Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,396
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey,

    Just wondering if you guys had any experience with seatpost breakage or bending. Quite a few folders require that you have a rather long (not always superstrong or especially beefy) seatpost sticking out of your frame, usually much longer and exposed than a regular bike. Particularly if you like riding high like me. I for example have a a Alu seatpost that is not folder specific, it sticks out a lot. I was talking to someone the other day and she had actually seen someone shearing their post and this wasn't even on a folder/a super long post. Sounded scary.

    Of course i stick to the minimum insert recommendation and don't do anything too extreme on my folder.

    There is a lot of leverage involved in a long post. Shearing your post sounds pretty messed up, but maybe one could even damage the frame that way?

    Would it be better to mount a steel post or...?

    Any opinions or experiences?
    Last edited by v1nce; 09-10-05 at 06:30 PM. Reason: bla

  2. #2
    Explorer CaptainSpalding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    My Bikes
    Dahon Jetstream XP, Merlin Road Ti, Fisher Mt. Tam
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The problem you envision is typically avoided by one of two methods: either the seatpost is a larger diameter than found on non-folders, or the wall thickness of the seatpost is greater. No need to go to steel.

    As far as stress cracks in the frame near the top of the seat tube, it is not unheard of on some bikes.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by v1nce
    There is a lot of leverage involved in a long post. Shearing your post sounds pretty messed up, but maybe one could even damage the frame that way?
    It does seem strange that the only minimum spec given is that from the post mfctr. The frame guys should also give a max force idea as well (torque = f x l) through specifying a max seat post for a given rider weight.

  4. #4
    Explorer CaptainSpalding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    My Bikes
    Dahon Jetstream XP, Merlin Road Ti, Fisher Mt. Tam
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jasong
    It does seem strange that the only minimum spec given is that from the post mfctr. The frame guys should also give a max force idea as well (torque = f x l) through specifying a max seat post for a given rider weight.
    My bet is that there is no frame manufacturer that conducts destructive testing to establish a such a specification.

    Just a more general word about alloy vs. steel frames: Aluminum and steel have very different fatigue characteristics. When talking in terms of flex cycles, aluminum fatigues many times sooner that steel. Even minor flexing can contribute to metal fatigue which will over time lead to the failure of aluminum components. It is for this reason that airplanes are "retired" after a given number of hours in the air. The odds of a structural failure grow and grow. So, with regards to alloy frames and seat posts, it should be considered that they have a finite lifespan. If ridden long enough, even without abuse, they will fail. Steel has a lifespan too, of course, but it is probably longer than the lifespan of the rider.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,396
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hmm interesting! Thanks for the info. Makes me even happier that i own a Raleigh Twenty (steel!) folder. And makes me somewhat reconsider ever getting a Alu Swift. The weight savings are somewhat moot if durability is so heavily affected. Hmm.

  6. #6
    Banned. folder fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Anti Social Media-Land
    Posts
    3,076
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My personal favorite components happen to be a good quality mix of steel along with a few aluminum ones for certain parts (like fenders/mudguards, racks, some handlebars.) My frames are always a good quality steel. I never need to consider "retiring" anything about the bikes since the times I might need to, I might not have the cash to do so.

  7. #7
    Senior Member af895's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    My Bikes
    2003 KHS F20-Westwood folding & enough parts to make several more bikes...
    Posts
    853
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainSpalding
    My bet is that there is no frame manufacturer that conducts destructive testing to establish a such a specification.

    Just a more general word about alloy vs. steel frames: Aluminum and steel have very different fatigue characteristics. When talking in terms of flex cycles, aluminum fatigues many times sooner that steel. Even minor flexing can contribute to metal fatigue which will over time lead to the failure of aluminum components. It is for this reason that airplanes are "retired" after a given number of hours in the air. The odds of a structural failure grow and grow. So, with regards to alloy frames and seat posts, it should be considered that they have a finite lifespan. If ridden long enough, even without abuse, they will fail. Steel has a lifespan too, of course, but it is probably longer than the lifespan of the rider.
    You said it better than I could have.
    I'm a heavy guy (losing weight fast thanks to biking - YAY!) but I'd be genuinely worried about destroying an aluminum folder's frame on account of my height (6'0") and weight (238lbs) putting a lot of torque on that seat-tube. (glad to have a CrMo frame!)

    BTW: the seat-POST on my KHS is NUTTY beefy. It's a 29.2mm diameter (that's not a typo) and the wall thickness must be 3mm. It weighs something like 2lbs. (!) I'd be more worried about the frame than the seat post.

    Good thread - this kind of issue should be well understood by people selecting folders to avoid nasty surprises.
    Last edited by af895; 10-15-05 at 07:01 PM.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't think destructive testing is going to be a necessity to determine guidelines or recommendations for those components. These forces are well understood and well analizable and should not require empirical testing.

    Agreed on material selection. Steel rarely should result in a frame weight difference of more than 2lbs if using decent tubing. Lifetime of the frame and maintainability (ie. easy to repair or add things like brazeones) easily justify that difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainSpalding
    My bet is that there is no frame manufacturer that conducts destructive testing to establish a such a specification.

  9. #9
    @#$% cars
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    My Bikes
    '02 Schwinn Frontier;'03 Fisher Tiburon; '04 Raleigh Companion; 04 Dahon SpeedPro; 69 Raleigh Sport fixed
    Posts
    405
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    34mm carbon on my Speed Pro. It seems thick, but I don't have another carbon to compare to ... so maybe it's just carbon thickness.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •