Conference noted::bicycle

    
    This is a good question.  To start off, as I have previously stated
    in this conference, Carbon Fibre frames have the advantage of Not
    Showing Dirt, a major plus in our grimy pastime.  :-)
    
    Fatigue: I've heard (perhaps in this conference) that steel frames
    are supposed to be good for about 100,000 miles; aluminum for half
    that (50,000), carbon fibre for half that (25,000).  Of course,
    steel rusts, which, in certain climates could shorten its lifetime
    quite a bit.
    
    But carbon fibre "scratches" - I've also heard the lament that if
    you crash with a carbon fibre frame, and sever some of the fibres,
    you've just impacted the frame's integrity.  If you crash with a
    metal frame, a slight dimple or bend can be ignored or repaired.
    
    As to the ride, the latest issue of Bicycle Guide (I believe) reminds
    us that ride (stiffness, shock absorption, quickness, etc.) is far
    less a matter of the frame material than of (1) the tubing (diameter,
    etc.), (2) assembly techniques (lugs/welding/gluing), (2) tube angles
    and other mysteries of the frame-maker's art.
    
    For example, they cite new large-diameter steel tubing as giving the
    same effect as the large-diameter aluminum.  Historically, carbon
    fibre is supposed to be excellent for shock absorption, and, if the
    layers are wrapped correctly (much trial and error here, starting
    with the Graftek and such frames), the frame will still be stiff
    and not too whippy.
    
    I personally am not interested in a carbon fibre frame, but I don't
    do that type of riding.  If I were a racer (which is more Mike's case),
    I'd be more interested, but durability would still be important.
    LeMond, by the way, used a carbon fibre frame for his TT's in the
    1989 TdF, saying he had to sneak it in, because it wasn't the
    team frame (Bottechia, steel).  So clearly he valued the material.
    (The frame had been made in France to his specifications.)
    
    As a final anecdote, a NYC friend told me he went on a club ride
    recently with a someone who had a bran new Kestral EMS (Enhanced 
    Modulus Something) frame.  From behind him, he heard a weird creaking
    sound, to discover that the guy's Kestral top-tube had split
    longitudinally, detracting somewhat from the bike's roadworthiness.
    So, at least at the leading edge, they haven't gotten all the bugs out!
    
    Now, I'll turn the podium over to anyone has more solid facts!  :-)
    
    -john

    In Trashbar they have some specs on the LOOK frames vs AL and Steel.
    @$999, $1399, and @$1699  They are a bit out of MY range!
    
    John

    I think I've said this somewhere before but if your gonna look
    at carbon you should also look at titanium. The price factors are
    about the same and the weights are very close.
    I'm in phase 1 of purchasing a new frame (phase 1 = convince wife
    that you need a new frame!) and have done some research on both
    Carbon and Titanium. The biggest difference that I have noted so
    far is the life span of both Carbon - this decade, Titanium - next
    milenium (sp)! In other words once you buy the titanium you don't
    need another bike ever...Now this could be helpful if your in phase
    1 of a purchase however my wife understands me quite well and knows
    that 5 years with the same steed makes me bored so I'm not quite
    sure if this is what I want, But wait theres more to this titanium...
    Maintance-  whats that! you don't need to paint this stuff because
    it don't rust! a rag will wipe it down quite nicely (read- no more
    car washes).
    Crash test- Bicycling had an article about this and in short the
    bike IS bullet proof!
    
    The same people who make steel frames can make titanium frames.
    This point is very refreshing to me because I can be sure I'll
    get a quality frame from experienced frame builders.
    
    As for the fact of getting bored with the same bike goes.... I
    figure as long as I stay away from Campy stuff at least I can 
    change my gruppo every 5 years ;-)
    
    ERIC

�    Carbon and Titanium. The biggest difference that I have noted so
�    far is the life span of both Carbon - this decade, Titanium - next
�    milenium (sp)! In other words once you buy the titanium you don't
�    need another bike ever...Now this could be helpful if your in phase

    If this is true, why don't you see any Teledyne frames around these
    days?

    - Jim

>    If this is true, why don't you see any Teledyne frames around these
>    days?

Friend of mine's still riding his.....

