merckx, Pegoretti, and a CSi. In fact, my search for a state of the art steel bicycle has led me full circle back about 18 years.

I love my ti bike and I love my carbon bike. They use differing technologies than steel bikes. The carbon bike is light, smooth and stiff. The ti bike is inert, light, and comfortable. But nothing looks or feels like a carefully crafted perfectly fitting steel bicycle.

[e-RICHIE]

are you implying that you can feel the materials
from which the frame is made, that is: if two
were identical, you could seperate the steel from
the ti (or the CF...) by riding them?

[dirtdigger88]

jason

[csb]

divine-issimo,

i'm ducking while i say this, but i can tell
just by waving a forked stick.

dowsing in downtown

[cpg]

curt,
thank you for being willing to engage in an exchange. yes, craftsmanship and design matter the most in how well a frame rides. but, i can't really believe that the advances in tubing haven't had some impact on improving ride quality. why else would someone like dario pegoretti work closely with tubing makers to push the envelop on what's possible with tubes? again, i'm not saying tubes are king, but i do believe that they have a real impact, and that they have advanced, not just in weight, but in performance characteristics. i grant you that i'm basing this on what i've read. i don't have first hand experience/knowledge. but what i've read makes sense...to me anyway! :rolleyes:
climb.

How do you know Pegoretti worked closely with tubing makers to push the envelope on what's possible with tubes? Do you have a personal relationship with Dario? Or did you read this somewhere? I'm not trying to scapegoat marketing because I use it too but it seems to be your basing an "arguement" on shaky ground. Lots of builders can make a claim of working with tube makers to come up with the new perfect tube made just for them you know you want it you can't get it anywhere else stiff yet compliant tough yet not jarring robust yet plush... do I need to go on? Materials have changed but not as much as the marketing would lead you to believe.

Curt

[bcm119]

Progress exists in all facets of life. Take the Serotta Forumites club- first you had to have a Serotta, then a 15 cm stem, then you had to know a pro, now you have to edit all your posts for some increasingly bizarre reason and state it below the edit. ;)

[vandeda]

are you implying that you can feel the materials
from which the frame is made, that is: if two
were identical, you could seperate the steel from
the ti (or the CF...) by riding them?

e-RICHIE,

I've got a question concerning this. I know many believe that the feel of a frame is largely/mostly due to the design of the frame, rather than the material. How come no other material has gotten the "dead wood" reputation that CF has? Are most (all?) CF frames designed to feel like dead wood?

As you probably realize, the question you posed is very hard to answer because few people have the same exact frame design, but 2 different materials, and if they were to feel the same ... what would be the point of owning the 2 separate bikes? Well .... there could be a point. A beefy steelie for commuting/touring, a lightweight CF for racing/fast rides.

Dan

[e-RICHIE]

i don't know the answer to the cf "wood" issue.
people own two like-designed bicycles so that
their fit/position/handling characteristics are
not skewed; oh, and also because we are consumers
by nature.

[Matt Barkley]

High-End "common" frame materials:

Steel (alloys)
Aluminum (alloys)
Magnesium (alloys)
Titanium (I guess..., alloys)
Carbon Fiber (different kinds)
And combinations of the above....

Steel has evolved and CONTINUES to evolve as a material with bicycle frames. It is joined in different ways. Shaped in different ways. Made differently, heated, treated, heck, even shot-peened in newer/different ways....

This stuff ain't rocket-science, (though I hear some Carbon Fiber is "satelliete-grade") - and bike frames are bike frames. Some ride well, some don't. Some are light, some are heavy. Some will last only a year or less then break, others maybe a couple decades of hard riding....

I still strongly hold the belief that the guy, gal, or machine designing and building the bike determines WAY WAY WAY more than the material.
:beer: - Matt

[Kirk Pacenti]

e-RICHIE,

I've got a question concerning this. I know many believe that the feel of a frame is largely/mostly due to the design of the frame, rather than the material. How come no other material has gotten the "dead wood" reputation that CF has? Are most (all?) CF frames designed to feel like dead wood?

As you probably realize, the question you posed is very hard to answer because few people have the same exact frame design, but 2 different materials, and if they were to feel the same ... what would be the point of owning the 2 separate bikes? Well .... there could be a point. A beefy steelie for commuting/touring, a lightweight CF for racing/fast rides.

Dan

Counter-Maketing???

[jerk]

the jerk has had the same exact frame design in terms of geometry in two different materials. one was made out of spx (lugged steel). one was made out of dedaccai 61.10 (welded aluminum)....everything else was the same at least where it mattered....the two bikes ride the same although the lighter one feels lighter when you pick it up. the jerk can tell more difference between silk and cotton tubulars than he can between these two frames but then again there is alot of difference between silk and cotton tubulars....both these bikes are stupid stiff, and really fast and feel really powerful. both have the exact same handling geometry and put the jerk in the same place....they're both fine and hardly get ridden ever because they're stiff ballsy kermesse bikes and the jerk is too slow and fat now. (the first one came to the jerk with the exclamation by the builder, "not for over 100km". if that is translated from the flemish it means, "rides like **** but you'll love it taking an inside line on a sharp corner or accelerating up a cobblestoned wall. just don't expect to not ache when you're done.)
jerk

[CNote]

Jerk,

But the tube shapes and diameters must be significantly different, no? Isn't this where the material used in the design matters most?

[jerk]

by the way, just to stir things up. the jerk hates those stupid looking non-functional, dumb, weird hideous looking lugs on that thing. ornate gaudy awful lugs were bad enough when the brits were combining them with terrible bicycle design and geometry the first time around and no matter how "nice" that thing might ride, the jerk will assume it sucks because no amount fleur de lilles, secret kabal symbols, carvings of winston churchill humping a rugby ball or any other ornate stupid thing carved will make up for the disgraceful geometry and tradition associated with the long history such eye-sores. lugs are a functional way to join two ferrous tubes together in a way that allows for little damage to the materials if done properly, less heat effect and the ability to vary frame geometry to suit the disciplines....simple lugs look good because the form follows the function...those things look awful, because, well, they are. what's up nervex out of business or something?
jerk

oh yeah, they are but the jerk hears there's some punk in connecticut with some knock-offs or something.

[Matt Barkley]

Cnote - I hear you but keep in mind as you may already be aware - tube diameters and thicknesses need to be different because of the properties of the materials used. Cheers. - Matt

[jerk]

Jerk,

But the tube shapes and diameters must be significantly different, no? Isn't this where the material used in the design matters most?


yeah,the shapes of the tubes and the diameters are completely different. the goemetry is the same. let's put it this way, both bikes are the same bikes made out of different materials. they were designed to ride the same way so they share the same geometry. they were designed to ride the same way so the aluminum one has much fatter tubes. it's not a question of material but what the builder is trying to get out of the material.....if there was some old vitus made in the same exact geometry as the two kermesse bikes, the thing would be awful. the spx bike uses a downtube for a top-tube to give it the torsional rigidity the builder deemed necessary, the aluminum one uses some stupid big square tube for the same effect.....again using the example of an old vitus, no in the same geometry the bike would be a horrible noodle which would be easily overpowered by the rider it was designed for in the type of races it was designed to be used in....so yes material does matter, but suffice it to say you can design a great bicycle out of just about any material and you can design an awful one with even greater ease.
jerk

[CNote]

Matt, that's my point, I think. When people say that aluminum feels different from steel feels different from titanium feels different from aluminum, it's because the material plays a large part in dictating tube dimensions, which plays a greater role in dictating ride feel. If Jerk's two bikes were indeed of the same design, also considering tube shapes and diameters, then his steel bike would be a LOT stiffer than his aluminum bike and a LOT heavier (or conversely, his aluminum bike would be a very light, yet very weak spaghetti noodle).

Edit: Jerk satisfied the issue.

[Climb01742]

are you implying that you can feel the materials
from which the frame is made, that is: if two
were identical, you could seperate the steel from
the ti (or the CF...) by riding them?

richie, if i rode a steel frame over a pothole and rode a carbon frame over the same pothole, yes, i could tell the difference. same riding the two frames up a hill. do you believe that a rider couldn't tell the difference?

[Dr. Doofus]

feeling a moral obligation to pee in everyone's cornflakes, let me say this:

just shut up already

you want to pay for zinglyzoo lugs? pay for it. the framebuilder needs guys like you.

you want a cf/ti/bette midler's unwavering girdle-technology monster machine you can't make go any faster than a 299.00 airborne? buy it.

you want a cheap 10-year old frame becuase you bought the hype and had two stupid bikes? great.

your Doofus loves you all. group hug. extra pinch on climb's butt.

now, knock it off.

[Climb01742]

How do you know Pegoretti worked closely with tubing makers to push the envelope on what's possible with tubes? Do you have a personal relationship with Dario? Or did you read this somewhere? I'm not trying to scapegoat marketing because I use it too but it seems to be your basing an "arguement" on shaky ground. Lots of builders can make a claim of working with tube makers to come up with the new perfect tube made just for them you know you want it you can't get it anywhere else stiff yet compliant tough yet not jarring robust yet plush... do I need to go on? Materials have changed but not as much as the marketing would lead you to believe.

Curt

yes i read it. but i also read that the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around. am i to distrust everything i read?

if materials have not changed that much, would you please name one division pro team racing on steel? yes, i know there are many BS reasons why teams ride what they ride. but there are also very good concrete reasons -- real reasons -- why people who value performance ride other materials than steel. no, i'm not a racer. but i can read and put two and two together. materials have advanced and steel is losing ground to other materials for some very real true reasons.

[Climb01742]

your Doofus loves you all. group hug. extra pinch on climb's butt.

now, knock it off.

thanks...i think. you are right. i will shut up now. i am a moron for engaging in this debate.

[pale scotsman]

The thing about steel and ti is that it is durable, and repairable. I wouldn't own a cf bike because I'd be scared to death to crash it, and if I did I'd worry myself to death about when it was going to fail. That's a lot of money for a throw away bike. Hell, I barely trust cf forks, and even at that my evil twin refuses to believe I even ride 'em now.

I've had aluminum in the past and had good luck with them but I just plain like steel and ti. It just makes sense. Time proven technology, comfortable, and affordable. Those who race pro don't pay crap for their bikes, and I'll bet a cold bud light that if it were their own money they'd buy something durable. Uhm, like steel or ti.

The pale one can't afford beaucoup bikes, and the better half would dismiss herr pale the now if he did. Even if I rode a 14lb dogma on Saturdays club ride I'd get dropped by some dude on a caad 7. :) Thank you and please pull forward.

[e-RICHIE]

"materials have advanced and steel is losing ground to other materials for some very real true reasons."


steel has lost ground because it is the most unforgiving material
that can be used in a production environment and still yield a
profit to the guy/guys/shareholders writing the checks.
steel has been usurped as the material of choice because it
became increasingly more difficult to find/to train/to pay
workers to do "all this". that is not to say it isn't done at all;
it's simply not done in the mainstream. it is easier to subcontract,
to outsource, to weld, to bond, to glue the nonferrous stuff than
it is to run a factory floor with "brazers". that is the only
reason steel left the building. oh, and the other reason is this:
these are consumer goods. this is the sporting goods consumer
market. you CANNOT sell the same thing to the broad base of
consumers year after year. the market for steel matured
in the early 90s. after that, the industry looked elsewhere.
btw, i am using the term "mature" in the business school sense.

[Big Dan]

I knew somebody was going to drop the "pro peloton" bomb in here.... :eek:

[vandeda]

Counter-Maketing???

Errrrr .... wha? My pea-sized brain doesn't understand what your saying Kirk, could you expand a bit?

BTW, you do custom lugs, right? If so, I may wanna talk ideas with 'ya come fall. Is it OK to ask that here? Well ... just PM me

Dan

[vandeda]

i don't know the answer to the cf "wood" issue.
people own two like-designed bicycles so that
their fit/position/handling characteristics are
not skewed; oh, and also because we are consumers
by nature.

Yeah .... I see the fit/position/handling .... and the consumerism. I guess I was thinking along the lines that if I'm going to have more than 1 road bike (which I do), 1 is for those fast rides with friends, the other for carying lots of weight. The designs surely won't be the same and there will be differences for the commuting/touring bike. But yes ... we are a blessed society in that multiple bikes for the same purpose is easily obtainable here.

Thanks,
Dan

[csb]

take 2 fuel sized (thats a 3" dia. round pc.) sticks of maple, very,
very cold maple. beat them together like you're a drum major
following the cheerleaders. the sound + feel (whatever that means)
is similar to what eminates from a carbonfibered bike as it
bounces over the rip rap we call macadam here in the northeast.

if you could hollow out the wood first better yet.

