I see full dynamix is making them and have read that Giant will have a team only verion this year....alloy MTB frames with carbon stays (like road bikes).....not too sure about this...any thoughts ?
would you ride these new school frames....
- Thread starter rockracing
- Start date
Looks light as hell... which means people will probably ride it. I'm too old and lazy for racing hardtails now though 
If I had the money and the inclination to have a bike purely for racing, I'd love one.
However, my XC bike gets ridden all day long, and crashed a fair bit too..... I don't like the idea of using carbon in an area where it would be susceptible to scratching and impact damage on a bike which I'll be riding in the (very rocky) peak district.
However, my XC bike gets ridden all day long, and crashed a fair bit too..... I don't like the idea of using carbon in an area where it would be susceptible to scratching and impact damage on a bike which I'll be riding in the (very rocky) peak district.
I'd be all over that. I ride a carbon bike, the stays hold up fine. It's a little flexy though; it'd be nice to have a stiffer front end but my last Al bike was too rough on me. Sounds like a perfect compromise.
In terms of the ride quality, I'm right there with you, but my problem with carbon stays would be that many of the trails round here are based on gritstone, with sizeable boulders. When you crash, the bike is going to hit one of these at some point, and the rock's really abrasive... the seat/chainstays on bikes that get a lot of use in this area tend to be covered in scratches, which can cause a lot more problems in carbon than they would in an equivalent metal rear end.
they've actually been making that frame for a number of years now. mig rode one to victory during the olympics if i'm not mistaken. IMHO carbon stays are the DUMBEST idea ever!!!! i don't like the on road bikes and definiatly not on a mtn frame. it's a bunch of hyped up bullshiet that these big name companies feed out to the public and everyone bites it and thinks its going to increase their comfort by huge amounts 
i think a lot of ppl would be way more comfortable on their xc bikes and be able to tell a much more noticable difference in their frames if they were fitted properly. and stosh that saddle is one of the most comfortable saddles on the market. if you don't like it you can always go put one of those big wide ass gel saddles on it :devil: 
i think a lot of ppl would be way more comfortable on their xc bikes and be able to tell a much more noticable difference in their frames if they were fitted properly. and stosh that saddle is one of the most comfortable saddles on the market. if you don't like it you can always go put one of those big wide ass gel saddles on it :devil: Originally posted by indieboy
stosh that saddle is one of the most comfortable saddles on the market. if you don't like it you can always go put one of those big wide ass gel saddles on it :devil:
Picked up one of thoes green gel saddles this past weekend at Walmart!
I second that.Originally posted by indieboy
they've actually been making that frame for a number of years now. mig rode one to victory during the olympics if i'm not mistaken. IMHO carbon stays are the DUMBEST idea ever!!!! i don't like the on road bikes and definiatly not on a mtn frame. it's a bunch of hyped up bullshiet that these big name companies feed out to the public and everyone bites it and thinks its going to increase their comfort by huge amounts
Carbon rear = heavy, expensive and probably most people cant tell any difference in ride quality, I certanly don't.
well the thing is the glue dries SO quickly it's hard to clean up. the same thing can be seen now on the RS world cup Sid's. the first year they used the carbon crown you couldn't see the glue b/c they didn't make that many of the forks but now they are being pumped out like crazy the quality probably went down just a slimmmmmmmm bitOriginally posted by Babar
Yep i saw some roadbike with glue sipping out and dried out of those joints.
Just crappy ass quality...
Well carbon stays aside, talking that bike in general
i'd be all over that like jarrod on a Subway!!
i'd be all over that like jarrod on a Subway!!
Yep, just put the first rock scrapes on my Titus this weekend. My Kona has several as well. I would shatter a carbon stay...
I need to get better or something.
Further proof that the XC scene is getting more and more "Road-like" every year. Which I believe will lead to the degredation of our sport.Originally posted by rockracing
I see full dynamix is making them and have read that Giant will have a team only verion this year....alloy MTB frames with carbon stays (like road bikes).....not too sure about this...any thoughts ?
