Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Advantages of Different Seatstay Designs on CF Road Race Bikes?

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Advantages of Different Seatstay Designs on CF Road Race Bikes?

Old 04-16-24, 06:40 PM
  #1  
OM boy
Thread Starter
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,428

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 545 Post(s)
Liked 685 Times in 460 Posts
Advantages of Different Seatstay Designs on CF Road Race Bikes?

Hi All !
I'm in the evaluation of buying or building a 'new/modern' bike (meaning adding/moving to a Disc Brake, possibly E-shift roadie, carbon). My Most Modern roadie is a 2015 Spec Tarmac w/rim brakes and mech/cable braking.
SO I'm doing my usual, over-analyzing everything. In particular the frame designs available. Seems 'Aero' is still a major thing (understandably). But extreme aero for mass start road racing is being modified. Spec 'Venge' is already passé' but 'less weight' is still the Golden Fleece.
so the two things which seems to vary significantly in frame design are toptube shape & SLOPE; and Seat Stay config.
I can see that most designs have gone away from sharp TT slope (prolly an aero consideration).
But I do see quite some variety in Seatstay design and attachment. Old standard Long Seat Stays attached at the toptube/seatpost cluster, variation of that with a 'wishbone' stay which varies from at the TT attachment point or varying points lower on the Seattube, and then what was dominant a season or 2 back - dropped stays attached directly to the seattube some significant distance below the TT. Here's a pic from Cycling Weekly (their copyright), showing a variety of these designs.

World Tour Bikes - Image copyright Cycling Weekly

So, anyone have knowledge or opinion on the advantages/disadvantages of any of these possible variations - Why?
CF construction appears very flexible, so likely any of these have no real construction issues...
Your own preferences ? Why?
again the consideration is 'road' group riding, not TT, not gravel, not bikepackingg/touring...
love to hear what you all think.
Ride On
Yuri

Last edited by cyclezen; 04-16-24 at 06:43 PM.
cyclezen is offline  
Old 04-16-24, 08:27 PM
  #2  
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,496

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3202 Post(s)
Liked 1,741 Times in 1,051 Posts
I tend to think that because so much can be done with fiber type, fiber orientation, and construction method, its effectively impossible to deduce anything about ride comfort by looking at the seatstay design. Given that, it’s probably more effective to listen to what the manufacturers have to say about their frame design.
chaadster is offline  
Likes For chaadster:
Old 04-16-24, 09:07 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Sierra_rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: NorCal
Posts: 583

Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur 4 TR, Canyon Endurace cf sl, Canyon Ultimate cf slx, Canyon Strive enduro, Canyon Grizl sl8

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked 1,032 Times in 399 Posts
I think the most commonly cited reason for dropped seatstays, at least by the manufacturers, is that it allows more flex/compliant ride qualities. I don't necessarily buy that reason, as any flex in a triangle(either the rear or front) seems to be more related to tube shapes and carbon layups, rather than the length of the sides...but I'm not an engineer, so I could be wrong. Also with the prevalence of disc brakes, they don't have to have the chain stays in traditional spot.

Me personally, my main road bikes(Canyon Endurace and Ultimate) have more of a sub-compact geometry(slightly sloped top tube) and don't have much in the way of aero concessions. The seat stays meet the top tube just in front of the seat tube, so not really dropped stay IMO. I don't really like the look of dropped stays anyway, so either bike looks "modern," but also has enough of a traditional "bike look" for me. The Endurace is a somewhat racy endurance frame and the Ultimate is a race bike/climbing bike. The frames look very similar to each other, but the Endurace has a smoother ride, which I attribute to a different carbon lay up and a springy seat post. The Ultimate isn't as smooth, but does an amazing job of transferring power to the wheel...it just feels fast/efficient when pedaling. It's just an example of how a very similar frame design can be altered with different carbon lay ups to have much different ride qualities.
Sierra_rider is offline  
Likes For Sierra_rider:
Old 04-16-24, 09:38 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,298
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4549 Post(s)
Liked 1,694 Times in 1,112 Posts
Everyone went to those low, boxy type of stays like the Merida or S-Works because of aerodynamics. The shape is good for air flow around the seat tube, and they are the lowest height that is UCI legal (otherwise CF aero bikes would have no seat stays).

