Today was just not my day. I burned myself twice, electrocuted myself, failed my bottom bracket failure test, and had a horrible day welding. Sometimes you take two steps back after taking one step forward, and today was definitely that day.
I wasnt allowed to start tacking my front triangle until I had finished a gruelon weld and done the bottom bracket failure test. The gruelon joint was welding three identically shaped tube into an equilateral triangle. My welding skills were way off from the beginning, as I oscillated between welds that were too cold and other welds that burned straight through the mitered tubing.
Gruelon in jig-
After finishing the complete gruelon weld, I discovered that I forgot to drill purge holes through the 3 tubes, so there was massive contamination on the inside of every weld.
Again already frustrated with the day, and probably wishing to rush through things to get to actual framebuilding, I somewhat hurriedly rush welded through the BB failure test.
BB failure test in jig:
Basically the BB failure test consisted of sticking a large lead pipe into the mitered seat tube and pushing down as hard as possible. Positive failure meant the tube failing right in front of the weld, while failure failure meant the tube failing at the weld.
Epic fail...
The good news was how much force was needed to actually break this thing, which uses inferior tubing to the stuff we are welding with. Even failing the test, it was somewhat of a confidence booster that the welding made these unconnected tubes very, very strong.
BB Test #2 (had to use the same BB shell, which u can see on the other side):
This time success!
Today I also found out I was not selected in the New York City Marathon lottery. I'm still not sure if this is good news or bad news. I might still run Philly or the Marine Corp Marathon depending on Katie's schedule.
Other good news is I placed my gear order in today. We're able to buy parts at a nicely reduced price. Id like to be able to build up this cross bike as soon as I can once I get home, so this will definitely help.
To finish the frame, I've also settled on Easton's EC90x fork. Weight is 450g (same as Edge, Alpha Q CX 20, and Ritchey), and has a nice aesthetic I've always liked. New for 2009 is an integrated threaded tube nut that threads into steerer tube.
Chris King seems to be the gold standard around here, so needing a headset, Black Chris King headset it is:
I've finally decided to make the leap to SRAM for this bike. Im still happy I went with 7900 for my road bike, but SRAM seems to offer more of what I'd like in cross components. SRAM's lowest offering still weighs less than Ultegra and offers most of Red's technology with zero loss shifting, internally routed cables and a crisp, responsive shifting mechanism. The price is also right, and the black finish is really nice.
I bought a component package with the Rival that not only includes the standard groupset, but basically every other part to make the bike work. It basically comes with a Ritchey Comp handlebars, seatpost, stem, Fulcrum 7 racing wheels, and a Selle Italia seat. I'll probably swap the Ritchey Comp stuff for the Ritchey pro components already on my existing Cross bike.
Im looking to finish the bike up with a Fizik Arione saddle, and plan on using my Neuvation Aero 4 wheels, which again offer performance at a bargain (plus I still have a year of no fault wheel insurance to use up).
I also used the opportunity to buy 2 torque wrenches to finish out my tool collection, so I could work on my super six without worrying about over torquing parts (as I have a tendency to do with just about everything).
Long Technical Section- Frame Materials
Lots of people have asked why build a Ti cross bike? I've ridden steel, aluminum and just recently upgraded to a carbon frame, all offering their own benefits and inherent problems.
Steel:
From the time of the p-far, steel bikes were the frame material of choice. Especially if weight is not a consideration, steel provides a beautiful ride quality. Steel is ideal for commuting bikes, touring bikes, or any other bike where durability is of chief concern. There's a reason why steel bikes from the 60's are still around in large quantities. They weigh more than all of the other frame materials, but for the "steel is real" crowd, it's still the frame material of choice.
My 1986 or 1988? Schwinn Prelude is steel Tenax SLX tubing, and while it weighs alot, it offer a real comfortable ride quality, although I'm sure the relaxed geometry and 28 mm tires I have on there doesn't hurt either.