[Kirk Pacenti]

Errrrr .... wha? My pea-sized brain doesn't understand what your saying Kirk, could you expand a bit?

BTW, you do custom lugs, right? If so, I may wanna talk ideas with 'ya come fall. Is it OK to ask that here? Well ... just PM me

Dan

Dan,

What I mean is, the idea that carbon feels like wood may have been started by a company building bikes out of another material, like aluminum or titanium or whatever.... just a guess. It also probably started long before EVERYONE did a carbon bike.

I wouldn't say carbon feels like wood, I'm sure wood feels much better! ;)

Seriously though, I do feel there are noticeable differences in the 'feel' of different frame materials. I spent a year and a half on a Merlin Cielo (exclusively), very nice bike, but I never really liked the ride. Then I jumped back on my personal (built by me) steel bike. WOW! It was like night and day, the bike felt so much better to me that I'll likely never ride anything else but steel.

Cheers,

[Climb01742]

"materials have advanced and steel is losing ground to other materials for some very real true reasons."


steel has lost ground because it is the most unforgiving material
that can be used in a production environment and still yield a
profit to the guy/guys/shareholders writing the checks.
steel has been usurped as the material of choice because it
became increasingly more difficult to find/to train/to pay
workers to do "all this". that is not to say it isn't done at all;
it's simply not done in the mainstream. it is easier to subcontract,
to outsource, to weld, to bond, to glue the nonferrous stuff than
it is to run a factory floor with "brazers". that is the only
reason steel left the building. oh, and the other reason is this:
these are consumer goods. this is the sporting goods consumer
market. you CANNOT sell the same thing to the broad base of
consumers year after year. the market for steel matured
in the early 90s. after that, the industry looked elsewhere.
btw, i am using the term "mature" in the business school sense.

richie--
what you say is absolutely true. ABSOLUTELY.

and big dan--
i knew someone would call BS when i brought up the pro racing point. as i said when i wrote it, there are loads of BS reasons that pro's ride what they ride.

BUT...

i believe there is one other reason (and i swear to heaven this is the last time i will EVER make this point...for your sake and mine...)

materials like carbon fiber allow a builder to do things they simply can't do with steel. like wrap more of it around the bottom bracket to increase stiffness, while putting less other places to reduce weight. or to shape tubes or intersections of tubes in odd ways. we could debate the effectiveness of some carbon shapes, but carbon allows these creations and explorations. i had a long talk yesterday with a guy who works for specialized (a guy who i've known for years and who wasn't BSing me). and some of the stuff they've done for cipo and teammates in the past, and are now doing for levi and teammates in carbon are pretty amazing. again, we could debate the effectiveness of it all, but new materials and manufacturing techniques give builders options that steel simply doesn't.

to say that steel is losing ground based on the reasons richie stated is true. but it's not the whole truth. and dan to say that pro's ride what they are told to ride is true. but it's not the whole truth.

carbon, ti and alu aren't necessarily better than steel. they are simply different. viva la difference. and with that, elvis -- at the very wise advice of a yogi in upstate new york -- is leaving the building for awhile...to find something more real than steel. peace.

[vandeda]

Dan,

What I mean is, the idea that carbon feels like wood may have been started by a company building bikes out of another material, like aluminum or titanium or whatever.... just a guess. It also probably started long before EVERYONE did a carbon bike.

I wouldn't say carbon feels like wood, I'm sure wood feels much better! ;)

Seriously though, I do feel there are noticeable differences in the 'feel' of different frame materials. I spent a year and a half on a Merlin Cielo (exclusively), very nice bike, but I never really liked the ride. Then I jumped back on my personal (built by me) steel bike. WOW! It was like night and day, the bike felt so much better to me that I'll likely never ride anything else but steel.

Cheers,

Hmmm .... idk ... the dead wood thing I've seen out of many consumer's mouths ... maybe just people who don't like CF, or bought into advertising ... hmmmm.

Next November I'll have a high quality steel bike, but until then, I'll be stuck with my '88 Centurion. It's a great bike, but ride quality is harsh. Well, is it harsh? Maybe ... maybe not. My only 2 other reference points are an Ottrott (though I rode it about 1.5 yrs ago now), and a Dragonfly. The Dragonfly absorbs so much that it's a very muted ride, bumps & vibrations that I don't or barely feel on the Dragon are very noticeable on the Centurion ... based on that, I understand where people came up with the dead wood feel. The first visualization that came to mind was take a metal pipe and throwing it onto concrete .... kinda of a harsh impact and it rings like a bell some .... and then throwing a piece of wood on some soft ground ... thud. When I think of my 2 bikes, that's the best way I can visualize the difference in sound. BTW ... that includes running the same tires, same pressure, and the same front wheel for a period of time once.

Ahhh ... whatever, if it rides nice ... who cares? Does it really matter that much? The thing I love about steel is the beauty of the lugs!

Anyone got a nice, high quality steel bike for a 5'3" person to try out anytime soon? (November is a long ways away, and there's a very good chance there will be salt on the roads so then I won't be riding the new bike until April or May ... or more than a year from now :( ).

Dan

[Big Dan]

yes i read it. but i also read that the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around. am i to distrust everything i read?

if materials have not changed that much, would you please name one division pro team racing on steel? yes, i know there are many BS reasons why teams ride what they ride. but there are also very good concrete reasons -- real reasons -- why people who value performance ride other materials than steel. no, i'm not a racer. but i can read and put two and two together. materials have advanced and steel is losing ground to other materials for some very real true reasons.

How can you say that people that value "performance" don't ride steel...
What kind of a statement is that??? :confused:
Sorry Climb, but your argument just doesn't hold water.....

Why does it matter what the pro's ride???...
what really matters is how quickly you come off my wheel.. boy...... :bike:

[Too Tall]

It is a ridiculous argument to say xyz material will feel more "compliant" or this or that in the same geometry bike and Matt and E and Joik and others said this repeatedly diff. ways. Any given bike made from XYZ materials is designed for a purpose / use. If the bike "feels" more compliant than it was designed to ride that way dooood. Similar to Jerk I've got a very stiff steel bike that if you blind folded me and put me in the drops and told me to hammer away I'd have a very hard time distinguishing it from my Ti Legend...which was designed to ride like a stiff steel bike. Golly. BEN you TRICKED ME MAN ;) wink wink.

High Tech? What are we talking about? High tech. in and of it self is "supposed" to connote a greater value or sumffin? I don't get it. Er yah saying if and that's an hypothetical "if" carbon for instance is infact "high tech" than are you saying it deserves and should cost more? What? I'm really lost as to what the value of the so called "high tech" label is anywho.

PS - My elementary school teacher said that "labels are for losers". Stickers are OK.

[zap]

it is easier to subcontract,
to outsource, to weld, to bond, to glue the nonferrous stuff than
it is to run a factory floor with "brazers".

Hmmm, I recall seeing robots brazing lugged steel frames.

[jeffg]

It is a ridiculous argument to say xyz material will feel more "compliant" or this or that in the same geometry bike and Matt and E and Joik and others said this repeatedly diff. ways. Any given bike made from XYZ materials is designed for a purpose / use. If the bike "feels" more compliant than it was designed to ride that way dooood. Similar to Jerk I've got a very stiff steel bike that if you blind folded me and put me in the drops and told me to hammer away I'd have a very hard time distinguishing it from my Ti Legend...which was designed to ride like a stiff steel bike. Golly. BEN you TRICKED ME MAN ;) wink wink.

High Tech? What are we talking about? High tech. in and of it self is "supposed" to connote a greater value or sumffin? I don't get it. Er yah saying if and that's an hypothetical "if" carbon for instance is infact "high tech" than are you saying it deserves and should cost more? What? I'm really lost as to what the value of the so called "high tech" label is anywho.

PS - My elementary school teacher said that "labels are for losers". Stickers are OK.

I generally agree with TooTall, although my carbon ride does feel quite different than my Legend. Even blinfolded I would bet most of us could tell ...
The geos on the two bikes are almost identical, so they handle accordingly.

The reason most pros ride what they ride is
(1) sponsorship
(2) their job is to find the quickest path between two points. Carbon and AL are the materials of choice here, as they can be built stiff and light.

We buy bikes for a different purpose. We want ours to perform well (for our intended purpose) and last more than a season. IMHO, a Ti bike such as a Legend is optimal here, though steel fits the bill as well and carbon can be fun. My carbon bike is light, stiff, and comfy over the long haul, so its great. It doesn't have the feel a Legend does and is far less durable, but that's why it's a second bike. If I had one, a Legend or a Spectrum would be high-tech enough for me. Since it's still snowing out, it will be the trainer again tonight ... :banana:

[e-RICHIE]

"Hmmm, I recall seeing robots brazing lugged steel frames."

you didn't see them making the kind of frames that
anyone in this forum would look twice at.

[zap]

My wife really likes her robot built steel lugged bike. I think some formites would get a real kick out of it too.

But no, it does not have the fancy scrolled lugs but it does have pointy ones :rolleyes: Nor does it compare to the frames you or Kirk or other quality steel brazers produce. But for its intended purpose it works.

[e-RICHIE]

you wrote:
"My wife really likes her robot built steel lugged bike."

my wife really likes hers too.
e-ROBOT

[JohnS]

I have no use for a bike like this. It may be art or sculpture, but is it a viable mode of transportation. Like Birddog said , it reminds me of goldplated, engraved guns that are never taken into the field because they may get scraped. Another example is some of the custom cars that you see at shows that have chromed driveshafts and brake rotors. They may as well be a hunk of metal for their usefulness for their intended purpose.
I personally, don't like lugged frames. They look too "busy" and cluttered for me. If I was to buy a steel frame, it would be fillet brazed or welded.

[e-RICHIE]

lugged frames are brazed.

[vaxn8r]

I have no use for a bike like this. It may be art or sculpture, but is it a viable mode of transportation. Like Birddog said , it reminds me of goldplated, engraved guns that are never taken into the field because they may get scraped. Another example is some of the custom cars that you see at shows that have chromed driveshafts and brake rotors. They may as well be a hunk of metal for their usefulness for their intended purpose.
I personally, don't like lugged frames. They look too "busy" and cluttered for me. If I was to buy a steel frame, it would be fillet brazed or welded.
Since you bought us back....I feel differently. I have no use for the frame in question either. But I will not buy a tig'd bike. Lugs or filet brazing for me because crafsmanship does matter to me, not that you can't tell the difference between good tig welds and bad ones because anyone can. To me there is a balance between form and function. I just think the example leans way too far towards form. But who cares, somebody will appreciate it.

Climb, fighting the battle of CF. It's not worth it. It's like trying to convince someone about religion. Anyway I saw a VERY trick frame last night. Specialized Roubaix S Works. Honestly, there is some amazing things being done in CF folks. It really is not as bad as some would make it out. I seriously doubt they are going to put Serotta out of business but IMHO they, and others, are advancing bicycle design in a good way.

[jerk]

race bikes matter. they mean the jerk can still get round handlebars, low bottom brackets, long stems, tubular tires and bikes that handle properly. if "the market" was the only thing driving road bike design we would all be riding these foolish things that handle like crap and have the seat and the bars at the same height and short stems and stupid front center measurements and awful balance. no offense to trek/specialized but what the market "needs" and "wants" are carbon fiber pilots and roubaixs. sorry, but bikes like that suck.
this is really, really selfish because most people are not racers, and would probably be happiest on a true "brevet" or "sport touring" bike....instead they get monstrosities with the back end of a racing bike, the front end of god knows what and the handlebar position of the free-spirit that guy who got his license taken away by the state rides with the bars really high and rotated back.....so maybe racing doesn't improve the bicycle it just improves racing bikes......what is the jerk saying here? he doesn't really know but all those finicky riders who are demanding special frames....guess what? they're not demanding more carbon around the bottom bracket or less around the seat tube top tube junction....they're demanding little tweaks in geometry to make the bikes handle better. that's what matters when your out there racing...not material. naturally, all other things being equal it is great to have a light bike, carbon and alloys allow that. they also allow really aerodynamic shapes and frame designs which one can not do with steel.....anyway, the jerk loves his c50. it rides really wonderfully, handles well and is snappy and fast.
jerk

[zap]

....still waiting for that high-tech, full carbon Serotta assembled by super duper skilled craftsmen from upstate NY. :banana:

:beer:

[William]

Like I said in the begining of this thread, I like it...because as an artist I can appreciate the vision, determination, and drive that went into making that ride. It's not what I would look for in a bike, but I think it's pretty cool and I'd ride it if I had the chance.

