Notices
Cyclocross and Gravelbiking (Recreational) This has to be the most physically intense sport ever invented. It's high speed bicycle racing on a short off road course or riding the off pavement rides on gravel like : "Unbound Gravel". We also have a dedicated Racing forum for the Cyclocross Hard Core Racers.

Carbon to Ti frame.

Old 11-08-23, 12:51 AM
  #76  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by TC1
I have been trying to educate you all --
Keep trying. Itís hilarious.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 11-08-23, 01:31 AM
  #77  
I am potato.
 
base2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,018

Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times in 887 Posts
Originally Posted by TC1
Then you went on to post a video of lateral deformation, and insinuate that it was somehow relevant to the conversation -- along with calling the position that you are now seemingly agreeing with "irrational" and "preposterous". So, to put it mildly, make up your mind.
I posted a video about lateral deflection and tortional stiffness to illustrate to you, exactly what every single titanium and steel bike rider knows the first time they get on a steel or titanium bike. This is exactly what the whole flippin' point of post number 9 was. To explain with words the graphical moving picture representation on screen that for whatever reason you, until this point have been unable to grasp. The entire thread, except you, got it and have been trying to explain to you ever since.

I did not disagree with all your post #9, that you laboriously quoted, and you'll note that I did not respond to it. Some of it didn't make any sense, but it wasn't worth my time to argue points not germane to my position. For example, you wrote:
Originally Posted by base2 (myself )
I think that what a lot of people mean when they repeat: "Steel is real" (& by extension, titanium) is that the frame twists, the quill stem flexes, the side of the handlebar that had weight on it flexed, the bottom bracket deflected, etc...All give the impression of a smoother ride. Whereas a carbon frame by nature of desing is intended to resist those forces so can be perceived as "wooden" by comparison.
Well of course you didn't understand it. Your refusal to learn in favor of disregarding anything that does not actively support your position is more concerning

In that paragraph, you partially support what I've been educating folks on -- which is that components are responsible for ride quality -- but then go on to claim that carbon fiber bikes have poor ride quality, when one of their alleged selling points is exactly the opposite.
Where in there is the claim on a carbon bikes ride quality? I used a point of reference (steel/ti) for which to draw a comparison to establish how a thing *could* be perceived in relation to said point of reference. My Cervelo R5 does indeed feel "wooden" when in direct comparison to my mixte for example (oops, diamond frame only )...I mean in comparison to any of my fleet of steel road bikes. That is not a judgement on its ride quality. In fact, if I feel I want to ride a rocketship on a century, it is ideally suited. So you can put the prejudicial conclusions that you thought I meant to say "poor," away. They make you look like a fool. I established that frame material and construction would create bikes that rode "different." Whereas you have been claiming throughout the thread that there is no difference to be had.


Now, I could have used this inconsistency to illustrate that all these notions of frame material effecting ride quality are nonsense, because even the believers can't keep their stories straight, but that was not worth my time, so I skipped it. If I called-out every bit of nonsense in this thread, I might burn out the servers that host this site.
You didn't because you couldn't.

But you did give a wrong quote attribution in post 75.

Last edited by base2; 11-08-23 at 01:40 AM.
base2 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 06:44 AM
  #78  
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,190
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2340 Post(s)
Liked 2,762 Times in 1,579 Posts
Several people participating in this thread have asserted that the apparently relevant test results---those demonstrating that double-diamond frames made of steel, aluminum, or titanium cannot different significantly in vertical compliance (and maybe even in ride quality) for a given geometry---are pretty much meaningless.

So, for those folk, let's restrict the topic to steel frames.

A number of those same people would likely also assert confidently that steel frames built using different grades of, e.g., Columbus tubesets would ride perceptively differently, with the ride quality differences corresponding unmistakably to the grade of steel (e.g., Aelle versus EL-OS), the tube dimensions, and the various forms of cross-sectional manipulation. And (my favorite perplexing assertion) to the skill of the builder.

They would be wrong, apparently.

Yes, here's that 1997 Magnificent Seven article again.

As reported in the PDF linked to below, a number of experienced riders tested seven frames that had been built by Antonio Mondonico with seven different Columbus tubesets but that were identical (other than their assigned identification numbers) in every way otherwise. None of the riders knew which frame used which tubeset.

Were the riders able to distinguish reliably the more expensive tube sets from the less expensive on the basis of "ride feel"?

They were not.

An excerpt:

"For the SLX frame to be the softest seemed technically possible. While the rifling inside the down tube and seat tube was billed as the road to rigidity 10 years ago, an oversize tubeset with similarly thick tubing---like Thron---should be stiffer.

