953 Reynolds should be you next frame set :D

w00 h00!

Yes, couldn't get through the riding season without repair. Cranks came stock on a Specialized Roubaix. Repaired by a well respected bike shop, twice. Went to a self installed Shimano R700 after I realized that the rubbing at my FD was due to the FSA chain rings warping. For me the Shimano was a big improvement. But when I found a great deal (270 including cups) on the Chorus UT cranks I decided to try them and have not had any further problems in two seasons. I still run the Shimano cranks on the bike at my vacation home. No hills, fewer miles. For that they have held up well. Some of my problems may have been from riding in the rain. But I do the same on the Chorus set without problems.

Replacing the bearings in the Shimano is sure cheap and easy. And I could have replaced a lot of bearings for the cost of the Chorus cranks. But this was a recommendation for someone starting from scratch.

Weird. I must just be lucky. I was 270# when I started riding the two bikes. They take all the abuse I can throw at them...

Waterford, their cheaper Gunnar line, and Rivendell make epic steel bikes.

For little fat ponys, and quarter horses these are excellent bikes with evident craftsmanship (especially the Rivs).

However for big Clydes steel is very poor frame choice. Big heavy cyclists will flex the bottom bracket enough to cause phantom shifts, the bike will feel like complete spaghetti.

No cyclist 6'3" and over and 250lbs and over should be riding steel. Just completely inefficient, and completely unpredictable in high speed descents.

Steel is real. Really inefficient. Really cheap to manufacture. Really easy to learn to braze or weld. Really making a poor frameset that doesn't begin to compare in terms of lightness, stiffness, or road feel to any aluminum, carbon, or ti frame made since 1985.

Compare apples to apples. Ride a high end steel bike for a thousand miles. Swap the drivetrain, carbon fork, wheelset etc. from a high end steel bike onto a good aluminum frame. Ride another thousand miles. You'll never go back...

FSA cranks and BB are failing, coming loose at an alarming rate.

This is with 140-165lb roadies on 'em.

Clydes should avoid FSA kit like the plague.

^^ Two emotional and opinionated threads is a row. Do you have any data to back up your dooms-day assertions?

No credibility at all! Consider the source. This guy pretends to be a professional wheel builder in one thread "difference in rims". Know everything there is to know about what is good for CLYDES but rides low spoke count paired "XTRA LITE" wheels in another thread.:eek:...cough cough, it's not the wheels, it's the fat body!;)

Suggests that a poster builds a custom bike but he himself rides a Giant OCR "off the shelf" after he just got done rec'ing not to do so.

Suggests another rider follow what "the touring crowd" rec's but is far from followinghis own advice withoff the shelf Xero X Lite hweels!:eek:

Late he suggests that a rider read Peter White's wheel site. Peter White would be the first person against a 375 lb rider riding paired spokes!;)

Seems Mtnbke is throwing lots of stuff out there contradicting himself while making statements trying to prove superior knowledge over a few of the others. But none of it makes sense!

Cracks me up, "fat human engine". SO what is a 375 lb fat human engine doing on X Lite race wheels?:roflmao2:

If I had 3k to spend on a bike, I would look at Rivendell too. I disagree with the assertion that big guys sould not ride steel. Lots of steel touring bikes out there. They are designed to carry a heavy load and be stable doing it. I have one, and it carrys my 270# self with a bunch of gear strapped to it as well, just fine. Even on fast down hills. Ok, 35 is a fast down hill for me, I can't vouch for any thing faster than that. I have no opinion on ti. Don't know enough about it. Carbon scares me a little. Yes I know it is strong and light and absorbs vibration well. I just don't like the prospect of throwing an expensive frame away because it gets a ding in it.

You feel the flex on a particular Ti bike; flex and rigidity are not unalterable material properties but a consequence of the way the material is used. (Mostly the tubing radius.) Alu has a rep for rigidity, but classic Vitus alu racing frames are wet noodles, for example.

This is utter bollocks.

