Gah, when will I learn not to buy the cheap inner tubes? Sure, they're cheaper, but when they split along the seam it a:is an unpleasant surprise because there's no obvious road debris/bumps/etc that caused it, and b:next to impossible to patch, because the molding along the seam stops the patch sticking down properly.
Today's flat was about 15 minutes in; the first patch I put on literally blew off again when I did a quick test inflate; the second one held while I put things back together, then for five more minutes, and then leaked, so I had rather more of a walk back home than I was expecting. On the other hand, it was a very nice day for a walk, so not all bad.
Gah, when will I learn not to buy the cheap inner tubes? Sure, they're cheaper, but when they split along the seam it a:is an unpleasant surprise because there's no obvious road debris/bumps/etc that caused it, and b:next to impossible to patch, because the molding along the seam stops the patch sticking down properly.
Today's flat was about 15 minutes in; the first patch I put on literally blew off again when I did a quick test inflate; the second one held while I put things back together, then for five more minutes, and then leaked, so I had rather more of a walk back home than I was expecting. On the other hand, it was a very nice day for a walk, so not all bad.
Yeah, I always carry tubes and change out on the road then repair at leisure in front of the TV once I've got a several of punctured tubes to deal with (cos an open tube of 'glue' doesn't keep so may as well do a bunch in one hit).
I take a puncture kit as well in case I have a bad day and puncture all my tubes but that's a last resort.
Normally I'd just switch to a spare tube, yup, but this was the last of the spare tubes, which I'd put in after the previous flat, and I haven't got around to buying new ones so I'm stuck repairing it rather than replacing it. Usually I'm fine with bigger tubes where the patch can get stuck down properly, but skinnier tubes are a pain.
Apparently latex tubes are the way to go, I've been told. They are like 3x as expensive, but apparently "never" puncture. They just always slowly leak...
Latex tubes absolutely puncture; depending on the type of flats you usually get you'll either see no improvement in flat rates or a significant one. They're tougher than butyl rubber (more stretch before bond failure) so can cut down on pinch flats but that doesn't help as much with penetration from debris. Since they're much harder to install and degrade a lot faster you'll tend to see more installation (i.e., sidewall pinch) and age failures.
Good to know. I usually run Gatorskins for puncture protection, so I haven't really felt compelled to go away from regular tubes. Plus they are easy to get and keep a bunch of spares around.
Gatorskins are probably my second-favorite tire. They're hard to beat for tread puncture resistance. I usually run Rubino Pro III's, which aren't quite as tough but survive and roll better than the gold standard Conti GP 4's at around half to two-thirds the cost. They're a good middle ground. (More importantly, they come with colored shoulder options. I'm a nerd for enjoying tires that match my frame paint, I know. I love them and I don't care.)
(I'm stuck at home with a bad cold on the nicest-weather weekend in months. I may be going mad.)
Well, I replaced my cheap inner tubes with new ones, and while I was at it my worn-out tires with new ones as well (700x28 gatorskins, coincidentally), and a mr.tuffy on the rear wheel, because I have had enough of getting punctures there for a bit. Put everything together and went for a ride:
There's a waterway that runs out of town and off into the country; it has some sort of history and there's signs about it along the way, but I forget the details.
After a while it heads out of the light industrial area it starts in and gets off into the countryside.
Turnaround point is a little lakeside town off in the country.
Coming back I went past The Giant Pencil:
Finally, downtown off in the distance under a railroad bridge on the way back:
total was 72km, three hours ride time, so not particularly fast, but it was too nice a day to hurry things.
Did this on Saturday. Ended up scooting around with a couple friends instead of going HAM. Even so we kept a decent average speed of 14mph. That was fun! I should do more.
Did Whistler this weekend. KM 70 wasn't nearly as daunting as it looked on the profile I posted. Finished just short of 6 hours, which was about what I was planning.
Gatorskins are probably my second-favorite tire. They're hard to beat for tread puncture resistance. I usually run Rubino Pro III's, which aren't quite as tough but survive and roll better than the gold standard Conti GP 4's at around half to two-thirds the cost. They're a good middle ground. (More importantly, they come with colored shoulder options. I'm a nerd for enjoying tires that match my frame paint, I know. I love them and I don't care.)
(I'm stuck at home with a bad cold on the nicest-weather weekend in months. I may be going mad.)
That's actually good to know, about the color choices. I always see people riding around color-matched and get envious. I might have to look at those...
I need to find some wheels that also do color matching. Preferably in a disc-able CX width.
There are definitely a lot of that style, some manufacturers more than others. Beyond a very slight slope it's largely an aesthetic and economics choice. There are some advantages and disadvantages.
