JqNav

[QUOTE=Ritterview;9865437]By ZG's, you must mean Ciamillo's more robust Negative G's, and not the lighter but wimpier Zero Gravity calipers.


You're correct!! The brakes are their Negative Gravity brakes.

2frmMI

So, Paketa refers to it as a "Racing Tandem". Do you race it? We love our S&S coupled steel Erickson, but sometimes dream of something superlight. I'm wondering if the Paketa would be suited to going fast on club rides (probably) but also longer rides and tours (supported, not loaded). Our team weight is same as yours.

JqNav

Here's my 5 cents worth;

1. Which do you like better? The C'dale was our first tandem. I did some mods to it to make it better. Retrofitted disc brakes and a winwood carbon fiber cyclocross fork. This improved the braking and steering significantly. The Paketa is just in a different league. It does everything better, but at a price.
2. What are the significant differences? Most significant is the comfort. It is very smooth, so you don't feel as a beat up after a long day in the saddle. Performance is better. We've gained a gear in terms of crusie speed. Handling is snappier too.
3. What does the wife think, worth the money? She loves the bike. She handled colors, I handled component spec's.
4. What was you motivator to step up to the Paketa, does it offer something the C'dale does not? The Paketa doesn't offer anything the C'dale does not. It's just that the Paketa does everything so much better. It's like asking does a Porsche offer anything a Camry does not. It just depends what you're looking for. We were very happy with our C'dale, but it was getting tired (the components and wheels that is, the frame was fine). The bike was about 8 years old, so I was looking at a complete rebuild, or a new bike. That softened the blow, since I managed to sell the C'dale for $2k, which covered about 40% of the Paketa frame. I was in for the new components anyway if I'd kept the C'dale.
5. Are your rides on the Paketa similar to the C'dale rides or do you find yourselves riding maybe further?
We usually go out with a group of single bikes, so we ride what they ride, but we definately feel "fresher" at the end of the ride. We're not riding much right now because we're training for a January '10 marathon, but we'll be back on the bike in earnest toward the end of January.

Hope that helps!

JqNav

We have no intension of racing the bike. My racing days are long behind me. We bought this bike to go at the same speed with less effort, versus to go faster. This is a fun bike for club rides. Houston is very flat, so we usually have a long line of single bikes behind us on club rides. We do a couple "charity rides" each year as well. My wife and I are very average cyclists, and we can crusie at 22 mph all day on the flat ground around Houston.

2frmMI

Thanks JG, sounds like exactly the way we ride. We also take extended trips sometimes, and I'm wondering about the 50-80 miles of hills/mountains daily for two weeks continuous.

bikerkim

did i miss this, or are my eyes just getting all bleary misted over becuase i'm lusting after a peketa of my own:
what is the combined weight our your team, JN? and height, too.
what is the size of your bike frame [captain and stoker, in CM, please] ??

mrfish

The AC rear hub redesign was discussed extensively at Weighweenies without any conclusive comments. I think the only difference is a spacer or step in the rear axle so that the bearings cannot be pre-loaded too much. Still has the silly double locknuts though. Just think minature old style headset - impossible to get tight without proper tools.

JqNav

Combined weight is 330lb. Captain (me) is 190 cm, stroker is 163 cm. This is a standard "Large Size" frame (not a custom). We were prepared to build a custom, but it so happened that the standard geometry of the Paketa fitted us almost perfectly.

oldacura

So, JqNav - I think a Paketa is in the same range of cost of a Calfee carbon fiber. Did you consider both? What swayed you to the Paketa?

vtrich

WOW,...another Paketa. We bought and have been riding ours for 2 years,..this being the second year. We came from an older steel Bilenky. I pretty much agree with all that has been said,...but I don't think the bike is all that stiff. I do agree that it tends to absorb an amazing amount of road noise and buzz. We had Chris King hubs built up to DT Swiss 1.2s, with 10 spd DuraAce components,..and NG calipers. We considered Calfee and various Santanas,..but I really like the way it rides,..but then I'm also partial to titanium and it is somewhat similar.

merlinextraligh

We have a set of 808's built on White Industries hubs by David, although with 145mm spacing. So far we've had no trouble with them, but we pretty much use them as race day wheels.

JqNav

I did consider both. I actually started by looking for a carbon fiber tandem. I didn't know Paketa, or Mg framed bikes existed until I started researching what high end tandems where out there. You are correct that the pricing of the bikes are about the same . . . i.e. in the 12k range well spec'd. I stumbled across a review of an Mg framed tandem by Paketa. I'm an engineer, with a major in metallurgy, and another in materials engineering, and the Paketa was a "no brainer" for me because I consider this materials solution to be "lower risk". This is of course my opinion, so this is not an invite to debate material properties. I don't consider myself an expert on this subject, but I'm probably more knowledgeable than most. What I mean by lower risk is the following;

1. Both "carbon" and Mg rate highly in the materials properties desirable for a high performance bike frame, i.e. stiffness to weight ratio, vibration damping, corrosion resistance . . . .blah . . blah . . .blah.
2. Mg does have the advantage of being more "crash resistant". The tubes have thick walls, so they will not dent or buckle very easily. I am less confident that a carbon framed tandem will survive a serious crash as well (may not be relevant, since I believe a lot of carbon frames carry a replacement warranty to protect your investment if you inadvertently destroy the frame . . . maybe??)
3. There is, in my opinion, far less skill that goes into producing an alloy frame vs a carbon frame. At the end of the day, as long as you weld the tubes properly, you will have a predictable result. Composites are far more technical (properties are directional with composites), and therefore there’s more opportunity for things to go wrong in manufacturing the frame, and when you spending this kind of money, it's nice to know that you've got what you thought you'd get.

