Death of a Cruiserweight (page 5)

cruiserweight

I'm glad it fits and am looking forward to a ride report. You've effectively gone up from a 52 to a 56 so your old frame must have been quite small for you. The description says that it has a brushed finish. Is that true? It looks like a bead blasted finish in the pictures. Hopefully mine will arrive this week. One more question if you don't mind. What sort of tyre clearance does it have? I'm hoping to fit 25mm three with raceblade guards.

RideOnTime

pastey_boy wrote:

here are 2 images of the hpt super bike. the frame looks the same apart from the graphics. the bike dates back to 2008/9 and retailed for £8000.

crikey :P

cruiserweight

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade but the 2012 frame is made from cheaper material and has a slightly different geometry to those 2008/2009 frames. The cost of raw titanium has also plummeted since 2009. It's still good value but it's not the bargain implied by the comparison to a different frame from a more expensive era. Those higher spec 2009 Super HPT's were kitted out with Campy Super Record and uber expensive carbon wheels. 105 or Ultegra would be a more appropriate match for this 2012 frame.

pastey_boy

cruiserweight wrote:

I'm glad it fits and am looking forward to a ride report. You've effectively gone up from a 52 to a 56 so your old frame must have been quite small for you. The description says that it has a brushed finish. Is that true? It looks like a bead blasted finish in the pictures. Hopefully mine will arrive this week. One more question if you don't mind. What sort of tyre clearance does it have? I'm hoping to fit 25mm three with raceblade guards.

It,s a blasted finish, as for clearance I don't know yet as I'm waiting for my forks to dry before the wheels go on.

pastey_boy

cruiserweight wrote:

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade but the 2012 frame is made from cheaper material and has a slightly different geometry to those 2008/2009 frames. The cost of raw titanium has also plummeted since 2009. It's still good value but it's not the bargain implied by the comparison to a different frame from a more expensive era. Those higher spec 2009 Super HPT's were kitted out with Campy Super Record and uber expensive carbon wheels. 105 or Ultegra would be a more appropriate match for this 2012 frame.

The only real query I have regards the weight, the 58 I have weighs 1295grams which compares to the quoted weight of the 53cm Super model of 1250grams. The weight of the 58cm 2009 hpt frame was 1600 grams as verified on Weight Weenies. 300 grams is hell of a saving for what is essentially the same frame.

cruiserweight

Hi Pastey, it wasn't my intention to decry the value of your purchase. I've bought one myself and it is good value. The weight of your frame is in line with an equivalent frame from someone like Enigma. For example a 59cm Esprit weighs 1.26 KG. The Esprit is a double butted frameset made from standard ti. It has a level top tube so (all else being equal) it should weigh fractionally more than a compact frame like yours that is triple butted. Unfortunately a manufacturer can state that a frame is double or triple butted when it only has one double/triple butted tube. A well respected company like Enigma is a useful benchmark because when they say double butted they usually mean all or most of the tubes. The fact that your frame weighs slightly more than a level top tube, double butted frame made from standard ti tells us what is likely to be made from. My best guess is that it has a part triple/part double butted front triangle with a standard gauge rear triangle. That would explain why your "triple butted" compact frame weighs slightly more than a horizontal top tube, double butted frame.

I sincerely doubt that the 2009 standard HPT weighed 1600 grams. Anyone can post anything on weight weenies. Dodgy scale, mischievous post, genuine error? For example, the bottom of the range Enigma Eclipse is made from straight gauge ti and it weighs about 1.4 KG, in a similar size. In the unlikely event that it's true, then Cube was a bit cheeky marketing it as a triple butted frame. I've never heard of a recent quality ti frame that weighs that much. In any event it does not matter. Your frame is a completely different model with a different grade and mix of tubes. Do not get hung up on any similarities in appearance. There are only so many 'looks' that can be achieved when the frame is made from a pallet of shapes from one small company. It's not a 2009 Super HPT (the different headtube length is absolute proof of that) but it is a very good frame in its own right.