XC bikes are getting to be like road bikes w/ bigger tires.
My buddies Pinerello came like that they clearcoated right over it...Originally posted by Babar
Yep i saw some roadbike with glue sipping out and dried out of those joints.
Just crappy ass quality...
Now that is just silly - what else would XC bikes be like? DH bikes only lighter???
I doubt that bike would last very long where I ride.
I'm sure it would be fine for some highly manicured trail, but as soon as you hit a more natural trail with rocks and roots and etc. it wont last too long.
I'm sure it would be fine for some highly manicured trail, but as soon as you hit a more natural trail with rocks and roots and etc. it wont last too long.
I see no issue with carbon fiber stays or bikes in general. Carbon fiber is many times stronger than aluminum and much LESS likely to become structurally damaged in a crash. Giant and Trek have been making full carbon MTBs for years - I am not aware of any durability issues.
My old Y-22 is not full carbon - it has an aluminum rear triangle - but it has seen more than it's share of impacts over the last 6 years - I guarantee you it is stonger than any other frame material out there.
Give it a tap and it sounds and feels like plastic.
The only problem is cost - this will be taken care of soon enough through volume production methods. There are already carbon tubed roadbikes assembled with lugs and glue.
My old Y-22 is not full carbon - it has an aluminum rear triangle - but it has seen more than it's share of impacts over the last 6 years - I guarantee you it is stonger than any other frame material out there.
Give it a tap and it sounds and feels like plastic.
The only problem is cost - this will be taken care of soon enough through volume production methods. There are already carbon tubed roadbikes assembled with lugs and glue.
Carbon's problem is not necessarily in a big crash. The problem comes if you compromise its structural integrity. For example, a scratch deep enough to penetrate the top coat and go into the fibres greatly reduces the failure stress for a carbon component.
I happily use carbon bars on m XC bike, because they're easy to inspect, and the only area likely to get abraded is the ends.... and these can be protected with good endcaps. I'd also consider using a carbon post. It's things like cranks, rear triangles and barends (the most likely contact patches in a crash) which I'd never go for.
I happily use carbon bars on m XC bike, because they're easy to inspect, and the only area likely to get abraded is the ends.... and these can be protected with good endcaps. I'd also consider using a carbon post. It's things like cranks, rear triangles and barends (the most likely contact patches in a crash) which I'd never go for.
i think you might be confused as where the sport of mountain biking developed from......it wasn't all that long ago that "MOUNTAIN BIKES" were just road frames w/ ballon tires and DROP bars....if anything it's a development of the sport, not a degredation of it. things are constantly changing and technologies are shared between each "divison" that lays within this sport. gonna go ahead and end that rant on that note.
BB is a silly monkey... in the 1970s we rode trails in Colorado (not the mountains though) on our 10 speeds. A Schwinn Varsity with fat thornproof tires was all we needed. Note the picture Eric posted this week - we rode those type of trails as kids on 10 speeds and thought NOTHING of it.
Originally posted by indieboy
i think you might be confused as where the sport of mountain biking developed from......it wasn't all that long ago that "MOUNTAIN BIKES" were just road frames w/ ballon tires and DROP bars....if anything it's a development of the sport, not a degredation of it. things are constantly changing and technologies are shared between each "divison" that lays within this sport. gonna go ahead and end that rant on that note.
indie, i definetly agree with you regarding proper bike fit being more important than just about anything (p.s. my s-works is now looking much better after a fitting). that said, ever ridden a Serotta Ottrott ST? i agree that some road bikes don't benefit from carbon stays, and that the work is poorly done, but it can be properly done, and can be a major benefit on road bikes. the Serotta in question was built to be stiff, in fact it felt as stiff of a sprinter as my Specialized, but much more comfortable while causing less fatigue to my body. Just because IF doesn't use carbon rear ends, don't knock them. oh, and I heard that IF is going the full suspension route...maybe they'll license the Slingshot design so they'll stay 5 years behind everyone else. example, an extra cost for disc tabs on the mtb frames?! ok, i'm done ranting about IF now, and btw, i'd still ride one.
ben.