Thus in my simple mind, I could get the high end properties of carbon (and better in some cases, although it probably not relevant since we are way over the "good enough" point with either option) without some of the risks (perceived by me) with going with a Paketa Mg frame over a carbon composite frame.

JqNav

Wow . . . maybe our C'dale frame was a lot more tired than I realized. Our Paketa is significantly stiffer than the C'dale, which is the only reference point I have.

Homeyba

When we had our Zipps made we were working with an engineer at Zipp. We wanted to use 808's as well. The engineer said no way because the angle between the rim and the hub was too great. He said a 505 would be as deep as he would go. I guess it's academic anyway since Zipp "officially" won't touch a tandem wheel so I'm not saying throw them out. I just want make you aware of what the Zipp engineer told us so you keep a close eye on them. That's all that should be required. It's better to be forewarned...

jnbrown

Well I chose carbon fiber because I have been riding CF bikes for 15 years and I know how they ride. I don't know how Mg rides and there was no opportunity to test ride one.
If there was I might chosen Mg.

Ritterview

This may be true, but we still don't find hardly any Mg half-bike frames. If all carbon frames still required custom type builds from tubes, such as done by Parlee, Crumpton, and Calfee, we might see Mg compete.

But half-bike carbon frames are mass-produced by factories in China and Taiwan, and the skill that goes into them is in the design and manufacturing process. Why don't we have any factory-built carbon tandem frames? No tandem maker has ponied up the $100,000 per frame size (minimal 3) to set up to have a frame made in Taiwan, for each frame to have a manufacturing cost of about $2000, which would need to be sold at retail for $4-5 K. I guess no one thinks the tandem market is large enough to get a return on that investment.

If a properly designed and engineered Taiwan factory built carbon frame were available, we'd all want it. It would be light, stiff and comfortable. Makers of aluminum, Mg, titanium, hybrid ti-carbon, frames etc. would see their orders plummet.

merlinextraligh

I had the same conversation with a Zipp rep. My bet is that they are being pretty conservative from a liability and warranty point of view.

The fact that the engineer that designed the Paketa built them gave me some comfort level. Also I don't think the angle the spokes come out from 808's to a 145mm hub can be that much different than from a 1080 rim to a 130mm hub.

Nonetheless, I realize it's a gamble.

TandemGeek

Re: Zipp and other 'Racing wheels'.

IMHO: The operative word is "Racing". Merlin's got it right, reserved for certain types of competitive events racing wheels make good sense for elite teams looking to squeeze a little extra performance out of their machines. However, for every day use and for teams that haven't really squeezed every bit of performance out of the engines, racing wheels are at best very expensive placebos that look really neat.

Homeyba

We weren't dealing with a rep, we were dealing with an engineer at the Zipp factory. You(me/we) don't have a warranty on any wheel from Zipp that we put on a tandem (that came from a rep). They won't fix/repair any wheel if we tell them it came off a tandem. I think they have a don't ask/don't tell type of policy regarding tandem wheels.

I'm not trying to scare you, I thought the 808 would make a stronger wheel myself. I do ultra-distance races and put a lot of miles on my wheels so the engineer may have been more conservative with me. Regardless of whether they are just being conservative or not I just wanted to let you know what the engineer said so you can keep a little closer eye on the wheel (specifically at the spoke/rim interface).

sbxx1985 

I ran across this thread today. I realize this is the tandem forum and not RC, but posted this picture in case anyone was interested in seeing what the Paketa road frames look like. My wife and I have been on Paketa frames for the last four years and love the bikes. Good to see the company is still doing well.

Ritterview

Does your family's predilection to ride Paketa's have anything to do with Paketa being built in nearby Golden?

Do you know what your half-bike frame weighs? Or the total weight of your bike? That build is quite similar to my BMC, which weighs 16 lbs.

I note that the fork is carbon. If magnesium is so great for frames, you'd think it would be doubly great for forks. Is this carbon fork a vote of no confidence in magnesium for that critical part?

uspspro

I think it has more to do with the already abundant choices of quality well-engineered carbon forks made by fork-makers. Why put the cost of R&D and production into something like that, when almost every other frame producer uses an aftermarket fork anyway.

jnbrown

Almost all the reviews and/or testimonials you see for Paketa are from people who live in Colo near the company. Its hard to put a lot of credibility to these until Paketa is sold more widespread. I am not saying they are false are misleading. Until you actually ride a bike, you don't know if its the right choice. I don't know if you can ride a Paketa without travelling to Colo. Another Mg frame was the Pinarello Dogma and they have now abandonded Mg and gone to carbon.

Ritterview

True, as far as that goes. But, we can ask ourselves, if magnesium is such a super material for frames, why do choices in magnesium frames, forks, handlebars, and stems range from few to none? Paketa is about the only magnesium frame, their are no mg forks or handlebars and one or two stems.

Magnesium looms much larger in tandemland, because it has been so difficult/expensive to make carbon tandem frames. Everywhere else where magnesium vies with carbon, carbon wins, as evidenced by the Paketa's carbon fork. So, since we have not gained familiarity with magnesium on any other component, there is a wariness to having an entire frame made of this material. Is it brittle? Subject to corrosion? Flexy? We don't know, because all we have are a few users here and there with generally positive reports. That's not much to go on when looking at spending thousands on something.

sbxx1985 

Paketa used to be made in Boulder. The company was recently sold and appears to be based out of Golden now. After riding ti, steel, and aluminum (note: I haven't spent enough time on carbon to compare), I couldn't be happier. Personally, I couldn't ask for more from a bike, and that's why I ride one.

Not sure what it weighs. If I had to guess, it'd probably be between 15-16 lbs.

I've never heard of a magnesium fork being produced and I doubt it will ever. I think carbon pretty much corners the market when it comes to forks. Paketa doesn't make forks.