pastey_boy

Regardless of what i have said i am very happy with my purchase whatever it is, i have a light ti frame which fits my odd bodyshape, what i cant get over is the mystery surrounding the frame. It is advertised as a super hpt yet comes emblazoned with the same paintjob as the normal hpt, the decal on the frame stating the top tube length is totally wrong and the frame only appears on bike-discounts website and there is no other reference to it anywhere else. Cube themselves wont acknowledge the existence of the frame either. With the wrong decal applied, could it be a factory second perhaps ?

pastey_boy

Just given the forks their final coat of lacquer, gonna leave them to dry for a couple of days before i insert the head race and fit to the bike. Just ordered a few finishing touches so if all goes to plan i should have the bike built for fri by which time this rain might ease up so i can get a ride or two in.

cruiserweight

It wouldn't be a factory second. Lynskey have great QC and a substandard frame is unlikely to get out the door. Returns cost them a fortune. It's almost certainly a cancelled model that is being disposed of by one of their biggest domestic customers. The Euro fell against the Dollar and consequently frames bought in from the US became unprofitable. Cube probably only had a small first batch when the decision was made to axe titanium from the road line-up. Another factor is that their in-house 2012 carbon bikes met with critical acclaim and are big sellers. There is therefore no reason for them to commit resources to a loss making, low volume model like the HPT range. Planet X also moved away from Lynskey at about the same time. Most of the decals were probably lying around from the 2011 model year and are the type that can quickly be printed out by an in house machine. It's no surprise that a stillborn model has inconsistent stickering. They wouldn't make much effort on a small batch of frames from a stillborn model range.

What you have is a sophisticated Lynskey made frame at a bargain price. It's worth about £1500 which is almost double what you paid. The 2011 model was very 'modern' but ultimately a marketing own goal. By modernising it they lost the main USP of titanium frames and sent the manufacturing cost skywards. Despite the press fit BB and tapered headtube it was still heavier, less stiff and more costly to make than a Cube carbon frame. These days titanium mostly sells on its durability (the main USP) but the 2011's press fit BB shell and tapered integrated headtube suggest problems down the line. The 2012 model is a more traditional ti "frame for life".

By the way is the frame brushed or bead blasted?

pastey_boy

when i mentioned a "factory second" i meant it as a mistake by cube putting the wrong decal on the frame , nothing about lynskeys qc. I have already answered the above question in an earlier post, it is bead blasted like the 2009 super. Painting my easton forks white was worth the effort, just held them against the frame and they look smart. i will fit them with no decals so my graphics man can see them on the bike and make something to compliment the finished bike. the finished bike may just dip under the 7 kg mark with the build i have in mind. I have written to both Lynskey and Cube regarding warranty for the frame , lynskeys are usually warrantied for life but with it seemingly appearing to be an unofficial model I have no idea where i stand.

cruiserweight

You have a 5-year frame warranty from Cube. Lynskey were, in effect, just a sub contractor, so there will be no warranty from them. I would apologise for intruding on your hope that it's a 2009 Super HPT but I get the impression that no amount of evidence will sway you. Seeing as no one could feel a difference when riding the things, you are quite right to stick to your guns. Maybe you've found the holy grail of bike buying. Buy the lower model while having the satisfaction of thinking you're riding the top model. A marketing mans nightmare

pastey_boy

Im not convinced either way i just want clarification from an official source as to what i actually have. If it is a cancelled 2012 model it should be advertised as such so all this confusion can be avoided. How can you state for certain that i have a 5 yr Cube warranty when cube themselves wont acknowledge this frame even exists ?

cruiserweight

It says Cube on the frame and it's sold by a reputable dealer. Common sense tells us that it is a Cube frame and that it therefore has the standard Cube frame warranty of 5 years. It doesn't matter if the frame was made in 1966, 2009 or 2012; the warranty runs from the sale date on your invoice and covers the original retail purchaser. A word of caution: If you deface the frame by removing decals and sticking on your own decals, it will probably void the warranty.

cruiserweight

PS: It's a bit dramatic to say that they deny all knowledge of the frame. They just didn't reply to your email. Most manufactuerers prefer to communicate through the dealers. I asked the retailer and they asked Cube. Cube confirmed that it was a 2012 model. Below is a cut and paste of (part) of my communication:

after a short talk to our purchasing department I would like to inform you that we got the name of the item and the sizes from Cube-Bikes as a 2012 model...