The other shapes are largely designed to look comfortable or cool. But it is true that if you want the chainstays to flex but not be paper thin, small diameters work best.
Kontact is offline  
Likes For Kontact:
Old 04-17-24, 05:23 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,698
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4532 Post(s)
Liked 5,034 Times in 3,111 Posts
Most aero focused bikes will have dropped seatstays. As for ride comfort I don’t think it is important. I have 2 endurance road bikes and 1 has dropped stays (Giant Defy) and the other has full length stays (Canyon Endurace). Both have very similar feel. Seatpost flex and tyres appear to be the dominant factors for ride quality. I don’t think the seatstays do very much on modem carbon frames and are certainly not a consideration unless you have a strong aesthetic preference. Most people prefer the look of full length stays, but I don’t care either way.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 05:56 AM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
eduskator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Québec, Canada
Posts: 2,147

Bikes: SL8 Pro, TCR beater

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1014 Post(s)
Liked 592 Times in 445 Posts
Is Trek going to try to make their awful writing even bigger? That's the question I have.
eduskator is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 05:57 AM
  #7  
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,496

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3202 Post(s)
Liked 1,741 Times in 1,051 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
Everyone went to those low, boxy type of stays like the Merida or S-Works because of aerodynamics. The shape is good for air flow around the seat tube, and they are the lowest height that is UCI legal (otherwise CF aero bikes would have no seat stays).

The other shapes are largely designed to look comfortable or cool. But it is true that if you want the chainstays to flex but not be paper thin, small diameters work best.
Yeah, I understood dropped seatstays to be an aero thing.

In your second paragraph, I don’t know if you meant to change to chainstays, but you’re absolutely on point that it’s the chainstays which provide bump compliance. Seatstays are largely a vestige of a bygone era, and not necessary elements with modern materials. Back in the ‘80s, Trimble was making seatstay-less frames, and Trek’s Y-Foil in the ‘90s was very successful seatstsy-less design. Cervelo’s P5X from around ‘16 is a more recent example.

Those are carbon fiber, but looking at English Cycles steel designs with their literally pencil-thin seatstays, on frames meant for crit racing, not comfort— and you have to wonder if the seatstays don’t inhibit bump compliance rather than provide it.
chaadster is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 06:14 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Troul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,513

Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 3,077 Times in 1,964 Posts
Dropped imo from riding a few allows the frame to flex, whereas the uniformed frame increases the rigidity... a dropped design might be better for non composite frames, & the other likely wouldn't induce a noticeable harsher ride when used with a composite material.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
Troul is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 06:38 AM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,298
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4549 Post(s)
Liked 1,694 Times in 1,112 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster
Yeah, I understood dropped seatstays to be an aero thing.

In your second paragraph, I don’t know if you meant to change to chainstays, but you’re absolutely on point that it’s the chainstays which provide bump compliance. Seatstays are largely a vestige of a bygone era, and not necessary elements with modern materials. Back in the ‘80s, Trimble was making seatstay-less frames, and Trek’s Y-Foil in the ‘90s was very successful seatstsy-less design. Cervelo’s P5X from around ‘16 is a more recent example.

Those are carbon fiber, but looking at English Cycles steel designs with their literally pencil-thin seatstays, on frames meant for crit racing, not comfort— and you have to wonder if the seatstays don’t inhibit bump compliance rather than provide it.
Yes, I meant seat stays. And if seat stays are UCI necessity, making them long and narrow is going to allow them to flex better than any other configuration except for something pre-bowed.

But seat stays also prevent the wheel from twisting around the axis of the chainstays.
Kontact is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 06:55 AM
  #10  
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,496

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3202 Post(s)
Liked 1,741 Times in 1,051 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
Yes, I meant seat stays. And if seat stays are UCI necessity, making them long and narrow is going to allow them to flex better than any other configuration except for something pre-bowed.

But seat stays also prevent the wheel from twisting around the axis of the chainstays.
Right, and that all really depends on what the chainstays are going to do. Adding stays (of any kind) to a Giant MCR (from’97, btw), for example, won’t do anything other than add weight.

We talk about seatstays and compliance, but we really should be talking about chainstays and compliance if not frame design and compliance.

In terms of feel at the saddle— distinct from compliance, which I think of physical displacement of the frame, or flex— seatstays do seem like a main conduit for shock waves from bumps to reach the rider, so maybe we could talk about shock attenuation from seatstay design rather than [bump, or vertical] compliance.

chaadster is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 07:24 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,298
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4549 Post(s)
Liked 1,694 Times in 1,112 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster
Right, and that all really depends on what the chainstays are going to do. Adding stays (of any kind) to a Giant MCR (from’97, btw), for example, won’t do anything other than add weight.

We talk about seatstays and compliance, but we really should be talking about chainstays and compliance if not frame design and compliance.

In terms of feel at the saddle— distinct from compliance, which I think of physical displacement of the frame, or flex— seatstays do seem like a main conduit for shock waves from bumps to reach the rider, so maybe we could talk about shock attenuation from seatstay design rather than [bump, or vertical] compliance.

The point I was making was that a bike designed to use both seat and chain stays is using those chainstays to prevent the wheel from twisting, not just increasing vertical stiffness.

