Conference noted::bicycle

    Aluminum frames are seductive, despite their bumpy welds and fat tubes.
    They're so light, and stiff, and absorb shock so well. However, you
    don't have to look any further than this notes conference to discover
    the most basic problem with them: aluminum doesn't bend, it breaks. One
    guy reports that he's stripped the threads in his front derailleur
    braze-on.  Another hit a curb and ruined his brand-new Vitus.  A couple
    of others sheared their rear derailleur hangers, and had to shell out
    $175 for replacement frames.  I watched a lug crack on an Alan I
    borrowed here in Italy; the tension in the seat bolt ripped it open.
    All of these are experiences documented by the compartively small
    community of this notes conference.
    
    The sensation that a well designed frame transmits is wonderful -- it's
    part of the thrill of riding a nice bike.  The things that will improve
    your absolute performance have nearly nothing to do with the frame
    material, however: steel is just as "fast."  That's why right now I'm
    shopping for a custom steel frame, not an aluminum one. 
    
    MATT

    	Agree with -.1   From an engineering standpoint, Al is 1/3 as
    strong as steel, so stress concentrations must be kept to 1/3 the
    level of a regular bike.  Since Al bikes use components designed
    for steel bikes, the attachment points, etc are stressed closer
    to their limits than steel framed bikes.
    	Also, the time-strength fatigue curve for steel drops initially
    and then levels out, so an old steel bike will be a bit less strong
    than a new one, but it won't get much weaker.  The fatigue curve
    for Al just keeps dropping.  Eventually, Al will break.  If you
    design it with a high enough safety factor initially, this might
    mean that it will break after 100 years of use, but you've been
    carrying around that extra mass for all that time [higher safety
    factor means less stress which means more material].  Since the
    savings in weight (1/3) exactly cancel our the loss in strength
    (1/3) of Al, I don't think much of Al for a frame material.  But
    Titaniam , or better yet Kevlar, or still better yet Carbon Fibre!
    Now, we're talking!  - Chris (who plays with Kevlar & CF)

    Hi,
    
    I own an al cannondale, it has about 20k miles on it, and I love
    the bike.  The Cannondales seem to be uglier than the treks and
    kleins but sometimes this is not the case.  The low-end, and if
    we are talking new bike, that that is the kind of klein you mean
    just didn't feel as good to me as the Cdale.  I have experience
    with Treks except that those models seem to be verrrrrry popular.
    
    BTW, regarding a custom-made steel bike you are probably looking
    $700 up for the frame.  I own a custom-made bike an I can say that
    is great having a bike made for you, but every major crash will cost
    you for repairs.
    
    When I bought my Cdale I was looking at several high-end bikes,
    GIOS, Guerciotti etc.  I have to agree with the assement that Cdales
    are a great value for the money.
    
    My $0.02
    Joe

I've had my aluminum bike (Guerciotti made by Alan) for about 1 1/2 years now
and it just turned 7000 miles a couple weeks ago.  Lightness is nice I guess
but the ride is really what is best.  Many of us are not true racers but we
still ride long and hard, so why do we punish ourselves with super stiff steel
racing frames?  With aluminum you can have the short wheel base/quick response
of a racing bike but not shake your teeth out of you head on slightly rough
road.  The knock against Vitus is that they are too soft for a bigger person,
but the bikes you mentioned all use oversized tubing so that they are at least
as stiff, more likely stiffer than a steel frame. 

I was the one with the front hanger that came loose.  I took it to the shop and
they told me to just glue it back on, the screws were just there as a secondary
attachment or to hold it in place while the glue dried.  Anyway, it came loose,
I fixed it, no problem. 

I admit that you take a small chance when you buy aluminum but in my opinion
it is well worth it.  That's only one man's opinion but I've owned both and
it's note even close.

**************

For any of you who get Winning magazine, take a look at Pedro Delgado's bike on
the front cover.  It says Columbus on the forks and on the seat tube but THAT
IS AN ALUMINUM BIKE!  Inside there is a little side bar about the winners bike
and the bike shown is not the one he's riding on the cover. 