Again: frames can be built to be rigid or flexy with steel, ti, alu or carbon. Despite what this pretentious, arrogant and ill-informed man says, it's the tubing radius that determines flex. The classic net article by someone who actually knows what they are talking about is here:

http://www.63xc.com/scotn/metal.htm

It's also worth remarking that -

- The steel Surly's are probably *the* most popular and successful choices for heavy riders in search of bikes

- A porky 250lb rider isn't going to make a frame flex as much as a lighter stronger rider - flex comes from pedaling, not the weight of an ass on a seat! I'm a 210 mesomorph, and I've never had a flex problem with a steel bike. And that includes hardtail MTBs - and if a 210lber like me can't find any flex in a fast descent with the bike taking a constant banging and my weight off the saddle, then a 250lb rider on the road won't have the slightest problem!

- Chromolly steel isn't cheap to manufacture! Alu is widely used partly because it is cheaper.

This is probably overkill, as this guy is OBVIOUSLY ignorant and full of it, but in this test in a real university engineering lab one of steel frames was among the LEAST flexy tested! http://materials.open.ac.uk/bikeframes/bikeframe.htm. I can't say this enough: flex isn't intrinsic to a material but the way that the material is used. You can rigid or flexy frames out of steel, alu, or Ti.

A professional wheel builder for what? Wheel barrows? Roller skates? Shopping trolleys?

:rolleyes::rolleyes:
jeez lol....... lot of crap you posted

I've learned some self control and refuse to get sucked in and post in one of these emotional X is better than y BS threads....

Crap. I just did.:twitchy:

just wait 30 years and see if people are still riding the same carbon bikes they are today... (I mean the exact same frame set)

I bet they aren't...

therefore,

it is a m00t post...

I bet you're wrong. My 1994 carbon fiber Trek bicycle is still going strong! I don't see any reason it shouldn't last another 10-15 years. And it's not nearly as well-made as my Cervelo RS...

Since quality Carbon frames have only been around since the inception of Kestral, Trek and Specialized in the mid 80's there aren't any 30 year old carbon bikes out there yet but there are a whole lot of 20yr old carbon bikes around. The Kestral is still an awesome bike. I see no reason in ten more years they still won't be around.

I had a Vitus Carbon and it lasted about 9 years and was toast.. The Carbon bikes of today are so much stiffer and better made than even something from 10 years ago..


I still have 2 Steel Merckx's from late 80's and early 90's that are ridden all the time..

I also have a Litespeed and would consider Ti a good choice for long lasting frameset, it is just a baby compared to my other bikes being that it is only 9 years old..

not being a big fan of, aluminum or carbon I would usually recomend steel. as the first posted said try and ride the Ti bike as longs as you can. I would not call myself a powerful rider but being a big girl *blushing* {OH I am not just heavy, I am tall I ride a 59} I puerchased a Ti frame in '00 and frankly I find myself reaching for my Columbus MAX Proto instead of the Ti. I just never felt the Ti was stiff enough in the BB or fork (carbnon) for me. too bad MAX frames are only custom these days but then again it might be worth it

Wow, there are many different opinions here. Let me add mine. I am a big rider, at 260, been lower but not now. Anyway, I have had Steel (Reynolds 531, Tange Prestige), Aluminum (Cannondale 3.0, 2.8, R5000, Klien, Trek 1440) and Ti (no butting Merlin). When I was in my 20's the Cannondales were great. I was really fast and weighed in the 220 range. I could not flex the frame but could flex the back wheels going up hill. They were custom built Mavic Open pros with 36 spokes. When going from a steel frame to the aluminum frame, I could tell that I was much faster from a stop with the aluminum. I could hit 20mph from a start going through a stop light. I could not do that with my steel bike. The only problem was I was not comfortable going over 40 miles, my would just be exhausted (not just the legs either). I then got a Davidson steel bike that was almost as light as the Cannondales but much more comfortable. I rode that for quite a few years. I still wanted to go lighter (a clyde that that wants a lighter bike, go figure!) so I tried other aluminum bikes. They were great but I still could not go as far. I sure could climb better. Anyway, I ended up trying a Ti bike, Merlin, and could not be happier. I do get break rub when out of the saddle climbing a hill very hard but I think that is the wheels and not the frame. I also have carbon bars, not for weight but for comfort and I have had them for 6 years. I did have them replaced initially because they began to squeak and the shop told me that they were cracked. That was 5 years ago. The bars are much more comfortable and my hands did not fall asleep. So my advice is to try all types of bikes. The way the frame is made (not just the material) has much to do with how it will ride. I personally love my Ti Merlin and it still looks new today. I can not say that about any of the other bikes that I have had. I still have the Davidson too. I also just upgraded my Merlin from 8 speed to 10 speed, so it is like a new bike.