CF? I'm sure the tech is to the point where I wouldn't really have to worry about riding one. But, because I have to go custom, I'm not likely to make the leap of faith to shell out the dollars to have one made to see if I like it. I want a test ride first.
As far as the "deadwood" phrase. I remember hearing that from a team mate back in the early 90's who rode an early CF frame. I'm not claiming he coined the term, just that its been around for a while.

I think that all tube makers (steel, alum, & Ti) are constantly pushing the envelope to come up with lighter, stronger, & marketable tube sets. I suppose you could call it "high tech" for what they are doing within their field? But what they are coming up with isn't always noticable to the naked eye. CF builders on the other hand are using molds and different lay ups & coming out with designs that are noticably different, and by appearences, "higher Tech". Certainly pushing the envelope in the CF bike world. Is it higher Technology then metal tubed bikes? I think apples & Oranges my friends.

William

[OldDog]

I love that bike and I'd ride the snot out of it, enjoying every glander I got of it. I'd get it repainted down the road when it needed it. I love and still ride my '72 touring Paramount. Love those Nervex lugs. It's been painted too when needed. Same with my 4 year old Sachs. When it needs painting, Ritchie and JB will take care of me. Though not as crafty, I still love to ride my 81 DeRosa and 97ish MX Leader. All of them are <quality built> rigs.

Lugs Baby! Time to get in line for a new Ritchie with Newvex lugs. Or maybe a Goodrich or Wiegle. Sigh....so many sweet bikes.

There has been advancement in steel bikes, tubing that can be better tigged, oversize tubing for both tig and brazing. Advancement in lugs themselves.
Improved, yeah. High tech? Not a chance.

Carbon and Ti? Anyone who thinks 25 year old aerospace technology that has made it's way to cycling products is new hight tech is dreaming. Take a look at the VN buyers guide, a piece on Time fabricating it's carbon tubes. That braiding machine is made by Magnatech International of Sinking Springs, PA. It is essentionally a 100+ year old design, just now they are using a carbon thread. Heck, that machine looks to be 100 years old. I know, I used to make all those rollers until an in between "supply chain" distributor took the job to China, along with most of those "high tech" carbon frames and bits. No doubt there are domestic builders who master in low volume custom carbon, parlee, etc. Actually I cannot think of anyone else who does carbon other than Parlee, that is on a small craftsman type scale. Help me out here.

I too have a Spectrum Ti, a 95 with straight pipes. This ride is great, for what it is. I've had a OCLV for a bit, that did not last long, Had a chance to put some miles on both a C-40 and a Orbea Orca. Nice, but not keepers, not for me anyway. To be fair, I'm fat and probably exceed the limit of those frames. OK, I'm biased, I love steel lugged bikes and when I come across one I like I keep it.

Ride what moves your soul and keeps a silly grin on your face :) This Llywellyn is one fantastic frame.

[OldDog]

CF builders on the other hand are using molds and different lay ups & coming out with designs that are noticably different, and by appearences, "higher Tech". Certainly pushing the envelope in the CF world. Is it higher Technology then metal tubed bikes? I think apples & Oranges my friends.

William



"and by appearences, "higher Tech".

Marketing. Gotta have something different to sell next season.

[vaxn8r]

race bikes matter. they mean the jerk can still get round handlebars, low bottom brackets, long stems, tubular tires and bikes that handle properly. if "the market" was the only thing driving road bike design we would all be riding these foolish things that handle like crap and have the seat and the bars at the same height and short stems and stupid front center measurements and awful balance. no offense to trek/specialized but what the market "needs" and "wants" are carbon fiber pilots and roubaixs. sorry, but bikes like that suck.
this is really, really selfish because most people are not racers, and would probably be happiest on a true "brevet" or "sport touring" bike....instead they get monstrosities with the back end of a racing bike, the front end of god knows what and the handlebar position of the free-spirit that guy who got his license taken away by the state rides with the bars really high and rotated back.....so maybe racing doesn't improve the bicycle it just improves racing bikes......what is the jerk saying here? he doesn't really know but all those finicky riders who are demanding special frames....guess what? they're not demanding more carbon around the bottom bracket or less around the seat tube top tube junction....they're demanding little tweaks in geometry to make the bikes handle better. that's what matters when your out there racing...not material. naturally, all other things being equal it is great to have a light bike, carbon and alloys allow that. they also allow really aerodynamic shapes and frame designs which one can not do with steel.....anyway, the jerk loves his c50. it rides really wonderfully, handles well and is snappy and fast.
jerk

Not sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing or even if you were referring to my post. I never claimed the Roubaix was a race bike. It isn't. Though it's as much a race bike as some I've seen in the gallery....and wicked light too. Would I buy one? Nope. Simply trying to illustrate a point Climb was making earlier about cool things you can do with CF.

[William]

Marketing. Gotta have something different to sell next season.

Bingo! How things appear, and how things are can be two entirely different things. Change for the sake of change?

William

[Dr. Doofus]

God what a vapid thing your doof is about to type...beauty is all about context. A piece of sheeyatsu Airborne AL is beautiful if it gives a 16-year-old something decent to race on. A 53 cm with a 22 cm head tube is beautiful if it gives some cat with six fused vertebrae something he can ride.

there just bikes, ferchrissakes...a Sachs and a Scattante are not meant for the same buyer...and thus, in a way, not for the same purpose...you can race a VW or you can race a Porsche, but if you can't afford a Porsche don't ***** that your VW isn't the equal of a 911...god that is the stupidest thing ever written but its the way it came out...anyway....

doof likes cheap bikes because he really doesn't understand the good stuff...or maybe doof is just bitter about the whole serotta experience...whatever...your doo-doo head thinks that gunnars and ionics are really beautiful because they're good basic bikes made by people who make really good really expensive bikes..it keeps the factory humming, keeps some cash flow, keeps the welders keep busy and enables some folks out there can snag a good frame for cheap...god I'm talking out my butt yet again and if this keeps up you'll get the lecture about how Miller Lite is actually a good beer and how much the doof loves satin-finish Martins and Ampeg amps...the aesthetic here is relentlessly middlebrow so your guy is kinda feeling outta this loop...whatever....

[Big Dan]

I'm more into :

Old Fender Strats
Fender J-bass
Fender amps
Ronald JC120 amps
Guild acoustics
Mxr phase 90 pedals..........
Ernie Ball Power Slinkys

My 1980 Strat kills........and no one calls me retro.........there's no plastic guitar that can come close........ :banana:

[flydhest]

Dan,

You'd love to hang out in my basement. Fender Strat, Blues Deluxe Amp, Pearl drum kit, Guild steel string, and a stable of Serottas.

[William]

Dan,

You'd love to hang out in my basement. Fender Strat, Blues Deluxe Amp, Pearl drum kit, Guild steel string, and a stable of Serottas.

Would you let a big guy with a 5 string BG banjo come hang out too???


William :)

[flydhest]

Should I put some beer in the fridge now?

[William]

:beer:





.

[Big Dan]

Nothing like some nice Strats and Serottas to make your life sweet.
Right now I have 3 Strats, 1 Guild acoustic, 1 Epiphone Jazz box, 1 Fender J-Bass, 2 steel Serottas and 1 steel Merckx Corsa..tight basement... :D
almost pull the trigger on a Reverend electric, but really don't have time to play them or to ride all of my bikes.....If I hit the Lotto...look out...... :)

[dirtdigger88]

I have a left handed Electra strat- very cool!! :cool:

Jason

[Ahneida Ride]

I don't care what anyone says...I'd ride it. :cool:

William


I'd ride it too !!!! Incredible .... Really ....

[OldDog]

Might you be interested in a Telecaster, new, unused, tags still hanging on it.
Guard depicts Blue Moon Swamp, audographed by John Fogerty. No case. Maybe 4 years old. Collecting dust in my den. I don't play. Well I used to until I lost a good range in my hearing. I think I can still play, but I am told I can't. Anymore I just sing along with the voices in my head....

Drop me a PM for the lowdown. I'll be out of town until sometime Sunday afternoon.

[flydhest]

Nothing like some nice Strats and Serottas to make your life sweet.
Right now I have 3 Strats, 1 Guild acoustic, 1 Epiphone Jazz box, 1 Fender J-Bass, 2 steel Serottas and 1 steel Merckx Corsa..tight basement... :D
almost pull the trigger on a Reverend electric, but really don't have time to play them or to ride all of my bikes.....If I hit the Lotto...look out...... :)

Nice.

One electric (Am. standard Strat), one steel string (Guild), one classical. That was actually the first draft of John Lee Hooker's song.

One steel Serotta, one steel Vanilla, two Ti Serottas.

Guitars are cheaper than bikes, but not by much.

[Darrell]

Hi Gladdies, as I am the person who constructed Tim's frame, fork and stem I would like to express a few thoughts and facts.
Tim commisioned me to make a frame along the lines of one I have made before. I had a free hand in some details. I can confirm it was a lot of fun however it was a lot of toil. One fact I would like to stress is this frame is a practical bike to ride. It will ride like a frame with simple lug shapes. The lugs and BB shell have radius spoons in all the critical areas to ensure many years of riding. Also tube wall thickness was selected with this in mind. It is not a frame made for a 60kg climber to race a dozen mountain top stages in a year, but it is not a boat anchor. Sure, I agree, it is not a frame that will appeal to all asthetic tastes. But it does create comment! {Ha it worked}
But it is a frame Tim will have fun riding!
For those who do not know my background I have been involved and still am connected with high performance cycling. I was head National road team mechanic. I have washed bikes in 23 countries and have been to two Olympic games and many world Championships. My products were used at the last Olympic games. I also still work with our national team biomechanists and coaches.
http://www.llewellynbikes.com/thegallery/My-work-with-the-AIS-and-National-teams
I have worked with Carbon, titanium and alluminium bike suppliers with team frames and products. Sponsorship deals and the $ and marketing dribble. Let me be frank, Pro team bike sponsorships are to market and advertise and thus sell units to day dreaming lusting bike riders of varied abilitys and ages.That is to every day punters like you and me!
These days I like to stay home and I have a fantastic partner {Tania} and I like my work with making frames.
Lets get something clear. Bike technology has not made bikes faster than they were 25 years ago! Aero dynamic regulations have been relaxed and changed to allow speeds to increase. Todays athletes are putting more watts on the pedals and for longer. Bike technology does not put more watts on the pedals. Ok, bikes can be made lighter, but if you do your maths, then only when climbing does that come into the eqaution and then it is only relevant to an athlete with skin folds less than 20mm over eight sites and is a paid proffie. In fact the best track and road tyres are still tubular and the construction of these is still pretty much the same as 30 years ago!!!! The most technicallyy advanced piece of cycling equipent is the silicon chip and the readout on your cycle computer. But having said that, one can say that manufacturing technology or knowledge has allowed products to be realised that were not possible before. An example is the STI gear/brake lever. This could have been hand made 100 years ago by skilled instument makers if they had the knowledge of what they wanted, what they need, and what the market needed it and some one willing to pay for it. Manufacturing technology is the biggest influence in the market place as it has allowed things to be made could not be made or made a price that allowed it to be successful in the market place.
So called bike technology: If you think you are going to peel off some one's wheel in the dash to the line and throw your hands in the air as you cross the line looking back at your defeated opponents and yell "Suck eggs fella's, I had carbon fibre brake cables and a frame NASA made with tubes used to pump propellent into space shuttle motors" then you are delusional.
Don't get me wrong, bikes are nicer to use that 25 years ago, clipless pedals STI, etc but if your cycling is just about gizzmos, then I feel sad for you.
I like fixed wheel riding, that is real cycling. You feel the pedaling, it is not interfeared with, its getting back to cycling to my way of thinking. If you do not regularly ride a fixed wheel bike than you are missing out on something sweet.
But of course it is not for all terrains.
Frames: It is first about getting what fits under you nicely for your requirements.
Tim's frame was about making a bike that he will cherish. A bike he will enjoy riding. I expect he will be proud to ride it as well. If I have made him a frame he will cherish and it gives him many year of good service then I am happy.
I do make simple frames, compact with lugs and lugless. My choice of material is steel. Not because I am nostalgic. But rather because I think you can make a very durable product with steel tubes, also rides well and other than 400 grams it will do what ever the other materials do and better. I can also impart my skills, my astheitcs and craftmanship into the frame. Not many frames I make are as elaborate as Tim's. Some of my frames have won world Championships. I make lots of other products as well used in competition today at Oylimpic games and world championships.
The ones worrying about grams and materials are not the real racers. Real racers worry about the engine and the race when the number is pinned on!The bike is a tool, as long as it works. Mike Rodgers and Robbie McEwen were not concerened about equipment when I was their mechanico. They were concerned about results in racing and getting good enough to sign a contract, and most importantly "Ready to sign a contract."
Back in 1996 the USA track cycling team was laughed at because they were so concerned about equipment and hype they forgot about the riders and a long term structured program to make good tough bike riders so they had a 43 year old do some laps in the qualifiying round in the individual pursuit. He sure had a nice bike! So my frame building is about a market niche. It is not mainstream, it never will be. If you want to see some bull to sell units to tragic market victems who think that unless you are riding this years NASA tubes bike with carbon brake cables and funky curved moulded tubes then their cycling pleasure is comprimised then I admit "Don't ring me to chat".
If you think riding is just about technology then you have missed the plot of cycling. :bike:
For me "LUGS RULE, LONG LIVE THE LUG"
But all types of bikes have a place in the world. Some will have that place longer than others and give more value to the rider.
Cheers from Dazza :cool: who thinks you should not judge the value of the poduct by its weight.

