Steel bike lighter than Carbon bike shock!
Comments
-
redddraggon wrote:The Mad Rapper wrote:Like what? A steel frame is just as rigid as carbon, so other than aero there's no difference.
Which Mickey Mouse institution did you get your materials engineering degree from then|?
I was speaking from a practical point of view. However, if you think I am wrong then educate me, instead of trying to shout me down and make yourself look like a tw@t...0 -
giant mancp wrote:you and me both pal, you and me both .....
Why not a Ti frame? Just out of curiosity?0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:redddraggon wrote:The Mad Rapper wrote:Like what? A steel frame is just as rigid as carbon, so other than aero there's no difference.
Which Mickey Mouse institution did you get your materials engineering degree from then|?
I was speaking from a practical point of view. However, if you think I am wrong then educate me, instead of trying to shout me down and make yourself look like a tw@t...
I think you managed that with your first comment fella. Still waiting for that review, by the way...0 -
softlad wrote:I think you managed that with your first comment fella. Still waiting for that review, by the way...
I managed nothing of the sort. I'm not playing your little game, so you can forget it. I've ridden both Ti, Carbon and Steel frames and there's nothing in it. Certainly not at our level any way. You and others talk of steel as though it's heavy and crap. You're wrong. I suppose you're going to tell me my opinion is worth nothing now?0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:softlad wrote:I think you managed that with your first comment fella. Still waiting for that review, by the way...
I managed nothing of the sort. I'm not playing your little game, so you can forget it. I've ridden both Ti, Carbon and Steel frames and there's nothing in it. Certainly not at our level any way. You and others talk of steel as though it's heavy and crap. You're wrong. I suppose you're going to tell me my opinion is worth nothing now?
your opinion is worth nothing, because I never said anything of the sort. I have also ridden steel, aluminium, carbon and titanium frames and in my opinion, the difference between steel and carbon is significant in terms of both weight and performance. Maybe your level is different to mine....
0 -
warming up nicely....
Think I'll get comfy for this one :twisted:None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
Popcorn please...0
-
softlad wrote:your opinion is worth nothing, because I never said anything of the sort. I have also ridden steel, aluminium, carbon and titanium frames and in my opinion, the difference between steel and carbon is significant in terms of both weight and performance. Maybe your level is different to mine....
WTF are you talking about then? What exactly is your argument?
I am new to road riding so I accept a level difference as a given. However, I don't accept that there's a significant difference in either weight or performance between the frames I've tried. If you cycle 5 hours a day and have 7% BF then perhaps there might be, but I don't see the point in getting wood about a 200 gram weight saving when the rider could easily lose a stone...0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:WTF are you talking about then? What exactly is your argument?
my argument is that your assumptions and your confused comments about weight v performance are being presented as facts - when they are clearly nothing of the sort.
Anyway, I'm done with this thread now. You have the cheek to ask me if I have ridden a 'modern' steel frame, and then you bottle it when I ask you to enlarge on your earlier comments.....0 -
softlad wrote:my argument is that your assumptions and your confused comments about weight v performance are being presented as facts - when they are clearly nothing of the sort.
They are presented as opinion - the same as 99.9% of the posts on this forum.
I asked you to tell me why I am wrong and you haven't. Is that because you can't?0 -
Without getting dragged into the arguement, what exactly is your point Mr Rapper? I guess you're getting the Enigma just 'cos you like the way it looks ,nowt wrong with that, but it does seem like a lump of cash for something that feels like anything else.
I've got a 2004 Giant TCR carbon and a 2009 Advanced and I really feel that the new one is 'better'. Don't even mention my TCR aluminium.0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:They are presented as opinion - the same as 99.9% of the posts on this forum.
I asked you to tell me why I am wrong and you haven't. Is that because you can't?
you first, fella...I'd still like to know more about how you arrived at the conclusion below...The Mad Rapper wrote:A steel frame is just as rigid as carbon, so other than aero there's no difference.
looking forward to your comprehensive explanation...... 0 -
inseine wrote:Without getting dragged into the arguement, what exactly is your point Mr Rapper? I guess you're getting the Enigma just 'cos you like the way it looks ,nowt wrong with that, but it does seem like a lump of cash for something that feels like anything else.
