Carbon retro?

[grantoury]

Above ^^ I'd take real world experience and expertise of cycling professionals, who rely 100% on their bikes to put food on the table, over any materials science muppet with a slide rule and a test rig.

The fact that Kelly had to 'retire' his Vitus carbon at the end of each and every Paris-Roubaix race, tells the professionals story. These guys aren't playing at it, they're in it to win races. Period.

Bikes are just tools, to be used and abused, and thrown away if necessary. When you're living depends on it....

That doesn't actually have any bearing on the question whether materials, carbon as original post or alu and steel indeed loose stiffness. Its a completely subjective argument, which isn't an argument at all. Pros burn through material without any emotional attachment, that isn't really an eye opener.

 

[Canuk]

Above ^^

The Vitus isn't steel, stay on topic. So no real facts then. Ok thanks.

The topic is carbon. See above. Thread title?

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

The topic is carbon. See above. Thread title?

You said steel frames lose their zing on the same carbon thread. I asked for some facts, proof. There is none you can supply. Have a great evening.

 

[Canuk]

You said steel frames lose their zing on the same carbon thread. I asked for some facts, proof. There is none you can supply. Have a great evening.

You too. Happy New Year.

 

[Frankenorange]

I personally wouldn't keep a steel frame around for more than a week, it goes all ramen noodles to me. Must be my sizeable shaven glutes. I know it can seem a bit neurotic, but I don't spend too much on them. Never more than 3k a week.

Is that 3k a week on noodles, or on shaving products for your glutes?

Anyway....regarding carbon as a frame material and longevity...as long as it is made properly and doesn't get any fractures in the fibres, from impacts , then it will last a very long time. How long exactly is a bit of an unknown as it is in its infancy really, compared to steel.
The Team GB UKSI track frames ,built for the 2012 olympics , are still going strong and are being used alongside the new Hope bikes. Lord knows what they have been through since they were glued together!

99.9% of steel frames will be the same after a very, very, long time as when they were put together. The problem frames will be those with super thin walled tubing, crashed and straightened frames, badly built frames that have been overly tweaked to be straight/not joined together properly/etc, and frames with tubing that has had bad heat treatment pre and post building. Big killer of course is rusty the clown.

Like most things in life. Done well and treated well it will last. Pushed to the extremes it will jot. Done badly/abused it will not.

The frames that i would think twice about are the frames with tubes glued into lugs. Most are still tickety boo and will probably be so for a very long time, but all these frames need is a bad fit between the tubes and lugs, not enough bonding agent, a bad mix of bonding agent, big temperature fluctuations, etc and a sudden catastrophic failure is possible.

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

Is that 3k a week on noodles, or on shaving products for your glutes?

Anyway....regarding carbon as a frame material and longevity...as long as it is made properly and doesn't get any fractures in the fibres, from impacts , then it will last a very long time. How long exactly is a bit of an unknown as it is in its infancy really, compared to steel.
The Team GB UKSI track frames ,built for the 2012 olympics , are still going strong and are being used alongside the new Hope bikes. Lord knows what they have been through since they were glued together!

99.9% of steel frames will be the same after a very, very, long time as when they were put together. The problem frames will be those with super thin walled tubing, crashed and straightened frames, badly built frames that have been overly tweaked to be straight/not joined together properly/etc, and frames with tubing that has had bad heat treatment pre and post building. Big killer of course is rusty the clown.

Like most things in life. Done well and treated well it will last. Pushed to the extremes it will jot. Done badly/abused it will not.

The frames that i would think twice about are the frames with tubes glued into lugs. Most are still tickety boo and will probably be so for a very long time, but all these frames need is a bad fit between the tubes and lugs, not enough bonding agent, a bad mix of bonding agent, big temperature fluctuations, etc and a sudden catastrophic failure is possible.

Nice to see you about mate

 

[bikeworkshop]

Big killer of course is rusty the clown.

https://sdcverifier.com/structural-...-limit-understanding-materials-specific-data/

That's "Rusty",
with a capital "R"

 

[bikeworkshop]

So (in a steel frame) a very small amount of corrosion, say down in the seattube by the bb, or near the rear drive side dropout, is going to massively reduce life expectancy, pulling the material endurance limit down into regular real world use.

A frame only needs to break in one place

 

[hamster]

Above ^^ I'd take real world experience and expertise of cycling professionals, who rely 100% on their bikes to put food on the table, over any materials science muppet with a slide rule and a test rig.

You mean the same materials science muppets who manage to make things like jet engines that run with a core temperature above the melting point, carbon fibre wings that have lasted decades, aircraft that don't crack etc ???

Cycling pros are paid to ride whatever they are given, often substandard from the sponsor.

 

[Canuk]

You mean the same materials science muppets who manage to make things like jet engines that run with a core temperature above the melting point, carbon fibre wings that have lasted decades, aircraft that don't crack etc ???

Cycling pros are paid to ride whatever they are given, often substandard from the sponsor.

That's not my experience (as a one year contracted pro in the 90s). Your top riders don't generally ride what everyone else is riding, they get to pick and choose components/ratios/set ups etc. Whatever they want, they get it. If you're a Tour winner or a top stage rider, the star, no one will say boo to you, leastwise the mechanics. In Merckx day you got to choose whether to ride Colnago frames (he did not like the ride nor the rigidity they offered) and was able to go to artisan builders and get exactly the steel/frame parts he wanted. He often chose well respected Spanish builders over the Kessels Colnagos the rest of the team rode. They were simply painted up as Molteni Colnago.

So, top pros are a damn sight more discerning (and well informed) about materials and frame specs than you'd imagine. It's a tool, it's not a bike, and they want the best tools available. Winning isn't just a fast pair of legs. I've had the pleasure of meeting Merckx when he came to London to watch the football. A more shrewd, canny and impressively intelligent cyclist I've yet to meet.

To win 525 races, become the top stage winner (by quantity) in Two grand Tours, ye kinda have to know an awful lot about bicycles, and what's best for your performance. You need a brain, coupled with vast experience of the environment.

Who do you trust more when you are flying? The pilot, with thousands of hours of at the wheel experience of the mechanism, and the foibles of the day to day operation, or the guy who designed the widget to make the seat go back?

I work in avionics. Have done these 35 years, material science bods are useful, but they're not the definitive core of an aircraft construction. Everyone knows what the tensile strength of steel vs carbon fibre is. Slide rule guys don't test pilot planes. I'd trust Merckx over just about anyone to come up with top end steel, history has proved that and then some