Aluminum:
While many will argue the origin of Aluminum, I'll say that it was Alan (AL uminum AN odized), an Italian frame company that first started popularizing Aluminum as a frame material in 1972. In general, its alot lighter than steel, alot stiffer, and alot more economical. Most bikes in the $500- $1500 is made from aluminum. Tubing is alot thinner than steel, and as a result, tube diameter increased. Aluminum gets alot of its strength from this tube diameter, so dropping an aluminum bike against a lightpost, or other fixed object will often result in a dented tube that severly compromises the strength ability of the frame material. However, plenty of people race on slightly dinged up framesets, and like any alloy frameset (and unlike carbon), it will not catastrophically fail. Companies like Cannondale popularized aluminum in producing a frameset that still weighs less than many carbon framesets. (Typical Optimo Cannondale CAAD 7, 8 or 9 framesets weigh approx 1300 grams).
My first road bike, a 2006 Cannondale CAAD 7 frameset, was made of aluminum. While Cannondale may have been known as Crack-and-fail back in the 80's while they were perfecting their craft, few can argue with their year's or research and field testing in creating one heck of an aluminum frameset. Its heavy enough to feel the bike underneath you, so it "feels" more stable through cornering, and is a terrific economic option for a racing frameset. I will say I'm not sure it was the best choice for a cross country expedition.
Carbon:
Alan also credits themselves for the first carbon fiber bike in 1976. Greg Lemond was one of the first to see carbon fiber's potential and was one of the first to ride carbon fiber in competition.
Well crafted carbon frames will be the lightest frames available, hands down. Their ability to be shaped into different shapes and beefed up in places needed the most such as the Bottom Bracket also allow it to be the stiffest.
Carbon has the ability to eat up alot of road chatter better than most frame materials; however, if you hit a big bump, you'll actually feel it even more. This is because while carbon has a very high tensile modulus of elasticity, its compressive modulus of elasticity is MUCH lower. I was never a huge believer that carbon could be that much better than aluminum, but having finally made the switch, I can say there is a huge difference.
Unfortunately, carbon doesn't crack... it catastrophically fails. One mishap on a carbon frame and it's likely finished. Im still not sure how, but during the Yale race weekend we discovered cracks on my seatstays and seat tube after the circuit race, even though I never crashed on my carbon bike.
Seeing how most bikes are made from aluminum and carbon these days, I wonder how many of those bikes we'll be seeing 30 or 40 years from now.
Ti:
Ti came out during the early 90's as an alternative that would split the difference between steel and aluminum in weight, ride quality and stiffness. While lighter than steel, Ti frames will never weigh less or be stiffer than carbon or aluminum, yet can cost more than both of them. However, they offer better road damping, do not lose their ride quality like aluminum over time, and are more durable than steel that can rust. Most people looking for a Ti bike are looking for a lifetime time that is a well crafted object and performs just as admirably. Ti has never really gone mass market and has remained the domain of the individual frame builder or smaller bike companies. Unlike other frame materials, Ti does not need to be painted, and already being a beautiful material, is often left in its bare state.
I'll admit that I think carbon has already cemented itself as the frame material of choice for road cycling. However, cross is different. While you would be right in saying carrying a bike at the end of a cross race can be downright exhausting, I've found body fatigue to be a larger factor for feeling tired than having a lighter bike. I value a slightly more comfortable ride than the stiffness that my aluminum cross bike provided.
There's still something romantically traditional about cross racing that differs little from when the sport first began. While deep section tubulars are a new thing, most of the other equipment remains, down to the wide angle cantilever brakes. Cyclocross is still a niche sport within a largely niche sport in America. Most cross racers are passionate about cycling, own several bikes, and are more knowledgeable than the average cyclist. They want a bike that rides well and don't just believe everything they are spoon fed by the bicycle manufacturers. People want frames that show the highest level of detail, quality and hand built craftsmanship.
If you think this covers everything about frame material, Sheldon Brown would say not so fast:
definitely worth a read through:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-materials.html
Crappy carbon bikes don't ride as a nice aluminum frameset. There are different grades of material
No comments:
Post a Comment