Originally Posted by
Jughed
What if the structure is so lightweight/lightly built that it gets physically damaged from "normal" use? By "normal", I mean a 1800w++ pro rider putting the structure thru its paces over the course of a grand tour, or series of grand tours - where they exceed or come close to the max the design capabilities of said structure?
The claims I heard them make was that frames felt "dead" by the end of the tour. Is it not possible that the stresses they put the frames under cause micro damage that changes the characteristics of the structure?
With the UCI min weight of 6.8 kg there is no incentive to design a frame close to the stress limits in normal use. Especially a chunky modem aero frame. Problems only arise when you use a cheap, poorly designed composite layup, badly manufactured with loads of voids etc.
1800W sounds like a lot, but in engineering terms it’s not a big challenge.
Specialized used the Aethos as a showcase for how light you can safely go in a well designed frame without imposing low rider weight limits. 585g frame and 270g forks. The S-works Tarmac is around 800g so very unlikely to be compromised in terms of stiffness.
Don’t the riders feel “dead” by the end of a GT? It sounds highly subjective to me. Have pro teams got to the point of regularly testing their bikes yet like we routinely do in F1? That I don’t know. But I suspect the frames can easily go the distance without measurable degradation if not crashed or abused.