Recently on Cyclingnews.com |
 Mont Ventoux Photo ©: Sirotti |
Tech letters for May 14, 2003 - answers and opinions
Edited by John Stevenson
Confounded by carbon fiber? Need to sound off about superlight stuff? Tech letters is the forum for your gear-related questions and opinions.
Send your emails to Cyclingnews' tech desk
In the second part of today's mammoth tech letters selection, your thoughts and opinions on the current tech hot topics - and especially Shimano's 2004 Dura-Ace. Part one has lots of new topics including riders seeking upgrade advice, thoughts on heart rate monitors and a mystery crank.
2004 Dura-Ace
Frame Materials
The best road bike
Tough tyres
[For information on 2004 Dura-Ace see our tech news pages for April 24, April 11 and March 13.]
2004 Dura-Ace #1
Has Shimano lost the plot? Ten speed for the sake of having ten speeds seems to be more a case of one-up-manship and boasting that "I have more features than you have" (Or at least copying Campagnolo to stay on par in the marketing department). Will the benefit of having an extra gear be worth it? Deep dish, thin chains and the lack of compliance with consumers' extensive collections of wheels that have been amassed from the 8/9s speed compatible era. History will tell if 10 speed goes down with the likes of Biopace, and I am certain that the marketing department did enough research to declare both systems to be sure things.
Rob Bowers
Mt Tamborine Australia
Sunday, May 4 2003
Shimano has already said that ten-speed will be compatible with existing hubs, though exactly how has not yet been revealed.
2004 Dura-Ace #2
Shimano insists that even though that chainring is bigger, because of extensive machining on one side, it is not only lighter but stiffer as well.
Francis Thomas
Wednesday, April 30 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #3
I feel confident that the levers, derailleurs and brakes are just fine. The accuracy required for ten cogs in a similar width has been there all along. However, I reserve judgment on the cranks/BB arrangement until I can get a set to measure.
The biggest concern is Q-factor and crank arm dishing (the profile of the crank arms). I am reluctant to believe the claims that Q-factor will remain the same as current DA. The outboard placement of the BB bearings just leaves very little room to fit things - something has to give. New XTR certainly suffers from the gynecologists stirrups syndrome (huge Q-factor). If Q-factor remains similar, then the arm dishing will necessarily be reduced. With current DA, the arms are very low profile, minimizing the amount of heel rub many "toes-out" riders get. Could we see Lance's cranks getting some heel polish over the course of the Tour? Could be why they moved the Dura-Ace print to the side of the crank arm.
We also await the news of whether the current freehub dimensions will remain (use a ten speed cog set on any 8/9 compatible freehub). I don't think even Shimano has the gall to change that standard, as it would certainly be a deal breaker for many (remember Campagnolo's freehub fiasco?)
All in all, pretty exciting stuff and fabulous promotional timing!
Drew Chilson
Wednesday, April 30 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #4
Now that Shimano is going the whole hog with 10 speed, will that mean that they will no longer manufacture 9 speed components? If I buy a 9 speed Dura-Ace group today and need to replace parts in the next couple of years (wear and tear, accidents etc), will I be OK or will I need to go to the wreckers and scavenge for 9 speed bits and pieces?
If I got the 10 speed Dura-Ace, I'd scrap the cranks and go with the carbon FSA ...
Darryl Peroni
Victoria Park, Western Australia
Wednesday, April 30 2003
Typically it takes several years for the supply of spares to completely dry up for a given design, and the law in many territories (including Australia and the EC) requires that manufacturers make spares available for a certain number of years.
2004 Dura-Ace #5
I think the development of new bike components is always a great thing and normally improves overall performance and fun, but I think the biggest problem is the cost/price, that comes with this when it is finally available in the shops for all of us.
The prices are going up and up and up, a 10 speed Campagnolo chain costs between 39 € and 45 €, what will it cost for 10 Speed Shimano chain, in a Dura-ace or later in Ultegra Quality?
I sometimes have the feeling cycling is getting more elite, moneywise than anything else, that the normal guy in the street who rides long and frequently will have problems affording a 10 speed chain and cassette, not to speak about buying a whole group.
This is a reason why I have stayed with Shimano components and not Campagnolo.
What does a standard 10 speed Campagnolo cassette cost? That's way up on the
top shelf, is the answer!
Regards
Ashley Clancy
Germany
Thursday, May 1 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #6
Other than the fact that my current Dura-Ace stuff is still beautiful and working fine, I'm stoked for the 2004 stuff, except the front chain ring. I know Shimano has their reasons, (most likely a bunch of technical jive about how light and stiff, blah, blah, blah) but, the thing is just flat ugly. Put the current Dura-Ace 53 tooth ring on the 2004 crank and you have a home run, out of the park, and over the Big Green Monster shot. There is the one thing the Italians will always have over the rest of us; a sense of style. The Italians would never dream of uglying up a Campagnolo crank to make it a few grams lighter, or stiffer. Ever seen an ugly Ferrari? Cipollini with a hair out of place? Hey Shimano, looks count too!
Joe F. Rocha
Troutdale, Oregon
Thursday, May 1 2003
We got lots and lots of letters decrying the appearance of the 2004 cranks, though we haven't posted most of them here because, really, how many variations on 'it's ugly' do you want to read? Many thanks to the guy who sent us a picture of a monkey's bum, though. Point made. - JS
2004 Dura-Ace #7
I have had an opportunity to ride the stuff on a Shimano bike brought home by an un-named Shimano employee, probably set out to begin the buzz.
Very nice group, the first thing you notice, (and I couldn't get too aggressive because of pedal difference), is that the front shifting is about 20 times more responsive, does not hesitate on ramping and is like going from Mavic ZAP to cables.
The cranks look heavier, are, in fact lighter and, according to tech rep, stiffer with outboard bearings and nothing much in the middle.
The rear is about the same as ever, 'cept of course the additional cog.
The shifters are nice, easier hoods, you aren't going to notice the throw lessening unless you are very sensitive, but they give a very positive confidence-inspiring shift, much like their predecessors. the PRICE, they say, is comparable to the corresponding Campagnolo Record and therefore, not cheap my friend.
Have fun, you'll love it if you liked the previous edition.
John Williams
Friday, May 2 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #8
Some butts are actually quite pretty and beauty is always on the eyes of the beholder so be cool about your remarks. I find it strange that in the past ten years there have been more and more vocal cyclists who have negative remarks about Shimano Dura-Ace and all praises and love for Campagnolo Record, however, Shimano Dura-Ace has been selling more and more each year and more pro riders use Shimano than Campagnolo Record. Looks is subjective and performance - no one can argue with that.
Paul Casino
New York City
Tuesday, May 6 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #9
What do we (a bike shop) think?
We can tell you that our sales have lowered somewhat as people are holding off until the new gear is out.
Our concerns are from a workshop perspective. Do we need new tools and if so, how much. What education schemes will Shimano initiate so the info we give is accurate and aligned with Shimano? Is any of our existing tooling going to become redundant? What will the supply of 9sp be like? How does it effect current Flight Deck, will Shimano offer an upgrade package on people who have 9 sp Dura-Ace and want the new gear. As bottom bracket shells vary in width, how does this go with the new crank system, can we still easily change our crank arm length, for TT races, bike fit recommendations and so on? Is 10sp technology going to flow into 105, Ultegra and so forth?
What sort of information sessions will be put on by Shimano - will this cost us money?
Is this similar to what other people are asking?
Forest
Victor Cycles City, Australia
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 14:41:25
2004 Dura-Ace #10
Shimano's move to 10-speed was to be expected and comes as no surprise. Does it make sense in general from a business marketing point of view? Certainly.
From a rider's point of view it has to be defined who the actual user is, - it's more clear that 10-speed doesn't make sense for everybody.
