| |
Main
Date: 14 Jul 2007 14:32:07
From: ryancycles@comcast.net
Subject: frame materials
|
Does the frame material have anything to do with performance? Trek's
advertisement for one of their road bikes says that the carbon fork
soaks up vibration. Exactly how does it do that? As far as I can see
the material the fork is made of can have no influence on vibration.
The fork/handlebar assembly is for all practical purposes a solid
unit. Road shock and vibration is transmitted directly from the wheel
to the handlebar. Same should apply to the rear triangle, a rigid
structure that cannot "soak up" vibration. Basically the only factor
effecting vibration is tire pressure. A bicycle frame is a very
simple structure comprised of two triangles. It, for all practical
purposes hasn't changed in 100 years except for the availability of
better materials that allow lighter frames to be built and more
sophisticated manufacturing methods. I doubt that there is any
difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
Dick Ryan
|
|
| |
Date: 02 Sep 2007 20:34:17
From: bryanska
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
> If you are saying the a CFRP frame *sounds* different than a steel or
> aluminum frame, you are exactly correct.- Hide quoted text -
No, I am confident in saying it's a different molecular structure and
thus a pretty darn different thing altogether.
|
| |
Date: 19 Jul 2007 20:55:33
From: JimmyMac
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
On Jul 15, 1:56 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net > wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:4699a786$0$16341$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
>
> > Kurd (who?) anonymously snipes:
> >> Not a bicycle. So not relevent. Bonk
>
> > First point of order is context, or in this case the lack thereof.
>
> > Second point of order; if it has two wheels in a single track and is pedal
> > powered, it is a bicycle.
>
> > Third point of order; it is spelled "relevant".
>
> > Fourth point of order; if you are bonking [1], you need to change your
> > food intake habits.
>
> > [1] US, not UK, usage.
>
> Mr. Tom Sherman of ARBR is almost as good as dealing with idiots as I am.
> But RBM just has too many for any one individual to deal with. Only the
> Great Brickston knows how to deal with them on their own terms. We here on
> ARBR are just too intellectual for the idiots of RBM.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
Ed Dolan has often stated that he stands behind every post that he
makes and can defend and justify everything that he has ever said
(written). He has also often stated that ARBR is comprised of idiots,
imbeciles and morons and he has expressed contempt for the lot of us.
He has also often stated that anyone who had any brains left ARBR long
ago and you has taken credit for getting rid of all the dumbbells on
ARBR and yet asserts that he and Tom Sherman, both with a presence on
ARBR, are intelligent although at times Ed accuses Tom of lacking
intelligence. Now, he just referred to the ARBR readership as "too
intelligent". Seems like the man just can't make up his mind about
the aptitude of the readership, does it not??? Ask yourself this.
Just how can Ed Dolan possibly stand behind, defend and justify
everything that he writes when he is constantly contradicting
himself??? Perhaps Ed Dolan had it right when he wrote ... "Hells
Bells, I do not even know what I believe anymore!" At least that is
one statement that Ed can stand behind, defend and justify and no one
will debate the issue with him. The conundrum continues.
Jim McNamara
|
| | |
Date: 20 Jul 2007 11:58:50
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
"JimmyMac" <jimmymac_4@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1184903733.560937.42650@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 15, 1:56 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> messagenews:4699a786$0$16341$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
>>
>> > Kurd (who?) anonymously snipes:
>> >> Not a bicycle. So not relevent. Bonk
>>
>> > First point of order is context, or in this case the lack thereof.
>>
>> > Second point of order; if it has two wheels in a single track and is
>> > pedal
>> > powered, it is a bicycle.
>>
>> > Third point of order; it is spelled "relevant".
>>
>> > Fourth point of order; if you are bonking [1], you need to change your
>> > food intake habits.
>>
>> > [1] US, not UK, usage.
>>
>> Mr. Tom Sherman of ARBR is almost as good as dealing with idiots as I am.
>> But RBM just has too many for any one individual to deal with. Only the
>> Great Brickston knows how to deal with them on their own terms. We here
>> on
>> ARBR are just too intellectual for the idiots of RBM.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>> aka
>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
> Ed Dolan has often stated that he stands behind every post that he
> makes and can defend and justify everything that he has ever said
> (written). He has also often stated that ARBR is comprised of idiots,
> imbeciles and morons and he has expressed contempt for the lot of us.