[Matt Barkley]

Darrell.
Thanks for the post and I am glad to have sold one of your framesets here in the states. Great work. Great post. Great points. Even greater bikes! Cheers :beer: - Matt Barkley

[H.Frank Beshear]

Well said, very well said Thank you Frank

[e-RICHIE]

"Lets get some things straight..."


yeah what he said.

[weisan]

But all types of bikes have a place in the world. Some will have that place longer than others and give more value to the rider.
Cheers from Dazza :cool: who thinks you should not judge the value of the poduct by its weight.

Serotta Forum Reader's Poll - Post of the Month for March.
http://www.chucksweeny.com/images/ribbon.gif

Anyone? :D

[Kirk Pacenti]

Damg, why can't I write like that?

[Kirk Pacenti]

Damg, why can't I write like that?


I can't even spell "DANG"!

[weisan]

I can't even spell "DANG"!

KP, you are too modest. I bet you, Richie-sawa, Dave Kirk, Tom Kellogg, Senor Jerk, DBRK, and many others I forgot to mention here but contribute to this forum...know just as much as Darrell does. But you've got a tough crowd here to educate. Thanks for the patience and the willingness in sharing the knowledge freely.

weisan

[Darrell]

I am with you Kirk, I cannot spell, I miss words and forget letters!
Can I blame the rushed typing to get into the workshop after breakfast and the two glass red wine hangover?
Also thanks for the many kind compliments about the Tim's frame.
I will see all you culture freaks at Cirque 2005!
Dazza :cool:

[dirtdigger88]

Darrell- welcome- well said- nice frames
Jason

[Wayne77]

satin-finish Martins and Ampeg amps...the aesthetic here is relentlessly middlebrow so your guy is kinda feeling outta this loop...whatever....


I'm a walking contradiction: currently playing either a beat up 80's Gibson Paul or an early flamed maple 90's Nitehawk through, heaven forbid...a Line6 Flextone. The agony!..Oh the horror!!!

One of these days I'll repent and get a cool little tweed or something..

[Climb01742]

:cool:

[Tom]

And so's everything else if you build it right.

I love the hell out of my CSi. Karen loves the hell out of hers, too. But if we had the spare cash we'd be riding Legends. And if I knew what those wheels were on the ones we demoed and I knew what I think I know now, we'd be riding tubulars.

What a set of problems to have. Could be worse.

[Big Dan]

ClimbO blasted:

darrell,

you built an ornate monstrosity. you set out to build an ornate monstrosity. you achieved it brilliantly. why not simply say that? and spare us the equally ornate, overblown, smug, self-righteous drivel?

yet your post did serve one useful purpose. no, actually two. first, it epitomizes the smugness, the close-mindedness, the self-righteousness, the holier-than-thou, the "i alone have a pipeline -- a steel pipeline of course -- to what it true and right" attitude that characterizes the steel is real mindset. and two, it was the single most nauseating post i've read on this forum.

and to those who chimed in lauding it? had you been at jonestown, you would have been the first ones to say, oh please, please can't i have another cup of kool-aid?

i have the intellectual honesty to admit that my opinions are just that, opinions. i don't have the gaul or the close-mindedness to posit them as truth or fact. to the steel is real crowd, what is your excuse?

to paraphrase e-richie, darrell your post demostrates that experience is no substitute for wisdom. and if you think this post is simply the rantings of a ***hole, well maybe it is. but i am not alone. others here are sick of the steel-is-real storm-troopers. they simply don't wish to take you guys on and get kicked in the teeth by you. unfortunately, my mamma didn't raise me to be that smart. and i have a few teeth left.

every utterance in this post is simply an opinion. the bicycle gods didn't give me the devine tablets. i guess they were down under with you, eh darrell?

Climb what can I say??? Steel is real..sorry but it is...now are you selling your MX??? let me know... :D

Why dismiss people that like the ride of steel as fanatical and crazy? Look at some of the people involved, maybe , just maybe they are not crazy and know a thing or two about bikes......just a thought....live$trong brother..

[GoJavs]

darrell,

...and spare us the equally ornate, overblown, smug, self-righteous drivel?...



Isn't tolerance a wonderful thing? That's alright Climb, you can keep your carbon bits, and I'll keep collecting my classic steel steeds. Not sure that makes us "steel is real" folk self-righteous. Nah, probably smarter, that's all! :banana:

[Climb01742]

Climb what can I say??? Steel is real..sorry but it is...now are you selling your MX??? let me know..... :D

big dan, i honestly love my steel bikes. i will never sell my mxl in particular. please understand where i'm coming from. i'm not attacking steel. steel has loads of great qualities. i just can't buy the superiority of steel...nor the superior attitude of many steel advocates.

why can't we simply say...each material has it's plus/minus. choose the ones you like...WITHOUT arguing for the absolute superiority of your choice, and WITHOUT denigrading the choices of others or the benefits of other materials?

in our choices, be humble. be open-minded. be fair. don't be smug. don't claim because of your experience you have a lock on the "truth".

in literature, there is faulkner, hemingway, ****ens, proust, tolstoi...does any one of them have a lock on how to build a novel? in film there is eastwood, sorcessi (sp?), hawks, wilder, chaplin, griffiths, polanski, hitchcock, and all those french dudes whose names i sure as hell can't spell...does any of them have a lock on how to build a movie?

so why must the steel is real crowd be so damned smug and sure of their vision? it's a cool vision. but we all have eyes. let us each see things as we see fit. without being stormtroopers about it.

[dirtdigger88]

Climb- did you stop eating again? Why so angry? Come on climb- bikes are aluminum because it is cheap and light- want proof? Go pick up a six pack of beer- see the cans? Why do you think they are made out of aluminum- cheap and light- I guess you are right- I am a card carrying member of the steel is real crowd- Anymore, when I walk into a bike shop- I dont even stop at all of the high tech wonder bikes- they no longer interest me- go ride your bike climb- ride your steel one- you will feel better- trust me ;)

Jason

[dirtdigger88]

so why must the steel is real crowd be so damned smug and sure of their vision? it's a cool vision. but we all have eyes. let us each see things as we see fit. without being stormtroopers about it.


now you know how we shimano users feel- now I understand your point of view climb- thanks

Jason

[GoJavs]

I agree, Climb. It's a matter of choice and just like with everything else in life where folks make choices, people will defend their choice till the end of time!

So, the steel crowd will fend off the "stuck in a time-warp" criticism and the modern materials crowd will defend against the "chasing the gimmick" talk forever...

Sounds like politics, sports, academics, coke vs. pepsi...you name it....same thing... :rolleyes:

[e-RICHIE]

"why can't we simply say...each material has it's plus/minus. choose the ones you like...WITHOUT arguing for the absolute superiority of your choice, and WITHOUT denigrading the choices of others or the benefits of other materials?"

i think dazza summed up his pov here:
"So my frame building is about a market niche. It is not mainstream, it never will be."

my pov as stated a billion times:
if the industry could've continued to profit with
steel being the material of choice, it would have.
owing to "market", consumerism, labor, and other
tangents, non-ferrous materials have supplanted
steel. period.

[woolly]

darrell,

you built an ornate monstrosity. you set out to build an ornate monstrosity. you achieved it brilliantly. why not simply say that? and spare us the equally ornate, overblown, smug, self-righteous drivel?

yet your post did serve one useful purpose. no, actually two. first, it epitomizes the smugness, the close-mindedness, the self-righteousness, the holier-than-thou, the "i alone have a pipeline -- a steel pipeline of course -- to what it true and right" attitude that characterizes the steel is real mindset. and two, it was the single most nauseating post i've read on this forum.

and to those who chimed in lauding it? had you been at jonestown, you would have been the first ones to say, oh please, please can't i have another cup of kool-aid?

i have the intellectual honesty to admit that my opinions are just that, opinions. i don't have the gaul or the close-mindedness to posit them as truth or fact. to the steel is real crowd, what is your excuse?

to paraphrase e-richie, darrell your post demostrates that experience is no substitute for wisdom. and if you think this post is simply the rantings of a ***hole, well maybe it is. but i am not alone. others here are sick of the steel-is-real storm-troopers. they simply don't wish to take you guys on and get kicked in the teeth by you. unfortunately, my mamma didn't raise me to be that smart. and i have a few teeth left.

every utterance in this post is simply an opinion. the bicycle gods didn't give me the devine tablets. i guess they were down under with you, eh darrell?

Man, you are some piece of work. Darrell stated up front in his post that he "would like to express a few thoughts and facts". The "thoughts" part reflect his opinions - do you really need an explicit disclaimer to point out each comment as opinion? Personally, I welcome his input, and his thoughts and perspectives that come from his experiences. I may not agree with all of them, but hey, those are his opinions. Heck, I may even chime in and say that I disagree with some of those opinions.

Darrell made no personal attack on you, yet you were compelled to lash out at him individually. Your comparison of others to the Jonestown incident was also both in poor taste and totally inapporpriate. This is totally different than debating merits of a frame material, or stating with conviction one's preferance towards one over the other.

Please, knock it off.

[Climb01742]

woolly, if you read carefully, darrell actually began is his post with:

"Lets get some things straight".

that, to me, does not sound like the beginning of an opinion. it sounds like a lecture. like he's got the answers. and any who disagree need to be "straightened out".

and your final line "knock it off" sounds like, well...childish.

and hey dirt, if you really thing all alu frames are just cheap, if you get the chance, ride a peg CCKMP or fina, or a merckx team sc. those, in my opinion, are simply damn fine bikes. i don't believe dario pegoretti does anything because it's cheap.

[dirtdigger88]

Ok climb- I will play along- you named two bike companies that (in your opinoin) make good (great?) aluminum bikes- Ok I will not disagree but what about the masses of other aluminum bikes- why does specialized or trek- or the likes use aluminum- Because it is cheap to buy and cheap to work with- it doesnt make it advanced or special- I go back to my beer can argument- aluminum is used because it is cheap and light- not for the fantastic properties and vibration dampening you feel while driking . . .

Jason

[Big Dan]

climb90125 blasted

woolly, if you read carefully, darrell actually began is his post with:

"Lets get some things straight".

that, to me, does not sound like the beginning of an opinion. it sounds like a lecture. like he's got the answers. and any who disagree need to be "straightened out".

and your final line "knock it off" sounds like, well...childish.

and hey dirt, if you really thing all alu frames are just cheap, if you get the chance, ride a peg CCKMP or fina, or a merckx team sc. those, in my opinion, are simply damn fine bikes. i don't believe dario pegoretti does anything because it's cheap.

Funny that you bring up Dario , wonder why he still uses steel on his bikes ..? :rolleyes: Also why he doesn't use carbon stays and compact geo.. :confused:

Cut your loses......
I bet you give some pro team a couple of BLE's or Marcelo's and they will deliver results....

[Climb01742]

jason, where have i argued for those things? and how on earth is your reply germaine to your earlier post where you said "Come on climb- bikes are aluminum because it is cheap and light- want proof? Go pick up a six pack of beer- see the cans? Why do you think they are made out of aluminum- cheap and light"? my response was to that point you made.

and dude, be fair: i have often said how much i dig my steel marcelo. and in the post above replying to big dan, i clearly stated my basic point: i'm not arguing with steel. i'm arguing with an attitude about steel. seems like both you and woolly read only what you want to read.

[woolly]

woolly, if you read carefully, darrell actually began is his post with:

"Lets get some things straight".

that, to me, does not sound like the beginning of an opinion. it sounds like a lecture. like he's got the answers. and any who disagree need to be "straightened out".

and your final line "knock it off" sounds like, well...childish.

and hey dirt, if you really thing all alu frames are just cheap, if you get the chance, ride a peg CCKMP or fina, or a merckx team sc. those, in my opinion, are simply damn fine bikes. i don't believe dario pegoretti does anything because it's cheap.

