charles vail
03-18-07, 03:21 PM
"I'm talking about the common average road or mountain bike sold for adults! Tigged (of course) Aluminum and or all or part carbon fiber and glued. Pick any brand and most are what I am describing. They just don't do it for me.
For some designs as you describe (dual suspension) Aluminum is the only reasonable choice but I don't have to like it!"
I think we are probably closer together as regards what we like than this discussion has allowed so far. My starting point though is that just because I like something doesn't mean the thing I dislike is crap made by tasteless thieves, or whatever the view on TIG is supposed to be. It also doesn't change the reality in just about every other field that TIG produces the superior product.
""If you take a standard tube, say 1.125, with .9mm in butt, and .6 walls elsewhere, The butted section is about 25% stronger. So while any weld degrades the joint strength somewhat, so do the other heating processes, it's only significant if the process results in insufficiently strong frames, and I still see no evidence that's the case. It should really be impossible. The issue isn't the method of joinery so long as that is reasonable, it's an engineering issue. Simply put enough meat in the frame where you need it. So long as the weight budget is high enough it's an easily solved problem.""
"Silver solder won't overheat the tubing but welding will in compairison.."
First, that's wrong, it takes much longer to silver solder than TIG, and the heat effects are dependant in part on time exposure; and the heat required to silver solder is enough to draw a lot of hardness if the tubes are hardened, and if they aren't neither process should overly affect the tube parameters; and the haz zone can be a lot wider from a gas torch and lugs or a pile of bronze, than from a focused arc. Anyway the point is you can weaken the tubes to the extent any of these processes does, since the structure is overbuilt for both lugs and other methods. The key is to push more method specific tubes and dimensions for dominant systems like TIG.
Indeed this seems already to have happened as the lug builders are now reduced to creating the required products for their craft including some new tubes. So however these arguments may have played out in the past, we appear to be in a time when the real concern is the availability of tubes left for the lug market. Should that ever happen good lug tubes with fitting options from 65-350 pounds to accommodate juniors right through to heavily loaded bikes will be gone.
"The whole bike won't be wobbling......sorry but thats an exaggeration! The lively feel of a well built steel frame has a unique ride quality."
I probably worded that badly, my point was that the stiffer the better since that will help transfer the shock loads to the shock absorbers. Stiff trusses connected by energy absorbers. Sounds good to me. So we probably shouldn't blame Al for what is an appropriate goal rather than a bad characteristic. There is some interesting stuff on Bob Brown's site on Al stiffness, if I recall properly.
"There were and are wonderfull steel bikes with great ride qualities and interesting appearance. Far from boring, especially these days. When you look at something like a Vanilla Bike or a Rivendell to name two, you can't deny they are much better to look at than the generic aluminum bike even the expensive ones.
Just because steel has been around for over 1000 years doesn't make it a bad choice in the "space age world". In fact the improvements in steel tubing make an even better bike frame than in even fairly recent years."
Right my point is to re-write aluminum history, I have only had one two wheeler in Al, a Cannondale, but I remember that it had it's time as an exciting material. I think modern buyers who may have been dropped into this photo negative world where aluminum is the big numbers choice and steel boutique or better, should be reminded that aluminum was once very chic and low volume and steel was the do anything material.
As far as Sacha is concerned, if it should turn out that riding steel bikes caused te$tic*lar cancer, and lugs cause ere&tile disfunction he would still be able to turn out cool looking bikes, with carved dropouts, and massive paint, regardless. There are a lot of lugged bikes with great ride that look nothing like his.
"Well there are quite a few bicycles such as my fathers old 1940's Henderson that I can still get parts for not to mention scores of really nice lugged steel bikes made since the 50's or even earlier. The parts technology really hasn't changed much and all that is needed is a simple spreading of the rear frame to fit wider rear axles and drivetrains made today on any steel bike made in the last 60 years. I have three examples on my page that are only 25 years old and still very rideble and serviceable. So I am not so sure that bicycles are such a risk for the long term."
Doubtless. My point is just that an active cyclist, for better or worse, is likely to have himself sold so many different styles of bikes with new features, the majority won't be hanging on to them for long. There are cooler heads that hold to the one bike and it's worth considering that if a person bought less bikes they could afford nicer ones...
"Cast lugs are better for alot of reasons. Closer tolerances"
That's mostly the cheapness issue again. You can make a piece of sheet as tight as you want, it's just hard to do.
"easier to make new designs,"
Maybe. If you want to make millions in Asia, then paying for new presses and formers might cost a few bucks, but it's far cheaper for one-offs to just trim out a piece of sheet, no mold making at all.
"easier assembly with tubing etc."
Why would we care about it being easier, I thought we are about the look. You get to flow the grain in a sheet around the corner get that ultra thin look. I am not against cast lugs at all however.
