Old 11-23-14, 03:55 AM
  #53  
sickz
Senior Member
 
sickz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: los angeles
Posts: 366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Thanks, I edited out the typo. At some point things get ridiculous. There will always be outboard flex, so the benefits of a thicker bulge at the clamp is going to be minimal. If greater rigidity is desired the better approach would be to either add more material, or extend the bulge as was SOP for aluminum bars, or both. A fatter short area at the clamp is more about marketing than technology.

imo the buldge on cf bars was to prevent crush failures from overtorquing a clamp to prevent inherent bar slippage. thus increasing the surface area to clamp too, increasing static friction. nowadays its prolly evolved to combat associated nuances.

Last edited by sickz; 11-23-14 at 04:04 AM.
sickz is offline