Climb,

Since we're picking nits, Darrell didn't start his post with "Let's get some things straight" - that's down in the middle of the post. This is well after he stated in the first sentance that he "would like to express a few thoughts and facts". To me that set the tone for the post. I took the information that he shared about the frame itself to be fact. He also shared facts about his experience in the industry, which I felt helped provide some context for his opinions. I took much of the rest to be his opinion.

I guess my main point is that this guy has a total of TWO posts to his credit. You may have an axe to grind regarding those who passionately feel that "steel is real", but Darrell doesn't have any history with that.

So, let me rephrase my "knock it off" request: PLEASE quit taking this out personally on others who are not arguing with you.

[Climb01742]

Ok climb- I will play along- you named two bike companies that (in your opinoin) make good (great?) aluminum bikes- Ok I will not disagree but what about the masses of other aluminum bikes- why does specialized or trek- or the likes use aluminum- Because it is cheap to buy and cheap to work with- it doesnt make it advanced or special- I go back to my beer can argument- aluminum is used because it is cheap and light- not for the fantastic properties and vibration dampening you feel while driking . . .

Jason

and jason, what about the mass of cheap crappy steel bikes out there? or are there no cheap crappy steel bikes?

there are cheap crappy bikes out there made of EVERY material. and thank heaven there are great bikes out there made of EVERY material. no material has a lock on greatness...or crappiness.

[Climb01742]

Since we're picking nits, Darrell didn't start his post with "Let's get some things straight" - that's down in the middle of the post...So, let me rephrase my "knock it off" request: PLEASE quit taking this out personally on others who are not arguing with you.

no, woolly, he actually TITLED his post "Let's get some things straight." which seems to make that thought paramount.

and woolly, since i have basically been the only one arguing against "steel is real" in this thread, who was darrell's post directed to? no, he did not name me, but who else is taking the other side in this debate?

but i would like to apologize for the jonestown reference. that was over the line. i am sorry for that. my anger got the better of me.

[William]

Wow, we have some big guns peddling into the neighborhood.

Darrell, I like your work, I think the piece in question is pretty cool, not exactly my cup-O-tea, but cool none the less (I couldn't afford it anyway). I also occupy a Niche position in another creative market, and one thing I've learned is that nothing will ever satisfy all people (I know you know that). So, you do what you do and to heck with all the rest. There will always be someone who doesn't like a particular work.....nothing wrong with that...such is life (shrug).

Coming from a production background (art based...it does exist really), e-RICHIES comment rings true to me. The big companies use what's cheap for them to use, then create the marketing hype to get the masses to buy it. I'm not saying that alum, CF, or Ti is less then steel. Just not what the companies are pushing. Is steel a better material then the others? Whatever I (or anyone else) say is an opinion, and we all know the saying about opinions.

The bottom line here, and I've said it before (and someone said it in this thread), is it's the engine that matters. Not whether the bike is CF, Alum, Ti, or steel. As far as the material, what ever floats your boat! Apples & Oranges.

The important thing is to just shut up and go ride it. It's cold, but the sun is out and I'm going riding. later!

William :)

[woolly]

Ya got me on the title - I tend to skip those. I still stand by what I said about the first sentence, that it really set the tone of the post (for me, anyway). Also appreciate the acknowledgement of the Jonestown misstep.

I still don't understand why this "steel is real" thing makes you so angry. Pay your money, take your choice. I seriously doubt the steel freaks are warming up the black helicopter for a trip over to your house. :D The DKS freaks here are pretty passionate about their preference too, why does that seem to be different?

:banana:

[H.Frank Beshear]

I woke up read climbs response to Darrels post, wrote as scathing and vitrolic a response as my sleep addled brain could muster up and then reread it and hit delete.I just started to do it again sorry. I was one of the ones who thought he had written a good post. He stated the reasons behind what he did and didn't personaly attack anyone. You were not the only person who questioned why he built that frame. I thought it interesting that it was not a show bikebut one that will actually be ridden hence my response to his post. I like bikes, my favorite one is steel. Doesn't mean I 'm brainwashed it just fits me best. I am concerned for you,your earlier posts were never mean spirited even when you didn't agree with someone. I am sorry if this offends you also as it was not my intention. Take care Climb please take care. Frank

[e-RICHIE]

i don't think anyone ever said "steel is real", though
i don't read every post. paris hilton is real, just let
me tell you...

[CNote]

Climb,

You're so defensive about this steel-is-real thing that for a newcomer to the world of bicycling, reading this forum as their introduction to said world, it might be questioned exactly whose view is representative of the mainstream culture and whose is representative of the fringe element.

I would only hope that your earlier rant would not in the end be a disservice to this forum (to which I am admittedly a newcomer) by dissuading experienced individuals from a respectable niche of the market from expressing themselves to those of us who are interested.

Darrell, thanks for the insight into your work!

By the way, my tagline has nothing to do with any kind of bicycle material. Please do not misinterpret.

[Big Dan]

the"steel is real" blast comes around the same time the "look at what the pro's ride" bomb............... :p

[Climb01742]

h. frank--i certainly take no offense at your post. i probably should have counted to 10 before posting. i'm not sure why this subject gets my back up so much. i could certainly have expressed the same ideas in a more civil manner.

cnote--just so you know...you'd be surprised how many forum members have written me off-line saying that they share my feelings but they would rather not be attacked for expressing them. there is a real feeling among some forum members that the passionate steel advocates do in fact respond unpleasantly to those who disagree with them. i happen to be the one who shoots his mouth off the most. :rolleyes: it is a subject i should simply leave alone. my posts on the subject do no-one any good.

i would like to apologize for _how_ i said some of the things i've said in this thread. but i stand behind the _what_ i said.

[slowgoing]

And I thought the people I work with had big egos....

[Kirk Pacenti]

i don't believe dario pegoretti does anything because it's cheap.

I am sure he doesn't either. Maybe a better term would be "price Point" or "cost effective". The fact is that there are very real cost considerations behind all consumer products.

Maybe Dario loves aluminum and felt he needed a great AL bike in his line up. Or maybe his distributor said, "Dario, baby, we love your stuff, but we really need some product at a lower price point. Do you think you could make some really *****in' AL bikes to fill out the line?"

Who knows, what ever floats yer boat is fine by me. People riding and enjoying their bikes is what's important. However, I really don't think it's fair or objective to discount what guys like Darrell, Richard and others who have spent a lifetime refining what they do by applying some silly "steel is real" label.I mean these guys have been around a long time and seen it all. They could have adopted new materials and building techniques anytime along the way, but decided to stick to what they do best. I'm sure if they didn't believe it to be the best way to build a bike (for them) they'd be doing something else.

Bigger companies (or ones that want t o be bigger) can't afford to take this approach. They have to do what he market demands, they have to "keep up with the Jones". At ABG we really had no desire to make bikes with carbon rear ends we really believed that Ti was a superior material. But when your dealers say "my customer really wanted your bike, but it didn't come with carbon seatstays"..... If we didn't offer a Ti/carbon bike to our customers, they'e buy from someone who does. Do you see the dilemma?

As it turns out, (many times) carbon SS on a Ti bike make for a heavier frame. And, what we quickly learned that the bike cost less to build and we could sell it for more money. This is what starts driving "product development" at bigger companies, increasing the bottom line. Then marketeers convince the buying public it is what they need, even though it may represent less of a *real* value to them.

That's not to say these bike aren't great, or you won't enjoy riding them. It's just that many times they are not all that they seem or are promised to be. Who here hasn't succumbed to marketing (or even peer) pressure to buy the latest and greatest to come down the pipe only to be sorely disappointed?Also, that does't mean you'll always be satisfied by what you get form a "Master (steel) Builder". But, I do think the motivations for getting you on their product a likely very different.... units sold vs. service??? ...just my opinion...

Now, can we all get back to playing nice again?

Cheers,

[Climb01742]

I am sure he doesn't either. Maybe a better term would be "price Point" or "cost effective". The fact is that there are very real cost considerations behind all consumer products.

Maybe Dario loves aluminum and felt he needed a great AL bike in his line up. Or maybe his distributor said, "Dario, baby, we love your stuff, but we really need some product at a lower price point. Do you think you could make some really *****in' AL bikes to fill out the line?"


kirk, all of those are very possible reasons. but could another possible reason for the CCKMP be that U2 tubing let him build the kind of climbing bike he had in mind? or he built the fina out of alu to try to build a very stiff sprinting frame? there are less-than-noble reasons for using alu, but i believe there are also some good reasons, too. maybe it was one or the other, maybe it was some combination.

there are good reasons to use steel. but i also think there are good reasons to use ti, alu and carbon. and yes, i readily admit there are bad reasons to use those materials, too. no material has a lock on the good or the bad. :beer:

[e-RICHIE]

i believe "he", and others, offers frames built with
all those materials so that the consumer has a choice.
i have spoken with many luminaries from the "old
country" and, to a man, they all said steel - lugged
steel - was their choice if they were going to produce
their signature piece. but, since they cannot do this,
since they all have staffs with wives/children/overhead,
and "all that stuff", they produce what the market wants.
and, to a man, the builders i spoke with lament the
"american -ization" of the industry, meaning the "putting
the cart before the horse" mentality of letting the market
dictate what can be done and what will be palatable.
many, many fine builders and companies have embraced
the newer materials (newer, as in the bicycles industry, but
not newer as such) simply as a way to survive.

[Climb01742]

but richie, do the "newer" materials offer no benefits?

[jerk]

climb-o,
yes. the cckmp is dario's lightest bike. yes the market demanded aluminum frames. on the other hand, dario's favorite bike is his marcelo not his luigino which (the luigino) is just as much a creation driven by market forces as his aluminum bikes. don't forget, dario was the first guy to tig weld in italy. i don't want to speak for the man, but the jerk seems inclined to believe dario feels brazing and lug work to be a labor intensive and unnecessary process for the construction of raing bicycles using modern tube sets. he'll do it, but it is sort of quaint and silly in the global scheme of things where he needs to produce hundreds of frames a year for alot of different people. the fina estampa is a wonderful bicycle. they're all well designed, straight, fast and exhibit proper torsional rigidity and balance....more later.
jerk

[e-RICHIE]

"but richie, do the "newer" materials offer no benefits?"


(*&%#$%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
they are more market-able.
that is the supreme benefit.

[jerk]

th new steel and the new aluminums can be tig welded. it is cheap, clean and produces a strong frame. new steels don't mind heat so you can use nice light thin tubes without the added expense of extra labor to braze. marketing is one thing, but we're talking race bikes here. if it ain't necessary and doesn't add any performance benefit, why not cnstruct the race bike using the more cost effective method? this is no way is meant to diminish the lugged frames relevence as a racing bicycle, when the jerk wins the lottery and/or is reincarnated as sr. squizi, he'll put a division one team on lugged frames mmkay?
jerk

[Birddog]

I think this is just Climb's way of filling the void left by the death of Hunter Thompson. Let it rest. Everybody ought to have tumbler full of Chivas before posting more on this. Better yet, make it at least a 12 year old single malt. Stir it up with a twizzler.

Birddog

[JohnS]

I'm just glad that they don't still make cars the old way using the old materials.
Climb, sorry to leave you hanging! I'm one of the ones that talked to him offline and agreeing with him...not that I have a reputation here to worry about! :beer:

[Big Dan]

I have a fever and the Dr says the only cure is another fine steel bike with lugs....
keep on talking..you people are going to ruin me.... :cool:

ClimbO5150 can I take your spot on Richie's list??? :hello:

let's go for the record...

[Matt Barkley]

:) I kindof feel like I am missing something with this whole "steel is real" thing. Maybe I have missed posts siding with opinion that steel is righteous and everything else bunk or thereabouts. I tend to agree with E-Ritchies statements on "new" materials being the choice for marketing reasons.

Sure alu and ti and carbon do certain things and have certain properties. One among them is marketability. Steel has many properties. One of them (certain current small niches) is marketability.

I read Darrell's post and really got the sense that we should all just be out there riding our bikes and loving it - rather than BELIEVING light pedals or a computer is going to make us faster. For us here on this forum - they won't make us faster. I appreciated his anecdotes regarding a few Aus. pros who weren't so concerned with equipment.And Darrell does make equipment for these world calss atheletes.

I have been wondering around this land of mass-marketing and consumerism trying to make heads or tails of something I actually do have experience with and know a bit about... Bikes. I am giving up trying new stuff and just sticking with what works for me and what I have found over the years I like. No biggee. It almost feels like a big waste of money , time, and my health - but I tried different bikes and they are all different. Nice ones (for me) are nicer then not nice ones. (Lack of subjectivity :) ) Big deal...