Mostly what I was fishing for was a realization that casting is melting metal, so where is the difference between casting and welding. Hey they are different, but maybe thinking it through will help people realize we are dealing with a lot of things that are very close together here, and the attempts to drive wedges between different processes is largely artificial. It's likely that lugs were just the easiest way in their day, then they got that aesthetic thing happening, like fuzzy dice, and people don't want to let the look escape, even when the technology has moved on.
"Of course Waterford needs profits like any company! When assembled with common brazing methods and especially with silver solder there isn't a grossly affected zone of heat damage and heat treatment is not compromised."
Most steel frames or the pre-assembled components are not heat treated. And they aren't doing any better after assembly.
There is some interesting stuff on HAZ on Bill Brown's site:
"This data shows... tig joints on both tubing had a higher initial strength and the least drop in the HAZ."
Here is his url:
http://www.bobbrowncycles.com/eng.htm
"Steel unlike titanium for instance has way more latitude when assembled by less than skilled hands. A bonus is the ability for steel to be repaired easily even in remote areas away from high tech welding environments. This feature of course applies only to, off the beaten path, world tourists but it is a real bonus feature worth considering."
I'm all for steel. And I think it does have some reparability advantages. I'm really happy steel is making a comeback because it makes it a lot better for those of us dabbling in frame building at a low cost. It's harder to weld aluminum or Ti, and it would not be much fun to make carbon bikes though there are some advantages like no heat distortion and little need for expensive frame prep tools...
To some extent what is happening in the custom frame market these days is that some of the heat has left the old arguments of lugs vs., brazing vs., TIG. It's probably better for everyone to concentrate on promoting custom, normally steel bikes. Of course, when it comes to securing a sale, people are probably going to pound home some arguments for their joinery choice, but it doesn't seem quite as divisive everywhere else.
Apparently Bob Brown has it figured out, once again proving my point regarding the superiority of steel and the great appearance of lugs, not to mention the really attractive and somewhat more practical stainless frame. Stiffness, fatigue strength, dimensional advantages for good clearances, repairability etc. make steel the smart choice. This of course doesn't make aluminum bad or tig welding for that matter but it does require certain compromises when using aluminum for frame building. I'd say a lugged steel, with non heat treated tubing of sufficient wall thickness to avoid dents or buckleing although slightly heavier would result in a truly long lasting frame that would be repairable and serviceable even in "primative" environments. Thats what I am going to be building or I will have built by someone else probably with investment cast stainless dropouts and perhaps lugs also. Actually I prefer to build it myself but time constraints may prohibit that for now.:)
For some designs as you describe (dual suspension) Aluminum is the only reasonable choice but I don't have to like it!"
I think we are probably closer together as regards what we like than this discussion has allowed so far. My starting point though is that just because I like something doesn't mean the thing I dislike is crap made by tasteless thieves, or whatever the view on TIG is supposed to be. It also doesn't change the reality in just about every other field that TIG produces the superior product.
""If you take a standard tube, say 1.125, with .9mm in butt, and .6 walls elsewhere, The butted section is about 25% stronger. So while any weld degrades the joint strength somewhat, so do the other heating processes, it's only significant if the process results in insufficiently strong frames, and I still see no evidence that's the case. It should really be impossible. The issue isn't the method of joinery so long as that is reasonable, it's an engineering issue. Simply put enough meat in the frame where you need it. So long as the weight budget is high enough it's an easily solved problem.""
"Silver solder won't overheat the tubing but welding will in compairison.."
First, that's wrong, it takes much longer to silver solder than TIG, and the heat effects are dependant in part on time exposure; and the heat required to silver solder is enough to draw a lot of hardness if the tubes are hardened, and if they aren't neither process should overly affect the tube parameters; and the haz zone can be a lot wider from a gas torch and lugs or a pile of bronze, than from a focused arc. Anyway the point is you can weaken the tubes to the extent any of these processes does, since the structure is overbuilt for both lugs and other methods. The key is to push more method specific tubes and dimensions for dominant systems like TIG.
Indeed this seems already to have happened as the lug builders are now reduced to creating the required products for their craft including some new tubes. So however these arguments may have played out in the past, we appear to be in a time when the real concern is the availability of tubes left for the lug market. Should that ever happen good lug tubes with fitting options from 65-350 pounds to accommodate juniors right through to heavily loaded bikes will be gone.
"The whole bike won't be wobbling......sorry but thats an exaggeration! The lively feel of a well built steel frame has a unique ride quality."
I probably worded that badly, my point was that the stiffer the better since that will help transfer the shock loads to the shock absorbers. Stiff trusses connected by energy absorbers. Sounds good to me. So we probably shouldn't blame Al for what is an appropriate goal rather than a bad characteristic. There is some interesting stuff on Bob Brown's site on Al stiffness, if I recall properly.