Ron

Spend some time on these forums and you'll read thousands of horror stories of people with FSA bottom brackets, and FSA cranks that work themselves loose from the BB.

I'd avoid FSA cranks and Bottom Brackets like the plague.

I meant every day ridden carbon...

actually no one cares what I think about carbon :D

I'll just be quiet...

Where do you make this stuff up? I've built ONE wheel in my entire life and it failed before I left the cul de sac. My too tiny XL Giant OCR1 did come with paired spoke Xero Xtra Lite wheels. They do have a low spoke count. I do weigh 375lbs. I've ridden that bike MAYBE 250 miles because it just doesn't fit. When I bought it in 2004 Giant marketed it as being fitting up to a 67cm classic geometry frame size. They have since redacted that and now claim it only fits up to a virtual 64cm. That being said I'm astounded that those wheels only needed to have one spoke tightened with my weight. Still perfectly true..

However, thinking those wheels would hold up long term is insane. They'd be a great fun wheelset for a lot of the fat ponys that would want something to keep them motivated and on the bike. They were spec'd OEM on many Giants.

Get your facts right, don't be disingenuous or duplicitous.

Let me know when you're going to send the check to fund the purchase of my 70cm Custom Zinn. Not everyone is a Radiologist or an Attorney that loves bikes. I bought the Giant (as I've discussed many times in these forums) because Giant marketed it as fitting like a 67cm virtual frame (modern compact geometry). At the time it was the LARGEST bike being sold. That bike would have been an insane deal (if it really had fit like a 67cm) considering it was Ultegra equipped for under a grand new.

Every cyclist would be better off on a custom Serotta or other such custom make that takes fit seriously, instead of just regressing toward the mean, than whatever off the shelf bike they ride.

That you think my inability to fund the purchase of a $7500 custom titanium bike in a 70cm or 72cm size has any bearing on anything is just ludicrous, and again disingenuous and duplicitous.

What is your obsession with my purchase of a bike to get a frame that was marketed as fitting like a virtual 67cm? Who in their right mind would think that a low count paired spoke wheelset would hold up to someone my size?

I've posted probably fifty different posts to the Clydesdale forum regarding the fact that most wheels won't hold up under Clydes or fat ponys. That Clydes should buy their own truing stand, learn to build their own wheels using touring rims (Mavic a719) with appropriate spoke counts and straight 14g spokes. I've posted ad nauseum that Clydes should avoid local 'master' wheelbuilders when they discover that their wheels are failing. I've always recommended that Clydes look to Peter White.

Those goofy paired spoke wheels came with the bike, I paid for it, they belong to me, I'd never ridden anything like 'em, and so I chose to ride 'em. I figured that they would collapse the very first ride, actually. I had to pay $20 after only 250 miles because they developed a wobble due to the loosened spoke. I've never been back on those wheels since getting 'em perfectly trued (by a professional wrench, why you made up the nonsense about me being a wheelbuilder is beyond me, I'm a hack with my truing stand). Furthermore I don't ride that Giant, let alone the wheels. Its just too small. I've stated that repeatedly in these forums. My 63cm Cannondale (66cm c-t) fits better. I realized almost instantly that Giant was misrepresenting the XL frame size as fitting up to a 67cm. It wasn't long after I'd bought mine that Giant redacted their fit guidelines regarding the XL. I was so disappointed, I'd wanted an XL Giant for over a year thinking it would be big enough.

About the wheels you're obsessed with, I've posted more about the need for appropriate well built strong wheels in the Clyde forum than probably anyone else here...

Why on earth did you decide you needed to completely misrepresent here, and in such a disingenuous manner? What is your issue?