I've got a 2004 Giant TCR carbon and a 2009 Advanced and I really feel that the new one is 'better'. Don't even mention my TCR aluminium.
I'm buying the Enigma because I believe in the value of buying something made in the UK. Something that's well designed, carefully built and which should last me a lifetime. Yes, it is a lot to spend on a bike, but I'll treat it well and hope that it serves me well.
If I have a point, it's don't write off the classic materials. I just don't accept that carbon represents that much of a leap forward to start jumping up and down and shouting from the roof tops. Modern steel and Ti frames are very light and very strong. The steel frames in particular are very rigid. I honestly didn't experience any difference between the Echo or Extensor frames and the Felt, Bianchi, Specialized and Scott carbon frames I tried. The only caveat that I can possibly add to this is that perhaps, as a new road rider, I am not educated enough in terms of feel to distinguish to differences that Softlad seems to think should be apparent. I don't know.
For avoidance of doubt, I have NO issue with carbon frames. I am thinking about buying one myself as well at some point in the future. I think they look amazing. If the rider has eliminated all unnecessary weight elsewhere, then sure, lose half a kilo from the frame, but if you're carrying excess weight, then surely you'll get more performance gain from losing that then changing frames?0 -
Believe me, there's a world of difference between different carbon frames so carbon vs steel, yes of course they're going to feel different. Inexperience could be a factor in this.The Mad Rapper wrote:inseine wrote:Without getting dragged into the arguement, what exactly is your point Mr Rapper? I guess you're getting the Enigma just 'cos you like the way it looks ,nowt wrong with that, but it does seem like a lump of cash for something that feels like anything else.
I've got a 2004 Giant TCR carbon and a 2009 Advanced and I really feel that the new one is 'better'. Don't even mention my TCR aluminium.
I'm buying the Enigma because I believe in the value of buying something made in the UK. Something that's well designed, carefully built and which should last me a lifetime. Yes, it is a lot to spend on a bike, but I'll treat it well and hope that it serves me well.
If I have a point, it's don't write off the classic materials. I just don't accept that carbon represents that much of a leap forward to start jumping up and down and shouting from the roof tops. Modern steel and Ti frames are very light and very strong. The steel frames in particular are very rigid. I honestly didn't experience any difference between the Echo or Extensor frames and the Felt, Bianchi, Specialized and Scott carbon frames I tried. The only caveat that I can possibly add to this is that perhaps, as a new road rider, I am not educated enough in terms of feel to distinguish to differences that Softlad seems to think should be apparent. I don't know.
For avoidance of doubt, I have NO issue with carbon frames. I am thinking about buying one myself as well at some point in the future. I think they look amazing. If the rider has eliminated all unnecessary weight elsewhere, then sure, lose half a kilo from the frame, but if you're carrying excess weight, then surely you'll get more performance gain from losing that then changing frames?0 -
giant mancp wrote:Believe me, there's a world of difference between different carbon frames so carbon vs steel, yes of course they're going to feel different. Inexperience could be a factor in this.
I'm talking about in terms of weight and rigidity. Not ability to absorb road buzz, or climb or anything else. The caveat I added still applies obviously.0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:giant mancp wrote:Believe me, there's a world of difference between different carbon frames so carbon vs steel, yes of course they're going to feel different. Inexperience could be a factor in this.
I'm talking about in terms of weight and rigidity. Not ability to absorb road buzz, or climb or anything else. The caveat I added still applies obviously.
You'll find a good carbon frame is a fair bit stiffer and lighter than a steel one. You aren't talking 200 grams weight wise either, more like 500...
And 'climbing ability' of a frame is directly linked to weight and rigidity :?0 -
I'm talking about in terms of weight and rigidity. Not ability to absorb road buzz, or climb or anything else. The caveat I added still applies obviously.
Sorry but this is even more ridiculous. If you keep the constant either the weight, price or rigidity between a carbon and a steel frame then the carbon will better the steel in the other two. You steel frame is 1400g+ and £1500. You said weight wasn't everything now you are saying it's the same. It's not. Lovely frame all the same 0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:Bigpikle wrote:love my Enigma - you can say all you like about the steel vs carbon rubbish and choose whatever bike you want at the end of the day, but >2500 miles this year on mine and I it still puts a big grin on my face!
