"Grindintosecond" (Grindintosecond)
01/30/2016 at 00:37 • Filed to: None
6
12|
"Grindintosecond" (Grindintosecond)
01/30/2016 at 00:37 • Filed to: None | 6
| 12 |
Three rides and 113 miles so far. (20, 33, and a nice big 60 were put on yesterday) !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , I built it up with used well-cared-for nice parts that are now cheap to buy, (for example $175 worth of handlebar and stem that I sourced used for $60.) The build turned out about as expected. With mid-grade parts and durable training tires, about 18.75 pounds. (8.53kg for you Metricsexuals)
In my previous post, I discussed the properties that a Mg bike should display. I can now see where the properties exhibit themselves and where their limits are. It is also a lesson in self-hyped dreams vs. reality. It is turning out to be something of an oxymoron. An, “It shouldn’t feel like this if it can do this” kind of thing.
It absorbs vibrations of road surfaces and minor irregularities like the science says. Washboard grooves from backhoe tank treads on the street, pavement cracks, grooves cut from trailer hitches and small things like that are absorbed nicely where the Cannondale CAAD9 I usually ride (An Alu race bike and the go-to frame for any criterium racer on a budget) would have hurt me in the ass. That’s a good thing and it’s more in line with a carbon frame money bike’s ability. What I didn’t like is that the stiffness is noticeable with larger bumps. Some things we can’t miss, like an occasional manhole or railroad tracks or unseen pot holes, once hit, are not absorbed and are transformed to hurt in my ass, just like the CAAD9; however, there’s no sustain to the bumps. So, like slamming the doors of a BMW or a ‘97 civic, there’s a difference here. The solid nature of Mg is the BMW car door slam. So, in bigger bumps, it tend’s to run through them as well as beating me up in the ass.
Climbs: I had a rough winter. I was sick and did zero training for probably 8 weeks. I actually wanted to train for something this year. I had no business doing that climb at this point but somehow I did it at 175 average heart rate. Something kind of normal for summer, and I can only translate that as frame efficiency. It is stiffer and power transfers better. I tested the bottom bracket a bit and this is definitely stiffer than the CAAD9, the bespoke race bike. It climbs well. Thank you magnesium.
On-power up hills or sprints: It’s stiff, no doubt. Power in equals power out. The odd part here, is that it doesn’t feel like it. It kinda feels dead when you really try to sprint. It doesn’t explode with life like some seriously responsive carbon bikes do and the CAAD9 I have, kinda feels better about that as well but really, it actually IS fast when sprinting. I just can’t tell. So, in a way it’s like a fast luxury sedan-no snap but it’s got speed and acceleration. An Aston Martin or Bently even? BMW 7-series?
Overall, I have to say that Mg is definitely different and worth consideration, but not for much longer. You see, the CAAD9 I compare it to is a 2008 vintage and this Mg frame is 2007. Since then, magnesium haven’t really changed much in what they can do with metallurgy like they can with aluminum. Since my bike, Cannondale has improved with the CAAD10 and then, as I was putting this together, they had to go and release the CAAD12, each one a jump of improvement to a point now where the 12 is as stiff as the magnesium frame but is much more comfortable over bumps. So, in reality, the magnesium alloy needs to become hydroformable and they need to vary thickness along a tube. Mg cannot be made to do that without expense beyond reason. The new CAAD12 frame is 1.5 POUNDS lighter than my frame and more comfortable and just as stiff...today. I guess I got a deal in a great long distance bike, as I’m in this at a $1,200 value in parts, but it’s uniqueness is no longer impressive, as a brand new $1,600 aluminum bike is it’s equal or better. All I got now is dent and impact resistance.
A velvet gloved fist. Overall, some clip-on TT bars and seat post and this would be a rather good TT bike. If I can unload it, I might do so but until then, it’s actually quite good on a long ride. Besides, I’d have to find someone 6-foot-5 to buy it...
The Crazy Kanuck; RIP Oppositelock
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 00:48 |
|
So it is the McLaren P1 of bicycles?
RallyWrench
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 01:33 |
|
Interesting to read your take on it, I’ve only read about Mag as applied to mountain bikes before. I mostly ride mountain, but ride road and commute on an aluminum ‘cross bike when I can. I've probably got over 10k on it since about 2007 and it'll need replacement someday so this is good knowledge. Thanks!
phenotyp
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 03:56 |
|
That is seriously nice. Both the writeup and the bike.
Clemsie McKenzie
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 06:19 |
|
Cool bike and good write-up! Is the fork Mg too? I have an aluminium bike with carbon fork, and I must say it’s really comfy.
TheRealBicycleBuck
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 08:39 |
|
Most if the frame material hype is just that - hype. Differences in lateral compliance are real, but diamond frames are damn near incompressible vertically by design. This is why any discussion about vertical compliance must start with the tires.
Changes in tire size and pressure provide a much greater range of vertical compliance than any diamond frame can mange without suspension, whether that be pneumatic or flex members which aren’t fully triangulated. In my experience, frames which other riders describe as “harsh” are really just loud. That is, they conduct a lot of sound. That “harshness” can be dialed out of the bike by lowering the tire pressure a bit. That increases the risk of pinch flats, so the only solution is to install a larger tire.
Larger tires can run lower pressures because they have greater volume. Unfortunately, racing frames have such tight clearances that a larger tire won’t fit. The only solution then is to get a frame with greater clearances which racers won’t do because they think the additional material and “slacker” geometry is going to slow them down.
When I was younger, one of my favorite activities was riding with the “fast” guys on a completely “inappropriate” frame. The first trolling frame was a 1976 rattle-canned steel Schwinn World Sport rocking 27" wheels. Keeping up with the guys on the latest carbon wonder-bikes drove them nuts.
These days I am older and slower and couldn’t keep up without a little assistance, so I ride a cyclocross frame with 38mm tires. Now I get to listen to them complain about how rough the roads are as I cruise along in comfort. Those who have ridden my bike talk about how soft and compliant it is. Imagine their shock when I point out that it is an aluminum frame. :)
PotbellyJoe and 42 others
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 11:05 |
|
A lot of this is geometry and tubing. The material dictates how far those can be taken.
The CAAD9 was intentionally one of the stiffest aluminum bikes ever made. It’s based on the purpose of the CAAD frames for the last 15 years, when Cipo was breaking frames during sprints, he wanted them stiff, strong and light, Cannondale complied.
I have aluminum, steel and carbon. My favorite to ride is the steel bike, but that is because it wears 28s on a very nice wheelset and Di2. It is built for miles, it’s fast, but it’s far from a sprint bike.
My sprinter is the carbon frme, but don’t point it up hills. It’s lighter so it has that advantage, but the gearing, geometry and reach is entirely wrong for me to start attacking 10%+ grades.
The aluminum bike is my best climber, but is numb and stiff due to oversized tubing and BB. It serves it’s purpose though. It is the best foul-weather bike I have ever owned.
So my point? You can make a compliant aluminum bike, just like you can make a stiff steel bike, geometry and purpose are what’s important. There are inherent strengths to some materials, but those advantages can be designed in/out of them with a good/bad design.
Don’t get me wrong, I am happy you like your bike and have long wondered about the ride of Mg, but unless they are all built to the exact same frame shape, wall-thickness, and tubing shape, it’d be difficult to say what modern materials do for a ride.
On a side note, I was incredibly impressed with the new Allez smartweld design, that is some neat thinking. I’ve always preferred the Cannondale Al, but the new Allez gives the Caad12 a run for it.
|
PotbellyJoe and 42 others
> Clemsie McKenzie
01/30/2016 at 11:10 |
|
That’s a Ritchey carbon fork.
Bouldaru
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 12:00 |
|
I gotta say, in regards to sprinting on flexible alloys, I know exactly what you mean. Sprinting on my Ti Merlin with CF seatstays feels dead. The rear triangle feels like noodles when sprinting.
|
Grindintosecond
> Clemsie McKenzie
01/30/2016 at 12:14 |
|
Its a carbon fork, alu steer tube i found on a clearance table new for $50!
|
Grindintosecond
> The Crazy Kanuck; RIP Oppositelock
01/30/2016 at 12:28 |
|
More like a 7 series autobahn cruiser.
|
Clemsie McKenzie
> Grindintosecond
01/30/2016 at 12:47 |
|
Wow that’s a lucky day!
|
Grindintosecond
> PotbellyJoe and 42 others
01/30/2016 at 15:39 |
|
The C9 was by no means the stiffest. Their ‘criterium’ named frame was impossibly stiff and something like a 50 minute ride was unbearable. The 9 is loads better but still snappy.
I see where you are going with that. The issue with Mg is the tubing cannot be made in varying thickness in an overall length like Alu and even steel can. So they have to pick one and use it. The CAAD12 frame is under 1100g. If Mg could be manipulated that way, it would be amazing in that design due to the vibration properties just to begin with.
I do like the frame but metal tech of Alu is outpacing Mg and surpassing it now. The only company advancing Mg is Segal out of Israel. They have their own Mg plant so well see how much tech they put into their frames over time, but until then, i would have been better off wit da C12.