.2>                                                          Since the
.2>    savings in weight (1/3) exactly cancel our the loss in strength
.2>    (1/3) of Al, I don't think much of Al for a frame material.
    
    I understood that there was a gain in stiffness though? Since three
    times as much material is needed for the same strength as steel, the
    tubes can have a larger cross-section, leading to a considerable gain
    in stiffness: eg, a Cannondale. .4 seems to contradict this,
    nevertheless I have read that Cannondales are very stiff (haven't
    ridden one myself).
    
    So isn't stiffness a desirable frame quality?
    
    Rod 

< Note 864.4 by PSG::BUCHANAN "Bat" >

> For any of you who get Winning magazine, take a look at Pedro Delgado's bike on
> the front cover.  It says Columbus on the forks and on the seat tube but THAT
> IS AN ALUMINUM BIKE!  Inside there is a little side bar about the winners bike
> and the bike shown is not the one he's riding on the cover. 

Just remember that the pros don't have to buy their bikes, have many bikes at 
one time, and probably replace them (at least the frames) every year.  If they 
crash and bend/break one, so what.  They just pull another one out of the back 
of the van.

I was looking at the TREK 1500 a while back, but decided I couldn't risk 
having my primary bike be un-repairable (un-alignable).  After all, I'm not 
independently wealthy (or sponsored).  Last year I crashed my old steel FUJI 
(just laid it down at 20 mph...didn't hit anything) and it bent to the point 
of being totally unsafe on high speed descents (it had been rock solid at 45 
mph; now was unsafe at 33 mph).  An Al frame I'd probably have had to replace. 
My Fuji is again rock solid after having it aligned.

I ended buying a Marinoni made of Columbus cr-mo, and its the best bike I've 
ever ridden.  I'm glad I made that choice.  I'd love to ride an exotic bike 
(Al, Carbon Fiber, etc) but I'd have to either win one or be given one, which 
isn't likely.

Kevin

    The Cannondale dealers response to the lack of frame repairability
    was that frame repair isn't cheap, and in the end could cost you
    nearly the same as a $175 new frame from Cannondale.  I know the
    validity of this statement has to be balanced across several dimensions
    such as the type of repair, satisfaction after repair and the time value
    of your bike if you have to wait for Cannondale to send you a new
    frame (I've seen previous notes on Cannondales which suggest patience
    is a necessary human quality when dealing with that company).
    
    On balance, how true is the dealers assertion that replacement is
    nearly the equivalent to repair, and in some more cost effective?
    
    Also, is the $900-$950 price range in line for a two year old, well
    maintained, cosmetically clean Dura-Ace equiped Cannondale?  I have
    no experience to compare against.

< Note 864.7 by CIMNET::HUPPERT >
                -< How cost effective is it to repair a frame? >-

>    On balance, how true is the dealers assertion that replacement is
>    nearly the equivalent to repair, and in some more cost effective?
    
My alignment cost me $75.  Since I'm not a mechanic, I had it overhauled at 
the same time which added to the cost, but I would have had to pay the dealer 
anyway to install at least the headset and bottom bracket.  I'd been told that 
C-dale replacement frames had gone up to at least $250 (from an ex-C-dale 
dealer)

Something I forgot to mention in my previous note: Since Al frames cannot 
effectively be aligned, they must be manufactured aligned in the first place.  
If not, there worthless.  I've heard TREK's quality control is/was atrocious.  
I don't expect a mass-produced frame to be perfect, but if you get one that 
isn't, if its steel at least it can be fixed.  Who pays is another question.  
I do expect a handmade frame to be perfect, and if it isn't (@ $625 or more) I 
would require the maker to pay for the alignment.  With an Al frame, all you 
can do is return it, and be without your bike.