Serotta would NEVER deliver a custom frame with drippy glue. 
hehehe i won't go on about serotta, they make some awesome bikes but the road bike w/ the elastomer rear end.....
........yeah, well lol nuff said. but yeah they CAN be a benefit......however right now w/ the current technology it's not really a big benefit, ESPICALLY on a Ti or Steel frame. on an aluminum frame it can be a benefit but you can not tell me that the aluminum rear end is heavier then the carbon and as for the FS project over at IF, they are indeed working on something. what they are working on i can honestly say i don't know, haven't really discussed it in full w/ them. however i'm sure w/ in the next few weeks i'm sure i'll know but i'll keep hush hush on it. but i'd be pretty damn sure it's not going to be a sling shot type design. i do know what they wanted to do but don't want to deal w/ the guy who owns the patent on the design. i'll leave that right there for now. and for the disc tabs..........those aren't an extra charge anymore. maybe you should read up on the new IF sales program in your dealer packet and you'd be aware of that . the reason why they did that is b/c the tabs were a bit to have milled and for a while they were producing a stock of frames. Ie. frames weren't being built on a order to order basis making it a little more costly do put the tabs on the frame, hence the extra charge. and wait till you see some of the stuff coming out the doors soon, some very interesting stuff to say the least 
BTW do you know if ACE is hiring? i'm thinking of coming to boston and am trying to find some possible jobs.....
Bridgestone is selling one of these aluminum/ carbon seatstay bikes in Japan this year.
Well, if IF would even send us some 2003 catalogs, maybe i'd know about these disc tab things. we just ran out of 2002 catalogs today, how does it look giving a customer buying a multi-thousand dollar bike a 2 year old catalog? next we'll be giving out the 2000 catalogs with Jason from Ace on the cover. But for real, i got nothing but love for IF, i just saw one of the frames with the new disc dropouts today, and all i can say is "damn". matt was in the shop today, i was finally introduced to him, not a bad guy.Originally posted by indieboy
hehehe i won't go on about serotta, they make some awesome bikes but the road bike w/ the elastomer rear end.....
BTW do you know if ACE is hiring? i'm thinking of coming to boston and am trying to find some possible jobs.....
If you have experience, you might be able to get a job at Ace or Belmont, but it's seeming pretty case by case right now because of all these rainy weekends...
ben.
When I got mine I lied to my wife about the price... now we are divorced but I still have my beautiful Serotta... paint is a little dated though...Originally posted by Babar
Yeah but they come with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Some people might have to sell there wife and kids to get a serotta.
THEY don't even have '03 catalogs. things are rough around there man. well maybe they finially did get them but i'm not sure. i think i still have some 02 catalogs in my truck of my car so when i come up i'll swing by and give those to you guys if you want. and i'm surprised you haven't met matty b. earlier then this. he's an ultra cool guy just EXTREMELY busy. you should really stop by the factory one day to meet all the guys. bunch of great laid back guys that enjoy bikes and enjoy discussing different things and theories and what not.
and if i came in i wouldn't try to get a mechanic's position since i'm not a great mechanic. i'd much rather work the floor. but i'll give it a shot when i get into town.
Every year bike companies are in a position where they HAVE to appear to be bringing out something new, something lighter, faster, stronger, more high zoot for the same price. So it comes as no suprise that someone eventually made a glue-in carbon rear end for mountain bikes. Is it a good thing? Does it make the bikes any better?
Unfortunately, the bottom line is that it doesnt matter if it makes the frames any better. It's 'new', and often thats all that some consumers ( I hate that word ) care about.
If I was a sponsored XC racer, I'd have no problem riding a composite bike. Anything that was going to be lighter would be a good thing, and if it cracked, had a notch failure or rode harsh? Who cares, right? Toss it away, get a new one.
