bmthom.gis

#nevertrainer - it's outside or bust for me.

Dan333SP

Trainers make a lot of noise, period. The actual mounting points for the rear skewer have some flex on my trainer and make a squeaking noise, and if you're not running a trainer tire it can make its own whomp whomp sound when you're out of the saddle at low cadence as the tire flexes against the roller drum. I wouldn't worry too much so long as the bike is mounted securely per the instructions that came with the trainer.

FlashBazbo

Well, you are in Columbia, South Carolina. Not exactly arctic conditions there.

e30jean

Hi Dan, I should have been more specific. I have two bikes, an aluminum frame roubaix and a carbon sst. The noise I am talking about is 100% coming from the CF frame, when using the same trainer in the same fashion.

Dan333SP

That's odd... are you using the same steel trainer skewer? Does it make any of these noises out on the road while pedaling hard at low cadence? What type of noise are you hearing?

e30jean

Yep, same trainer skewer, same tires even. It's the CF frame making the noise from the BB/chain stays area when the frame is flexing on the trainer that doesn't like the rear section of the bike move or tilt left/right when you are training while standing up or not keeping the bike perfectly straight.

The same bike does not make ANY such noise when riding or climbing on the trails/roads .

Dan333SP

I mean, I know my carbon bike flexes a bit while on the trainer around the BB junction, because I can see it. But I don't hear anything from that flex.

If I could hear creaking noises as the carbon flexed, I'd probably stick to using my aluminum bike in the trainer. What type of frame are you riding?

e30jean

Fuji SST 2.1 , which has a pretty massive BB section and was/is one of the stiffest frames for climbing :/
https://www.fujibikes.com/global/bike/details/sst-21

Aluminum one is Fuji Roubaix, does not flex like the CF does on the trainer.

I've been reading more about this, it seems that the reason is when you have a trainer that locks the rear section of the bike (or the bike overall) and does NOT let it sway left/right, it's instead putting the flex on the bike frame and it tries to twist it on the horizontal axis between the Front mounting point (your front wheel) and the rear section that's fixed on the trainer. Vs, when you are out on the trail/road or Rollers where the bike frame does not suffer from the same twisting as the bike is able to sway/lean left/right as needed.

I am learning to use the rollers more, and wife is using the Roubaix on the trainer until we get a different trainer that lets the bike rock/move left/right.

rpenmanparker 

I wonder why the old system was abandoned that fastened the bike by the fork and a clamp over chainstays at the bottom bracket. The rear end was free to flex as was the front due to fork rotation. It was a bulkier device, but did not have the potential for damaging the bike.

texaspandj

Maybe those older trainers not damaging the bikes had more to do with the bike than the trainer.
The sticker clearly states do not use this bike on a trainer.

Kopsis

Downward force needed on the chainstays to eliminate wheel slippage on the roller is much higher than at the dropout due to the added moment arm (chainstay length). Beer-canning metal chainstay tubes with that system would be a significant risk, especially with today's thin-walled tubing. With carbon stays you'd get the same "we didn't design them to take that type of force" response.

bmthom.gis

I did indeed move south to get away from "real" winter. I tend to do more mtb or cross riding and wrenching in the cold month...s.

rpenmanparker 

Not really. The compression at the bottom bracket didn't have to be greater the weight of the rider. The idea was just to constrain the bike from jumping off the BB support.

Psimet2001 

I used to have one of those in the late 80's early 90's. Horrible.

Can't believe this made it to 2 pages: carbon bikes don't assplode when put into trainers. They'd be a really bad bicycle if they did and I would question using them on a road if it was liable to assplode in a trainer.

Now get back to killing your soul and any love you have left for the sport by riding it away one 30 second interval at a time. Spring time domination awaits.

rpenmanparker 

Apparently you didn't see that part about fixing the position of the rear axle on a trainer. Rollers don't count.

Carbonfiberboy 

Presenting an alternative to a possible broken frame is then, in your opinion, forbidden.

Be that as it may, while I was at it I thought I would also present my opinion that sweat is more likely to damage a carbon bike than is a trainer, particularly if it sees a lot of good hard work. I always leave quite a puddle just to one side of mine as my fan is set up to blow the sweat to one side. The sweat guard catches what doesn't blow to one side. Just a heads up to those new to the trainer game.

I know quite a number of riders who use their carbon bikes on trainers, plus there's these guys who I think put out quite a bit of power:
I also realize that sweat was not listed as an issue by the OP. You may register your complaint with the mods. We now have three useless posts in this thread, eh? Though that may be a low-end record for BF. OTOH, you were able to up your count by one more.

GeneO 

Just what exactly bout sweat that damages carbon fiber?

Carbonfiberboy 

As I said in comment 15, it damages the aluminum bits and steel bits if you have any, like water bottle bolts, stem bolts, that kind of thing. Aluminum bits like cable "braze-ons" and BB hardware. Same with any bike. Carbon is better than steel, but still has bits which can be damaged. Probably doesn't do the paint any good, either. Been there, replaced that, use a sweat guard now. They're cheap, no reason not to.

macca33

In answer to the OP's question, I cannot see how, if the bike is correctly fitted to a stationary trainer, ther is any higher probability of damaging same, than there is riding on the road...


I've also seen some people set a bike up on a trainer and the skewer is barely tight, it is misaligned in the dropouts, etc, etc - a bit like how some people incorrectly set up their wheels to ride outside and then wonder how the wheel 'fell off.'


cheers

69chevy

Have you ever seen a bicycle sway from side to side when a rider sprints?


A trainer locks the bike in place like putting it in a vise. This means instead of being able to sway or tilt, that stress is absorbed by deflecting your frame.


If you stay seated and put out smooth power, there's nothing worry about. If you stand and sprint, you are stressing your frame in a way it wasn't necessarily designed to handle.

nickw

Well, considering BMC is the only frame manuf that seems to worry about this, the other 163 manuf don't, it's a non issue for most of us. I can see how the rear of a bike locked into a trainer, maybe a full 1500W+ sprint may cause a frame to flex abnormally, but spinning along at 200-400W, very little stress and well within the design limits of a frame I'd think. I wouldn't think twice about it personally, BMC or not.

superdex

isn't this what bikesdirect.com is for?

Rollfast

Point it at the couch so if it breaks at least the rug or sofa won't be as hard on you.

easy49

My CF bike made a lot of noise when using my Elite Quobo trainer. I put some Phil's on the QR that you use for the trainer and it stopped.

Jackmen

A simple way folks, to alleviate potential concerns is to get a trainer that has some movement in the back where it is not fixed. The couple that I think of are Tacx Neo, and Kurt Kinetic. Tacx has minor movement inherent with its design, and the kinetic has this movement built in.

Another option which I used when I had my Tacx Vortex, was that I put the trainer on a Piece of plywood, that was on top of a piece of 2" thick memory foam. It worked great and allowed a bit of sway in the trainer (similar to how my Tacx Neo is now). This also helps me on zwift to where the trainer experience feels more life like.

For everybodies edification I rode my CF Giant Defy in the rigid trainer for 1200 miles last year before I figured out the memory foam thing, and there was no damage. I was always a bit concerned though about the rigid clamping of the back of the frame and me getting up and pushing 600 watts in a sprint, and there being some damage. The Memory foam (or the Neo) totally takes this out of the thought process.