Well I've just spent half again what my bike cost on bits for a new wheel. And then I need to build the wheel but that should only take a couple hours in front of the TV.
I haven't bought a bike in 8 or 9 years. bikes with a very sloped top tube seem to be the thing right now? Is that right?
Seems to be more of a thing on the women's frames, I'm still not sure why - who is riding around in a pencil skirt? Or maybe they think our pants are tighter? But yeah, I'm seeing it on both mens and women's. Mind you the Allez (which is the unisex version of this one^^) definitely has a straighter top. I'm not really fussed, though I think I prefer the aesthetics of the allez.
Smaller (read: many women's) frames benefit more from the stand-over height improvement that a compact frame gives: as you shrink the frame for the rider you can't really drop the bottom bracket by more than a few millimeters, so the relative height of the top tube relative to the rider's height becomes more of a hassle/danger.
(Imagine a small 44 cm frame for a rider with a ~71 cm inseam: the BB is still going to be ~27 cm off the ground regardless of how small you make the frame, so while the distance from the BB to the rear of the top tube shrinks as the rider measurements do, the total B+S shrinks slower than the rider! A compact frame with a steeply-sloping top tube might allow you to get down to 68 cm or less stand-over height.)
It's also good for manufacturers because they can make small frames in slightly larger size increments (say, 3 cm instead of the traditional 2 cm) without running into clearance issues. Fewer frame sizes == less stock to make and carry.
So we get stiff once in a while. So we have a little fun. What’s wrong with that? This is a free country, isn’t it? I can take my panda any place I want to. And if I wanna buy it a drink, that’s my business.
0
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
edited November 2016
It means it's impossible to raise the stem any higher up, because they set it at the lowest possible position and cut off the rest of the steerer tube.
EDIT: It also needs a star-fangled nut installed to adjust the top headset bearings, as it is now they will not be set right.
Eh, If I was spending that kind of scratch on a bike I'd want the factory warranty and a bike that didn't have the stem cut down. Also I was shocked to learn that Cervelo bothers slumming it with 105 groupset (I even checked their website to verify this was actually a factory option!).
Yeah, it basically means: consider that the fork might be trash for your purposes. Disclaimer: I don't know that fork, but I know a lot of other CF forks. It could be okay if:
1. It was cut correctly. The end-view shot looks maybe okay, length-wise, though it's hard to tell and the end finish is a little gnarly. I'd double-check with Cervelo on minimum heights once you get it in your hands, though. I can't tell if there's a spacer between the bearing cover and stem, but I don't even know if that's required on this frame+fork combo.
2. That fully-slammed position lets you get enough rise for your riding position.
and
3. The stem wasn't torqued down without the compression plug supporting the end. This is the one that would make me real nervous because if they did you could have a cracked steerer (and early CF cracks are usually invisible to the eye). Cracked steerer == face- or brain-ending crash at some point. If they were testing the bike without a rider (no load) they could've gotten away with a hand-tight stem. If they torqued it down for any reason, though, who knows. Maybe it's fine. Maybe it's not. There's no damned reason they shouldn't have put the plug and cap in during testing.
(Also, that ad says "star nut", but for anyone else listening: for the love of god don't use a star nut in a CF steerer. They pierce the surface and lead to eventual steerer failures. Compression plugs only! They're only like $10! Your face will thank you!)
So we get stiff once in a while. So we have a little fun. What’s wrong with that? This is a free country, isn’t it? I can take my panda any place I want to. And if I wanna buy it a drink, that’s my business.
Thoughts? I have no idea what he means about the fork, stack, and star nut, but I really really really want a P2. XD
Do you do Triathlons? If not, you may want to stay away, as that's designed as a competitive Tri bike, which means the riding position is a little different from standard bikes (likely less comfortable).
Also @honovere - Compact frames are a thing now because you don't really lose any stiffness or geometry options while gaining standover height. This is especially important for women's frames, as they don't want someone at the low end of the fit range to not be able to stand over the bike.
+1
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
So do I take a chance and offer him like $1,500 for it or do I just go out and buy a brand new one for $2,400?
Unless you are specifically looking for a triathlon bike I wouldn't do either of those things. If you ARE looking for a triathlon bike then yeah, keep looking.
I am looking for a triathlon bike, and after talking to my friend who does Ironman, he suggested I skip buying a carbon bike sight unseen and just get a new one due to carbons fragility.
Sooooo, I put a deposit on a bran new P2 at the closeout price of the 2014s.