"But I picked Thron as the most shock absorbing. And I lumped Aelle, Cromor, Brain, and EL-OS together. To be honest, I couldn't feel a difference between an Aelle frame---with straight-gauge tubing and weighing in at 4 pounds 12 ounces---and an EL-OS frame---with double-butted, oversize Nivachrom tubing and only 4 pounds of heft. A conclusion that, if the marketing literature is to be believed, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

"If the numbers on the bikes were switched around and I were to test each bike again, my guess is that I'd come up with different tubing preferences. I think my ride impressions were essentially random."

In an earlier thread where the Magnificent 7 article was referenced, one poster said, confidently, that the only reason the test results came out that way was that the later, higher-tech Columbus steel tubesets were not yet available. Interesting logic.

So---same builder. Same material. Same geometries. Different tubesets. Riders' perceptions all over the place.

Starting in 1963, I rode and raced well over a dozen steel bikes built with Columbus Aelle, SL, and SL/SP and with Reynolds 531 and 853. They were all great, but my favorite was my Bianchi Eco Pista, built with Columbus Aelle.

If I had to guess why I liked that one so much, it was the geometry. In particular, the wheelbase was around a centimeter shorter than what I was used to with my road bikes, and I liked the resulting quicker handling.

No, I never noticed any difference in "comfort" among those bikes. But I've always been able to detect a difference of even a half-centimeter between wheelbase measurements.

Then I bought my first aluminum race bike. Again, no difference in "comfort." But a big (to me, anyway) difference in wheel tracking and (therefore) in sprinting and in descending at speed, thanks to the increased torsional and lateral stiffness.

So my two remaining steel bikes (531 and 853) languish in the basement.

By the way, though I won't cite it here, you can find a Bicycling! magazine article, posted about six months ago by SpeedOfLite, that reports the results of test ride comparisons of two Trek racing bikes built in (I think) 1989, where Trek used their new aluminum frame for one and a steel frame for the other (the same model of steel fork was used for both). So the frames were of different materials, but the components and the geometries were identical.

The article concluded with the writer saying that every one of the test riders preferred the aluminum frame, especially with respect to ride feel. That was followed by a wistful observation: that, given how well steel had served for so many years, it's a shame that steel bikes would likely all but disappear from the market soon.

And, of course, for the most part, that's what happened. It took a while before lower-end bikes changed from steel to aluminum, but aluminum---and then carbon fiber---took over the specialty-bike market segment rapidly.

Yes, some hip bike shops are back to stocking some steel bikes, especially in major metropolitan areas, but most of the shops near me stock no steel bikes.

I still see steel fixed-gear bikes being ridden around here. But fewer and fewer of those are around, having been replaced by various forms of electric scooters.

I love seeing all the pictures of beautifully restored and maintained classic steel bikes on this site. And I feel nostalgic from time to time, as do, I suspect, many here, about the bikes I rode 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 years ago. But I harbor no illusions about their ride feel having been better in any way than the ride of my current aluminum bikes.

Weird. I wonder if I'm the only one here who raced steel bikes in the early '60's and for decades thereafter but who now prefers aluminum racing bikes.

Great article from the February 1996 issue of Bicycle Guide

"Can the experts REALLY tell the difference between frame tubing?"

Last edited by Trakhak; 11-08-23 at 07:58 AM.
Trakhak is offline  
Likes For Trakhak:
Old 11-08-23, 10:40 AM
  #79  
TC1
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Location: Illinois
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 275 Post(s)
Liked 115 Times in 74 Posts
Originally Posted by base2
I posted a video about lateral deflection and tortional stiffness to illustrate to you, exactly what every single titanium and steel bike rider knows the first time they get on a steel or titanium bike. This is exactly what the whole flippin' point of post number 9 was. To explain with words the graphical moving picture representation on screen that for whatever reason you, until this point have been unable to grasp. The entire thread, except you, got it and have been trying to explain to you ever since.
What on Earth are you talking about? Again, no one and certainly not me, has ever suggested that lateral deflection does not occur. "Lateral" is different from "vertical". If you cannot understand that, please, to save everyone's time, desist from further comment here.

And, for the record, I've owned several titanium bikes, and a bunch of steel ones, and your comment in that first sentence is utterly wrong and displays a jarring lack of experience with actually riding bikes. For just one example, the steel frame of a Surly Pugsley will not deflect laterally as-shown in that video, and not to any visible extent.