I heard this racer guy (super strong Cat1) on this mornings 10 o'clock group ride talking about his bikes as he was riding a new carbon frame and he was comparing them to his other 4 or 5 framesets and I came to the conclusion that this guy knows what works for him and it is entirely different from what works for me. Again, no biggee. It was funny because his "favorite" was the ceapest most mass-produced bike out there. He said it with an ironic chuckle too..

I was going to try to chime in on arguements regarding so and so's use of steel and not using carbon but using ALU and being inpressed with Lleweln and igoring a dozen other frames on the floor, and others who have dropped Alu. and I figured I'd pass and just take a picture of my new Aluminum U2 bike and post it in the custom section. Man! it sure rides differently (though, not too much differently) than the exact same geo in SAT 14.5 steel. HA! - Cheers - :beer: - Matt

[William]

I kindof feel like I am missing something with this whole "steel is real" thing. Maybe I have missed posts siding with opinion that steel is righteous and everything else bunk or thereabouts. I tend to agree with E-Ritchies statements on "new" materials being the choice for marketing reasons.

I was thinking the same thing. I don't recall this sort of "steel is real" sentiment. :confused: I guess I missed those? If anything, I thought the leaning of most folks on this group is toward Ti. Or at least having one of each. But that's just my take.

I've already stated my agreement with Big-e on the marketing aspect.

Ride what you like, and like what you ride. :beer:

William

[davids]

This is for you, Mr. Sachs. If I remember correctly (and I don't have the energy right now to do the research to confirm) you have said that two identically designed bikes made out of different materials will ride the same. In other words, the materials don't ultimately matter.

Yet you also have said that, were it not for forces outside of design considerations, builders would prefer to make their bikes out of steel.

If materials don't ultimately matter, why this preference?

It seems to me that materials do have inate qualities, and that over time, they have been been engineered to improve those qualities. Differences in resonance between CF and steel is an easy example. Can these be addressed through design?

[flydhest]

davids,

Not to answer for him, as he is fully capable, but that isn't precisely what he said. The statement was more along the lines that one could design a bicycle to have a certain set of ride characteristics from any material. Whether or not you would want to, is a different story. The point was that when one compares X aluminum bicycle to Z titanium bicycle, to be able to make a valid comparison of the materials themselves, you would have to have the same person design both bikes and intend to have them ride the same. Implicit, I think is also the need for the designer to be good and to understand each material. If you had me do it, you wouldn't get any sensible results as I'm just a hack.

[e-RICHIE]

This is for you, Mr. Sachs. If I remember correctly (and I don't have the energy right now to do the research to confirm) you have said that two identically designed bikes made out of different materials will ride the same. In other words, the materials don't ultimately matter.
they will ride the same due to the frame's design.
i did not say "the materials don't ultimately matter".
Yet you also have said that, were it not for forces outside of design considerations, builders would prefer to make their bikes out of steel.
every builder i have spoke with who has started before the nonferrous
era agrees that steel covers all bases, though it may not cover the
"marketability" base.
If materials don't ultimately matter, why this preference?
to earn a living.
It seems to me that materials do have inate qualities, and that over time, they have been been engineered to improve those qualities. Differences in resonance between CF and steel is an easy example. Can these be addressed through design?
you must tell me the answer to that.

[Serotta PETE]

While I have had the opportunity to ride many different bikes and various materials over the years (but not any all carbon except for a Trek a few years ago) I have to tell you none ride better than a modern CSI made by Kelly or a modern Sachs made by e-Richie.

Yes I also love the Ottrott and Legnd Ti. (as well as the CIII) and while I like all of them, none make me faster or put a bigger smile on my face than a great steel bike. Kelly and Richie have a way of interacting with the rider, their immediate wants, and also what ride they are looking for at that time. SPOKES and I just had this discussion on our ride this morning.

Luck and old age have allowed me to sample many bikes over the years and even lust over a few of them. All time lust (bikes) definitely centers around an OTTROTT, CSI (Kelly) and a SACHS (SPOKE's green one). There would be a fourth one if Ben could ever find the time to build again.

These frames even rank up there with a good bottle of Dry Creek old vine Zin - - - especially if i have the opportunity to share with Flydhest and/or Mike from Cyclesport!!!! (Well - they almost rank up there with good friends and good wine.).


PETE

[Big Dan]

This must be a mistake..Pro's don't race steel bikes, much less with lugs... :crap:

[Darrell]

Hi Possums, wow 12 pages and going. Good thing this is not all about nuclear weapons or arms treaties, then it would be serious!
Which bike is best, which material is best? I do not wade into this very far. Others can go into mortal battle over this. :bike:
However I will use "Colnago" for an example as I think they have been the most successfuly marketed race frame in history. Say slowly, "YES, that is Dazza's opinion".
Warning, more Dazza opinions follow.
Mr Colnago makes
#1 Aluminium frames
#2 Titanium frames
#3 Carbon frames
#4 Steel frames
#5 Miscellaneous merchandise items.
Why? So what ever your taste is he can sell you a frame.
Mr Colnago has every corner of the market covered so he can sell you "The Consumer" what ever it is you lust for, and/or what ever is to your taste.
Which one would he say is the best? {I mean what he would say, not what you or I would say}
Does he even care? Or is it more important what keeps the essential Euros rolling in to keep everything rolling and the responsibilties of this?
I say the above lines as a question and it will reflect on my opinion.
I am a small and narrow version of #4 in the market place.
Also I do not think I have ever said "Steel is real". Good grief, that is so corny and old.
I also do not expect Tim is going to race on his new bike. He said that when he placed the order, so the bike was not designed to race on. As a custom and made to measure builder it is my goal to give the customer what he or she desires without comprimising my building criteria.
I am so surpised that the original post from "Musgrave cycles" has kicked off something so heated. However I have enjoyed it all, I can see that a few were upset by my post. Perhaps some over enthusiastic irrational analysis of my words has led to some unintended misconceptions. {Crikey I am not Shakespheare.} I wanted to explain the rational of my thoughts and way of operation, I have no intention to "Epitomizes smugness, close mindedness, self-righteousness, holier-than-thou, I alone have a pipeline, to what it true and right attitude" in my post. I tried to outline my 26 years of experiences and thus the rational behind my thoughts and opinions.
After all this, it was fun and enjoyable.
If your upset, take an aspirin and sleep it off.
Cheers Dazza :cool:
is 12 pages a record?

[JohnS]

The two top threads for both posts and views are about people not liking steel. Hmmm...

[Tony Edwards]

Man, you are some piece of work. Darrell stated up front in his post that he "would like to express a few thoughts and facts". The "thoughts" part reflect his opinions - do you really need an explicit disclaimer to point out each comment as opinion? Personally, I welcome his input, and his thoughts and perspectives that come from his experiences. I may not agree with all of them, but hey, those are his opinions. Heck, I may even chime in and say that I disagree with some of those opinions.

Darrell made no personal attack on you, yet you were compelled to lash out at him individually. Your comparison of others to the Jonestown incident was also both in poor taste and totally inapporpriate. This is totally different than debating merits of a frame material, or stating with conviction one's preferance towards one over the other.

Please, knock it off.

Very well put. IMO Climb's post was unnecessarily hostile and vicious, and went beyond the bounds of good taste for no reason whatsoever.

[Darrell]

Fifth day in a seven day stage race in Normandy, you scraped into front group after the cat 3 climb.
Your in the line in the cross wind, it is drizzling rain. its 12 degrees celsius. 120kms down, 20kms to go. A couple of people you are about to have intense hate thoughts towards drop it down two teeth and put everone in the gutter. The gaps open up. You just give more until there is no more. You fight to stay in contact till they give it up, well this is your desperate hope.
Please form up an echelon you plead silently to those B------ds causing your misery.
You are out the ar--. spat, shelled, droped, poped, f---ed, out the pipe.
You look up, two riders have just put 150m into the small group you were spat from.
If you think "If I had less carbon spokes that would not have happened".
Then it is time to pack up and go home to mummy.
Tech bike gear is no substitute for pure grunt. Tech bike gear is also no substitute for combating those swallowing yippee beans!

[William]

You look up, two riders have just put 150m into the small group you were spat from.
If you think "If I had less carbon spokes that would not have happened".
Then it is time to pack up and go home to mummy.
Tech bike gear is no substitute for pure grunt.

AND DAT's DA FACT, JACK! :cool:

Now, a new word for me to use! :cool:

"Crikey" :D

William

[amg]

cpg,

To respond to your post from page 5, it is well documented (just do a google) that Dario Pegoretti worked closely with Dedaccai to develop the Radius and Dynalite tube sets back in the 90's. Both tube sets were/are covered under brevetto (Italian for pantent) and IIRC these tube sets were marketed by Pinarello on their bikes. I don't know much about these tube sets other than that Radius had variable sections and Dynalite was a lightweight tube set.

In a Mar/Apr 2000 article on Pegoretti from ProCycling magazine, David "the Man of the Pyrennes" Millar wrote, "Involved in Dedaccai's development program to produce and perfect steel tubing, Pegoretti has the distinction of giving the world the Radius and Dynalite designs. Now he is involved in a similar program with the Italian firm's aluminum tubing, which is also supplied to Carrera, De Rosa, Fondriest, Pinarello, Scapin and Viner." A bit too poetic of a description IMHO, but I think it's pretty straight-foward that Dario Pegoretti has been involved with the tubing suppliers for some time to help in developing tube sets.

Antonio

[Climb01742]

Very well put. IMO Climb's post was unnecessarily hostile and vicious, and went beyond the bounds of good taste for no reason whatsoever.

tony, perhaps it is lost somewhere in these 12 pages, but i apologized for my excessive language. i have a combative streak. it got the better of me today. i will do my best to not cross the line again in expressing my opinions. there are, i believe, reasons for my opinions, but not for expressing them as i did. time to most definitely chill. peace.

[Kirk Pacenti]

The two top threads for both posts and views are about people not liking steel. Hmmm...


John,

I don't understand, is there statistics on threads and posts that I am missing? I'd love to read the anti(?) steel POV. I love steel but, am open to all points of view, where can I find them?

Ciao,

[bulliedawg]

This must be a mistake..Pro's don't race steel bikes, much less with lugs... :crap:

THAT is a thing of beauty!

[Matt Barkley]

Whose Mariposa is that and where is that photo from? Awesome ride! - Matt

[Dr. Doofus]

That is Dee Dee Barry's bike...nice when your father in law is a framebuilding god...which makes your doof wonder...does E-Ritchie have daughters?

Our antipodean pal is right...doof struggled the fifth time up a climb today becuase his mind cracked, he wussed out, and then made the bad decision to threshold back to the front group rather than eat the pain for 2 really hard minutes to catch the last wheel...doof's lousy finish (35th of 60 who started, and 47 who finished on a really fun course...6.6 mile loop with a 1 mile 8%+ hill) was due to doof's lousy brain and, uh, little problem with those things called corners (your guy was a mediocre bike handler ten years ago...8 years away from a pack has made him even worse)...it had nothing to do with his 22-pound bike.

Maybe Dario has a daughter....

Question: would you marry an ugly gal just to get a bike from dad????

[bulliedawg]

Whose Mariposa is that and where is that photo from? Awesome ride! - Matt

Here's the story of that beauty.

http://www.bikespecialties.com/mariposa-dedebarry.html

[bulliedawg]

That is Dee Dee Barry's bike...nice when your father in law is a framebuilding god...which makes your doof wonder...does E-Ritchie have daughters?

Our antipodean pal is right...doof struggled the fifth time up a climb today becuase his mind cracked, he wussed out, and then made the bad decision to threshold back to the front group rather than eat the pain for 2 really hard minutes to catch the last wheel...doof's lousy finish (35th of 60 who started, and 47 who finished on a really fun course...6.6 mile loop with a 1 mile 8%+ hill) was due to doof's lousy brain and, uh, little problem with those things called corners (your guy was a mediocre bike handler ten years ago...8 years away from a pack has made him even worse)...it had nothing to do with his 22-pound bike.

Maybe Dario has a daughter....

Question: would you marry an ugly gal just to get a bike from dad????

Where was the race?

[Dr. Doofus]

River Falls SC -- next weekend its bacl to the sick joke that is Donaldson Center....

good thing today: doof rides 27+ for 7-15min and tears through corners to catch the main field twice

bad thing today: doof had to do that to start with...jeesh...if you can ride like that to chase, you'd think this guy could get his head on straight and ride like that at the right end of the field....


anyway, Dee Dee Barry won the Montreal World Cup on that bike in 2002(?)...the pic was from that race...and now she pedals on a Giant...and today's tie-in were the two T-Mobile chicks who did the men's Pro-1-2 today...and the guy on the old-school Master Light....

back to this thread, doof is going to flip a coin between the gunnar roadie and an easton-tubed thing from Boulder...apples and oranges....

