CYCLINGFORUM.COM - Where Cyclists Talk Tech --- Return To Home

 

    Register FAQ'sSearchProfileLog In / Log Out

 

****

cyclingforum.com ****

HOMECLUBS | SPONSORS | FEATURESPHOTO GALLERYTTF DONORS | SHOP FOR GEAR

Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
          View posts since last visit

CF vs. AL bars -- i'll stick with the latter
 Goto page 1, 2  Next

Author Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
walter
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 4226
Location: metro-motown-area

10/31/17 8:24 AM

CF vs. AL bars -- i'll stick with the latter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0stL5Q9b_oo

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Jesus Saves
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 1026
Location: South of Heaven

10/31/17 10:09 AM

I witnessed a cyclist with a lightweight carbon fiber handlebar catastrophically fail. His front wheel was trashed and he had lots of road rash (only). He was doubly fortunate as it was towards the end of a group ride that ended within a 100 meters of our planned train stop.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 15814
Location: Portland, OR

10/31/17 10:11 AM

My 2.00 [2 cent highly inflated] ;)

I'd like to have seen the carbon drop test with just round carbon bars and not the aero formed ones seen in the test. Especially considering the Aero bars had cable routing holes.

The test seems to have used round carbon for the cycle test and aero wing type for the drop test??

When I saw it was Control Tech I was hoping the carbon bar would be the TUX being my last bar purchase for the Domane build got them. And if one recalls I chose them specifically due to a carbon bar stiffness test in which they came in last.

The SLX3 Easton on the Madone I perceived as a place to get comfort back with a different bar. They are big round and stiff. Although the TranzX Stem I installed in conjunction remedied the harshness enough ordering another TUX bar was deemed unnecessary.

I have retired my AL bars by 10 years old. And I mean the 199 Primo and other ultra light AL bars with similar fresh AL or Carbon mostly. Still have more AL than carbon.

When I see NOS or older/period AL bars that where pulled for carbon when new I usually just by them for future builds. I never buy used carbon bars. How is that for a perception? ;)

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 15814
Location: Portland, OR

10/31/17 10:20 AM

"witnessed a cyclist with a lightweight carbon fiber handlebar catastrophically fail"

Which came first, the chicken or the egg [egg=bars chicken=wheel].

BTW, I don't even used 5NM usually specified. So my 5NM tool on bars and post installs I deem overly tight when it clicks. I have two and tested them against each other, the same. ;)

I have had an STI move on a hit and bars stay put. I also torque light on the STI bands on carbon apparently. Once it caused the DI2 wire to unplug on a hard speed bump I hopped over poorly. [tired] I had accidentally taped the loop I had in the Di2 wire when I installed the sprint shifters. So much for my 'when to use the reading glasses' decision making...


The second tool got gifted to a good friend that had crushed more steer tubes than Carter has little liver pills.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Jesus Saves
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 1026
Location: South of Heaven

10/31/17 10:52 AM

Egg..bars....the handlebar went into the spokes and eventually he witht a pluck, pluck, pluck overture played in c minor.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 3773
Location: Nashua, NH

11/1/17 5:29 AM

Back in the day...

...I saw a few aluminum bars snap, too. The ultralight bars in the '70s and '80s were prone to fatigue, which is probably why today's Al bars are so much heavier. My main objection is that carbon bars are typically too damned stiff and seriously uncomfortable on anything other than extremely smooth surfaces. In contrast, most Al bars have some degree of flexibility, making them a better choice for the roads around here. I've noticed that there are finally companies toying with the idea of building some compliance into carbon bars (they're following the trend in frames, I guess), which is long over due. Ultimately, you'll be able to pick your desired degree of flex, which will be a huge benefit.

The other objection I have to carbon bars is the price. $200+ for handlebars is crazy.

 Reply to topic    

Jesus Saves
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 1026
Location: South of Heaven

11/1/17 10:36 AM

How old were those aluminum bars? I bet more than a few years old. Ultralightweight and fabrication tolerances from the 70s and im 80s, no thanks. Also Al shows signs of stress much more so than carbon fiber.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 15814
Location: Portland, OR

11/1/17 10:55 AM

"other objection I have to carbon bars is the price. $200+ for handlebars is crazy."