I love my Look carbon as well but my next bike will be a custom made Enigma Extensor, and I've already chosen the paint scheme
What are you going for? I was going to have white originally, but have decided to go for Ferrari red with cream panels and mirror polished logos. Stunning
snap - I test rode a red one and it was stunning. I have a black Ethos now so need a different colour....
Somebody asked why not ti, but having ridden several of their ti and steel frames it was the steel that just felt best t me. The Extensor is a very stiff lively feel that just begs to be thrashed like a race car - loved every second of my test ride on it like I have with no other bike, and that was before I was properly fit again!Your Past is Not Your Potential...0 -
The Extensor, it's that great feeling to it, especially off the saddle, just comes alive. Fab. I'm going for something completely custom for mine. I don't know if Enigma's painters can even achieve it, but we shall see ....0
-
If I was to buy an Extensor it'd have to have standard geometry, although this would likely reduce stiffness.0
-
giant mancp wrote:The Extensor, it's that great feeling to it, especially off the saddle, just comes alive. Fab. I'm going for something completely custom for mine. I don't know if Enigma's painters can even achieve it, but we shall see ....
we need pictures when it comes...
I remember wanting to get stopped at all the lights and junctions on the Enigma test route so I could race cars from a standing start! It was a shame I wasnt itter at the time and able to get more from it as it was obviously a far more talented bike than I was rider.
I just love mine (as everyone can tell) and it is a very elegant bike which gets comments every time I meet new riders out and about. Next year its going to do the Raid Pyrenean with me as well as a few other multi-day events as well. Sadly I suspect it will be 2012 before my budget stretches to the Extensor as well so I will have to make do until then...tough!Your Past is Not Your Potential...0 -
For a given frame size (or sizing, geo), carbon and aluminium alloys can be made stiffer than steel for a given weight. Whilst the modulus of steel is three times that of aluminium, it is also three times denser. Double the diameter of a tube (keeping the wall thickness the same) the stiffness of that tube goes up by a factor of 8. So it is quite possible to have an alu tube 2/3rd the weight of a steel one, yet 8/3 times as stiff...
The problem with steel is that you can only thin the tube walls and oversize them so far before they begin to buckle, and frames under 3lbs begin to get very whippy.
Of course that is just a very basic look at tubing, there are many other factors such as the joining method etc.0 -
giant mancp wrote:The Extensor, it's that great feeling to it, especially off the saddle, just comes alive. Fab. I'm going for something completely custom for mine. I don't know if Enigma's painters can even achieve it, but we shall see ....
When I spoke with Jim about painting, he said I could have pretty much whatever I wanted within reason. So I guess it depends how complicated what you have in mind is! 0 -
Bigpikle wrote:I remember wanting to get stopped at all the lights and junctions on the Enigma test route so I could race cars from a standing start! It was a shame I wasnt itter at the time and able to get more from it as it was obviously a far more talented bike than I was rider.
Ha!
I did the exact same thing, from the railway crossing near the entrance to their industrial estate
The Extensor is stunning. I felt completely unworthy - what a beautiful bike!0 -
Is there any truth in the rumour that Lewis Hamilton's 2011 car is going to be built from steel?Boardman Elite SLR 9.2S
Boardman FS Pro0 -
Appart from the fact Columbus XCR isn't some old crappy tubeset, but one of the newest on the market. Still its pretty bad when a cutting edge steel frame is around 1/2 Kg heavier than a decent carbon frame.0
-
Problem is that all steels used for bikes have the same modulus, be it XCR or mild steel. The flex 'problems' will still exist at the limits of tube diameter to wall thcikness ratios.0
-
supersonic wrote:Problem is that all steels used for bikes have the same modulus, be it XCR or mild steel. The flex 'problems' will still exist at the limits of tube diameter to wall thcikness ratios.
Depends on the profile. They are not all round you know None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
supersonic wrote:
Problem is that all steels used for bikes have the same modulus, be it XCR or mild steel. The flex 'problems' will still exist at the limits of tube diameter to wall thcikness ratios.
Depends on the profile. They are not all round you know
I think it's a question of science, not tube shape.0