Kevin

The story about Delgado's bike was a bit off the subject but I thought it was a
bit amusing that it said Columbus at least 5 times and looks like an aluminum
frame to me.

As I reread the base note I think I may have misspoken.  I was saying that the
main advantage to aluminum was the much more comfortable ride and that's true
but at least with the Cannondale this is not true.  Before I bought my frame I
had a chance to ride both the Cannondales and the Treks.  The shops let me take
them a couple times for fairly long rides.  My impression of the Cannondales
was that it was very light and VERY stiff but every bit as harsh a ride as any
steel frame.  The Trek was light, stiff and yet definitely more comfortable
than a steel frame.  I have never had the opportunity to ride a Klein so I
can't say for sure but my guess it that it rides similar to the Cannondales
(true?). 

Since a 1/2 lb. lighter frame is not important to me I wouldn't (and didn't)
buy a Cannondales.  However I liked the Trek very much.  Other than this
conference I've never heard anyone say anything bad about a Trek that they have
owned.  And come to think of it I can't remember anyone in here saying they
hated their Trek, always something like "I have a friend who's cousin once knew
a guy who read a story that once a Trek had a flat tire." 

This may just prove what a wasteful American I am but if I had a wreak and bent
my fork, regardless of steel or aluminum, I'd buy a new fork.  If I bent the
main frame I'd never trust it again, I'd replace it.  I remember the drivers
were crazy back there but you guys should try not to crash so much!  Most
riders go years with nothing more than having the wheels slip out once or
twice.  

    I chose a Vitus framed road bike based on riding tests some years ago,
    and it has held up well, but I have not had any real crashes, except for
    going down on a metal grating bridge in the rain once (at a rather slow
    speed.)

    The reason was comfort and handling for the style of riding I like.
    I found the stock Cannondale quite stiff, but harsh.  My understanding
    is that replacing their fork with a Vitus fork mostly corrects this
    problem.

    I only weigh about 120 lbs, so I can get away with an aluminum bike
    like that though.  A significantly heavier rider may not like it.

    I don't have any psychological bias one way or the other as far as
    frame material goes - what works right and holds up is what counts.
    So far, I seem to be getting my money's worth...

    - Jim

    How do Vitus carbon fibre and Look kevlar frames fit in to the stiffness
    and durability spectrum of   steel ... Cannondale  ... other aluminium
    ...?

    I've replaced the fork on my TREK (bent during somersault over falling
    rider) and had the deraileur hanger straightened (bent after collision
    with, ahem, stopping rider).  Great and comfortable bike.  I did
    BMB, a few multi-century rides and the over night part of a RAAM
    Open on it.
    
    What is bad is that it just does not shed dirt, I mean, you know,
    it just looks used.
    
    I've used steel bikes for lots of rides this year also.  Even used
    my BIKE Trashbar for a double C.
    
    ed

    I've had a cannondale for about 3 years, about 15K miles, and
    two crashes. My frame is still the same alignment, and all my threads
    are still fine.  While the Maine roads are a bit rough, and not
    all my rides have pavement under them, I have adjusted to the harsh
    ride. I love the feeling I get when I stand up and honk on the
    pedals. (I weigh about 180, and hate to use my low chainring on
    climbs) If that is your style of riding, then go with the fat tubes!
    
    BTW: Cannondales are no longer legal for international competition
    due a rule aimed towards aero-dynamic frames. They fail because of 
    the size of the down tube [I believe].  Trek's apparently stay
    within the maximum. Not that it'll matter to most of us...
    
    Robb

    RE: -.1
    
    I have no plans to race, so the size of tubing makes no difference
    to me.  The more important tube size considerations are whether
    it would fit my workstand (the answer is yes), and if it would fit
    by car rack (I have the Thule carrier which allows both wheels to
    remain attached, with a support arm clamping onto the downtube-
    I don't know if the clamp jaws open far enough for a cannondale).
    
    A Cannondale dealer said that next year they are coming out with
    a legal diameter tubing racing bike.