Originally Posted by base2
Well of course you didn't understand it. Your refusal to learn in favor of disregarding anything that does not actively support your position is more concerning
I do understand that you are unable to differentiate between "lateral" and "vertical", and between "comfort" and "handling" -- which is very concerning. This site may be of use to you.

Originally Posted by base2
Where in there is the claim on a carbon bikes ride quality?
"Whereas a carbon frame by nature of desing is intended to resist those forces so can be perceived as "wooden" by comparison."

Originally Posted by base2
My Cervelo R5 does indeed feel "wooden" when in direct comparison to my mixte for example (oops, diamond frame only )...I mean in comparison to any of my fleet of steel road bikes. That is not a judgement on its ride quality.
If you are going to invent your own terminology, you are going to need to define those words before using them. The rest of the community would consider that a judgement on its ride quality.

Originally Posted by base2
So you can put the prejudicial conclusions that you thought I meant to say "poor," away. They make you look like a fool.
I did not try to guess your meaning, I simply responded to that which you wrote. That said, your writing and inconsistency there-of do an excellent job of displaying your foolishness.

Originally Posted by base2
I established that frame material and construction would create bikes that rode "different." Whereas you have been claiming throughout the thread that there is no difference to be had.
You established no such thing, first of all. No more than saying "I believe in Bigfoot" establishes that bipedal apes walk our woods.

Yes, we disagree, and one of us has the support of all the relevant science, and the other has only wishful-thinking and snake-oil. Until and unless you can propose some physical explanation, or better yet, scientific evidence, to support your claims, they remain nonsense and superstition.
TC1 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 10:48 AM
  #80  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: London, UK
Posts: 701

Bikes: Yes, probably too many but still have a roving eye...

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 307 Post(s)
Liked 2,602 Times in 511 Posts
Do you even own a bike?
botty kayer is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 11:05 AM
  #81  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak
Several people participating in this thread have asserted that the apparently relevant test results---those demonstrating that double-diamond frames made of steel, aluminum, or titanium cannot different significantly in vertical compliance (and maybe even in ride quality) for a given geometry---are pretty much meaningless.

So, for those folk, let's restrict the topic to steel frames.

A number of those same people would likely also assert confidently that steel frames built using different grades of, e.g., Columbus tubesets would ride perceptively differently, with the ride quality differences corresponding unmistakably to the grade of steel (e.g., Aelle versus EL-OS), the tube dimensions, and the various forms of cross-sectional manipulation. And (my favorite perplexing assertion) to the skill of the builder.

They would be wrong, apparently.

Yes, here's that 1997 Magnificent Seven article again.

As reported in the PDF linked to below, a number of experienced riders tested seven frames that had been built by Antonio Mondonico with seven different Columbus tubesets but that were identical (other than their assigned identification numbers) in every way otherwise. None of the riders knew which frame used which tubeset.

Were the riders able to distinguish reliably the more expensive tube sets from the less expensive on the basis of "ride feel"?

They were not.

An excerpt:

"For the SLX frame to be the softest seemed technically possible. While the rifling inside the down tube and seat tube was billed as the road to rigidity 10 years ago, an oversize tubeset with similarly thick tubing---like Thron---should be stiffer.

"But I picked Thron as the most shock absorbing. And I lumped Aelle, Cromor, Brain, and EL-OS together. To be honest, I couldn't feel a difference between an Aelle frame---with straight-gauge tubing and weighing in at 4 pounds 12 ounces---and an EL-OS frame---with double-butted, oversize Nivachrom tubing and only 4 pounds of heft. A conclusion that, if the marketing literature is to be believed, doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

"If the numbers on the bikes were switched around and I were to test each bike again, my guess is that I'd come up with different tubing preferences. I think my ride impressions were essentially random."

In an earlier thread where the Magnificent 7 article was referenced, one poster said, confidently, that the only reason the test results came out that way was that the later, higher-tech Columbus steel tubesets were not yet available. Interesting logic.

So---same builder. Same material. Same geometries. Different tubesets. Riders' perceptions all over the place.

Starting in 1963, I rode and raced well over a dozen steel bikes built with Columbus Aelle, SL, and SL/SP and with Reynolds 531 and 853. They were all great, but my favorite was my Bianchi Eco Pista, built with Columbus Aelle.

If I had to guess why I liked that one so much, it was the geometry. In particular, the wheelbase was around a centimeter shorter than what I was used to with my road bikes, and I liked the resulting quicker handling.