But only 10% of the mountain biking population race on a regualar basis, and I'd be amazed if 20% of them are sponsored in some way, so what do the rest of us do?
My arguement is, assuming all the relevant assumptions - get a custom bike in Steel or Titanium. I've only had limited hours on Scandium but I can say that may be an option for some riders, but steel and ti provide us with the most versatile platform on which to concentrate on whats more important than some glue in off-the-shelf part - catering for the individual in terms of fit, spec and appearance.
Now, I have nothing against carbon - like all materials it's great in the correct design and application. Heck, I'm even going to delve into a composite frame hopefully before the end of the year, but for me, a beautifully fitting and painted custom steel or Ti frame beats a generic, 7005 with a carbon glued in rear, some combination of white, red, blue or yellow painted McBike any day.
But then again....I'm biased! :devil:
Unfortunately, the bottom line is that it doesnt matter if it makes the frames any better. It's 'new', and often thats all that some consumers ( I hate that word ) care about.
If I was a sponsored XC racer, I'd have no problem riding a composite bike. Anything that was going to be lighter would be a good thing, and if it cracked, had a notch failure or rode harsh? Who cares, right? Toss it away, get a new one.
But only 10% of the mountain biking population race on a regualar basis, and I'd be amazed if 20% of them are sponsored in some way, so what do the rest of us do?
My arguement is, assuming all the relevant assumptions - get a custom bike in Steel or Titanium. I've only had limited hours on Scandium but I can say that may be an option for some riders, but steel and ti provide us with the most versatile platform on which to concentrate on whats more important than some glue in off-the-shelf part - catering for the individual in terms of fit, spec and appearance.
Now, I have nothing against carbon - like all materials it's great in the correct design and application. Heck, I'm even going to delve into a composite frame hopefully before the end of the year, but for me, a beautifully fitting and painted custom steel or Ti frame beats a generic, 7005 with a carbon glued in rear, some combination of white, red, blue or yellow painted McBike any day.
But then again....I'm biased!
:devil:
Hey Warwick... when are we going to go for a ride man?
You planning to show up to any FTF winter series races?
Also, out of curosity, if I said I wanted a sub 1400gram ti hardtail for xc race.. can you deliver?
You planning to show up to any FTF winter series races?
Also, out of curosity, if I said I wanted a sub 1400gram ti hardtail for xc race.. can you deliver?
Can't say I'm in the business of building frames with a weight goal, Burko. How about I build one that fits you and doesnt ride like a wet noodle?
A painted, 18" x 23.8 top tubed Columbus Foco Custom with both brake options and powdercoat weighs about 3.6lbs, so if we crack 3.3lbs/1500g in Ti I'd be impressed.
More importantly, can you afford a custom titanium frame? We're way out of Merida territory here ya know
A painted, 18" x 23.8 top tubed Columbus Foco Custom with both brake options and powdercoat weighs about 3.6lbs, so if we crack 3.3lbs/1500g in Ti I'd be impressed.
More importantly, can you afford a custom titanium frame?
We're way out of Merida territory here ya know
price is not the issue my friend, performance isOriginally posted by Thylacine
More importantly, can you afford a custom titanium frame?
Well, you only mentioned weight. I assume you have other 'performance' parameters, right?
I've done one race this year - the Singlespeed Championships ( See my write-up, pg 8 of June AMB mag ). I don't envisage doing any more races until I've gotten around to making a frame for myself. I have the FS, sure, but it's not a race bike, and frankly, I suck at racing.
Tell ya what, you buy a Ti Custom and I'll come with ya to every race in Vic and be your 'moral support'. Hows that? Heck, I might even hand you a waterbottle and a tube of my homemade 'Gu'!
I've done one race this year - the Singlespeed Championships ( See my write-up, pg 8 of June AMB mag ). I don't envisage doing any more races until I've gotten around to making a frame for myself. I have the FS, sure, but it's not a race bike, and frankly, I suck at racing.