    [Apologies to those who already read these comments in Cycle_Racing]
    
    My brother works as a product manager at Cannondale.  They built
    a number of special bikes this year for international competition
    with "skinny" tubes.  Those bikes will not be made available for
    sale.  The '89 frames for sale will have some changes in tube
    diameters, and will be lighter, and will include aluminum forks.
    The international rule against fat tubes has been changed or recinded,
    so all Cdales will be legal next year.  
    
    pjd

Steel is not by default so stiff that it gives a harsh ride.  Stiffness 
of a steel frame is a function of:

o   Geometrical features such as angles, fork rake, chainstay and top
    tube length, seat cluster design (normal vs. the Crashbar
    triangulated thingie), and so on

o   Tubing thickness (Reynolds SL v. club weight)

o   Tubing metallurgy (Reynolds manganese moly v. Columbus chrome moly)

o   Tubing ribs (straight/missing/rifled)

I have a 25-inch (63 cm) 1980 Proteus "touring" bike made of Reynolds 531 
medium-weight tubing except for a club weight (heavier) down tube.  It
has 73� angles and a fork rake of something near 2 inches (51 mm), and a
wheelbase of 42-1/4 inches (107.2 cm).  This bike has something like
6000 miles on it - I went through a non-riding period due to delayed
complications from a 1979 accident but am now riding again - and I
wouldn't trade it for *any* aluminum frame.  Reynolds has always had a
reputation for a softer ride than Columbus. 

The good reputation of Treks, by the way (re: .9) could be due in some 
measure to the fact that Trek has sold far more steel bikes than 
aluminum ones.  Maybe the population of aluminum Treks isn't big enough
to provide a valid sample for reliability.

- Dick

    As fate would have it, I spent a few weeks this fall riding yet
    another aluminum bike, and I have yet another Al-related problem
    to report.
    
    I had to replace the steering stem with a longer one so I could
    ride comfortably.  I slip in a nice, new 130mm TTT, tighten it
    down, and ride away.  Several weeks later, it comes time to return
    the bike, so I try to swap back the orginal stem.  No way.  When
    I loosen the bolt, the handlebars move side to side, but with no
    amount of coaxing, banging, or assorted violence will they slide
    upwards or downwards.  It seems that the stem, being harder than
    the fork's aluminum steering tube, created a notch in it.  Using
    oil hasn't helped -- now I'm seriously looking for ANY WAY to 
    remove this thing.  
    
    MATT

    re .17	Thats weird, like WEIRD !   Don't expander bolts just open
    up the split stem and force it against the walls ?   It sounds as
    if the stem has somehow failed to spring back when the expander
    (truncated) cone was let down.  I'm having trouble imagining how
    it could be jammed against the wall in such a way that it would
    twist but not pull out.  Even an oversized expander cone shouldn't
    cause THIS to happen.....   If it were  *_MINE_*  I'd be figuring
    out how to wrap one of those plastic coated non marring hooks around
    the stem and couple it up to a 10lb slide hammer <hint>, but I wouldn't
    'recommend' such action to anyone else:-^)
    
    	Good luck with this one, 
    
    		Reg
    

    'scuse me, but the stem's stuck in the steer tube, right?  Did you
    try putting a 2x4 on the top end of the expander bolt and hitting
    it (aforementioned 2x4) with a hammer?  That almost always works
    for me.
    
    ed
    
     -- the time it didn't some sweaty guy had dripped sweat
    (imagine, sweating on a pleasure bike!) into the steer tube and
    nothing could get it loose.

    RE: .19 
    
    That's the first thing I tried to do; in the past, it's worked
    for me, too.  But this time, the steering tube's made of aluminium.
    The bottom lip of the stem (near the expander bolt) has apparently
    embedded itself into the softer aluminium wall of the tube, and
    knocking it downwards has only made it dig itself in deeper as it
    forces the aluminium beneath it inwards.  With a steel steering
    tube, the stem would "give way" as it was pushed down on the harder
    steel.  Not so with aluminium.
    