I somehow justified the 280.00 TUX bars due to 1/2 price and 0 shipping. Even deeper discount for the Easton EC90 SLX3s. And I see the EC70 for 89.00 often for prospective. I also have a $59.00 Nashbar sale set. you gotta pretty much figure are made by one the few name stamped they are currently offering that allows the 89.00 sale on the previous Eastons.

I find it more difficult to find AL bars with the reach/drops I have come to like for non quill stem setups.

I also keep newer and put older on bikes I sell off. Although I am getting a backed up this season. Last two seasons more probably. ;)

And when I upgrade to new STI/xSpeed I do it on new bars. I decided 10+ year old 200 gram AL bars for my big fat ars is asking for it. I say so in my ads which does not stop them from selling with the old STIs all together wrapped fresh 6.00 Nashbar black tape with cables and housings long enough for my 60 CM bikes. ;)


Last edited by Sparky on 11/2/17 12:09 PM; edited 2 times in total

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 3773
Location: Nashua, NH

11/2/17 12:06 PM

Again, back in the day...

...there wasn't much for safety standards for aluminum handlebars, so manufacturers concentrated on making their bars light (these were the days of "drillium" after all). Unfortunately, that made them prone to fatigue and ultimately, breakage. Once the CPSC and CEN got involved, it seemed like overnight that the lightest Al bars jumped from ~200gr. to 260+.

The same thing happened with Al tubular rims, though I'm not sure why. At one point, sub-300 gram rims were common and the next thing you know, it was hard to find anything under 400 gr. It started around the time that Mavic and Ambrosio introduced grey anodized rims.

 Reply to topic    

Jesus Saves
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 1026
Location: South of Heaven

11/2/17 1:12 PM

Yeah, okay but you still had a choice with Aluminum handlebars in the 70s and 80s:

A) lightweight & unsafe or

B) heavier and safe

For instance, I rode option B) on my '86 Peugeot for over a decade - no problem.

If I knew better then, I would have replaced my bars more often, like I do now, irrespective of their weight.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 15814
Location: Portland, OR

11/2/17 2:13 PM

Seems like carbon steerer failures are more likely overall perhaps.

Especially with a slammed stem and stems with minimal surface area on the ID touching the steerer.

_____________
BTW; Easton EC70 SL3 $79.00 shipped

"Intelligent Flexibility" they are intelligent. ;)

http://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product2_10053_10052_589146_-1

These are nice if you dislike the ergo bend in the drop, and too shallow a drop.

Or the EC90 SLX that are 35 grams lighter for $269.99. These must have fuckin Genius Flex or something.


Last edited by Sparky on 11/2/17 10:27 PM; edited 1 time in total

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

daddy-o
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 2850
Location: Springfield

11/2/17 5:44 PM

Tangent: Hi-E rims

Good reading.

Rims: When I weighed 120 lbs I bought the parts to build up my first tubulars. The local shop, the club sponsor, told me in no uncertain terms the Hi-E rims were a bad idea. So I took their Fiamme Reds and was plenty happy. This was moving from 27x1 1/4 chrome steel.

The Hi-E were riveted at the seam, a high, boxy profile for the day too. Does anyone remember them well enough for perspective?

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Rickk
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 496
Location: Montreal

11/3/17 5:56 AM

In response to the GCN handlebar video

Here's Australian CF guru elaborating further.
He may speak slowly and often repeat, but he's no dummy. https://youtu.be/EFUTFmZHq_4

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 3773
Location: Nashua, NH

11/3/17 8:34 AM

I raced on Hi-E rims and hubs

I had both their "heavy duty" 250 gram rims for road racing and their 199 gram rims for TTs (this was in the pre-aero days, where everone's focus was on reducing weight). They were incredibly responsive, but not very durable. Additionally, once tensioned, the brake tracks became uneven, which resulted in pulsation under braking. The shape of the tire well was not conducive to good contact with the tire, but I don't recall having any issues with tires not adhering when using 3M Fast Tack cement, which is what they recommended.

