Shimano Dura Ace 2013

greasedscotsman

Is this just the worst looking chainset ever?



Don't think much of the rest of the groupset either!

http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/04/22/shi ... g-website/

de_sisti

Seriously, what's wrong with it?

Aggieboy

Looks cheap.

greasedscotsman

De Sisti wrote:

Seriously, what's wrong with it?

You like it? You would put it on your bike? But there's a bit missing! And the two tone finish looks terrible. Chainsets are supposed to look like this...



Shiney! 8)

de_sisti

greasedscotsman wrote:

You like it? You would put it on your bike?

FFS, all I said was "seriously, what's wrong with it?" :roll:

greasedscotsman

De Sisti wrote:

FFS, all I said was "seriously, what's wrong with it?" :roll:

OK, calm down. I don't like how it looks. It looks like there is an arm missing. I don't like the two tone finish. I like chainsets and components that are silver and shiney, like in the one in other photo I posted.

Do you like it? Would you buy a bike if it had that chainset on it?

OffTheBackAdam

Not aesthetically pleasing to my eyes.
5-arm spiders for me too.

Aggieboy

OffTheBackAdam wrote:

Not aesthetically pleasing to my eyes.
5-arm spiders for me too.

That embossed logo makes it infinitely better anyway.

greasedscotsman

Aggieboy wrote:

That embossed logo makes it infinitely better anyway.

But even the current stuff looks rubbish.



It was a nice chainset until they put all that writing on it! Extreme Performance Shifting System, Titanium Ultra Torque, Q-Factor 145.5! And why is it English?

napoleond

Because the US is one of 'Campy's' biggest markets. If not the biggest...

greasedscotsman

NapoleonD wrote:

Because the US is one of 'Campy's' biggest markets. If not the biggest...

Yeah, I kinda knew that. But it's still RUBBISH!

Oh well, I'll have to buy this instead.

BillyMansell

As the purpose of a chainset is to transfer your energy into forward motion and as the Dura Ace is similar to the Deda design it could be surmised that the engineering analysis suggests placing pairs of arms at the points of maximum power is the way to go.

Is it pretty? who cares as long as it transfers energy, and who worries about what their chainset looks like when they're riding their bike anyway? If prettiness is important than performance in your hobbies take up flower arranging or dressmaking.

mattshrops

BillyMansell wrote:

As the purpose of a chainset is to transfer your energy into forward motion and as the Dura Ace is similar to the Deda design it could be surmised that the engineering analysis suggests placing pairs of arms at the points of maximum power is the way to go.

Is it pretty? who cares as long as it transfers energy, and who worries about what their chainset looks like when they're riding their bike anyway? If prettiness is important than performance in your hobbies take up flower arranging or dressmaking.

OOH hark at her.

I bet you had a face like a trod on chip while you typed that.

greasedscotsman

BillyMansell wrote:

As the purpose of a chainset is to transfer your energy into forward motion and as the Dura Ace is similar to the Deda design it could be surmised that the engineering analysis suggests placing pairs of arms at the points of maximum power is the way to go.

Is it pretty? who cares as long as it transfers energy, and who worries about what their chainset looks like when they're riding their bike anyway? If prettiness is important than performance in your hobbies take up flower arranging or dressmaking.

Can it not be functional AND pretty? Suppose that is a bit too much to ask.

BillyMansell

mattshrops wrote:

BillyMansell wrote:

As the purpose of a chainset is to transfer your energy into forward motion and as the Dura Ace is similar to the Deda design it could be surmised that the engineering analysis suggests placing pairs of arms at the points of maximum power is the way to go.

Is it pretty? who cares as long as it transfers energy, and who worries about what their chainset looks like when they're riding their bike anyway? If prettiness is important than performance in your hobbies take up flower arranging or dressmaking.

OOH hark at her.

I bet you had a face like a trod on chip while you typed that.

Just to complete your image;

Aggieboy

BillyMansell wrote:

As the purpose of a chainset is to transfer your energy into forward motion and as the Dura Ace is similar to the Deda design it could be surmised that the engineering analysis suggests placing pairs of arms at the points of maximum power is the way to go.

Is it pretty? who cares as long as it transfers energy, and who worries about what their chainset looks like when they're riding their bike anyway? If prettiness is important than performance in your hobbies take up flower arranging or dressmaking.

Form and function isn't impossible and is desirable.

Edit - And great minds think alike

napoleond

Rotor make the best chainsets. Except for Cannondale SiSl maybe... Oh, and Shimano.

greasedscotsman

BillyMansell wrote:

Like his flip-flops.

BillyMansell

Form and function, yes, when form follows function in this context. Prettiness is function following form, good for furniture and soft fabrics, not so good for performance bicycle parts.

greasedscotsman

NapoleonD wrote:

Rotor make the best chainsets. Except for Cannondale SiSl maybe... Oh, and Shimano.

Used to have a Coda chainset on a Cannondale a few years back, looked very similar to this...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/millerartwork/3973560227/

Why did I sell them? What was I thinking?

greasedscotsman

BillyMansell wrote:

Form and function, yes, when form follows function in this context. Prettiness is function following form, good for furniture and soft fabrics, not so good for performance bicycle parts.