A seat stay-less design does both with that massive chainstay, but may not flex vertically much at all due to the rigidity needed to stop twisting.
Kontact is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 08:21 AM
  #12  
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 15,204

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6315 Post(s)
Liked 4,905 Times in 3,380 Posts
You can't just focus on that one thing without taking all the rest into consideration.

What that accomplishes for one bike model might be handled differently to achieve almost the same thing by another bike model design. And it might be in things you can't tell from the external appearance. Different internal dimensions, different materials or different fabric and layup or any other possibilities.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 09:44 AM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,044

Bikes: addict, aethos, creo, vanmoof, sirrus, public ...

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1284 Post(s)
Liked 1,405 Times in 714 Posts
these days, i’m pretty sure you can use the properties of the carbon layup to create almost whatever amount of compliance, flex, stiffness you want with dropped or traditional seat stays. so while optimizing aero properties undoubtedly affects stiffness (the elongated / boxy shapes that are aero are also stiffer in one axis than another, etc) a good design process can optimize both - or choose not to.

i have two carbon road bikes at the moment, and the one with traditional/undropped seat stays (s works aethos) is a much smoother, lighter ride than the one with dropped stays. sloping top tube also helps, i’m sure, but again, could almost certainly be cancelled out by the carbon design.

my preference, based entirely on aesthetics and my personal experience, is for a slightly sloping top tube, undropped stays, and slightly tapered slightly elliptical tubes. not the most aero thing, but light and beautiful. like the cervelo at bottom right of your roundup.
mschwett is offline  
Old 04-17-24, 07:08 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,729

Bikes: Too many bikes, too little time to ride

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 445 Post(s)
Liked 480 Times in 333 Posts
Whether dropped seat stays provide more compliance has been debated. One source I do not recall argued that dropped stays = smaller rear triangle, which in turn gives a stiffer ride, and that compliance instead generally comes from a frame having a lot of exposed seat post. The latter point I tend to agree with in my experience - frames with an integrated seatpost/seat mast (popular in the early 2010s) were really stiff feeling.
tFUnK is online now  
Old 04-18-24, 06:53 AM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 929

Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 599 Post(s)
Liked 847 Times in 431 Posts
Limited data set here - but my CF cyclocross frame, Giant TXC, has dropped stays and a "flexy" seat post and it's the harshest bike I've ever ridden. Even when it has my cross/gravel tires installed and running lower pressures.
Jughed is offline  
Old 04-18-24, 10:21 AM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked 1,065 Times in 448 Posts
I have both dropped and high seat stay road bikes. On fast downhill road descents, my drop seat stay bike with more exposed seat post definitely dampens road chatter. My high seat stay bike with less exposed seat post tends to be more bumpier. In terms of visuals, I prefer high seat stays. It just looks better to my eye. Plus I feel that stiffness allows me to put down slightly more power on the pedals. My gravel bike has a wishbone style, high seat stay setup with 38c tires and comfort on that is just fine. Wider tires can even out the comfort level level between the two designs.

If I were to buy another road frame, I would probably get something that looks like a Cervelo R5.
jonathanf2 is offline  
Old 04-18-24, 10:35 AM
  #17  
Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked 197 Times in 116 Posts
BITD, Litespeed marketed their characteristic radial seat stays as being compliant for all-day comfort etc etc. Pure marketing BS, IMO - the stays on my ~24-year-old frame are beasts - I can't imagine them flexing worth a damn under any circumstances, although they do look pretty. In addition, when I see some of the comparatively wispy yet adequate seat stays on any number of modern CF frames, it's clear that the thicker stays on older frames were, in many cases, overkill, adding unnecessary weight and likely stiffness. Frame design has certainly evolved since then.



Many years ago, I had the opportunity to spend a few summers riding one of these - talk about curly stays! I honestly don't recall if it was any more comfortable as any other bike I rode.


Last edited by 13ollocks; 04-18-24 at 10:41 AM.
13ollocks is offline  
Old 04-20-24, 02:36 PM
  #18  
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,496

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3202 Post(s)
Liked 1,741 Times in 1,051 Posts
Originally Posted by jonathanf2
I have both dropped and high seat stay road bikes. On fast downhill road descents, my drop seat stay bike with more exposed seat post definitely dampens road chatter. My high seat stay bike with less exposed seat post tends to be more bumpier.
the only problem is that seat stay attachment points (i.e. high or low) don’t have any relationship to amount of exposed seat post, though.
chaadster is offline  
Old 04-20-24, 04:44 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,698
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4532 Post(s)
Liked 5,034 Times in 3,111 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster
the only problem is that seat stay attachment points (i.e. high or low) don’t have any relationship to amount of exposed seat post, though.
Yeah, it’s the top tube slope that matters for seat tube exposure.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 04-21-24, 03:04 AM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,729