> He has also often stated that anyone who had any brains left ARBR long
> ago and you has taken credit for getting rid of all the dumbbells on
> ARBR and yet asserts that he and Tom Sherman, both with a presence on
> ARBR, are intelligent although at times Ed accuses Tom of lacking
> intelligence. Now, he just referred to the ARBR readership as "too
> intelligent". Seems like the man just can't make up his mind about
> the aptitude of the readership, does it not??? Ask yourself this.
> Just how can Ed Dolan possibly stand behind, defend and justify
> everything that he writes when he is constantly contradicting
> himself??? Perhaps Ed Dolan had it right when he wrote ... "Hells
> Bells, I do not even know what I believe anymore!" At least that is
> one statement that Ed can stand behind, defend and justify and no one
> will debate the issue with him. The conundrum continues.
Anyone who posts to Usenet is an idiot - period! It may not have been like
this in the early days of Usenet, but now it undeniably is. Hells Bells,
even when I, the Great Ed Dolan, am posting to Usenet I am only doing so in
my role as a fellow idiot.
Yea, if you are here and reading any of this rot that passes for news on a
newsgroup, then you are an idiot. Welcome to the club!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
| |
Date: 18 Jul 2007 00:23:48
From: Luigi de Guzman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:36:01 -0700, Dane Buson wrote:
> Useful knowledge that. One of my coworkers does a *fantastic* goat
> biryani. I just went to the bike shop and assisted him with a bike
> selection. Maybe I can see if he has any got related plans in the
> future. Of course he also does a mean Mango Pudding.
The delicious irony in all of this is that Shimano's group for
small-wheeled bicycles (mainly folders and recumbents) is named
CAPREO--which looks suspiciously like the Latin word for "goat," (/caper/).
But that irony is not nearly as delicious as a good goat biryani, or the
kalderetang kambing a friend of the family's can make. YUM.
-Luigi
replacing the calories he expended in today's ride.
--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com
|
| |
Date: 16 Jul 2007 14:52:27
From: Luigi de Guzman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:41:09 -0700, Tom Keats wrote:
>
> There's a trick to not letting your goat be gotten.
It's a well-known fact that it's trivially easy to obtain goats from
recumbent riders. Heck, just *mention* a diamond-frame upright and you'll
be *buried* in the goats of 'bent riders.
--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com
|
| | |
Date: 17 Jul 2007 16:36:01
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Luigi de Guzman <luigi12081@cox.net > wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:41:09 -0700, Tom Keats wrote:
>
>>
>> There's a trick to not letting your goat be gotten.
>
> It's a well-known fact that it's trivially easy to obtain goats from
> recumbent riders. Heck, just *mention* a diamond-frame upright and you'll
> be *buried* in the goats of 'bent riders.
Useful knowledge that. One of my coworkers does a *fantastic* goat
biryani. I just went to the bike shop and assisted him with a bike
selection. Maybe I can see if he has any got related plans in the
future. Of course he also does a mean Mango Pudding.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally."
-Oscar Wilde
|
| |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 22:41:09
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
In article <469ac44d$0$7328$88260bb3@free.teranews.com >,
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > writes:
> Kurd (who?) anonymously wrote:
>
> Dude, ever hear of context?
>
>> Not a bike, nor have they [recumbents] been bikes since 1933.
>
> INDEFINITE PRONOUN ALERT!
>
> I believe "Kurd" means April 1, 1933.
>
>> Best thing the UCI ever did.
>
> The UCI only defines what a bicycle is for the purposes of the
> professional racing series they sanction. The UCI is not the arbiter of
> language in any country. Duh!
Huh?
I can't hear either of you -- I have all these
Bo Diddley tunes blasting into my ears.
Okay, it's off now. Except I'm gonna have
a bunch of Roger Waters tunes blasting in my
ears pretty soon -- Radio KAOS.
"Who needs information
when you're working underground ... "
There's a trick to not letting your goat be gotten.
You know that.
cheers,
Tom
--
"Icy wind of night begone,
this is not your domain,"
in the sky a bird was heard to cry.
Hear the lark and harken to the barking
of the dog fox
gone to ground.
See the splashing of the kingfisher flashing
to the water.
And a river of green is sliding unseen
beneath the trees,
laughing as it passes through the
endless summer,
making for the sea.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Jul 2007 19:18:31
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> In article <469ac44d$0$7328$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Kurd (who?) anonymously wrote:
>>
>> Dude, ever hear of context?
>>
>>> Not a bike, nor have they [recumbents] been bikes since 1933.
>> INDEFINITE PRONOUN ALERT!