    MATT

    Is the steering tube on the front for hollow at the bottom?  If
    so, tip the bike securely upside down and use a long punch to hit
     the side of the stem.  Even better is to place into the hole a
    round piece of steel 1/8" smaller that the tube to hammer against.
    
    Good luck, sounds like an interesting challenge
    
    steve

    I'm not sure if I should thank Matt or not. If anything has been
    cleared up for me on ALUMINUM it's the fact that it appears to be
    a matter of preference. I guess factions and opinions will always,
    always be as diversae as the choices! Oh well. I can appreciate
    the short comings of ALUMINUM (and believe them) as well as the
    steel +'s & -'s. I am not a competetion rider, but a serious re-
    creationalist (do citizen's now and then). Not that anyone will
    care, but I am going ALUMINUM because I can't cough "12 yards"
    for a Kevlar/CF or some other composite. I'll build it this winter
    and when I've logged some serious mileage I'll relate my personal
    stuff!
    
    GOOD BIKING!
    
    Chip

    re .21	Arrrrgh !  Won't that just pound on the expander bolt's
    cone and make everything worse, MUCH WORSE, again ?
    
    	R
    

    In December I was walking by the WheelSmith Bike Shop in Palo Alto,
    and went in to talk with the people.  We got talking about Aluminum
    vs Steel, and one of the people there mentioned Tom Ritchey's (sp?)
    thoughts on the matter.  He said that Ritchey thinks of a bike as
    being a spring between a rider and the road.  When was the last
    time you saw a spring made out of aluminum?
    
    I don't know if his comment has any technical merit, but its an
    interesting way of looking at the problem.
    

    A little late again, but... All remarks are subjective to what riders
    are looking for. If that guy wants a spring he should look at an
    ATB. If you want something that's kinda touring/TT/Crit comaptible
    then you want something stiff. With a degree of stiffness you'll
    have irritating things happen like frame flex while pedaling that'll
    keep you constantly adjusting the front derrailleur due to chain
    rub. It'll feel spongy on tight corners, funny on less than smooth
    roads. To me, I'd end up feeling a little unsafe on it.
    
    (If you can get me C-dale frames for $175 I'll take 10!)
    
    I have 800+ miles on my new C-dale (Chorus equip'd) and I can tell
    you that you don't put up with bumpy welds. The bike is beautiful.
    Aluminum is strong. It won't have a tendency to damage (bending
    or denting) much more than steel. The problem comes in when you
    try to "unbend." This will weaken the material considerably more
    than steel (maleability sp?). In fact, it is not recommended that
    you repair aluminum frames. The only drawback I've read about.

    
    I'm currently in the market for a new racing bike.  I've been riding
    a Raliegh Team USA (1986) for the past 4 years.  I've always had
    a problem with frame flex during a sprint or hill climb causing
    the rearl derailleur to shift.  I've decided to go with the supposedly
    stiffer Aluminum frames.
    
    So far, I've looked at the C'Dales and Treks.  There hasn't been
    much talk about Aluminum bikes that past year so I thought I would
    get some opinions from you readers today.  The Trek models I looked
    at are:
    
    	Trek 2300 --> 3 Tube Carbon Fiber with remainder of the bike
    		      being Al.  Shimano Ultegra 600.  $1000
    
    	Trek 1500 --> All Aluminum bike with upgraded Al package over
                      the 1400.  Shimano Ultegra 600.  $900
    
    	Trek 1400 --> All Aluminum with a lower grade Al than used on
    		      the 1500.  Shimano 105 Hyperglide.  $700
    
    	Cannondale -> All Aluminum road geometry.  Shimano 105.  $760
    
    Any thoughts on the merits of any of these bikes?  How about the
    Trek 2300 with Carbon Fiber?  Shimano 105 vs Shimano 600?
    
    Thanks for any help in advance,
    Newc