Best regards,

H&S Bike-Discount GmbH

Matti Maus

H&S Bike-Discount GmbH
Wernher-von-Braun-Str. 15
DE-53501 Grafschaft
Germany
phone: +49-2225-8888-222
fax: +49-2225-8888-199
http://www.bike-discount.de

Vertretungsberechtigte Geschäftsführer:
Dipl.-Ing. Ralf Heisig
Dipl. Volkswirt Christopher Stahl

Registergericht: Amtsgericht Bonn
Registernummer: HR 8581
USt. ID-Nr.: DE 204042912

cruiserweight

Two minutes ago, Lynskey confirmed by email that they have not made any frames for Cube "for about four years". The German dealer therefore lied to me. Unfortunately as the geometry of these "2012 frames" does not match anything from 2008/9, we can not even be sure that they were made by Lynskey. They are definately Cube, so the warranty still applies. I have reported the frame advert to Lynskey. These frames could be 2008/09 prototypes made by Lynskey and dredged from the back of a warehouse ... but I suspect we will never know. I bet that Cube don't really know what they are and can't be bothered to spend several hours examining old invoices. They obviously stuck on any old decals and sold them cheaply to Bike Discount de. This dealer has been undercutting almost all UK dealers for components but I for one will avoid them from now on.

cruiserweight

I'm going to cancel my order.

From Lynskey:
yup,
we had several emails about that one. Either not a 2012 or not one of ours.
Best personal regards,

Don Erwin, Sales Manager

pastey_boy

cruiserweight wrote:

PS: It's a bit dramatic to say that they deny all knowledge of the frame. They just didn't reply to your email. Most manufactuerers prefer to communicate through the dealers. I asked the retailer and they asked Cube. Cube confirmed that it was a 2012 model. Below is a cut and paste of (part) of my communication:

after a short talk to our purchasing department I would like to inform you that we got the name of the item and the sizes from Cube-Bikes as a 2012 model...

Best regards,

H&S Bike-Discount GmbH

Matti Maus

H&S Bike-Discount GmbH
Wernher-von-Braun-Str. 15
DE-53501 Grafschaft
Germany
phone: +49-2225-8888-222
fax: +49-2225-8888-199
http://www.bike-discount.de

Vertretungsberechtigte Geschäftsführer:
Dipl.-Ing. Ralf Heisig
Dipl. Volkswirt Christopher Stahl

Registergericht: Amtsgericht Bonn
Registernummer: HR 8581
USt. ID-Nr.: DE 204042912

Hello Carl,

We only built for Cube that one year in 2007, so if indeed this is a 2012 model, it isn't one of ours. Now it may be a 2007 model with just updated graphics, and if this is the case, certainly it might be one of ours. It certainly looks like our tubeset from the photo, but it oes not look like our finishing color. That may just be the lighting. If it is one of ours, get ready for a super stiff ride. That was built with a 6/4 front triangle, folded sheets of titanium - seam welded and super light. Enjoy your new bike Carl.

Best personal regards,

Don Erwin, Sales Manager

pastey_boy

The frame i have is exactly the same as the super hpt frames pictured earlier in the thread so i am pretty confident i have in my possession the lynskey built super frame, every detail is the same apart from the painted decals. the drop outs, brake bridge, tubing shapes and the colour are identical. although i am a little disappointed at the bikes misleading description overall im very happy that i have scored a very expensive frame for so little money and as mentioned it fits my freakish dimensions . the only fly in the ointment is that its wearing the wrong clothes.

cruiserweight

Pasteys photo shows the same finishing colour as the website picture. It's supposedly not a Lynskey finishing colour which is why I asked about the finish. I do now know exactly who built it and when as I've got a PDF of the build sheet directly from the manufacturer.

pastey_boy

cruiserweight wrote:

Pasteys photo shows the same finishing colour as the website picture. It's supposedly not a Lynskey finishing colour which is why I asked about the finish. I do now know exactly who built it and when as I've got a PDF of the build sheet directly from the manufacturer.

my pic was taken in bright sunlight, indoors under lightbulbs it appears darker with a more brownish tint as it does in the pics from page 1 and 2. Do you have a link to this PDF you mention ?

cruiserweight

I'll send you it privately. I've got PDFs for the 60 and 62. It's a straight gauge frame made in China by an alcoholic wife beater. Just kidding, it is a level 4 Lynskey made from 6/4 ti. It was made in 2008. It's not a 2009 Super but it might well be better than one of those. Enjoy.