"There were and are wonderfull steel bikes with great ride qualities and interesting appearance. Far from boring, especially these days. When you look at something like a Vanilla Bike or a Rivendell to name two, you can't deny they are much better to look at than the generic aluminum bike even the expensive ones.
Just because steel has been around for over 1000 years doesn't make it a bad choice in the "space age world". In fact the improvements in steel tubing make an even better bike frame than in even fairly recent years."
Right my point is to re-write aluminum history, I have only had one two wheeler in Al, a Cannondale, but I remember that it had it's time as an exciting material. I think modern buyers who may have been dropped into this photo negative world where aluminum is the big numbers choice and steel boutique or better, should be reminded that aluminum was once very chic and low volume and steel was the do anything material.
As far as Sacha is concerned, if it should turn out that riding steel bikes caused te$tic*lar cancer, and lugs cause ere&tile disfunction he would still be able to turn out cool looking bikes, with carved dropouts, and massive paint, regardless. There are a lot of lugged bikes with great ride that look nothing like his.
"Well there are quite a few bicycles such as my fathers old 1940's Henderson that I can still get parts for not to mention scores of really nice lugged steel bikes made since the 50's or even earlier. The parts technology really hasn't changed much and all that is needed is a simple spreading of the rear frame to fit wider rear axles and drivetrains made today on any steel bike made in the last 60 years. I have three examples on my page that are only 25 years old and still very rideble and serviceable. So I am not so sure that bicycles are such a risk for the long term."
Doubtless. My point is just that an active cyclist, for better or worse, is likely to have himself sold so many different styles of bikes with new features, the majority won't be hanging on to them for long. There are cooler heads that hold to the one bike and it's worth considering that if a person bought less bikes they could afford nicer ones...
"Cast lugs are better for alot of reasons. Closer tolerances"
That's mostly the cheapness issue again. You can make a piece of sheet as tight as you want, it's just hard to do.
"easier to make new designs,"
Maybe. If you want to make millions in Asia, then paying for new presses and formers might cost a few bucks, but it's far cheaper for one-offs to just trim out a piece of sheet, no mold making at all.
"easier assembly with tubing etc."
Why would we care about it being easier, I thought we are about the look. You get to flow the grain in a sheet around the corner get that ultra thin look. I am not against cast lugs at all however.
Mostly what I was fishing for was a realization that casting is melting metal, so where is the difference between casting and welding. Hey they are different, but maybe thinking it through will help people realize we are dealing with a lot of things that are very close together here, and the attempts to drive wedges between different processes is largely artificial. It's likely that lugs were just the easiest way in their day, then they got that aesthetic thing happening, like fuzzy dice, and people don't want to let the look escape, even when the technology has moved on.
"Of course Waterford needs profits like any company! When assembled with common brazing methods and especially with silver solder there isn't a grossly affected zone of heat damage and heat treatment is not compromised."
Most steel frames or the pre-assembled components are not heat treated. And they aren't doing any better after assembly.
There is some interesting stuff on HAZ on Bill Brown's site:
"This data shows... tig joints on both tubing had a higher initial strength and the least drop in the HAZ."
Here is his url:
http://www.bobbrowncycles.com/eng.htm
"Steel unlike titanium for instance has way more latitude when assembled by less than skilled hands. A bonus is the ability for steel to be repaired easily even in remote areas away from high tech welding environments. This feature of course applies only to, off the beaten path, world tourists but it is a real bonus feature worth considering."
I'm all for steel. And I think it does have some reparability advantages. I'm really happy steel is making a comeback because it makes it a lot better for those of us dabbling in frame building at a low cost. It's harder to weld aluminum or Ti, and it would not be much fun to make carbon bikes though there are some advantages like no heat distortion and little need for expensive frame prep tools...
To some extent what is happening in the custom frame market these days is that some of the heat has left the old arguments of lugs vs., brazing vs., TIG. It's probably better for everyone to concentrate on promoting custom, normally steel bikes. Of course, when it comes to securing a sale, people are probably going to pound home some arguments for their joinery choice, but it doesn't seem quite as divisive everywhere else.
Apparently Bob Brown has it figured out, once again proving my point regarding the superiority of steel and the great appearance of lugs, not to mention the really attractive and somewhat more practical stainless frame. Stiffness, fatigue strength, dimensional advantages for good clearances, repairability etc. make steel the smart choice. This of course doesn't make aluminum bad or tig welding for that matter but it does require certain compromises when using aluminum for frame building. I'd say a lugged steel, with non heat treated tubing of sufficient wall thickness to avoid dents or buckleing although slightly heavier would result in a truly long lasting frame that would be repairable and serviceable even in "primative" environments. Thats what I am going to be building or I will have built by someone else probably with investment cast stainless dropouts and perhaps lugs also. Actually I prefer to build it myself but time constraints may prohibit that for now.:)