Since this note is a bit old, I think I'll ask again... What's the current 
feeling about carbon fiber frames?  It seems to me that CF would make the 
perfect ultra-marathon frame due to the supposed superior ride comfort.  I 
hadn't heard about the short life span... at 7-10k miles per year (for me), a CF
frame would only last from 2.5 to 3.5 years (John Ellis would need to replace it
EVERY year!)  

To get the greatest comfort from a CF frame, do you need one with all the tubes
made from CF, or can you go the root that TREK and some others take, with an
aluminum rear triangle?  Anybody have an experience with the TREK bikes?

Thanks,

Kevin

I understood that comfort was not what CF frames were renowned for, thanks to
their high stiffness.  General opinion here seems to be that the Vitus 979
aluminium is fine for comfort but a bit sloppy under big efforts.  The latest
and greatest Vitus 992 is reckoned to have solved the problem with ovalisation
at the bottom bracket(mainly) and still retains the comfort of the previous
model.  I think it has the advantage of price - in France a Look composite at
the bottom end is nearly 5000 FF ($1000) and the team replica twice that.  You
can get a 979 at 3600 FF ($720) and a 992 at 3800 ($760).  I have a test
review if you are interested.

    I've never ridden a cf frame so this is hearsay, but one of the most
    enthusiastic reviews I've ever seen for a bike was for the Specialised
    Allez cf bike. More recently I read a review of a replica of the TVT cf
    framed bike that Lemond rode in the 1990 French Tour. Both articles
    described the ride as being very comfortable because of a claimed
    vertical compliance. This surprised me as I too was under the
    impression that cf was stiff as hell. What also surprised me was that
    this vertical compliance was claimed to coexist with high horizontal
    stiffness. A bit iffy if you ask me, but what do I know.
    
    
    Rod

    
    I test-rode my friend's Specialized Allez a week ago - a couple of short
    rides, and a 156-mile ride.  Not ideal conditions because it was
    chilly, but my conclusion is that the bike does soak up road shock 
    and is quite good climbing out of the saddle (but that may have as
    much to do with the angles as anything else). The aluminum fork is
    great.  But I appreciated the "feel" of the CrMo De Rosa somewhat more,
    especially on the flats.  Maybe it's what you get used to...
    
    I am supposed to test-ride a Kestrel in a couple of weeks.  That is
    different technology (carbon-fibre molded monocoque), and its
    proponents claim great things for it - including comfort.  We'll see.
    "Watch this space."
    
    -john

	I guess you need to take all testing with the proverbial - it must
depend on so many things, after all, if you spend all your time grinding along
on 58 by 12 up and down billiard table dragstrips you can take the stiffest
frame imaginable.  On the other hand, with potholes so deep that you need to
change gear to get out of them ........  I was talking to an old mec(hanic)
the other day on the subject of 'baton' wheels which had just appeared in
Fusberti's - he said he didn't fancy the hardness of ride you would get on our
local roads.  I remember some old trackie who reckoned his best idea was a B17
carved out of wood to avoid losing power depressing the leather, but (as usual)
I digress.

PS	I'm impressed with your technological terminology Rod, have you
swallowed Cassell's Dictionary of Science?  Are you the same Rod who belts his
wheels with lumps of wood to true them?  ;>)
PPS	Got the Portes du Soleil forms Saturday - get training so you can make
me eat your dust!

    
    
      From what I remember from my Carbon Fiber reading,  The stiffness
    that comes from CF frames is mostly tortional(twisting) stiffness that
    can be fine tuned by how the fibers are wrapped.  Carbon Fibers will 
    flex very easily but they do not stretch.  I believe most CF frames are
    actually very light guage Aluminum tubes that are wrapped in specific
    patterns by CF.  Using this method you can wrap the down and seat tubes
    so that pedaling actions won't twist them, thus givng a stiff feel, but
    direct shocks to the frame such as large bumps will be dampened by
    the flexable aluminum tubing.
    
    Personally I still like Titanium Its just as light, it dos'nt break
    and it won't wear out.  I hav'nt taken one for a jaunt yet so I can't
    comment on the ride, but I know that some people in here can.
    
    John C.
    