Bikes: Too many bikes, too little time to ride

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 445 Post(s)
Liked 480 Times in 333 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster
the only problem is that seat stay attachment points (i.e. high or low) don’t have any relationship to amount of exposed seat post, though.
It could be coincidental that the dropped stay frame just happens to also have more exposed seat post.
tFUnK is online now  
Old 04-21-24, 07:55 AM
  #21  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,698
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4532 Post(s)
Liked 5,034 Times in 3,111 Posts
Originally Posted by tFUnK
It could be coincidental that the dropped stay frame just happens to also have more exposed seat post.
It’s actually more likely that the dropped stay frame will have a longer seat tube. Look at the photos in the first post. Most of the modern bikes with full length stays have a steep sloping TT and short ST.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 04-21-24, 08:15 AM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,298
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4549 Post(s)
Liked 1,694 Times in 1,112 Posts
Originally Posted by 13ollocks
BITD, Litespeed marketed their characteristic radial seat stays as being compliant for all-day comfort etc etc. Pure marketing BS, IMO - the stays on my ~24-year-old frame are beasts - I can't imagine them flexing worth a damn under any circumstances, although they do look pretty. In addition, when I see some of the comparatively wispy yet adequate seat stays on any number of modern CF frames, it's clear that the thicker stays on older frames were, in many cases, overkill, adding unnecessary weight and likely stiffness. Frame design has certainly evolved since then.



Many years ago, I had the opportunity to spend a few summers riding one of these - talk about curly stays! I honestly don't recall if it was any more comfortable as any other bike I rode.

This is kind of weird engineering problem. On the one hand, if you want something to flex more easily, building a curve into it should encourage it to flex with that curve. On the other hand, titanium gets stiffer as you cold work it, and Serotta discovered in the '80s that their S curve chainstays were stiffer than straight ones.

OTOH, Dave Kirk's curved stay frames are assembled under bending tension - like a preloaded suspension spring.
Kontact is offline  
Old 04-21-24, 07:39 PM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
Kimmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,549

Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1530 Post(s)
Liked 724 Times in 515 Posts
Weight is overrated according to the science, but this overlooks the placebo angle and the fact light bikes are more fun; on the other hand frame weight is probably not such a big deal because you can have a heavier bike that feels light if the weight is concentrated lower down and behind the head tube.

Aero totally matters, and due to the exponential nature of drag, it's worth chasing marginal gains if you like to go fast.

Compliance also matters, not just because a softer bike is more pleasant, but because you're slower if you have to put more energy into dealing with bumps, and because bigger hits translate some of your horizontal motion into vertical. Mitigation of the latter is a lower-order effect unless you're riding something seriously compliant like a beam bike, though. The importance of compliance scales with the typical distance you ride, bearing in mind that you're probably prepared to ride a plusher bike further. Also remember that you can stuff a lot of tyre in modern bikes, and that makes more difference than almost anything you change with the frame, short of doubling the amount of exposed seatpost or putting a suspension beam under the seat.

All else being equal, you pay for aero with weight and more stiffness. The simplest and lightest way to get compliance is to have a long round seatpost, which can make as much difference as a few extra mm of tyre. The most aero setup has become a boring cookie-cutter consensus - level top tube, dropped stays, aero seatpost, fork crown faired in to downtube; all this jazz started off with a pretty hefty weight penalty, but I gather they've figured out how to make it a bit lighter by now.

It tends to be fairly stiff due to the level top tube and shorter aero seatpost, although there's potential to compensate for that with careful layup - the frame can be engineered to allow the seatpost to flex backwards as the seat tube bows a little with the seatstays pushing on it... but to allow a meaningful amount of flex without compromising durability that's a significant amount of engineering, so I would expect most bikes which look like this to be pretty stiff, with the situation gradually improving over the coming years.

Oh yeah, forgot to mention that they've come up with a truncated airfoil section with a flat back which is nearly as aero, and allows for lighter and more compliant construction, so look for that.

Last edited by Kimmo; 04-21-24 at 08:05 PM.
Kimmo is offline  
Old 04-21-24, 07:58 PM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
Kimmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 9,549

Bikes: https://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=152015&p=1404231

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1530 Post(s)
Liked 724 Times in 515 Posts
Originally Posted by Jughed
Limited data set here - but my CF cyclocross frame, Giant TXC, has dropped stays and a "flexy" seat post and it's the harshest bike I've ever ridden. Even when it has my cross/gravel tires installed and running lower pressures.
The TCX has a round post, doesn't it? If so, replace it with the lightest one you can find. Some carbon posts are way overbuilt.
Kimmo is offline  
Old 04-22-24, 03:37 AM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 929

Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 599 Post(s)
Liked 847 Times in 431 Posts
Originally Posted by Kimmo
The TCX has a round post, doesn't it? If so, replace it with the lightest one you can find. Some carbon posts are way overbuilt.
No, it has a shaped post that is designed for flex.
Jughed is offline  

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.