When it came to wheel design, they were way ahead of their time. I build some of their asymmetric rear wheel designs, 14/28 and 16/24 (yes, that's the number of spokes on the left and the right). Most of my front wheels were radial, which they also promoted. I still have a 14/28 rear hub, a 36 hole rear hub. a pair of 36 spoke wheels that are on my '79 Klein Team Super and a spare 36 spoke front wheel. Sadly, I don't have any of the rims.

The 16/24 rear wheel and 36 spoke radial front laced to their lightweight rims are on my '77 Graftek, which is currently hanging in the collection of First Flight Bikes in Statesville, NC. It also has a Dura Ace AX crank and pedals, GAlli Ti brake with Matthauser brake blocks and customized Suntour Cyclone derailleurs and levers. I built it this way to use as a TT bike, but I don't think I ever raced it in this configuration.



This one clearly shows the riveted seam on the front wheel:

 Reply to topic    

Jesus Saves
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 1026
Location: South of Heaven

11/3/17 11:41 AM

Nice ceiling detail!

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 15814
Location: Portland, OR

11/3/17 11:46 AM

Lots of ceilings like that in MA when I was there. Tin ceilings are retro cool, an usually cover in layer upon layer of lead paint, and often over lead panel in the earliest examples IIRC. ;)

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Anthony Smith
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 823
Location: Ohio

11/5/17 4:01 PM

bars and rims

So my choices in the 1970s.

Cinelli bar and stem. Not super light, but strong even after being bent back after a crash. Fiamme red lable (360gr) rear and yellow label (290gr) front.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 3773
Location: Nashua, NH

11/5/17 5:36 PM

I was a 3TTT guy...

...though apparently they've shortened the company name to 3T now. The bars on the bike are the lightest model they made (the name escapes me a the moment) in 41cm Gimondi bend. I used Fiamme Red Label or Super Champion Arc-en-Ciel rims for training.

 Reply to topic    

walter
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 4226
Location: metro-motown-area

11/5/17 6:39 PM

i like those LT videos

sound thinking.

however, i think him harping on GCN's vertical- drop test was off. IMO that is a valid usage mode, all of us hop off of curbs from time to time and put substantial vertical loads on our bars. however, he was right that the fore-aft crash loads for crashing should have been *added* to the GCN testing.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

KerryIrons
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 2850
Location: Midland, MI

11/6/17 10:15 AM

TTT defined


quote:
though apparently they've shortened the company name to 3T now.


TTT stands for Tubo Tecnico Torino (based in Torino, IT). It has variously been referred to as 3T, TTT, and 3TTT over the years, with the latter being mostly a branding.

 Reply to topic    

walter
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 4226
Location: metro-motown-area

11/6/17 12:20 PM

spoken...

...the cognescenti referred to 3ttt as "triple T"

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 15814
Location: Portland, OR

11/6/17 12:43 PM

Never seen it as 3TTT, just TTT or 3T personally...

EDIT: Should have said heard it spoken as 3TTT, I have seen it in Logo I realize..


Last edited by Sparky on 11/6/17 2:27 PM; edited 1 time in total

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

walter
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 4226
Location: metro-motown-area

11/6/17 1:22 PM

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

KerryIrons
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 2850
Location: Midland, MI

11/8/17 9:42 AM

In the know


quote:
the cognoscenti referred to 3ttt as "triple T"


(Spelling corrected). Indeed, that's what we always called it. I never knew I was in the "in-crowd." The bars you pictured are a perfect example of the 3TTT logo. I don't recall anyone ever pronouncing it "three, tee, tee, tee."

 Reply to topic    

daddy-o
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 2850
Location: Springfield

11/8/17 9:48 AM

I always thought of cognoscenti as those being 'in the know,' with the inside information. So insiders, in-crowd, I guess it fits.

This one's for Kerry

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail


Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
           View New Threads Since My Last Visit VIEW THREADS SINCE MY LAST VISIT
           Start a New Thread

 Display posts from previous:   


Goto page 1, 2  Next  
Last Thread | Next Thread  >  

  
  

 


If you enjoy this site, please consider pledging your support

cyclingforum.com - where cyclists talk tech
Cycling TTF Rides Throughout The World

Cyclingforum is powered by SYNCRONICITY.NET in Denver, Colorado -

Powered by phpBB: Copyright 2006 phpBB Group | Custom phpCF Template by Syncronicity