No, I never noticed any difference in "comfort" among those bikes. But I've always been able to detect a difference of even a half-centimeter between wheelbase measurements.

Then I bought my first aluminum race bike. Again, no difference in "comfort." But a big (to me, anyway) difference in wheel tracking and (therefore) in sprinting and in descending at speed, thanks to the increased torsional and lateral stiffness.

So my two remaining steel bikes (531 and 853) languish in the basement.

By the way, though I won't cite it here, you can find a Bicycling! magazine article, posted about six months ago by SpeedOfLite, that reports the results of test ride comparisons of two Trek racing bikes built in (I think) 1989, where Trek used their new aluminum frame for one and a steel frame for the other (the same model of steel fork was used for both). So the frames were of different materials, but the components and the geometries were identical.

The article concluded with the writer saying that every one of the test riders preferred the aluminum frame, especially with respect to ride feel. That was followed by a wistful observation: that, given how well steel had served for so many years, it's a shame that steel bikes would likely all but disappear from the market soon.

And, of course, for the most part, that's what happened. It took a while before lower-end bikes changed from steel to aluminum, but aluminum---and then carbon fiber---took over the specialty-bike market segment rapidly.

Yes, some hip bike shops are back to stocking some steel bikes, especially in major metropolitan areas, but most of the shops near me stock no steel bikes.

I still see steel fixed-gear bikes being ridden around here. But fewer and fewer of those are around, having been replaced by various forms of electric scooters.

I love seeing all the pictures of beautifully restored and maintained classic steel bikes on this site. And I feel nostalgic from time to time, as do, I suspect, many here, about the bikes I rode 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 years ago. But I harbor no illusions about their ride feel having been better in any way than the ride of my current aluminum bikes.

Weird. I wonder if I'm the only one here who raced steel bikes in the early '60's and for decades thereafter but who now prefers aluminum racing bikes.

Great article from the February 1996 issue of Bicycle Guide

"Can the experts REALLY tell the difference between frame tubing?"
I would suggest that comparing the differences between frames made of different brands of steel, of the same diameter, and same geometry, is much like comparing brands of electric guitar strings, and claiming one can hear the difference between brands. However, stating that it is impossible to hear the difference between round-wound and flat-wound strings because they were measured to vibrate at the exact same speed is applying "science" without an understanding of the bigger picture.

I would agree that there are some factors about our bicycles that we may talk ourselves into believing, but someone insisting that all bikes must ride with the same feel/comfort, regardless of material, based on the results of a deflection test in one direction, is unknowledgeable about the stresses on a bicycle frame during use. Vertical compliance is only one factor in a system composed of many factors.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 11:30 AM
  #82  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by TC1
You'd sound much more like you have a clue, if you, ya know, had a clue about the relevant science. That's not an accurate description. An accurate description would be: "We've measured the force required to deflect thousands of different frames, and in every case, the required force is two orders of magnitude greater than the force required to deflect the other components in the system."
The accuracy of my description is irrelevant to the point, but you've done a nice job illustrating that you still don't understand.


Originally Posted by TC1
I never have, and neither has anyone else since the development of pneumatic tires. Again, I am not offering my opinion here, this has been proven, time and again, over decades.

And by the way, you're again misrepresenting the situation. "Power" has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem.
You are so rigidly attached to the vertical plane that it's blinding you from recognizing that frames are stressed - and bend - in other directions, as well, and power has a hell of a lot to do with it. How a frame responds to a rider's power is meaningful in the perception of not only handling, but also comfort. Comfort is not only measured by our butt on the saddle, but also by our hands and feet. Yes, tires, wheels, and other components play a role. Some of them, a very significant role. However, if a bike frame were completely isolated by those components, as you have insisted, we could put our hand on our frame while riding and would never feel the vibrations of the road in the tubes.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 12:01 PM
  #83  
TC1
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Location: Illinois
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 275 Post(s)
Liked 115 Times in 74 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
The accuracy of my description is irrelevant to the point, but you've done a nice job illustrating that you still don't understand.
So you are claiming that I don't understand a point that you cannot even accurately describe? You might should rethink that line of attack.


Originally Posted by Eric F
You are so rigidly attached to the vertical plane that it's blinding you from recognizing that frames are stressed - and bend - in other directions...
For the nth time, I never said frames do not deflect laterally -- in fact, I've said they do. However, that deflection is irrelevant to rider comfort -- and that's the point you are unable to comprehend.