Have I got this right, your saying a sofa has no (or very little) function? Surely is has to be comfortable to sit on, doesn't it?

tailwindhome

greasedscotsman wrote:

Aggieboy wrote:

That embossed logo makes it infinitely better anyway.

But even the current stuff looks rubbish.



It was a nice chainset until they put all that writing on it! Extreme Performance Shifting System, Titanium Ultra Torque, Q-Factor 145.5! And why is it English?

That looks like it was designed using a spirograph.

CiB

Someone has to point out that you've missed the point re the current Dura Ace design. In case you hadn't noticed Di2 (electric) gears are becoming popular. For Di2 to work as well as it does the front rings need to be very stiff in terms of lateral flex. Those old 80s style designs don't cut the mustard when it comes to standing up to the front mech of a Di2 g/set doing its stuff. Unlike mechanical changers, once the change is invoked it happens.

Personal view? I like em.

Ben6899

BillyMansell

greasedscotsman wrote:

BillyMansell wrote:

Form and function, yes, when form follows function in this context. Prettiness is function following form, good for furniture and soft fabrics, not so good for performance bicycle parts.

Have I got this right, your saying a sofa has no (or very little) function? Surely is has to be comfortable to sit on, doesn't it?

I did say that function follows form not that there was little or no function at all.

To continue the simile but focusing on the high performance aspect, you can go to Tesco or Argos and order a sofa shaped object just as you can go to Tesco or Argos and buy and bike shaped object. In both examples, which has come first - form or function? The answer is form as their design and construction is driven by cost rather than achieving the best performance. When performance becomes a priority then function becomes more important but neither are wholly exclusive.

As for those chainsets of the 80s and 90s, they were of their time but they are too flexible compared to today's offerings. Back in the day I used to ride a Suntour Suprebe Pro groupset but the chainset, despite having lovely simple lines and being among he stiffest at the time, twisted under pressure and eventually remained warped. The current Dura Ace I ride remains true and that's what's important to me.

For balance, I would add that the one area on my bikes where form leads function is with handlebar wrap. On my road bike I give slightly more importance to the bar tape being the right shade of blue than it offering the best comfort or grip.

greasedscotsman

CiB wrote:

Someone has to point out that you've missed the point re the current Dura Ace design. In case you hadn't noticed Di2 (electric) gears are becoming popular. For Di2 to work as well as it does the front rings need to be very stiff in terms of lateral flex. Those old 80s style designs don't cut the mustard when it comes to standing up to the front mech of a Di2 g/set doing its stuff. Unlike mechanical changers, once the change is invoked it happens.

Personal view? I like em.

I don't think Di2 has anything to do with it. Shimano just have different ideas on how a chainset can be made. If you make the chainrings stronger, you can do away with one of the arms and save weight. It's like Shimano stick with making there components out of alloy whereas Campagnolo and Sram use carbon. One isn't necessarily better than the other, they both have their advantages and disadvantages, it's just a different way of doing things.

greasedscotsman

BillyMansell wrote:

I did say that function follows form not that there was little or no function at all.

To continue the simile but focusing on the high performance aspect, you can go to Tesco or Argos and order a sofa shaped object just as you can go to Tesco or Argos and buy and bike shaped object. In both examples, which has come first - form or function? The answer is form as their design and construction is driven by cost rather than achieving the best performance. When performance becomes a priority then function becomes more important but neither are wholly exclusive.

As for those chainsets of the 80s and 90s, they were of their time but they are too flexible compared to today's offerings. Back in the day I used to ride a Suntour Suprebe Pro groupset but the chainset, despite having lovely simple lines and being among he stiffest at the time, twisted under pressure and eventually remained warped. The current Dura Ace I ride remains true and that's what's important to me.

For balance, I would add that the one area on my bikes where form leads function is with handlebar wrap. On my road bike I give slightly more importance to the bar tape being the right shade of blue than it offering the best comfort or grip.

Well, TBH if was buying a sofa, I don't really care what it looks like, I just want it to be comfortable.

It's interesting that no one has picked up on the commets I've made about the two tone finish. OK, I'm sure it's 29.33% stiffer and 18.5% lighter or whatever, but why the awful finish? Can we not have it nice and shiney? Is that not possible anymore? OK, Campagnolo and Sram can't make their chainset like that as they are carbon, but Shimano can, they are still alloy. I think I could just about live with it if it had nice shiney finish. That would make no diference to the function, so the performance geeks would be happy and the old farts like me would love it as well!

OK, maybe that's not quite true, I'd probably buy something from FSA instead...

fish156

Matt black frames, deep carbon rims - not sure a "shiney" groupset would fit in with the current "stealth" fashion? Shimano are just probably just supplying the majority fashion.

greasedscotsman

fish156 wrote:

Black frames, deep carbon rims - not sure a "shiney" groupset would fit in with the current "stealth" fashion? Shimano are just probably just supplying the majority fashion.

Yeah, I'm not very fashionable.

nevman

^because it looks like something that would haul a load across the Rockies maybe?
(Coda chainset^^^^^^)

willhub

We like it, I like it, you like it too
Willhub's on wax for the Dura Ace crew
All I know is this chainset tears up nuff venue
So anytime we're around this is what we do
It's the way that we crank this sound
It's the way that we bring this Dura Ace to you
It's the way that we crank this sound
It's the way that we bring this Dura Ace to you
Hey Yo!!