So we get stiff once in a while. So we have a little fun. What’s wrong with that? This is a free country, isn’t it? I can take my panda any place I want to. And if I wanna buy it a drink, that’s my business.
I am looking for a triathlon bike, and after talking to my friend who does Ironman, he suggested I skip buying a carbon bike sight unseen and just get a new one due to carbons fragility.
Sooooo, I put a deposit on a bran new P2 at the closeout price of the 2014s.
Carbon is not that fragile. It's susceptible to certain types of things (punctures) that aren't repairable, but it's not fragile. Carbon is used for mountain bikes and hell, even mountain bike rims, which see the most abuse of basically any bicycle part short of mountain pedals.
0
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
edited November 2016
Back when I was studying to be an aircraft technician, carbon was still an exotic new material and much of the development of the last 15 years hadn't happened. High velocity impacts were fine (like from a bullet), they would just make nice clean holes that could be plugged easily and wouldn't affect the strength of the skin, but low velocity impacts (like dropping your screwdriver on the wing while you were standing up there doing work) would result in a matrix of fine radiating cracks that would severely weaken the skin and were very difficult to repair correctly.
Back when I was studying to be an aircraft technician, carbon was still an exotic new material and much of the development of the last 15 years hadn't happened. High velocity impacts were fine (like from a bullet), they would just make nice clean holes that could be plugged easily and wouldn't affect the strength of the skin, but low velocity impacts (like dropping your screwdriver on the wing while you were standing up there doing work) would result in a matrix of fine radiating cracks that would severely weaken the skin and were very difficult to repair correctly.
I'm glad that shit's changed.
Well also Aircraft Carbon != Bike Carbon as they will use different layups and epoxies based on their use. Hell, they even have carbon downhill bikes now, which sees the most stress of almost anything.
Anecdotally - I have an old ski bud that's big into singlespeed racing. As such, he splits cranks and other things with ALARMING regularity (still the only person I've seen split a rear hub and a bottom bracket with leg torque).
He's broken 1 frame on the seat stays that was not built for singlespeed (he adapted it), other than that he mostly rides carbon without issue. If he isn't breaking shit, you probably won't be.
+1
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
edited November 2016
Well yeah, now that all the different types of carbon fibre and epoxies have been developed things are significantly different than they were back in the very early 2000s, and even Koeniggsegg have that carbon weave with the titanium wire filament woven through it to make it MUCH more durable in crash situations. Back then all that stuff was in experimental stages, the kind of stuff that Lockheed Martin was playing around with in their skunk works.
What I want to know is what would happen if they load-tested the carbon frame after it's been whacked into the concrete, though; all my bike frames have various nicks and scrapes on them from being leaned on stuff that's more abrasive than paint/steel, or dropped, or banged into by other things, or been locked up not as carefully as I might, or hitting a tree /the ground/ etc after I crashed,and I'm not concerned about the dings leaving unexpected gotchas for later on. I think carbon is pretty great as long as you're careful with it, but I don't want to have to worry about that myself.
Meanwhile, in other carbon-related news, Zipp have new wheels with more trademarked technologies than ever before:
SawTooth™
AeroBalance™
HyperFoik™ nodes
HexFin™ ABLC dimples
Showstopper™ brake track
ImPress™ NSW graphics technology
Cognition™ hubset
Axial Clutch™
They look pretty fancy, to be sure. (but come on, claiming that it's lighter weight because they put their giant logo on with some sort of impregnation rather than stickers? maybe they could just, I dunno, not put the logo on there? Nobody is going to confuse these rims with other ones..) That said, they have real spokes on there, and a roughly sensible number of spokes, which is always nice to see.
Most reputable companies have a pretty durable outer layer of epoxy/weave for just that reason. The nomad in the video is a mountain bike that gets thrown into rocks on a regular basis. If they broke that often, no company would use it for anything but xc race bikes, let alone consumer downhill bikes.
Posts
I would probably just disassemble myself if I came across an actual hill
Today's flat was about 15 minutes in; the first patch I put on literally blew off again when I did a quick test inflate; the second one held while I put things back together, then for five more minutes, and then leaked, so I had rather more of a walk back home than I was expecting. On the other hand, it was a very nice day for a walk, so not all bad.
I think mine is damaged from years of thinking the Ozarks are real mountains. They are not.
Saddle bag and spare tubes?
I take a puncture kit as well in case I have a bad day and puncture all my tubes but that's a last resort.
(I'm stuck at home with a bad cold on the nicest-weather weekend in months. I may be going mad.)
There's a waterway that runs out of town and off into the country; it has some sort of history and there's signs about it along the way, but I forget the details.