Originally Posted by Eric F
Comfort is not only measured by our butt on the saddle, but also by our hands and feet.
Hands and feet that are not only not in contact with the frame, they are both isolated from the frame by greased bearings -- as previously explained. Do you install special audiophile-quality bearings in your bikes, to assure that they faithfully reproduce impacts and vibrations?

Originally Posted by Eric F
Yes, tires, wheels, and other components play a role.
And that role is entirely responsible for ride comfort, as has been repeatedly proven.

Originally Posted by Eric F
Some of them, a very significant role. However, if a bike frame were completely isolated by those components, as you have insisted, we could put our hand on our frame while riding and would never feel the vibrations of the road in the tubes.
Again, the rider does not touch the frame! Have you ever actually ridden a bicycle, or seen someone do so? Please stop with the ridiculous nonsense, as you are wasting everyone's time.

Last edited by TC1; 11-08-23 at 12:12 PM.
TC1 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 12:24 PM
  #84  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by Fentuz
what is people real life experience between Carbon and Ti?
Going back to the original question...

In my experience, the feel of a bike is going to be affected by a lot of factors, and making a definitive determination based on just frame material is not realistic. Geometry, tube size/shape, etc. will all play a part in the final result. Bigger factors to how is feels under your butt, hands, and feet will be the components. For a gravel bike, the biggest thing will be tires. For CF, the response of the frame can be manipulated in more ways than metals, just because the nature of the material permits it. CF might provide a ride feel you prefer over Ti...or it might not. Will CF and Ti feel different? Probably. Better? That's subjective to each person's preferences. Don't discount aesthetics as a valid factor. Being exited about the appearance of your bike is totally okay! If you like the look of skinny round Ti tubes, rather than the manipulated shapes of modern CF, that's just fine.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 12:35 PM
  #85  
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,190
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2340 Post(s)
Liked 2,762 Times in 1,579 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
I would suggest that comparing the differences between frames made of different brands of steel, of the same diameter, and same geometry, is much like comparing brands of electric guitar strings, and claiming one can hear the difference between brands. However, stating that it is impossible to hear the difference between round-wound and flat-wound strings because they were measured to vibrate at the exact same speed is applying "science" without an understanding of the bigger picture.

I would agree that there are some factors about our bicycles that we may talk ourselves into believing, but someone insisting that all bikes must ride with the same feel/comfort, regardless of material, based on the results of a deflection test in one direction, is unknowledgeable about the stresses on a bicycle frame during use. Vertical compliance is only one factor in a system composed of many factors.
If you're looking for a more appropriate analogy, there are people on musician forums arguing about the merits of two specific bass amplifiers---one an older, class A/B amp (praised for its "heft," "slam," and "grunt") with big transformers, and the other class D, lacking those (unquantifiable, of course) characteristics.

The argument continues, even after it was pointed out that the person was arguing with the guy who designed both amps and who had provided test data disproving the claims. (I posted as follows: ' "Heft," slam," and "grunt": God's gifts to people who don't trust numbers.' Got a like from the amp guy, gratifyingly.)

What are your thoughts about the substance of my post---specifically, about the Bicycle Guide reviewers being unable to distinguish among the steel tube sets and the Bicycling! magazine test riders uniformly preferring the Trek aluminum-frame bike to the otherwise identical steel version?
Trakhak is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 01:07 PM
  #86  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak
If you're looking for a more appropriate analogy, there are people on musician forums arguing about the merits of two specific bass amplifiers---one an older, class A/B amp (praised for its "heft," "slam," and "grunt") with big transformers, and the other class D, lacking those (unquantifiable, of course) characteristics.

The argument continues, even after it was pointed out that the person was arguing with the guy who designed both amps and who had provided test data disproving the claims. (I posted as follows: ' "Heft," slam," and "grunt": God's gifts to people who don't trust numbers.' Got a like from the amp guy, gratifyingly.)

What are your thoughts about the substance of my post---specifically, about the Bicycle Guide reviewers being unable to distinguish among the steel tube sets and the Bicycling! magazine test riders uniformly preferring the Trek aluminum-frame bike to the otherwise identical steel version?
As a bass player, familiar with bass amps, I'm aware of your reference. I've played old tube amps, hybrid amps, and digital amps. They all make loud noises. There is something in the subtle quality of the hybrid amp sound that made it my favorite, and the one I chose to play for years. Maybe the difference in tone only exists in my head, but it still matters to me. I'm also aware that in a blues/rock band context, zero people - including me - can hear the difference, any more than anyone can hear the difference between the maple or mahogany fretboard on the guitar player's favorite axe.