It depends what the rider wants to get out of it. If the intention is to ride perfectly tuned-in to a certain cadence and to ride at the respective maximum speed in order to achieve maximum efficiency, 10-speed is a very good choice. Riders who are not really into the whole number crunching thing of heart rate, cadence, speed etc, shouldn't bother about 10-speed. I guess this is the majority. For those riders, 10-speed just adds more complexity to the system, here I mean the increased complexity resulting into more complicated drive-train tuning.
As for lightness and stiffness of the crankset (or other components...) it's the same as the above, it depends what one wants to get out of this product. I've no doubts, this is a great product for racers and the ambitious, however most riders are playing not in this category and lightness and stiffness is by far not the only factor to consider when it comes to set up a ride.
Another comment I have is on the design (as in styling) 'language' of the chainring/crank. Besides all the performance-driven features that come with this crank, the visual appearance doesn't quite address this story. By story I mean the connotations that should be triggered when one is looking at this product. I'd expect to find some forms and shapes that speak of such things as lightness, performance, purpose and tightness. I'd rather find myself misled by the form and shape into other categories of bikes such recreational bikes which have "Taiwan" written all over them. In this regard, Shimano is making a fuzzy statement with their signature road group.
Bernd Kretschmer
Kempten, Germany
Thursday, May 8 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #11
In the past, for example in the early '80s with aerodynamics, or in the mid '80s with Dyna-Drive, Shimano has often been thinking so far ahead of the rest of the industry that the significant contributions and great value of their innovations usually went right over our heads. Let's hope that now (finally in 2003) when we once again evaluate Shimano's newest round of breakthrough components, we first do the necessary homework -- and adjust our attitudes -- so that we can objectively and fully appreciate Shimano's engineering and manufacturing genius, rather than looking cynically for "why it won't work" or "why we don't need it." After all is said and done, it's obvious that Shimano's engineers work harder than other engineers at new product design and, it seems, they may even be the smartest group of engineers ever assembled to design components. Why not consider that as a possible fact and be done with it. Then, go for a ride -- using the best components you can find, of course.
Dave Kerlin
Sacramento, CA
Thursday, May 8 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #12
All my bikes have DA 9sp. The new XTR crank looked pretty cool and I was hoping for something along those design lines for the new DA. When I saw the pictures of the USPS bikes I thought the drive side looked like garbage. The technology used here is 80's BMX or 90s SweetWings and the crankset looks like it came off a P.K. Ripper or a kid's MTB from Kmart. I just keep on thinking about what Chris Boardman said about DA 9sp: as close to perfection as possible without the wear or tolerance problems of 10sp. I was hoping that Shimano would eventually come out with a cartridge DA BB. I think I'm going to keep my money in my pocket.
Jan
Friday, May 9 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #13
2004 Dura-Ace has halted the sale of primo bikes in the local shop that I work at. Everyone has delayed their purchase of groups and bikes until the new breed is let loose. An example of this is putting two year old 105 group on a brand new ultra light weight custom PAVE until Dura-Ace comes out!
One of my colleagues made a good observation yesterday relating to the old Dura-Ace, Campagnolo and the new Dura-Ace. "The old Dura-Ace was borne from the Campagnolo identity and they both grew and evolved together, looking similar along the way. The new Dura-Ace has taken off in looks and doesn't look like Campagnolo at all, it's gone all techno, I don't like it..." This guy is a Campagnolo nut and will probably stay that way, I on the other hand love the new look of Dura-Ace and can't wait till it comes out, it's provided me with a great excuse to upgrade my complete bike also!
Cheers for all the info and can't wait for more...
Andrew Bell
Australia
Wednesday, May 7 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #14
Probably a bit late to comment on the new Dura-Ace group set, but I love the new crankset! Fantastic looks, how long will it take Campagnolo to adopt this method of bottom bracket/crank design? Once again Shimano moves the boundaries.
David Butler
England
Thursday, May 1 2003
2004 Dura-Ace #15
Things are best said, when simple, I am very disappointed with the Dura-Ace 2004 group. The cranks look awful, shifters look cheap (when are they going to get those shifter cables aero?), and if they are asking more money I will stick with Campagnolo Carbon 10 speed group. I was hoping to see some kind of Carbon crank, shifters, and rear derailleur, but nothing, oh well, I guess now it be a couple more years before they fix this mistake, and Shimano products have usually been good.
Michael Anderson
NY NY
Wednesday, April 30 2003
Frame Materials #1
I think that Noel's frame builder contacts have agendas of their own, and it's not building aluminum frames. I'm 6ft 2.5in and my riding weight has varied between 185 and 205. I've ridden a number of aluminum frames from different manufacturers, and have never experienced any quality problems like those you're afraid of. Aluminum is like any other material - you can build a good frame using it, or you can build a bad frame using it.
Steve Ostrofsky
Gig Harbor, WA
Wednesday, April 30 2003
Frame Materials #2
JS - since when is asking a question "too cynical"? I like bikes to last. the bike that I rode as a junior and cat 2 senior (an '81 Bianchi Superleggera) lasted for the better part of ten years.
I ask the question since I'd like to know what to expect before a lay down $3k for a Pinarello. without naming names, some very good frame builders have told me not to go with aluminum. I just wanted to get some opinions....
I'll take your response off line - and by the way, since I've been riding or racing "good" bikes since 1979, I know the importance of a good builder. but the greatest builder in the world can't construct a 2lb frame that will last for very long.
Noel Murphy
Wednesday, April 30 2003
I like bikes to last too - what I thought cynical was the notion bike manufacturers deliberately build short-lifespan bikes. Manufacturers are typically highly embarrassed by frame failures as any significant number of them means bad press and possible recall.
I'm with you 100 percent on the durability issue, it's just nowhere near as simple as 'aluminium bad, steel good'. I've seen fatigue test data that puts Cannondale at the front of the pack for durability, and you can still embarrass Ritchey people by mentioning the early '90s steel P23s that turned into two P11.5s after nine months or so of racing... - JS
Frame Materials #3
With regard to frame materials, it's worth reading this page from Sheldon Brown's site, which is an English translation of a frame stress test done by EFBe of Germany back in '97. The upshot of the test was that frame failure has less to do with the material used than how well the frame is engineered. A Cannondale aluminum frame was one of three that did not break after 200,000 cycles on the EFBe frame stress machine, whereas several more traditional steel frames failed after fewer than 100,000 cycles.
Steve Rempel
Mountain View CA USA
Thursday, May 1 2003
Frame Materials #4
I weigh about the same (175 lbs) and chose to forsake aluminum for titanium when upgrading from a steel frame. I agree with the other writer that there are good and bad frames made from each of the four major materials, but there are important differences among them in expected longevity. The bottom line for longevity is fatigue resistance. The normal day-to-day stresses encountered by a frame are well below the tensile strength (the force required to pull apart the material) of all four materials. But repeated smaller stresses can cause a frame to fail over time (micro cracks form and are gradually enlarged until the material fails). Aluminum has by far the worst record for fatigue resistance, titanium the best. This is why you may have seen a number of aluminum frames ridden by pros or otherwise strong riders fail after about a year. However, some newer aluminum alloys which utilize grain refiners such as scandium have a much better fatigue resistance than other common aluminum alloys.
Ken O'Day
Tucson, AZ
Thursday, May 1 2003
The best road bike #1
I agree the bike that fits the best for both your body and your riding style is the best bike. Remember is the motor, not the machine.
Renee Eastman
Colorado Springs
Wednesday, April 30 2003
The best road bike #2
A lot of people have said that for the best road bike you should get a Colnago C-40 with record and top-line everything, or same with a CAAD 7, etc. Let me just say that even Johan Museeuw, Erik Dekker, Michael Boogerd, and Oscar Freire fail to be distinctive on C-40's. The damn bike is everywhere. Also, the geometry is a bit peculiar and definitely only truly suits a specific body type (as is true of all great frames). A normal rider at a local ride on a C-40 just looks like a chump who wanted the best thing he could get his hands on but had no idea how to choose for himself because he has no personality, no definite presence as a rider, and no idea what equipment he really needs so he just bought everything. Now, having thoroughly trashed all of the bike yuppies at all of the local group rides on C-40's who will never even be able to churn out 350 watts for one hour, my criteria for a great personal road bike.
1) The frame is the heart and soul of it all. First, it needs to fit you perfectly and be designed exactly for your strengths and preferences. I'm a 6ft 3in 185lb rouleur who rides long and often hammers in breaks on rolling terrain. My torso is relatively long, so the Look KX is a perfect fit. The geometry suits me great, the strength and stiffness of the uniquely shaped carbon tubes and slightly sloping frame fit a powerful rider, the shock is taken out of New England potholes, and the road feel is much more lively than carbon bikes by other companies who can't seem to lay the fibers correctly to get comfort and good road feel at the same time.
2) Get the wheels you need. For most people, riding on low spoke count wheels is retarded. The only time to do it is when you race. Not only are they expensive, but they don't even feel good. Training on them is asking for maintenance troubles and discomfort. Plus, they won't make that much difference for training. It's more fun just to beat the joker on tubular, low spoke, carbon rim money pits. Mavic Open Pro's will give you plenty of performance and the strength you need.
3) Buy good components that you like. I bought Chorus because I like Campagnolo way better than Shimano but recognize the fact that nobody ever actually needs Record. Furthermore, even the pros rode Chorus over record at Roubaix. A good rule of thumb: if pros refuse to ride something (especially wheels and components) at a race like Flanders or Gent-Wevelgem with a few cobbles, than you should be skeptical of training on it every day for a few seasons.
4) Never compromise on the stuff that touches your body. Get the right (i.e. strong, comfortable, and relatively high performance) pedals, shoes, shorts, saddle and helmet that will give you the comfort and peace of mind needed to spank Mr. Mid-Life Crisis and his $5,500 custom tricked-out C-40. The only people who should ever ride $5,000+ bikes are the guys who will never have to pay for a bike for the rest of their careers. For the rest of us, rock a frame and a build-up that suit your individual needs and remember that almost winning on almost top-line gear is way cooler than almost winning on the best gear on the planet. And for god's sake, don't let them sell another orange Colnago to a Euro poseur.
Jordan David Sagalowsky
Wednesday, April 30 2003
The best road bike #3
Raj obviously hasn't ridden a Sachs, Seven, Spectrum, Merlin, Waterford, or any number of other fine American bikes.
His Italiaphilia is a little over the top.
Doug Hamilton
Oxford, OH
Thursday, May 1 2003
The best road bike #4
Regarding the "best road bike" suggestions. If money is not a problem, get a custom made bike. It will fit you perfectly, and feel like an extension of your own body. A good shop and frame builder will help you choose the right geometry, frame materials, wheels, and components to fit your needs and style. Don't buy any of the pro-bikes, just because the pro's ride them. And definitely do not buy the pro apparel to match. Oh, and the most comfortable saddle ever made is the San Marco Rolls. It ain't pretty or super lightweight, but once it is broken in, you will switch it onto every new bike you get.
Ferdinand Arcinue
Los Angeles
Friday, May 2 2003
While I'm also a fan of the Rolls, it doesn't suit everyone - I picked mine up cheap from a friend of a friend who just could not get on with it. - JS
The best road bike #5
When will we get an objective way to evaluate frames? Didn't one of the U.S. cycling magazines have a machine called the "Tarantula" that tried to measure things like force applied to the frame and the resulting deflection? Are there any similar attempts at real frame evaluation going on?