After a while it heads out of the light industrial area it starts in and gets off into the countryside.
Turnaround point is a little lakeside town off in the country.
Coming back I went past The Giant Pencil:
Finally, downtown off in the distance under a railroad bridge on the way back:
total was 72km, three hours ride time, so not particularly fast, but it was too nice a day to hurry things.
Next up, cookies: philsfondo.com/route-profiles-1
That's actually good to know, about the color choices. I always see people riding around color-matched and get envious. I might have to look at those...
I need to find some wheels that also do color matching. Preferably in a disc-able CX width.
This. This is why I cycle.
Seems to be more of a thing on the women's frames, I'm still not sure why - who is riding around in a pencil skirt? Or maybe they think our pants are tighter? But yeah, I'm seeing it on both mens and women's. Mind you the Allez (which is the unisex version of this one^^) definitely has a straighter top. I'm not really fussed, though I think I prefer the aesthetics of the allez.
(Imagine a small 44 cm frame for a rider with a ~71 cm inseam: the BB is still going to be ~27 cm off the ground regardless of how small you make the frame, so while the distance from the BB to the rear of the top tube shrinks as the rider measurements do, the total B+S shrinks slower than the rider! A compact frame with a steeply-sloping top tube might allow you to get down to 68 cm or less stand-over height.)
It's also good for manufacturers because they can make small frames in slightly larger size increments (say, 3 cm instead of the traditional 2 cm) without running into clearance issues. Fewer frame sizes == less stock to make and carry.
Thoughts? I have no idea what he means about the fork, stack, and star nut, but I really really really want a P2. XD
EDIT: It also needs a star-fangled nut installed to adjust the top headset bearings, as it is now they will not be set right.
1. It was cut correctly. The end-view shot looks maybe okay, length-wise, though it's hard to tell and the end finish is a little gnarly. I'd double-check with Cervelo on minimum heights once you get it in your hands, though. I can't tell if there's a spacer between the bearing cover and stem, but I don't even know if that's required on this frame+fork combo.
2. That fully-slammed position lets you get enough rise for your riding position.
and
3. The stem wasn't torqued down without the compression plug supporting the end. This is the one that would make me real nervous because if they did you could have a cracked steerer (and early CF cracks are usually invisible to the eye). Cracked steerer == face- or brain-ending crash at some point. If they were testing the bike without a rider (no load) they could've gotten away with a hand-tight stem. If they torqued it down for any reason, though, who knows. Maybe it's fine. Maybe it's not. There's no damned reason they shouldn't have put the plug and cap in during testing.
(Also, that ad says "star nut", but for anyone else listening: for the love of god don't use a star nut in a CF steerer. They pierce the surface and lead to eventual steerer failures. Compression plugs only! They're only like $10! Your face will thank you!)
Do you do Triathlons? If not, you may want to stay away, as that's designed as a competitive Tri bike, which means the riding position is a little different from standard bikes (likely less comfortable).
Also @honovere - Compact frames are a thing now because you don't really lose any stiffness or geometry options while gaining standover height. This is especially important for women's frames, as they don't want someone at the low end of the fit range to not be able to stand over the bike.
Unless you are specifically looking for a triathlon bike I wouldn't do either of those things. If you ARE looking for a triathlon bike then yeah, keep looking.
Sooooo, I put a deposit on a bran new P2 at the closeout price of the 2014s.
Carbon is not that fragile. It's susceptible to certain types of things (punctures) that aren't repairable, but it's not fragile. Carbon is used for mountain bikes and hell, even mountain bike rims, which see the most abuse of basically any bicycle part short of mountain pedals.
I'm glad that shit's changed.
Well also Aircraft Carbon != Bike Carbon as they will use different layups and epoxies based on their use. Hell, they even have carbon downhill bikes now, which sees the most stress of almost anything.
Anecdotally - I have an old ski bud that's big into singlespeed racing. As such, he splits cranks and other things with ALARMING regularity (still the only person I've seen split a rear hub and a bottom bracket with leg torque).
He's broken 1 frame on the seat stays that was not built for singlespeed (he adapted it), other than that he mostly rides carbon without issue. If he isn't breaking shit, you probably won't be.
Shit is CASH, man.
Meanwhile, in other carbon-related news, Zipp have new wheels with more trademarked technologies than ever before:
They look pretty fancy, to be sure. (but come on, claiming that it's lighter weight because they put their giant logo on with some sort of impregnation rather than stickers? maybe they could just, I dunno, not put the logo on there? Nobody is going to confuse these rims with other ones..) That said, they have real spokes on there, and a roughly sensible number of spokes, which is always nice to see.