IMO, there are sometimes differences in things that people can detect, and sometimes only think they can detect. However, sometimes people develop a sensitivity/awareness to factors that other people aren't in tune with, and sometimes those people are told their awareness doesn't exist. I think the Bicycle Guide experiment was interesting, but I wouldn't extrapolate it into a concrete conclusion that no one is able to feel a difference between two bikes.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 01:23 PM
  #87  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2023
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked 47 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
As a bass player, familiar with bass amps, I'm aware of your reference. I've played old tube amps, hybrid amps, and digital amps. They all make loud noises. There is something in the subtle quality of the hybrid amp sound that made it my favorite, and the one I chose to play for years. Maybe the difference in tone only exists in my head, but it still matters to me. I'm also aware that in a blues/rock band context, zero people - including me - can hear the difference, any more than anyone can hear the difference between the maple or mahogany fretboard on the guitar player's favorite axe.

IMO, there are sometimes differences in things that people can detect, and sometimes only think they can detect. However, sometimes people develop a sensitivity/awareness to factors that other people aren't in tune with, and sometimes those people are told their awareness doesn't exist. I think the Bicycle Guide experiment was interesting, but I wouldn't extrapolate it into a concrete conclusion that no one is able to feel a difference between two bikes.
Experienced violinists can fairly reliably, in blind experiments, accurately guess the quality (approximated by price range) of violins. There are lots of different ways a violin can be good, bad, or mediocre; they're not identifying any clearly measurable aspect of the instrument or its maker and history. Acoustics can be very subtle.
One Wheel is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 01:29 PM
  #88  
I am potato.
 
base2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,018

Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times in 887 Posts
Originally Posted by TC1
What on Earth are you talking about? Again, no one and certainly not me, has ever suggested that lateral deflection does not occur. "Lateral" is different from "vertical". If you cannot understand that, please, to save everyone's time, desist from further comment here.
But you did. Here are your words:
Originally Posted by TC1
There is no difference in comfort between any rigid double-triangle bicycle frames. Anyone who claims that there is, is selling you snake-oil, or repeating the snake-oil pitches that they've heard.
Trakhak Changing the arena to the difference (if any) to one grade of purity or composition of one material to another is an example of special pleading. Your fallacy is: Composition/Division.
You like tortionally stiff frames. Good for you.
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.

Car dependency is a tax.
base2 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 01:32 PM
  #89  
ignominious poltroon
 
Polaris OBark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,858
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2161 Post(s)
Liked 3,277 Times in 1,712 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
I'm probably wrong.
The humility is refreshing, but I don't think you are wrong.

I can feel differences between my two steel road bike frames, and more pronounced differences still compared to my wife's titanium frame (which I built up to otherwise match one of my steel bikes -- same tires, components, etc, so it is a reasonable control).

I do understand that carbon can be taylored for any desired frame characteristics, but it is typical at least with the major brands to design these to be less forgiving/flexible.
Polaris OBark is offline  
Likes For Polaris OBark:
Old 11-08-23, 01:33 PM
  #90  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by One Wheel
Experienced violinists can fairly reliably, in blind experiments, accurately guess the quality (approximated by price range) of violins. There are lots of different ways a violin can be good, bad, or mediocre; they're not identifying any clearly measurable aspect of the instrument or its maker and history. Acoustics can be very subtle.
No doubt at all. Meanwhile, those without the experience to perceive the differences may insist that differences do not exist, and bring "science" to prove it.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 11-08-23, 01:39 PM
  #91  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by base2
But you did. Here are your words...
TC1 insists that only vertical compliance is responsible for comfort. This is the hill he is dying on. Repeatedly. TC1 has stated that lateral compliance is irrelevant to comfort. This is where TC1 and I vastly differ.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 01:56 PM
  #92  
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,190
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2340 Post(s)
Liked 2,762 Times in 1,579 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
As a bass player, familiar with bass amps, I'm aware of your reference. I've played old tube amps, hybrid amps, and digital amps. They all make loud noises. There is something in the subtle quality of the hybrid amp sound that made it my favorite, and the one I chose to play for years. Maybe the difference in tone only exists in my head, but it still matters to me. I'm also aware that in a blues/rock band context, zero people - including me - can hear the difference, any more than anyone can hear the difference between the maple or mahogany fretboard on the guitar player's favorite axe.