This discussion sounds like the emperor's new clothes to me. The manufacturers tell us that carbon back ends are cushy so we echo that by saying, "Any frame with a carbon back end will be more comfortable than any frame with a non-carbon back end." But we don't really believe that, do we? Isn't possible to create the exact same rear triangle characteristics from a wide variety of materials?
Another example of that type of marketing suggestion is the curved seat stays that Litespeed has made popular. I'm a huge Litespeed fan, but frame builder Ben Serotta tried curved stays and said they don't make any difference. Who should I believe and how could I prove it?
I have simultaneously owned 1) my favorite carbon fiber frame ever (Calfee Tetra), 2) my favorite aluminum frame ever (Felt F-1) and 3) a Litespeed Ti frame that I loved. The geometries were very similar and when they were built up with the same components it was almost impossible to tell them apart. Changing saddles, tires or wheels always seemed to have a much greater effect on comfort and ride quality than changing frames or frame materials. I could spend 6 days riding one of the frames, and on the 7th, if it had a flat tire, I could grab one of the others for a ride and barely notice any difference. I always suspected that the Calfee was more comfortable and it was the bike I rode the most, but it had longer chain stays, a longer wheelbase and a nicer fork with more rake so it's hard to say which factors were significant.
Am I just not as perceptive as the rest of you or are we all too confident that the marketing hype really matches the engineering reality?
Louis Garrett
Friday, May 2 2003
The best road bike #6
As a rule of thumb. If it ends in 'o' or 'i' and is built in a country shaped like a boot, and has no wires sticking out from the hoods, then you've made the right choice. :)
Ian (running for cover) Loxton
Sydney
Tuesday, May 6 2003
The best road bike #7
The best road bike is mine. I might be willing to part with it, but it will cost you.
Nathan Vandenbroek
Wednesday, April 30 2003
The best road bike #8
I hesitated to put my two cents in on the subject of best bikes, because I am inclined to blab on the subject without being asked. But having read the resulting replies, I can no longer restrain myself. Asking what is the best bike is like asking who is the best looking man/woman. Depends on your taste.
But that being said, I would argue that variety is the spice of life, and rather than coughing up three or four thousand dollars for a Ti or Carbon frameset, treat yourself to a couple of steel bikes, because top of the line steel costs half as much as these materials as often as not. Once again I will put Pegoretti up there near the top of the list of bikes one should have, along with Casati, Tommasini, Masi- hey, a trend has developed. Rather than spend eight or ten thousand on a bike, go to Italy and visit the guys who have the years' experience building bikes for first division teams, those "rebadged" bikes you have read about. Have a couple made to measure, and then enjoy the difference between them.
You'll find that all steel is not created equal; EOM 16.5 feels different than Foco, and shaped tubing does in fact dampen road vibration without increasing bottom bracket flex. There is a good chance that a steel bike will outlast any other material, even at the lightest weight end of the spectrum. The Pegoretti Marcelo weighs 1.3 kilos- think you need lighter than that? Okay, but don't expect it to last more than 30,000 kilometers. As a cousin of mine once put it, "they're like roller coasters; once you've ridden one, you want to ride them all."
My Yankee sensibilities would not let me go out and blow my wad on a C-40, or a Seven, when I could have two steel frames for the same amount. I have four road bikes, and ride them all. The Marcelo is a weekend ride, race only. The Tommasini every day that there is not rain, salt or other gunk to contend with. The Teschner - he's from Oz, but there has to be an Italian gene in there somewhere - plays tag with the Tommasini. And the lugged Ron Cooper - eminence grise of British, lugged frame building - is for the rough roads, because I haven't any more change to buy a Pegoretti Duende cross bike. So, what's my advice? Buy a bunch of bikes from the best frame builders you can find, and love the one you're on.
Jay Dwight
USA
Wednesday, May 7 2003
Tough tyres
Tufo tubulars with the latex seal and have given me 3 years of puncture-free
riding. They are first rate and I cannot recommend
them enough.
Andy Farrand
Wednesday, May 7 2003