Curtado

Hi,
I think this is the original Cube Litening Super HPT made by Lynskey.
Here is a review from a german magazine with the same geo
http://www.roadbike.de/rennraeder/test-cube-litening-super-hpt.295542.d_odc_produkt_datenblatt.9.htm

pastey_boy

Here she is with my freshly painted Easton EC90 sl forks. They have turned out brilliantly and look so much better than the original carbon weave colour. Once I get some factory style decals fitted they should finish the bike a treat. Also switched the sram red chainset in favour of a set of easton ec90's.

pastey_boy

Curtado wrote:

Hi,
I think this is the original Cube Litening Super HPT made by Lynskey.
Here is a review from a german magazine with the same geo
http://www.roadbike.de/rennraeder/test-cube-litening-super-hpt.295542.d_odc_produkt_datenblatt.9.htm

Thanks for that, I can now officially without a doubt proclaim to the world that i have a genuine Lynskey built 6al/4v Cube Litening Super Titan Ha ha ha ha ha.

pastey_boy

pastey_boy wrote:

Curtado wrote:

Hi,
I think this is the original Cube Litening Super HPT made by Lynskey.
Here is a review from a german magazine with the same geo
http://www.roadbike.de/rennraeder/test-cube-litening-super-hpt.295542.d_odc_produkt_datenblatt.9.htm

Thanks for that, I can now officially without a doubt proclaim to the world that i have a genuine Lynskey built 6al/4v Cube Litening Super Titan Ha ha ha ha ha.

Got to add that the retail for the original frame, fork , headset and post was a staggering 4199 euro's which makes this frame a stupendous bargain as i paid £830 posted.

cruiserweight

No, it's not the same geometry as the one it that German review. Slightly different chainstay length, seat tube length and headtube length. Pasteys frame also has a freakishly high BB (60cm drop) which is track bike like and also different to the frame in that German review.

pastey_boy

cruiserweight wrote:

No, it's not the same geometry as the one it that German review. Slightly different chainstay length, seat tube length and headtube length. Pasteys frame also has a freakishly high BB (60cm drop) which is track bike like and also different to the frame in that German review.

Its the same to within 1-2mm. They would have measured the dimensions themselves so 1 or 2 mm here and there seems acceptable, and how did you get the figure of 60cm regarding the bb drop ?

cruiserweight

A few mm here and there makes a big difference to the handling and ride of a bike. A few mm here and there is all bike designers have to work with without exceeding acceptable parameters. If you want to believe that the measurements are all different because of measuring mistakes, then that's your prerogative. However in my experience journalists and reviewers go by the spec sheet given to them by the manufacturer. They have neither the time nor the inclination to measure every dimension of every test bike. For example, in order to measure things like seat tubes accurately they would have to strip the cranks and BB off every bike they tested. Unlikely in an age of pressured deadlines. It's pretty plain to me that these frames have a different geometry to the 2009 Super HPT. That link I gave you was to an official Cube website from 2009. For example, the 60cm frame advertised by Bike Discount has a 17mm shorter headtube than the one on the 2009 Cube website.

I got the BB drop of 60mm from the 2008 build sheet PDF sent to me by the US manufacturer and also from the Bike Discount de web site. Take a look, it's quite clear. 60mm is a very weird number. These days, the absolute minimum drop for a decent handling road bike is generally considered to be 70mm. Colnagos tend to have something like 75mm and Richard Sachs and crew 80mm. Enigmas have a 74mm drop. A few mm here and there make a huge difference and a BB drop of 60mm is way beyond normal parameters. It is not likely to corner or descend particularly well. A very high BB (for a road bike) like that would also set the rider higher on the bike which impacts the aerodynamics and "effectively" shortens the headtube and chainstays.