Tell ya what, you buy a Ti Custom and I'll come with ya to every race in Vic and be your 'moral support'. Hows that?
Heck, I might even hand you a waterbottle and a tube of my homemade 'Gu'!
I'm interested.... I shouldn't bee cos I spend way too much cash on bikes... but I'm interestedOriginally posted by Thylacine
Tell ya what, you buy a Ti Custom and I'll come with ya to every race in Vic and be your 'moral support'. Hows that?
whats a ballpark fig? PM me if you want
also.. *cough* :devil:
Dont you guys ride around Kew?
I have a buddy racing that frame. He's says it's fast and light.Originally posted by rockracing
I see full dynamix is making them and have read that Giant will have a team only verion this year....alloy MTB frames with carbon stays (like road bikes).....not too sure about this...any thoughts ?
So what? Lots of things are 'fast' and 'light'. Thats not the question, the question is would you ride them, and whats the benefits of the carbon rear. Is it a good thing/important/revolutionary etc.
I read a very good psychological explanation of why light, rigid hardtails often feel faster than more compliant, and FS bikes, despite the fact that every written comparison confirms the contrary.
When you're barrelling down a rockly trail on the lightest, most rigid bike you can find, things happen rough and fast. You're getting jolted about, every bump is getting transmitted straight to your eyeballs, and you can't sit on the seat. Your experience is so jolty and manic it seems to be quick.
More compliant and FS bikes absorb more trail shock. They seem calmer, less frantic, and therefore they feel slower. Your riding experience seems less frantic, less jolty. Your brain isnt working as fast because a big part of your riding input - finding the smoothest line - isnt required to the degree it is on a more rigid bike.
The other thing about rigid bikes is that they concentrate stresses, rather than distribute or absorb them. As 'rigidity' is usually bantered at the less elastic materials - Al and Cf - they're more likely to fatigue and have a limited life span.
Think about this also. The frame is the singlemost expensive, most critical part of your bike. It dictates fit, ride quality, and the alignment of every component you bolt onto it. You'd have to agree that its important, right?
Okay. so we've already assertained that ultimate rigidity isnt that important, so what about weight? These days each frame material is, for the same size bike, separated by about 200, maybe 300g at the most . Your frame represents typically about 8% of your bike weight, and about 2% of the total weight you'll be draggin' up a hill.
Seems silly to pick a frame on weight and 'perceived' quickness, doesnt it?
Okay, okay......lecture over.
I read a very good psychological explanation of why light, rigid hardtails often feel faster than more compliant, and FS bikes, despite the fact that every written comparison confirms the contrary.
When you're barrelling down a rockly trail on the lightest, most rigid bike you can find, things happen rough and fast. You're getting jolted about, every bump is getting transmitted straight to your eyeballs, and you can't sit on the seat. Your experience is so jolty and manic it seems to be quick.
More compliant and FS bikes absorb more trail shock. They seem calmer, less frantic, and therefore they feel slower. Your riding experience seems less frantic, less jolty. Your brain isnt working as fast because a big part of your riding input - finding the smoothest line - isnt required to the degree it is on a more rigid bike.
The other thing about rigid bikes is that they concentrate stresses, rather than distribute or absorb them. As 'rigidity' is usually bantered at the less elastic materials - Al and Cf - they're more likely to fatigue and have a limited life span.
Think about this also. The frame is the singlemost expensive, most critical part of your bike. It dictates fit, ride quality, and the alignment of every component you bolt onto it. You'd have to agree that its important, right?
Okay. so we've already assertained that ultimate rigidity isnt that important, so what about weight? These days each frame material is, for the same size bike, separated by about 200, maybe 300g at the most . Your frame represents typically about 8% of your bike weight, and about 2% of the total weight you'll be draggin' up a hill.
Seems silly to pick a frame on weight and 'perceived' quickness, doesnt it?
Okay, okay......lecture over.