>>
>> I believe "Kurd" means April 1, 1933.
>>
>>> Best thing the UCI ever did.
>> The UCI only defines what a bicycle is for the purposes of the
>> professional racing series they sanction. The UCI is not the arbiter of
>> language in any country. Duh!
>
>
> Huh?
>
> I can't hear either of you -- I have all these
> Bo Diddley tunes blasting into my ears.
>
> Okay, it's off now. Except I'm gonna have
> a bunch of Roger Waters tunes blasting in my
> ears pretty soon -- Radio KAOS.
>
> "Who needs information
> when you're working underground ... "
>
> There's a trick to not letting your goat be gotten.
>
> You know that.
butbutbut [1], I ENJOY arguing on Usenet!
[1] gratuitous gdanielsism
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 22:09:41
From: BobT
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
<ryancycles@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:1184448380.522013.263330@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> Does the frame material have anything to do with performance? Trek's
> advertisement for one of their road bikes says that the carbon fork
> soaks up vibration. Exactly how does it do that? As far as I can see
> the material the fork is made of can have no influence on vibration.
> The fork/handlebar assembly is for all practical purposes a solid
> unit. Road shock and vibration is transmitted directly from the wheel
> to the handlebar. Same should apply to the rear triangle, a rigid
> structure that cannot "soak up" vibration. Basically the only factor
> effecting vibration is tire pressure. A bicycle frame is a very
> simple structure comprised of two triangles. It, for all practical
> purposes hasn't changed in 100 years except for the availability of
> better materials that allow lighter frames to be built and more
> sophisticated manufacturing methods. I doubt that there is any
> difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
>
> Dick Ryan
>
You obviously have not been to the new Trek Madone ("everything else is
history") web site. If you are more interested in seemingly endless
discussions about frame materials rather than marketing hype, try searching
rec.bicycles.misc on google groups. If you are trolling, I hope you enjoy
the rest of this thread.
everything else is history:
http://www2.trekbikes.com/madone/
seemingly endless discussion:
http://tinyurl.com/2jbljz
BobT
|
| | |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 22:26:30
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Bob Taylor wrote:
> <ryancycles@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1184448380.522013.263330@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>> Does the frame material have anything to do with performance? Trek's
>> advertisement for one of their road bikes says that the carbon fork
>> soaks up vibration. Exactly how does it do that? As far as I can see
>> the material the fork is made of can have no influence on vibration.
>> The fork/handlebar assembly is for all practical purposes a solid
>> unit. Road shock and vibration is transmitted directly from the wheel
>> to the handlebar. Same should apply to the rear triangle, a rigid
>> structure that cannot "soak up" vibration. Basically the only factor
>> effecting vibration is tire pressure. A bicycle frame is a very
>> simple structure comprised of two triangles. It, for all practical
>> purposes hasn't changed in 100 years except for the availability of
>> better materials that allow lighter frames to be built and more
>> sophisticated manufacturing methods. I doubt that there is any
>> difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
>>
>> Dick Ryan
>>
> You obviously have not been to the new Trek Madone ("everything else is
> history") web site. If you are more interested in seemingly endless
> discussions about frame materials rather than marketing hype, try searching
> rec.bicycles.misc on google groups....
I would think there are more frame material discussion in
rec.bicycles.tech than in rec.bicycles.misc.
> If you are trolling, I hope you enjoy the rest of this thread.
Maybe Mr. Ryan wants to be in the vanguard (pun intended) of bicycle
design once more.
> everything else is history:
> http://www2.trekbikes.com/madone/
The Trek MadOne is just another conventional diamond frame upright (as
it has to be to meet UCI regulations).
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 14 Jul 2007 20:15:29
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
On Jul 14, 9:59 pm, bryanska <BARRELB...@HOTMAIL.COM > wrote:
> > Does the frame material have anything to do with performance? Trek's
> > advertisement for one of their road bikes says that the carbon fork
> > soaks up vibration. Exactly how does it do that? I doubt that there is any
> > difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
>
> Material hardness, stiffness, and resonance.
>
> The simplest test is to ride two Specialized Sirrus bikes of identical
> size. The lower model has a cromoloy fork and rear triangle. The upper
> model has carbon fork and triangle.
>
> Another test is to try two different seatposts on the same bike with a
> rock-hard seat. One carbon, one aluminum.
>
> Or - have you ever seen a tuning fork made from carbon? It wouldn't
> sound very clear, if at all.