IMO, there are sometimes differences in things that people can detect, and sometimes only think they can detect. However, sometimes people develop a sensitivity/awareness to factors that other people aren't in tune with, and sometimes those people are told their awareness doesn't exist. I think the Bicycle Guide experiment was interesting, but I wouldn't extrapolate it into a concrete conclusion that no one is able to feel a difference between two bikes.
To anyone who is annoyed by my dragging this thread even further into the weeds of irrelevance, I apologize. That said, I persist for this one post:

I absolutely agree that finding the right bass amp is crucial. Maybe especially in a blues/rock band. That's about as exposed as a bass player gets. If the dynamic and tonal response of the amp is right, then there it is: the effortless give-and-take with the other musicians that's the best part of playing in a band.

All any of us need to do is find what works for us. For me, it's aluminum bikes (currently, anyway). And a Peavey Headliner amp, believe it or not. (BobbyB, formerly a Peavey amp designer and a participant on the TalkBass forum some years ago, once remarked, in response to a post of mine extolling my Headliner amp in a thread there, that "The MiniMega was designed to provide sophisticated tone shaping for modern music. The Headliner was designed for unbridled volume.")

(P.S.---52Telecaster once posted a video of his blues band in a Foo thread. He's an intimidatingly formidable guitarist, and he has a killer bass player.)

Last edited by Trakhak; 11-08-23 at 02:00 PM.
Trakhak is offline  
Likes For Trakhak:
Old 11-08-23, 01:56 PM
  #93  
TC1
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Location: Illinois
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 275 Post(s)
Liked 115 Times in 74 Posts
Originally Posted by base2
But you did. Here are your words:
"There is no difference in comfort between any rigid double-triangle bicycle frames. Anyone who claims that there is, is selling you snake-oil, or repeating the snake-oil pitches that they've heard."
And that precisely and pointedly does not say that lateral deflection does not exist. Your reading comprehension, or honesty -- maybe both -- needs quite a lot of work.
TC1 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 02:14 PM
  #94  
TC1
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Location: Illinois
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 275 Post(s)
Liked 115 Times in 74 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
No doubt at all. Meanwhile, those without the experience to perceive the differences may insist that differences do not exist, and bring "science" to prove it.
So why are those who should have that experience also unable to perceive any differences, when tested? Evidence for which has been previously cited in this thread.

Let me guess -- because you are such an incredibly gifted, experienced, and sensitive cyclist that you can perceive that which no one else can, because you are just so darn great. This particular psychology, in case you were wondering, is called "delusions of grandeur", and it, too, is quite common. In reality, however, "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake" -- sorry to break it to you.

Last edited by TC1; 11-08-23 at 02:15 PM. Reason: correct typo
TC1 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 02:21 PM
  #95  
TC1
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Location: Illinois
Posts: 372
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 275 Post(s)
Liked 115 Times in 74 Posts
Originally Posted by One Wheel
Experienced violinists can fairly reliably, in blind experiments, accurately guess the quality (approximated by price range) of violins.
Originally Posted by https://www.npr.org/sections/deceptivecadence/2012/01/02/144482863/double-blind-violin-test-can-you-pick-the-strad
Joseph Curtin, a violin-maker from Michigan, was one of the researchers. "There was no evidence that people had any idea what they were playing," he says. "That really surprised me."
I have to add some characters here, to make this comment long enough to be accepted. Suffice it to say, interested parties will want to read that article, and potentially stop blathering nonsense.

Last edited by TC1; 11-08-23 at 02:28 PM.
TC1 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 02:25 PM
  #96  
Expired Member
 
shelbyfv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,423
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3626 Post(s)
Liked 5,286 Times in 2,685 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
Keep trying. Itís hilarious.
Judging by past threads there is much more to come before the lock.

Originally Posted by botty kayer
Do you even own a bike?
Seems unlikely.
shelbyfv is offline  
Likes For shelbyfv:
Old 11-08-23, 02:49 PM
  #97  
I am potato.
 
base2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,018

Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1724 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times in 887 Posts
Originally Posted by TC1
And that precisely and pointedly does not say that lateral deflection does not exist. Your reading comprehension, or honesty -- maybe both -- needs quite a lot of work.
But you continued in your post the following:
Originally Posted by TC1
All of the other meaningful components on your bicycle will flex before the frame will, in the vertical plane. There is no subjectivity to the question, either, it is a simple matter of physical properties -- a double-triangle frame will not deflect vertically before:
What else is a reasonable person to understand what you mean?

You've tied yourself to this whole vertical compliance thing (which nobody denies, BTW) AND rejected any other potential explaination until the same source you claimed (Cycling About) offered the exact same information. Personal incredulity.