We now have the facts about the geometry, so let's go on to guesswork. Was the 60mm BB drop a mistake that caused a batch of frames to be stored in the back of a warehouse for four years? We'll never know but I don't see why any experienced manufacturer would deliberately spec a BB drop that is so odd. It wouldn't save them any money but it would almost certainly cause sub-optimum descending and cornering.

cruiserweight

There was a forensic element to the original post and I like a good mystery. Unfortunately I suspect that what I uncovered did not fit in with the OP’s hopes. I got interested because I almost bought the frame and because several seemingly incorrect assertions were made that might lead to people making poor buying decisions. For example the frame is not two sizes smaller than typical sizing and it is not the same as a 2009 Super HPT. I also hope that I steered the OP away from voiding his warranty by defacing the frame.

I would actually go so far to say that this frame should be avoided. At first glance it does seem like a bargain but bargains are like buses. There’ll always be another one and why go for one with so many question marks. To sum up:
Dishonest advert. It’s not a 2012 model
Dodgy geometry. The BB is way too high. How did this come about?
Rough ride. Titanium (especially 6/4 ti) is stiffer than aluminium but the tubes on this bike are very large aluminium type diameters. It will therefore ride even rougher than an unsophisticated aluminium bike (don’t fall for all that ti stuff – it’s mostly all about diameters and geometry). A titanium frame with smaller diameter, thicker tubes and a less racy geometry will be exceptionally comfortable and will last a very long time. This frame will be harsh and will probably make the clicking and popping sounds that are typical of thin ti tubes.
A new aluminium bike like the CAAD10 will be stiffer, lighter and ride/handle better. Titanium tubes have a very limited range of tube shaping possibilities and the companies who make them have small R&D budgets. Companies like Cannondale have huge R&D budgets and hydroforming allows them to make very sophisticated shapes. This sophistication allows them to achieve great things with a cheaper metal. A CAAD10, Canyon Ultimate Al or the new aluminium Trek Madone 2.1 will perform much better than this frame and cost half as much. They also come with fantastic warranties.
I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade. I’m just telling it like it is. I did order one of these but cancelled it when I found out about the 60mm BB drop (madness) and the dishonest advert

pastey_boy

Lynskey themselves have confirmed that this frame looks like their work apart from the colour which was most probably altered when the original Super paint job was removed, They state they only manufactured frames for cube 4/5 years ago and the super has folded and seam welded top and down tubes just like my frame (Lynskey only produced the folded tubes from 6al/4v) And i cant see anyone making a copy of a frame with Lynskeys trademark tubing and cube drop outs. The geometry matches the bike of the same size (I have measured my frame with digital verniers and metal rules) that was tested by a respected German publication who physically measured the geo of the actual bike in question themselves which tells me the printed geo charts on other sites were erroneous which is what I'm guessing the above poster is hanging his argument offalong with an email from the vendor which was a total lie , they also gave the complete bike a glowing report in an in-depth and thorough test,and no mention of the 60mm BB drop which is based on a geo chart that is wrong in the first place. I myself have studied the actual frame against numerous close up images of the 2009 Super HPT and it is the same in every detail. I have based the above information on fact from both the manufacturer of the frame and published results from cycle journalists , not assumptions from someone who has never ridden the above bike or seen one in the flesh. I did take a gamble with this frame and purchased it with the thought in my head that it may be the Super but as i originally stated I was not too fussed either way. Since then i have have confirmed indeed that it is the Super HPT but emblazoned with 2011 decals that do not match the frame (wrong geo details printed on the back of the seat tube )
So in conclusion I have 2009 Cube Litening Super HPT frame with painted decals from a 2011 Cube Litening HPT (with actual proof)
As for 6al/4v being stiff , In my case this is a good thing as I weigh anything between 17-18.5 stones. I had a Boardman Pro Carbon which flexed under me like a rubber noodle. My Ti hardtail is also massively stiff which suits me fine.
Further more Bikeradar reviewed the Normal Hpt 2009 ( http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/ ... l-09-33008 ) which has the same geo as the super and said they had to go up 2 sizes (4cm) over their usual size which fits in with me ordering a 58cm when i usually would ride a 54cm. The reviewer mentions nothing of the crazy bb height mentioned in the previous post, infact the reveiw backs up my reasons for going for the cube ie stiff, light, stable and slightly upright which will do my slightly dodgy back no harm at all .