>
> If you alter your idea of vibration to include higher frequencies,
> those are soaked up quite differently from material to material.
If you are saying the a CFRP frame *sounds* different than a steel or
aluminum frame, you are exactly correct.
|
| |
Date: 14 Jul 2007 19:59:02
From: bryanska
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
> Does the frame material have anything to do with performance? Trek's
> advertisement for one of their road bikes says that the carbon fork
> soaks up vibration. Exactly how does it do that? I doubt that there is any
> difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
Material hardness, stiffness, and resonance.
The simplest test is to ride two Specialized Sirrus bikes of identical
size. The lower model has a cromoloy fork and rear triangle. The upper
model has carbon fork and triangle.
Another test is to try two different seatposts on the same bike with a
rock-hard seat. One carbon, one aluminum.
Or - have you ever seen a tuning fork made from carbon? It wouldn't
sound very clear, if at all.
If you alter your idea of vibration to include higher frequencies,
those are soaked up quite differently from material to material.
|
| |
Date: 14 Jul 2007 18:02:41
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
In article <46993f79$0$31535$88260bb3@free.teranews.com >,
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > writes:
>> It, for all practical
>> purposes hasn't changed in 100 years except for the availability of
>> better materials that allow lighter frames to be built and more
>> sophisticated manufacturing methods. I doubt that there is any
>> difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
>
> What about the concept of rotating the rider's body position backwards
> by 90° or so?
Yeah, wheelies are fun too :-) :-)
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| |
Date: 14 Jul 2007 17:18:08
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Dick Ryan aka The Godfather wrote:
> Does the frame material have anything to do with performance? Trek's
> advertisement for one of their road bikes says that the carbon fork
> soaks up vibration. Exactly how does it do that? As far as I can see
> the material the fork is made of can have no influence on vibration.
> The fork/handlebar assembly is for all practical purposes a solid
> unit. Road shock and vibration is transmitted directly from the wheel
> to the handlebar. Same should apply to the rear triangle, a rigid
> structure that cannot "soak up" vibration. Basically the only factor
> effecting vibration is tire pressure. A bicycle frame is a very
> simple structure comprised of two triangles.
Even bicycles like this:
<http://ryanownersclub.com/scrapbook/vanguard/titaniumvanguard.jpg >?
Seems to violate several of the above contentions, does it not? ;)
> It, for all practical
> purposes hasn't changed in 100 years except for the availability of
> better materials that allow lighter frames to be built and more
> sophisticated manufacturing methods. I doubt that there is any
> difference in performance between frames made of various materials.
What about the concept of rotating the rider's body position backwards
by 90° or so?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 00:39:37
From: Kurd
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Not a bicycle. So not relevent. Bonk
|
| | | |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 00:42:04
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Kurd (who?) anonymously snipes:
> Not a bicycle. So not relevent. Bonk
First point of order is context, or in this case the lack thereof.
Second point of order; if it has two wheels in a single track and is
pedal powered, it is a bicycle.
Third point of order; it is spelled "relevant".
Fourth point of order; if you are bonking [1], you need to change your
food intake habits.
[1] US, not UK, usage.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 16 Jul 2007 01:17:55
From: Kurd
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Not a bike, nor have they been bikes since 1933.
Best thing the UCI ever did.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 20:57:06
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
Kurd (who?) anonymously wrote:
Dude, ever hear of context?
> Not a bike, nor have they [recumbents] been bikes since 1933.
INDEFINITE PRONOUN ALERT!
I believe "Kurd" means April 1, 1933.
> Best thing the UCI ever did.
The UCI only defines what a bicycle is for the purposes of the
professional racing series they sanction. The UCI is not the arbiter of
language in any country. Duh!
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 15 Jul 2007 01:56:20
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: frame materials
|
"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:4699a786$0$16341$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
> Kurd (who?) anonymously snipes:
>> Not a bicycle. So not relevent. Bonk
>
> First point of order is context, or in this case the lack thereof.
>
> Second point of order; if it has two wheels in a single track and is pedal
> powered, it is a bicycle.
>
> Third point of order; it is spelled "relevant".
>
> Fourth point of order; if you are bonking [1], you need to change your
> food intake habits.
>
> [1] US, not UK, usage.
Mr. Tom Sherman of ARBR is almost as good as dealing with idiots as I am.
But RBM just has too many for any one individual to deal with. Only the
Great Brickston knows how to deal with them on their own terms. We here on
ARBR are just too intellectual for the idiots of RBM.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
|
|