>            <<< Note 1655.10 by IDEFIX::HEMMINGS "Lanterne Rouge" >>>
>
> PS	I'm impressed with your technological terminology Rod, have you
> swallowed Cassell's Dictionary of Science?
    
    Now, was it "stiff as hell" or "iffy" that you really liked?
    
      
>                                           Are you the same Rod who belts his
> wheels with lumps of wood to true them?  ;>)
    
    Spokes, Robin, be precise, and if I don't do it, the road will - got to
    get your retaliation in first! 
    
> PPS	Got the Portes du Soleil forms Saturday - get training so you can make
> me eat your dust!
    
    I did 88km through the snowy Pays de Gex landscape yesterday!
    Consequently I'm shagged out today (that's another technical term).
    
    
    Rod

The really neat (another technical term...) thing about CF is that by varying 
the direction of the fibers, you can vary the stiffness. So you can stiffen up 
the bottom bracket area without making the entire bike overly stiff (like a 
C-date, for instance).

I have also been told by bike shop folk that the TREK CF frames are actually the
aluminum tubes wrapped in CF.  TREK's literature doesn't mention this at all, 
and in fact, implies to me that the tubes are all CF and Kevlar.  I may have to
call TREK to be sure.  I've no interest in a CF-wrapped aluminum bike.

I'm beginning to think that I'd probably get quite an improvement in my 
Marinoni by adding an aluminum fork and CF seatpost.

BTW, John, are you test riding these CF bikes as possible RAAM mounts?

Kevin

    
    Kevin, yes, I am testing these for RAAM.
    
    May lend variety if nothing else.  :-)
    
    -john

    I read  an  article (in Cycling Science) on the Huffy Triton. It's
    the bike that came out of their work for the US Olympic team. They
    custom  wrap the tubes, so you can specify not only your size, but
    what  stiffness pattern you want (taking your weight into account,
    of  course.) Very interesting high tech bike, also quite expensive
    (I think around $10k with full campy).

--David

>Note 1655.13                   Carbon Fibre Frames                      13 of 15
>BCSE::KLASMAN "ALL-IN-1 DESKtop for PCs. dtn 381-07" 16 lines  18-FEB-1991 12:57
>     -< CF - you can put the stiffness where you want it... and only the >-
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The really neat (another technical term...) thing about CF is that by varying 
>the direction of the fibers, you can vary the stiffness. So you can stiffen up 
>the bottom bracket area without making the entire bike overly stiff (like a 
>C-date, for instance).

    C-date ???  What's a C-date ???  Sounds like a stiffness pill or 
    something that was dated over 100 years old?  I give up?
    
    Possibly you were thinking of the new Huffy Carbon Fiber bike
    that appears in an article in this months "Mens Health".  The
    bike is called a Titan and it looks like a trick TT machine but
    the author claims that for $6 to $8K they will build a bicycle
    out of CF exclusively to meet your riding style and application.
    Supposedly each frame is hand built and over 150 manhours is
    required.  The fibers for each section are individually wrapped 
    specifically to your ability and cycling needs. 
    
>>BTW, John, are you test riding these CF bikes as possible RAAM mounts?
    
    	Maybe John should consider purchasing a few of these Titans
    for his trek across the U.S. ..... as soon as he signs Citibank as
    a sponsor that is :)
    							_Jerry

    I'm so overwhelmed by so much of technicalese being bandied about, I
    feel embarrassed about using simple terminaologies in the following so
    I'll apologize first....
    
    What's not so neat is that if you perceive a difference between two CF
    or other frames, you will never find the real reason for it.  One
    manufacturer will attribute the difference to some allegedly superior
    feature while it could well be that you can't determine a thing without
    performing an autopsy.
    
    ed

Ed's right, its tough to know EXACTLY why you like one frame better than another.
And that was a typo in my earlier note (.15?).  I meant C-dale, not C-date.  
Just hate typing Cannondale.

Kevin

>>And that was a typo in my earlier note (.15?).  I meant C-dale, not C-date.  
>>Just hate typing Cannondale.
    
    	Kevin - How come you can spell Marinoni (sp?) without any problems
    and have a hard time with Cannondale?  Apology accepted :)  
    						_Jerry