[jerk]

the jerk hates this thread which started as an homage to fugly frame..so here goes:
jeesh...you know what the jerk has raced on complete crap and on bikes far better than the jerk has ever deserved. it makes a difference. what ever, the jerk is on a program and 1998 is the year of the come-back. "steel is real"? you want to know what's real? trying to force a two month recovery in between the first and second days of de panne..and still winding up not finishing and having your director, your hero your flemish father figure spit on you and refuse to speak to you for a week.. you're all a bunch of stupid punks who wouldn't know a race bike if my elbow hit you in the gut on the 90 degree turn at the bottom of astridstraat in st. niklaas as i grabbed the wheel of the fast kid you were trying to sit on and it wound up in your teeth. it ain't about steel, or ti, or carbon or aluminum...it's about balls, smarts, form, luck and equipment that works. if you don't believe the jerk, let's go. the jerk on any bike in the world and you on some stupid piece of garbage with fleur de lille lugs and "shore lines" or what ever the hell else those morons on the classic rendez-vous website like to leave wet spots about. my c50 and a richard sachs cross bike that was supposed to be returned to him weeks ago rode a bunch of idiots on "awesome" bikes off our wheels this morning and the jerk hopes the two of us idiots can do it tomorrow too. and the jerk is washed up so there. (yeah, the jerk is riding again and it feels good.)
jerk

[e-RICHIE]

"...my c50 and a richard sachs cross bike that was supposed to be returned to him weeks ago rode a bunch of idiots on "awesome" bikes off our wheels this morning and the jerk hopes the two of us idiots can do it tomorrow too."



alas.
am i reading this?????
i am still waiting for those two bikes!!!
with love,
e-RICHIE

[jerk]

hey,
i gave'em boxes and packing material even! they're naked as of this afternoon. stripped richard stripped!
jerk
(if the jerk provides stamps does he get a t-shirt?)

[e-RICHIE]

"...i gave 'em boxes and packing material even! they're naked as of this afternoon."



hmmmmmmm...

[jerk]

they are very pretty though.....hamburgers today i'll pay you on tuesday! checks in the mail! the jerk'll make sure they're are twizzlers in the boxes mmmkay? double express and stuff on monday....
(e-richie, ever tell you the jerk doesn't care what those other guys say about you? he thinks you're swell.)

jerk

[e-RICHIE]

this will be our secret.

[jerk]

ok.
sorry.
going to bed now.
jerk

[Climb01742]

you two wanna get a hotel room or somethin'? :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

[Dr. Doofus]

say it ain't so! if what your doof who couldn't hold the jerk's wheel if it was just standing there is inferring, then the doof's boy who used to ride a c-dale is now bikeless with no 'cross frame?????

now doof is going to have to beat up some old dude that rides a curly-cue lugged 58 or so and hand deliver it to nastyshua...then the jerk can get toasted by a guy on a froo-froo bike


oh yeah..the blog is updated...

[Kane]

It took me three days to read this thread in its entirety. Please, please, please let's put it to bed and me too.

Kane

[zap]

We all are riding rubber on aluminium or carbon. Steel is only available on $50 dept. store bikes and doesn't like water!

Get out and ride and wave to your fellow cyclist.

:beer:

[e-RICHIE]

"Steel___doesn't like water!"


'splain.

[Serotta_James]

I leave you guys alone for the weekend and this is what happens?

[Kevan]

and you other steelies.

When I was romping with the boys up there in the hills of the left coast we got to talking about rust and seat tubes. I asked in more of a suggestion manner, why not brush rubber glue around the collar and the tube's compression slit, sorta waterproofing that area from back tire splash. I suggested the glue wouldn't likely mistreat the metal or paint surfaces and any extra glue slopped on could be easily removed using a finger to make rubber balls of the excess (remember art class in elementary?) .

So what do you think of my idea?

Please keep in mind this idea is coming from a CF guy whose intentions are good. :D

[e-RICHIE]

regardless...
i don't get the "steel doesn't like water..." statement.

[zap]

e-RICHIE, I'm disappointed in you :no:

Maybe you haven't ridden steel so you might be excused. :D Some of us who were less fortunate when we started riding remember steels dismal performance in the wet.

[e-RICHIE]

what happened in the wet??

we 'cross all autumn "in the wet" with
no known problems. you have me scared.
please let me down easy.

[zap]

OK, but I was preeeeeety sure "rubber" would have been the clue :rolleyes:

I'm talking about two round things called ............rims :banana:

[e-RICHIE]

sorry.
one of us needs an esl course.

[davids]

So, rust just isn't a problem no more?

I get nervous when my steel bike spends too much time in the rain. One time it got rained on for four long hours while being transported down the interstate. I left it hanging upside down, seatpost out, in front of a fan for 3 days after that.

'splain, please?

[e-RICHIE]

i can't see any connection with rain and rust.

[dave thompson]

Zap was referring to steel rims and the crappy braking in the wet.

As long as the water that would accumulate inside your frame from rain or condensation has somewhere to go, rust isn't a problem with steel frames.
Having a drain hole in the bottom bracket is good, as is having a section of inner tube around the seatpost/seat tube junction. Greasing your seat post will will keep out water. Treating the inside of the frame with Frame Saver is a nice, long-term solution.

[davids]

I understood Zap's point - It just got me thinking, is all.

So, with a well-cared-for, Frame Saver-treated frame, do I have anything to worry about? Should I be wary of NE's salt-encrusted roads?

One of the reasons I'm interested in a Ti frame is that, compared to steel, corrosion is a complete non-issue. Have I been duped in this regard?

Another reason Ti seems attractive is that it's (supposedly) able to filter out more high-frequency road vibration and smooth the ride without eliminating road feel. This ability is (again, supposedly) an inate quality of the material.

Which brings me to another question - E-richie, the last part of your response to my earlier questions left me befuddled. It's either some kind of Zen koan on which I should be meditating, or I'm lost. How can I tell you whether material's inate properties can be addressed through design? :confused: I'm just a lowly consumer, trying to understand my options. I'm relying on honest designers to guide me. Can you offer clarification?

[e-RICHIE]

is this the question:
"It seems to me that materials do have inate qualities, and that over time, they have been been engineered to improve those qualities. Differences in resonance between CF and steel is an easy example. Can these be addressed through design?


what does "Differences in resonance..." mean?

[OldDog]

:eek: I go to Tim-buk-two and back over the weekend and this thread is still going :eek:


e-ritchie, how often should us steel guys be Frame-Savering our rigs? How many frames can be treated with a can of FS?

Thanks

[terry]

like a train wreck i can't turn away from this thread. re: rust-it's a non-issue. i've got a 25 yr old steel bike that i primarily ride as my early season bike and i ride it on the same salted new england roads you do, david. it must have over 75K mi. on it by now, it does at least 1-1.5k mi. every year and doesn't have a speck of rust (it has been repainted 3 times) on the insides. before frame-saver i used some kind of oil. i think the key is the cutout in the BB and i wash it down pretty often.

[e-RICHIE]

i've never re-framesavered my frame, but doing so would
be cheap insurance. btw, i get at least 3 frames per can.

[OldDog]

'Tanks

[Climb01742]

I understood Zap's point - It just got me thinking, is all.

So, with a well-cared-for, Frame Saver-treated frame, do I have anything to worry about? Should I be wary of NE's salt-encrusted roads?

One of the reasons I'm interested in a Ti frame is that, compared to steel, corrosion is a complete non-issue. Have I been duped in this regard?

Another reason Ti seems attractive is that it's (supposedly) able to filter out more high-frequency road vibration and smooth the ride without eliminating road feel. This ability is (again, supposedly) an inate quality of the material.

Which brings me to another question - E-richie, the last part of your response to my earlier questions left me befuddled. It's either some kind of Zen koan on which I should be meditating, or I'm lost. How can I tell you whether material's inate properties can be addressed through design? :confused: I'm just a lowly consumer, trying to understand my options. I'm relying on honest designers to guide me. Can you offer clarification?

david, perhaps the folks in the best position to answer your questions would be builders who work in BOTH steel and ti. they would have first hand experience in both materials and would not have a vested interest in shading their answer one way or the other. among possible folks to address your questions could be: serotta, IF, tom kellogg, the hampstens, seven and others i'm sure i'm forgetting.

[e-RICHIE]

does anyone know what "Differences in resonance..." means?
i'll go ride for 70 minutes and check back.

[William]

does anyone know what "Differences in resonance..." means?


I'm guessing that he's referring to the differences in the way road vibrations would be transmitted through different frame materials.

William

(How was the ride? Just got back myself.....warm...not bad attall)

[Kevan]

from this merry band I've heard comment about pulling seatposts and the owner being unsettled by seeing signs of rust on the post, regardless of make. To "steel" from Shakespeare, I tend to agree, that it likely is "Much Ado About Nothing", this rust, assuming the frame is properly vented/drained and framesaved. Still... where post meets tube, when seats and posts are shimmied back and forth to gain the perfect rider rump height, possibly wearing down protection at the same time, could be the cause of discoloration. That's why I suggested a possible remedy.

[Too Tall]

E-issimo - OMG like totally. I was in Venice a while back and saw where they do that. 2wit:

Crystal Resonance Therapy™ -
1. The process of applying the vibrational frequencies of crystals to a system in order to affect change or improvement in that system. The process of utilizing the vibrations of crystals for healing.
2. The practice of utilizing resonant vibration to clear a system, so that it comes to resemble crystal. A meditative practice for clearing one's physical and energetic bodies until they resemble crystal in their clarity and energy.

How'd I do? What the heck does it have to do with bicycles?

[flydhest]

david, perhaps the folks in the best position to answer your questions would be builders who work in BOTH steel and ti. they would have first hand experience in both materials and would not have a vested interest in shading their answer one way or the other. among possible folks to address your questions could be: serotta, IF, tom kellogg, the hampstens, seven and others i'm sure i'm forgetting.
. . . uh, climb, they would, however, have a vested interest in making you believe that there are important differences between the metals, no? Elsewise, they'd be saying we do something that's redundant. Now, I'm not saying which is right, all I'm saying is that people who build in both have a horse in the race, just in a different way.

[davids]

is this the question:
"It seems to me that materials do have inate qualities, and that over time, they have been been engineered to improve those qualities. Differences in resonance between CF and steel is an easy example. Can these be addressed through design?


what does "Differences in resonance..." mean?
E-Richie,

Aye, that is the question. To which you responded, "you must tell me the answer to that." (boldly)

By "differences in resonance", I am referring to the frequencies and amplitudes at which tubes made of various materials might ring when struck. Carbon, for example, has been referred to as having a wood-like resonance (low frequency and amplitude.)

My guess is that your response to this definition could be along the lines of, "Ah, but resonant frequency is not just a factor of material, but of the length, diameter, and thickness of the tube in question." So maybe I'm on my way to answering the question myself. Maybe not.

Tube resonance is just one of many design considerations (if it's a consideration at all!) How many variables can be handled as a designer attempts to reproduce the characteristics of one material with another?

Let me attempt to get at my question from another angle; Do you believe that there is anything to our stereotypes about the characteristics of Ti, CF, Fe, and Al? If so, what?

...sorry for the delay. I'm doing some occassional work here...

[David Kirk]

Get out your grains of salt...........

While I no longer build with Ti I have done a lot of it in the past and of course I've worked with steel for a long time.

From my perspective rust is a non-issue. A little Framesaver and common sense will allow a steel frame to last a life time. If you want to get acedemic about it it's true that most Ti frames will outlast a steel frame. But the realm of reality rears it's ugly head..........a steel frame may last 75 years and a Ti frame 100. Of course I'm pulling those numbers from a dark place you don't want to visit but you get the idea.

I've often thought that steel frames didn't start rusting until folks started making bikes from Ti or AL..........funny..hmmmm.

I got out for my first real ride in the mountains yesterday. It was silly windy but it felt great to climb again. How where your weekend rides?

Dave

[e-RICHIE]

what does "Differences in resonance..." mean?


E-Richie,

Aye, that is the question. To which you responded, "you must tell me the answer to that." (boldly)

By "differences in resonance", I am referring to the frequencies and amplitudes at which tubes made of various materials might ring when struck. Carbon, for example, has been referred to as having a wood-like resonance (low frequency and amplitude.)

My guess is that your response to this definition could be along the lines of, "Ah, but resonant frequency is not just a factor of material, but of the length, diameter, and thickness of the tube in question." So maybe I'm on my way to answering the question myself. Maybe not.