Why are you trolling the bike forums? Get a life.

The only person misrepresenting here is you. Anyone can search my posts and discover that I've posted probably fifty times regarding recommendations that Clydes and Fat Ponys avoid custom wheelsets by local 'master' wheelbuilders. That they get a truing stand and build their own or go Peter White. That they select appropriate touring rims with high spoke counts and 14g spokes or 13g/14g double butted spokes.

Almost everything you've posted here is completely in discord with what I've posted repeatedly in this forum. Whatever your personal issues with me are, move on man...

Go ride your bike!

My secret shame in the Cannondale crowd is that I would LOVE to have a custom Calfee Tetra and Tetra Tetra laid up as stiff as my vintage 'dales. The irony would be that Calfee would have to tell all the other people waiting for their custom build that they were getting pushed back. My bikes would use up ALL the carbon!

I have no doubt that Calfee could make a tandem to suport our almost 600lbs on the bike, or a single that could do the same.

However, can you imagine spending over ten grand on a couple of bikes as a big Clyde fattie only to love the bikes so much that you ride the snot out of 'em and get skinny? I wonder what a carbon tandem custom laid up for 600 pounds of fatties would ride like if we got down to a total weight of around 350 combined (I'm more than that now by MYSELF).

I don't know anything about carbon, and with my wonderful little guy in my life, I can't see myself ever having occasion to learn and actually have the opportunity to ever buy one.

Maybe Calfee will want to build one for me/us as an demonstration of their ability.

Carbon is certainly epic stuff in the hands of the right builder. A custom Calfee or Serotta carbon bike is something else entirely.

Same with Titanium.

However, who can afford either?

If you have the means to have bikes like that in your stable to support your passion for cycling and you don't give back to bike charities like Project Rwanda where a $1k bike literally changes entire families fortunes, well I've got to believe there is special pothole out there for those people...

As for steel I still maintain it builds up into garbage frames. Ti does everything steel can do and better, without being any of the things that steel is (inefficient, overly flexy, heavy). Carbon goes one step further.

I still say an epic Cannondale or Klein aluminum bike will put any steel frame to shame. I'll never represent that these epic vintage aluminum bikes are superior to custom carbon or ti bikes, but there is a difference of getting a whole bike of Craigslist for $500 and spending more than $5000 for a frame alone.

It makes me sad that cycling has evolved to the point that I'll never have what is technologically possible.

In the late 80s I remember picking up a Lemond Maillot Jaune (Reynolds Steel) for my ex-girlfriend. This bike:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...9236/index.htm

It had full Dura-Ace with Campy Record hubs. I only paid $300 for the whole bike because of the paradigm change to STI. How things have changed, when you could pick up a Tour de France bike for a couple of bills, to now where Tour bike builds would cost well over ten grand...where a wheelset can cost a couple of thousand.

So while Carbon and Titanium have elevated cycling so far beyond the meager steel frame that its almost impossible to possibly compare them, it makes me sad that the average joe can no longer ride a bike that his favorite pro would ride. That was always something amazing about cycling. You may not have been Marco Pantani or Greg Lemond, but you could ride what they rode. Who could possibly afford the bikes that UCI pros ride on today? Let alone ever imagine collecting a stable of such bikes to celebrate important victories/races.

As much as I point out the limitations and shortcomings of steel as a frame material, make no mistake, there was something democratic about steel bikes. Steel bikes, even the highest end ones, were cheap to produce, and relatively accessible to cyclists. Those days are over...

I thought this was interesting. Since I have FSA cranks on my tandem maybe I better check into all these thousands of failures! I could be riding on a time bomb! So I did a search on the entire website, not just the clyde board (wouldn't want to leave anything out). I did a simple search, "FSA Failure" that should include just about all FSA product problems. I got a whopping 15 threads in response and none of them were specifically about about a crank failure. There was one bb failure though. You're close there mtnbke, you're only off by a factor of 1000's. ;)

If you are talking about it just coming loose, that is not a failure. That is someone in need of a torque wrench!

I have cheap FSA on one of my bikes and have had zero issues, and if OP is spending $3k he need not worry about cheap components.