This would be sad if it wasn't so entertaining.
__________________
I shouldn't have to "make myself more visible;" Drivers should just stop running people over.

Car dependency is a tax.
base2 is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 02:59 PM
  #98  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by TC1
So why are those who should have that experience also unable to perceive any differences, when tested? Evidence for which has been previously cited in this thread.

Let me guess -- because you are such an incredibly gifted, experienced, and sensitive cyclist that you can perceive that which no one else can, because you are just so darn great. This particular psychology, in case you were wondering, is called "delusions of grandeur", and it, too, is quite common. In reality, however, "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake" -- sorry to break it to you.
Humans aren't all wired the same. My wife has a good bit more sensitive palate than mine when it comes to identifying flavors in wine, despite me having put more effort into attempting to educate myself in that area.

You're not very good at guessing. I have never claimed to have any sensitivities about bicycles that aren't also shared with other people on this site, and other people I ride with. Some folks have shared their similar experiences in this thread. I'm nothing special at all.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 11-08-23, 03:10 PM
  #99  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,557

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 7,579 Times in 3,586 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak
To anyone who is annoyed by my dragging this thread even further into the weeds of irrelevance, I apologize. That said, I persist for this one post:

I absolutely agree that finding the right bass amp is crucial. Maybe especially in a blues/rock band. That's about as exposed as a bass player gets. If the dynamic and tonal response of the amp is right, then there it is: the effortless give-and-take with the other musicians that's the best part of playing in a band.

All any of us need to do is find what works for us. For me, it's aluminum bikes (currently, anyway). And a Peavey Headliner amp, believe it or not. (BobbyB, formerly a Peavey amp designer and a participant on the TalkBass forum some years ago, once remarked, in response to a post of mine extolling my Headliner amp in a thread there, that "The MiniMega was designed to provide sophisticated tone shaping for modern music. The Headliner was designed for unbridled volume.")

(P.S.---52Telecaster once posted a video of his blues band in a Foo thread. He's an intimidatingly formidable guitarist, and he has a killer bass player.)
You're a TB guy?? Somehow, I'm not surprised - LOL I spent a lot of years posting there (same user name), but haven't stopped by in a long time. Personally, my weapon of mass destruction is an Aguilar DB750, which replaced a '90s SVT. I've gotten better "SVT" tone from the Aggie and a SansAmp. I remember 52Tele from my earlier days on the FDP forum.

EDIT: IMO, sensitivity for differences in bike frames (or any other part of the system) is right along there with musical instruments. While technique, strings, amp, and a number of other things might make a bigger difference in tone, the subtle difference in tone between new Fralin pups and vintage Fender pups can be heard. This is another example of when someone might not be able to pick one or the other accurately in a blind test, but when compared side-by-side, the difference becomes noticeable for someone with the experience/ability to hear it. I can hear the differences between these 3 guitars, but I can't say that I can accurately ID them in a blind test...
That said, there very well might be people who can, and it wouldn't surprise me a bit.

EDIT 2: For the video above, someone could do a scientific study, and produce data indicating that all 3 guitars played the same notes, for the same durations, at the same tempo, and come to a conclusion that there is no difference between them. That conclusion might even be cited as "scientific evidence" that they are identical. In the real world, they are not identical. Science is blind, but don't be blinded by it.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions

Last edited by Eric F; 11-08-23 at 03:36 PM.
Eric F is offline  
Likes For Eric F:
Old 11-08-23, 03:13 PM
  #100  
Senior Member
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,722

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4689 Post(s)
Liked 3,772 Times in 2,453 Posts
[QUOTE=Trakhak;23065524...

(P.S.---52Telecaster once posted a video of his blues band in a Foo thread. He's an intimidatingly formidable guitarist, and he has a killer bass player.)[/QUOTE]

Wish I'd had known this before I rode with Gugie, 52Telecaster, Andy K and others a couple of summers ago. I'd have brought my harp!

(I have 3 amps, a sweet 12W, 12" custom tube that sounds wonderful in the living room but isn't up to the guitar amps. (Feedback.) A Roland solid state Blues Cube. Lighter, a lot more powerful, decent sound but still feedback challenged. And a Victoria. Last tube amp at a closeout sale. 1960s rock reverb. Heavy! But 3 10"s and 40W. Feedback free! Fully up to the guitars. And wonderful sound, if not quite classic blues. The piece that glues it all together is the Astatic mic that fits so well in my hand and that I have played through for more than 3 decades. I think it is part of the feedback challenge but when things are right - )
79pmooney is offline  
Likes For 79pmooney:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.