Tube resonance is just one of many design considerations (if it's a consideration at all!) How many variables can be handled as a designer attempts to reproduce the characteristics of one material with another?


i don't know what the other guys are doing, but i concentrate
on efficient position and frame design, not the "engineering" stuff
you are seeking to analyze.
does that stuff make a difference? somewhere, it must. i can't
comprehend how it would be discernable on a quality-made
bicycle that fits. furthermore, i can't recall ever discussing this
issue with any other builder - ever.

[Darrell]

Hi Gladdies, who started the story in cycling land that titanium tubes are fatigue proof? I have seen many failed titanium road frames, head tubes, down tubes around the bottle bosses and welded gear bosses, seat tubes, drive side chainstay and rear dropout failures. These were tube failures next to the weld. The problem I see with with TIG welds is the stress risers created by the uneven edge to the weld and perhaps undercutting at the weld edge rather than the length of the HAZ that everone speaks of when selling TIG. These have been famous USA made brands, not just cheap Asian made stuff. What I found a little annoying is that the owner of these frames was led to believe that they would be life time rides and convinced their wifes of this. {wife = minister of war and finance}Yeh Ok if you strapped the bike to the mast of your yacht and sailed the high seas for decades then the frame will only dull in colour while the rest of the bike oxidised away till the frame is left, but riding it a life time is a different matter
The good thing for the manufacturer of these frames is that the customer said "It is not worth the hassle to pay the freight and back {$900aus} to get the warrenty repair."{the brands will not pay the freight back to the return to OZ}. One good customer of mine had his USA made titanium bike sent back and repaired {chainstay failure and he paid the freight} and it came back looking real nice again {other than the lousy decal application} and all was good till I came to reassemble it and "Crikey, where is the cable stop on the chainstay?"
So I hear lots of theory and talk about titanium being fatigue proof but that is not what I see.
Cheers from Dazza who does see steel frames fail and the said titanium frames were not from the forum host.

[davids]

does that stuff make a difference? somewhere, it must. i can't
comprehend how it would be discernable on a quality-made
bicycle that fits. furthermore, i can't recall ever discussing this
issue with any other builder - ever.
Thanks, e-Richie. I'm gonna drop this now, since my interest is more theoretical than anything else, and I feel we're burning more energy than this deserves without discussing this face to face, with a couple of beers in front of us. :beer:

Hope you had a good ride. I've been watching this relatively lovely day pass from behind a pane of glass...

[e-RICHIE]

" I feel we're burning more energy than this deserves without discussing this face to face, with a couple of beers in front of us..."




thanks.
make it a dinkel acker
and i'll be there.
your's truly,
e-RICHIE

[Darrell]

i don't know what the other guys are doing, but i concentrate
on efficient position and frame design, not the "engineering" stuff
you are seeking to analyze.
does that stuff make a difference? somewhere, it must. i can't
comprehend how it would be discernable on a quality-made
bicycle that fits. furthermore, i can't recall ever discussing this
issue with any other builder - ever.

I am with Richie on this, engineering is fun and useful but it is all lost simply by have a terrible "Pedal force direction technique" or a position set up that makes you sit on the bike like a sack of potatoes, or your body makes you sit on the bike like a sack of potatoes. Perhaps like myself, many need to spend time on the yoga matt and sort out the body problems before you worry about vibration and resonance dissipation and ....... :confused:
A body, bike position and bike design blended together in the right equation is the secret.
Body + technique + position/design x training time= performance.
Hey, Richie is that the correct order of the equation???

[dirtdigger88]

Darrell- where does the EPO fit into your formula? :p

jason

[Darrell]

Bike rider is "A". "A" + EPO becomes E=mc2
EPO just vapourizes vibration resonance.
Add and stir Pot Belgique and poof! Anti matter.
SAD stuff :(

[davids]

thanks.
make it a dinkel acker
and i'll be there.
your's truly,
e-RICHIE
Make mine an Ipswich IPA!

[zap]

Darrell, your new here, but we did mentioned several times in this forum that quality construction is most important to frame longevity. Does not matter if its Ti, AL, carbon composite, or steel.

But I guess it bears repeating.

[jerk]

what are you people on? just because "you" (that's the theoretical person the jerk is adressing) doesn't understand bicycle design and geometry doesn't mean "you" can change the subject by entering concepts like "material resonance" that NO ONE understands because it's all just gobbley-gook. people talk about how great their steel, carbon, titanium, berylium wunder frame rides, the jerk reads..nods his head sometimes and then he sees a picture of the thing set up in such a way that in no way could handle properly....saddle pushed all the way forward on a seat post that's sticking an inch out of the frame....handlebars too wide and rotated back like the town drunk's schwinn varisty and a 80mm stem......how can "you" have anything of any importance to say about bicycle design? ok jerk rant is over. turn a pedal in anger. these are racing bicycles we are talking about. any piece of garbage is going to function on your "group ride". go buy the town drunk's varisty he needs the money for thunderbird.


the jerk loves you all and thinks his carbon fiber colnago is much better than the piece of shiit steel colnagos he's tried in the past.....so there.

jerk (who can still be a jerk)

[Darrell]

QUOTE=David Kirk]Get out your grains of salt...........

If you want to get acedemic about it it's true that most Ti frames will outlast a steel frame. But the realm of reality rears it's ugly head..........a steel frame may last 75 years and a Ti frame 100. Of course I'm pulling those numbers from a dark place you don't want to visit but you get the idea.


Darrell, your new here, but we did mentioned several times in this forum that quality construction is most important to frame longevity. Does not matter if its Ti, AL, carbon composite, or steel.

But I guess it bears repeating.

Yeh I know, I am with you Zap,
but my "where does the myth of fatigue proof titanium come from?" was a question that comes to me when I hear this
Was it one test sample or? other than marketing speak because in the real world this is not true.

[pbbob]

[QUOTE=David Kirk]Get out your grains of salt...........I got out for my first real ride in the mountains yesterday. It was silly windy but it felt great to climb again. How where your weekend rides?

Nice 2 hours sat. 1 hour on sunday, felt like crap. went out and hit golf balls, did real well and felt great again. custom steel bikes and off the shelf steel club shafts for this guy.

[saab2000]

The Jerk is on form!!!! And Salty to boot! Beware the censors! We do not want to lose the jerk! :no:

[Big Dan]

I know Saab, but I want to know how he really feels....... :fight:

[slowgoing]

I would pay James to kill this thing.

[Ozz]

So,....what year was the last Tour de France won on a steel bike? ;)

[e-RICHIE]

delgado.
on a probicin.

[Big Dan]

E what did Miguelon ride to his victories?? :confused:

[Serotta PETE]

:beer: Is this an all time record "236" postings to a single initial topic.???

[e-RICHIE]

peginerellos

[jerk]

E what did Miguelon ride to his victories?? :confused:

a bike. a big bike. the pinarellos were tig welded steel made by some sub contracter frame builder named pigori or peugetto or something. the jerk hears he's making frames for some new england based continental team now...can't be sure though. ;)

[csb]

it was riis on a duravit

[saab2000]

I believe Big Mig won on steel bikes built by Pegoretti........ Though he also used the very fine TVT carbon bikes.

FWIW, I can remember reading interviews with Lance Armstrong back in the early '90s and Miguel Indurain was one of the few riders Lance really admired.

Anyway, none of this matters. Like someone else has said, if you are screaming along in an echelon, pulse at 188, fearing the next gradient which could send your pulse to 189 (into the red) you really don't care if you have steel or carbon or Frequency Resonation or vibration propogation or lugged or welded or 36 spokes or 32 or carbon handlebars or a 2-bolt or a 4-bolt stem or titanium railed seat or anything else.

The only thing that matters is if you can hang onto the wheel in front. Or if you are good, make the wheel on your back go away. That is the best feeling. Looking back and seeing a HUGE gap!!!! And you know something, if you can ride someone off your wheel it is for sure not because of the bike you are riding!

Different strokes for different folks I guess. Lugged steel is cool. So is everything else.

Just ride and forget about everything else!!!!!

Let's move on!

[JohnS]

I remember a few months ago when Merlin? came out with some etching on their bike frames and everyone said how ugly and stupid it looked. Now someone makes a frame that's even more pimped out and everyone gushes over it because it's lugged steel. Go figure...

[jerk]

not the jerk. look at the jerk's comments on that thing. it is quite awful.
jerk

[Ozz]

I remember a few months ago when Merlin? came out with some etching on their bike frames and everyone said how ugly and stupid it looked. Now someone makes a frame that's even more pimped out and everyone gushes over it because it's lugged steel. Go figure...
some people like anchovies....some people like plain cheese......it's still pizza and it still goes great with wine or beer! :beer:

P.S. - As long as the wine is red ;) (Friends don't let friends drink white zinfandel) :beer:

[saab2000]

I dig the jerk. But I have a different opinion here, even though normally I agree with his take on things.

I dig the ornate lugs and the engraved Ti. All those things are cool in my book, as long as they do not compromise the purpose of the bike.

There is room in this world for attractive design on a functional piece of equipment. That is why Ferraris are so desirable. They are not full of lots of performance compromised, but they are also pleasing to the eye.

Aesthetic design and function to not need to be in conflict.

Just my $02.

Of course, not everyone needs to like fancy lugs..... But I do, especially when they are stainless steel and buffed to a brilliant shine.

[davids]

I remember a few months ago when Merlin? came out with some etching on their bike frames and everyone said how ugly and stupid it looked. Now someone makes a frame that's even more pimped out and everyone gushes over it because it's lugged steel. Go figure...
I don't care for either. The engraved Merlin seemed like a bad gimmick. This one is so over the top that I can't appreciate it as anything more than folk art.

My tastes run towards smooth joints. Give me a fillet-brazed Kirk or Vanilla for aesthetic perfection!

DISCLAIMER: This is my opinion only. Yours may differ. It is equally valid.

[Dr. Doofus]

to help raise money for my new bike, I will ornately engrave your carbon frame with a straight razor and chisel for only 20 bucks

act now

[vaxn8r]

The only thing that matters is if you can hang onto the wheel in front. Or if you are good, make the wheel on your back go away. That is the best feeling. Looking back and seeing a HUGE gap!!!! And you know something, if you can ride someone off your wheel it is for sure not because of the bike you are riding!


This is probably like throwing gasoline on a bonfire.....but I have a bunch greater chance of all that stuff happening when I'm riding my bicycle made of "low resonating" carbon fiber than any steel bike I have ever ridden.

With all do respect, I think there's more to it than fit and design. At least I hope I haven't been riding poorly fitting bikes for the last 20+ years. And I'd like to think frame designers like Masi and Merkx and Serotta would know a thing or two about designing steel racing bikes. No disrespect to Dave, Richard, Kirk or anyone else who regularly contributes here. The fact is I love steel bikes. I have more of them than any other (though I ride ti, CF and AL as well). Actually, I love just about any bike, though there's many I would not choose to buy.

Saab, I'm not saying the motor doesn't matter. It is 99% the motor. But there is a small, but very significant, bike factor. I don't know if it's 1%, more or less, I climb better and accelerate better on my carbon fiber bike than any other bike I own. I also can ride it longer, more comfortably than any of my steel bikes. There's simply more to it than fit.

[William]

Saab, I'm not saying the motor doesn't matter. It is 99% the motor. But there is a small, but very significant, bike factor. I don't know if it's 1%, more or less, I climb better and accelerate better on my carbon fiber bike than any other bike I own. I also can ride it longer, more comfortably than any of my steel bikes. There's simply more to it than fit.

Vax man...Maybe you just "feel" more efficient on your CF frame then you do on your others? My aluminum frame "feels" like it has a more direct power transfer then my steel frames, but I can't say for certain that it's faster. Not with out running multiple structured comparison tests?
Riding longer & more comfortably? Sure. Give me AR's Ti Legend and I could ride that longer because it mutes the road buzz a little better then my steel & alum bikes.

William

[saab2000]

Vaxn8r,

If you like your carbon bike, by all means ride it! That is the point of my post. I am not saying it doesn't matter for everyone, but to me it really doesn't.

I am a fan of technology. I love to check up on the new stuff. I have just rarely believed it made me go faster.

In the '80s I was slow to adapt to clipless pedals and indexed shifting.

I am not saying you are wrong with your assessment of your carbon bike, and I am not really the retro grouch it looks like.

Anyway, at the end it is just splitting hairs. We just do this to have fun and keep in shape. Whenever something fun turns into an argument we need to step back and look at the big picture. Cycling does not really register on the screen in the big picture.

Everyone should have fun riding whatever they like! And that is the way it is in my world. I am done contributing to this post as it has gone too far, IMHO. Peace in the cycling world. :D

:beer: