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

Frame material

Notices
Tandem Cycling A bicycle built for two. Want to find out more about this wonderful world of tandems? Check out this forum to talk with other tandem enthusiasts. Captains and stokers welcome!

Frame material

Old 12-09-12, 06:22 PM
  #1  
jerman
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Frame material

Hello.
So, I been reading and there are many opionions that say to buy an expensive tandem, that you won't regret it.
I am about sold on a daVinci, I think the ICS is perfect for my stoker and my riding style. That leaves frame material...
I have an old steel Trek from'92 or '93 now and it's fun, but looking for the new technology... so steel, alu, or maybe carbon $$ ?
The idea of alu is great for less weight to go faster..
The idea of steel is great for comfort on centuries..
The idea of carbon is suddenly considered after reading here that other people actually entertain the thought of $11K for a tandem... !!!

So, is this really worth considering, that is a lot of money!?! Great ride, less weight, lots of fun... but $11K????
Can this be rationally considered - I don't want buyers remorse??
jerman is offline  
Old 12-09-12, 07:53 PM
  #2  
TandemGeek
hors category
 
TandemGeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,231
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
For many years, daVinci was pretty much committed to a very narrow design model where a daVinci tandem was defined by its ICS drivetrain, 26" wheels and aluminum frames. If you wanted a travel bike, then steel was an option but aluminum was the default.

Consumers want choices, and over time daVinci has bent over backwards to give it's clients LOTS of choices that now include imported "production tandems" as well as built-to-order steel, aluminum, titanium, carbon, IsoGrid, carbon/steel hybrid frames, 26" or 700c wheels, and road or off-road models including the full-suspension Symbiosis.

It's fair to say that any of these tandems, from the Grand Junction to the most exotic travel model will deliver a great ride... just figure out what kind of budget you have to work with and find a match.

Can a tandem really be worth $11k or more? Perhaps, but that's a very customer-specific value judgement that probably has more to do with just how much discretionary income folks have to drop on something like a tandem an their expectations for what an $11k tandem will provide. Frankly, I've only heard of a handful of people who've dumped high four to five-figure amounts into a tandem that admitted they'd made a poor decision out of what must now be over a 100 high-end tandem owners whom we know pretty well. But, to the best of my knowledge, none of these folks have financed their tandems... they just wrote a big check.

We wrote a pretty big check back in 2007 and have no regrets... Then again, we have a garage full of bicycles and motorcycles, so it's all relative.
TandemGeek is offline  
Old 12-09-12, 09:09 PM
  #3  
waynesulak
Senior Member
 
waynesulak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971

Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Some observations not in any particular order:

• There are some frequent posters here that have bought $10,000 plus carbon tandems and love them.

• I don’t recall anyone posting here that didn’t like their $10,000+ carbon tandem.

• I think that everyone posting here that has bought a new major brand tandem costing $5,000 or more, of any type, steel, aluminum, titanium,
magnesium, or carbon has posted that they were happy with it. I don’t think anyone posted that they made a mistake.

• Top of the line Titanium, Magnesium or carbon tandems are really nice bikes.

• A $5,000 tandem from a major manufacturer is a quality bike.

• If you get dropped on a $5,000 tandem I would guess its not the bike’s fault. I know because we are experts at getting dropped.

• I would hope that a $10,000 tandem would be nicer than a $5,000 tandem. Hopefully twice as nice.

• I would rather spend $10,000 on a tandem than a boat. Then again we ride a tandem 5-6 days a week.

• I ride a steel tandem and do not want a carbon one even though I could write that fat check. Actually we have two steel tandems, and three singles which all together cost us as much as a one carbon tandem without all the bells and whistles.

• Some people can afford really nice things.

• Some people buy more really nice things than they can afford.

• Some people can’t afford really nice things but have just as much fun anyway.

• I think the trick is not to have enough money to buy all the nice things but rather to know how many nice things you can afford to buy and how to have fun with them.

Good luck. Wayne
waynesulak is offline  
Old 12-09-12, 09:16 PM
  #4  
photogravity
Hopelessly addicted...
 
photogravity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Central Maryland
Posts: 5,007

Bikes: 1949 Hercules Kestrel, 1950 Norman Rapide, 1970 Schwinn Collegiate, 1972 Peugeot UE-8, 1976 Raleigh Sports, 1977 Raleigh Sports, 1977 Jack Taylor Tandem, 1984 Davidson Tandem, 2010 Bilenky "BQ" 650B Constructeur Tandem, 2011 Linus Mixte

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Frame material is highly personalized and seems there are some who take to a specific frame material with nearly religious fervor. As much as I hate to admit it, some may count me among that number. With that said, I've only ever ridden steel and aluminum frames and have concluded that I like steel. Someday I'd like to try out a titanium framed tandem, but we're not in a big hurry since we just purchased our Bilenky 650B Constructeur tandem in June 2012.
photogravity is offline  
Old 12-09-12, 10:26 PM
  #5  
mwandaw
Half Fast
 
mwandaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Southern California
Posts: 680

Bikes: A road bike and a tandem road bike

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 2 Posts
Tandem enthusiasts can give you good advice on the various advantages and disadvantages of different frame materials and designs. However, you really should ride before you decide.

That's not easy to do, because tandems are usually few and far between. However, if you work at it you will be able to get some seat time and get at least an idea about what type of tandem is right for the two of you. You can probably get some test rides at these dealers:

https://www.crank-2.com/store/ (San Francisco area)
https://houseoftandems.com/ (Houston area)
https://www.precisiontandems.com/index.html (Kansas City area)
https://tandemcycleworks.com/ (Denver)
https://www.tandemseast.com/ (South of Philadelphia)
https://www.tandemsltd.com/ (Birmingham)

Another very good way to learn about tandems is to find a bike club that has a good group of tandem riders. There are only a few such clubs. We ride with the Orange County Rebels in Orange County, California, and there about ten regular tandem teams in the club. Of course, they probably wouldn't loan you their tandems the first time you meet them! Once you get to know the members, you'll be able to get a lot of first-hand advice and maybe a little seat time.

Good luck!
mwandaw is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 09:10 AM
  #6  
2frmMI
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Mid Michigan
Posts: 345

Bikes: Erickson Signature, Paketa D2R

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You might want to get an alternative perspective on light weight steel tubing from R&E Cycles in Seattle. I'm not really in the market, but if I was, their ultra light True Temper S3 steel frame would be on my short list. They insist they can match weights with carbon or titanium, but with the superior feel of steel...
Rodriguez Ultra Light Tandem
2frmMI is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 11:35 AM
  #7  
Bill G
Bill G
 
Bill G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: California
Posts: 338

Bikes: Co-Motion Nor'Wester Tour, Co-Motion Primera Tandem, WizWeelz Terra Trike 3.6 Tour model

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
We have a 2012 model steel da Vinci Joint Venture 700 with the Campy shifters and 4 gear front chain ring set up the Envi Composites fork and White Ind freewheel upgrades (highly recommend the White Ind Freewheels)

Like Tandem Geek said frame material is a personal choice. I have had aluminum on other tandems and we decided to go back to steel as we like the ride of steel for distance riding and it is a little more cost affective and easier to repair if something happens.

With all the bells and wisles our new da Vinci Joint Venture cost around $6000.00 dilivered to my door. We love the way the tandem rides and looks the quality is top notch and it's a great long distance tandem (we like metric & century rides)

I had the tandem dilivered not put together by my request because I prefer to build my own tandems. They pretty much normaly come put together ready to go other than some miner assembly of bars & saddles, front wheel due to being in a dilivery box. da Vinci does great work and we really like the ICS system. Call and talk with Todd at da Vinci about the pros & cons verses cost for what you get out of diffrent frame materials from a manufactures stand point you might be supprised by what you find out.

Ride Safe All,
Bill G
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
tand 6.jpg (49.7 KB, 37 views)
File Type: jpg
tand 7.jpg (49.5 KB, 39 views)
File Type: jpg
tand 5.jpg (54.4 KB, 34 views)
File Type: jpg
Jump stop intalled 4.jpg (88.4 KB, 39 views)
File Type: jpg
Jump stop installed 3.jpg (89.8 KB, 34 views)
File Type: jpg
tand 2.jpg (48.7 KB, 38 views)

Last edited by Bill G; 12-10-12 at 11:51 AM.
Bill G is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 01:14 PM
  #8  
rdtompki
Senior Member
 
rdtompki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hollister, CA
Posts: 3,957

Bikes: Volagi, daVinci Joint Venture

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
We also have a steel daVinci going on 4+ years. While we didn't do an Al test ride, the Al version isn't much lighter (1.5 lbs as I recall) and we're not a lightweight team. We were novices when we purchased and test rode CoMotion, Santana and daVinci. We would have been very satisfied with any of these brands, but somehow the uniqueness of the daVinci call to "us" (actually, "me"). We've got the quad chainrings and sometimes cross-chain our way to using all 40 combinations (36 in a stock bike). The long chain line is nice that way and works even when abused. Our lowest gear is 24-36 and we're not too proud to use it when needed although our normal cassette is an 11-32.

The Campy shifters are a personal preference. I only had Shimano brifter experience prior to the daVinci, but I really like the up/down multi-shift capability particularly on the tandem. YMMV. We put about 9000 miles on the original wheels without touching them. I bought a second set of daVinci wheels so I'd have a spare set, but the stock wheels seem incredibly strong so my spares may sit for a long time. The newer wheels are a bit nicer since the machined brake track gives a bit more bite.
rdtompki is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 03:40 PM
  #9  
ksisler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,739
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by jerman
Hello.
So, I been reading and there are many opionions that say to buy an expensive tandem, that you won't regret it. I am about sold on a daVinci, I think the ICS is perfect for my stoker and my riding style. That leaves frame material... I have an old steel Trek from'92 or '93 now and it's fun, but looking for the new technology... so steel, alu, or maybe carbon $$ ? The idea of alu is great for less weight to go faster..
The idea of steel is great for comfort on centuries.. The idea of carbon is suddenly considered after reading here that other people actually entertain the thought of $11K for a tandem... !!!

So, is this really worth considering, that is a lot of money!?! Great ride, less weight, lots of fun... but $11K???? Can this be rationally considered - I don't want buyers remorse??

If you are fearful of buyers remorse, then stay in the middle of the pack in terms of material choices and buy in the top half of the available price range.

Going with a carbon frame leaves one to deal with the unknown long term reliability issues. So recommend looking for ads for several different carbon based used tandems in the 20-25 year old range and ask the sellers how much they rode it and how hard and for their impressions with ownership.

Back to the better choices; After one approaches the upper half of the price range the difference in weight between steel and a aluminum tandem isn't as great today as one might think. Before deciding you should ride both for a century ride at least and see if you have any reaction to their feel. Some folks can't tell the difference while others take on a life long mission to never allow anyone they know to buy one or the other because of the obvious betterness of their choice.

If you leave the test with no clear decision, recommend shopping on ebay for a month or two to pick up a used Santana steel one from 1990's or later (often gettable under $1,000) and use it a year or two to see if your needs can be better defined. When you are really ready to drop $5-12k, you want to know for sure! You may find that the trial one is just fine and dandy as it is.
ksisler is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 04:42 PM
  #10  
Carbonello
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 56

Bikes: Team Scandium/ Sovereign

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ksisler
Going with a carbon frame leaves one to deal with the unknown long term reliability issues. So recommend looking for ads for several different carbon based used tandems in the 20-25 year old range and ask the sellers how much they rode it and how hard and for their impressions with ownership.
20-25 year old carbon tandems?? How many of those are around?
Bob
Carbonello is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 05:00 PM
  #11  
ct-vt-trekker
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CT
Posts: 380

Bikes: 2024 Specialized Tarmac SL8Pro, 2022 Specialized Epic Evo, 2021 Framed Alaskan Fatbike,2019 Trek Emonda SL6 Pro, 2018 Trek Stache 9.7, 2013 Specialized Roubaix SL4 Expert, 2009 Ritchey Breakaway Cross, 2016 Lynskey ProCross, 2008 Trek T1000 Tandem,

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonello
20-25 year old carbon tandems?? How many of those are around?
Bob
Did anyone even make any carbon bikes 25 years ago? I bought a Trek OCLV single (5200) in the early 90s and the only other common brand of carbon bike on the market at that time was a Kestrel. I put over 50,000 miles on that bike adn sold it last year to a friend , he still rides it. I had the same "dependability" questions when I bought that bike but now I think carbon is as durable and long lasting as steel or aluminum.

Last edited by ct-vt-trekker; 12-10-12 at 05:03 PM.
ct-vt-trekker is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 05:55 PM
  #12  
akexpress 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Anchorage, Ak
Posts: 620

Bikes: 2015 Calfee Tetra tandem,2016 Calfee Tetra Adventure Tandem, Ventana ECDM 26 mtn tandem, Ventana ECDM 29r full suspension Mtn tandem ,Ventana Fat tire tandem, Calfee Dragon Fly, Santa Cruz Carbon 5010, 907 Whiteout fat tire

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Craig Calfee started making carbon bikes in 1987 and were ridden in the Tour de France in 1991 so there is certainly a history for carbon as a frame material for well over 20 years. I believe he made some tandems in the late 90s. It all depends on your desires, we rode every frame type on singles for many years and when we decided on a tandem we liked the way our carbon singles rode the best and we had a carbon tandem built and have never looked back in regret (about 15k miles on it). Our kids have aluminum tandems and can drop us at will and they enjoy the ride however they are younger and more resilient. We have done numerous centuries and beyond and the bike has been on four continents and the durability and dependability has been fine. With the same components and wheels etc the rides of the various material are going to be similar enough that the best thing to do is get a bike and ride it!!!
akexpress is offline  
Old 12-10-12, 10:14 PM
  #13  
zonatandem
Senior Member
 
zonatandem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 11,016

Bikes: Custom Zona c/f tandem + Scott Plasma single

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 11 Posts
Material does matter.
Have ridden steel, alu, ti, bamboo and carbon fiber.
Our c/f tandem currently has 34,000+ miles on it.
We consider it an 'investment' in our continued good health
You control the purse strings . . .
zonatandem is offline  
Old 12-19-12, 06:34 PM
  #14  
jerman
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanks for all the replies and the good info. From what it looks like, get a carbon if it's in the budget and you're going to ride it pretty often. Other than that, steel makes a fine tandem. This tandem will probably just be a back-up bike for us, riding two to three times a month, so unless the deal is good then it have to be a good deal to upgrade to carbon.
Thanks for the input and pics,!
Jerry
jerman is offline  
Old 12-20-12, 11:33 AM
  #15  
Max Viotu
Senior Member
 
Max Viotu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Paketa magnesium.
Max Viotu is offline  
Old 12-31-12, 01:54 AM
  #16  
ksisler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,739
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by akexpress
Craig Calfee started making carbon bikes in 1987 and were ridden in the Tour de France in 1991 so there is certainly a history for carbon as a frame material for well over 20 years. I believe he made some tandems in the late 90s. It all depends on your desires, we rode every frame type on singles for many years and when we decided on a tandem we liked the way our carbon singles rode the best and we had a carbon tandem built and have never looked back in regret (about 15k miles on it). Our kids have aluminum tandems and can drop us at will and they enjoy the ride however they are younger and more resilient. We have done numerous centuries and beyond and the bike has been on four continents and the durability and dependability has been fine. With the same components and wheels etc the rides of the various material are going to be similar enough that the best thing to do is get a bike and ride it!!!
I suspect that two or more guys have missed my point (which was part factual and part satire) that although CF is all the talk around town and there is some reasonable years of build experience for singles and a bit less years of build experience for tandems (so maybe from 1999 or so for first examples in CF); all that CF experience is factually much shorter that the Century-plus of experience for steel and to a few decades for Aluminum. My point was simply to suggest the OP consider that set of facts when choosing a frame material.

Last edited by ksisler; 12-31-12 at 01:56 AM. Reason: Typo
ksisler is offline  
Old 12-31-12, 09:01 AM
  #17  
TandemGeek
hors category
 
TandemGeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,231
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by ksisler
I suspect that two or more guys have missed my point .... all that CF experience is factually much shorter that the Century-plus of experience for steel and to a few decades for Aluminum. My point was simply to suggest the OP consider that set of facts when choosing a frame material.
With all due respect, I would suggest you open up your aperture a bit with regard to "factually relevant" considerations.

Yes, steel and aluminum pre-date composites as does titanium and magnesium. However, while there are examples of composite frame failures out there -- many of them celebrated by those who are overly fond of steel -- there are very few examples of composite tandem frame failures and long-term fatigue was not the issue. The latter is also true of most modern steel and aluminum tandem frames where the failures tend to be rooted in material flaws or process escapes in manufacturing / welding.

What's probably more useful information is how reliable composite tandem frames have proven to be by the people who actually ride them... and in particular who ride them a lot. In this regard, there are many Calfee tandems with 10's of thousands of trouble-free miles on the road; ours is best described as having moderate use as it approaches 20,000 miles; about 4,000 miles of use a year. There are other teams whom we know who log closer to 8 - 10,000 miles a year on their Calfee tandems, including one of the older Calfee Tetra Tetra models from early 2000 and newer Dragonfly models that are used for weekly brevets and endurance events.

In practice, these well-made composite frames have had no reliability or durability issues. Those who know a thing or two about composites will also tell you that long term fatigue life will also be a non-issue.

So, while it is a fact that steel, aluminum, & titanium tandems have a great track record for reliability, there are examples of frame failures that suggest they are prone to material and process escapes with a very low frequency of occurrence. The steel and aluminum tandem frames that spend 99% of their lives sitting unused in garages and basements and get sold with less than 1,000 miles really doesn't add to the body of knowledge of how reliable or durable they are. But we do know there are examples of very high-mileage steel, aluminum AND composite tandem frames that suggest they are all excellent materials. While Paketa's early magnesium V2 tandems had some material and process escapes, those problems appear to have been addressed and the frames that are seeing very heavy-duty use. In fact, some of the strongest tandem teams are now winning national-level events on Calfees and Paketa tandems.... which I would argue is a very strong testament to the strength and predicted reliability of those materials to hold up under some of the most demanding use.

Just some food for thought, as there are various different ways to measure "material experience" and I think most of us "get that".
TandemGeek is offline  
Old 12-31-12, 10:55 AM
  #18  
DubT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 1,180

Bikes: Trek Speed Concept 9.9, 2011 Calfee Tetra Tandem

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 9 Posts
Extremely well said!
DubT is offline  
Old 12-31-12, 12:04 PM
  #19  
waynesulak
Senior Member
 
waynesulak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971

Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
I believe that we often put too much focus on the material and not enough on the design used to build a bike with the material.

For example steel bikes include anything from heavy straight gauge tubing to 10/7/10 tubes to ultra thin 7/4/7 tubes. Large diameter 7/4/7 tubes are .4mm thick for most of there length and when used in large diameters make a very stiff fairly light bike. In my book the very large diameter 7/4/7 tubes used by some builders are not durable because they are easy to crush or dent like a coke can. Steel is generally pretty durable as a material but the design of those bikes sacrifices the durability in the name of stiffness and weight saving. Designing the bike with smaller diameter tubes would make them much less crushable but the bike has more flex. Using large diameters with thicker tube walls would provide stiffness and durability but add weight. In the bicycling industry today added weight usually means a drastic reduction in sales volume.

I know much less about carbon but if I have read Craig Calfee's writing correctly a similar situation exists for carbon bikes. He has chosen to design his bikes with smaller diameter thicker walled tubing to provide for durability and as a result doesn't build as light a frame as many others. Those big tubed light weight single frames are not nearly as resistant to damage as a Calfee. For example below is a quote from his web site regarding the 953 gram dragonfly frame:



Calfee Dragonfly weighs only 2.1 pounds in a 54cm size, delivers power as well as any large diameter, thin wall frame, has superior vibration dampening, compressive and impact strength, and is protected by a 25 year warranty

Contrast that approach with that used by Cannondale:



....It actually gets lighter. The blue-and-green color scheme on the Team model actually adds 120 grams to the the bare 695-gram frame. .....
Cannondale's frame is stated to be 258 grams or 27% lighter than a Calfee Dragonfly and the Cannondale uses a larger diameter tubes. It seems reasonable to conclude that the Cannondale's tubing with 27% less material spread over a larger tube diameter would not be as resistant to impacts as the Calfee frame.

Not all carbon bikes are alike just like not all steel bikes are alike so it is hard to talk about materials without looking at how they are designed and manufactured.

I have been impressed with Calfee's careful design. He doesn't build the 650B low trail tandem that I want but if he did I would be tempted to buy one.

Last edited by waynesulak; 12-31-12 at 12:17 PM.
waynesulak is offline  
Old 12-31-12, 12:33 PM
  #20  
akexpress 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Anchorage, Ak
Posts: 620

Bikes: 2015 Calfee Tetra tandem,2016 Calfee Tetra Adventure Tandem, Ventana ECDM 26 mtn tandem, Ventana ECDM 29r full suspension Mtn tandem ,Ventana Fat tire tandem, Calfee Dragon Fly, Santa Cruz Carbon 5010, 907 Whiteout fat tire

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
We are very satisfied Calfee owners with around 18-20k miles on our bike. It is also a well travelled bike with more then 20 trips in its cases and we have not suffered any issues from what with the concerns some people have expressed regarding travel with a carbon frame. I want to point out one more thing pretty cool about carbon and a custom boutique builder like Calfee. We completed a tour in Turkey this fall and discovered we had a coupler making noises on standing climbs when either one or both of us stood. We had chased the noise for while before concluding it was from the rear coupler on the lower tube at the rear BB. I could not detect movement of the coupler but the noise was there. I sent the frame to Calfee for inspection and they confirmed that the carbon was moving against the coupler. Our bike has Ti couplers vs the Alu that are now used and the bonding methods have now changed. Our Ti coupler was tig welded to the Ti BB shell so there was not a chance of the coupler failing. Calfee completely rebuilt the BB area and replaced the BB shell and changed the way the coupler was bonded. They did all this under warranty and compleely repainted our frame even though we have an expensive custom shade shifting paint scheme. At the same time I had them retro fit for DI2. I committed all the way and they removed all the cable stops and filled all the wholes in the frame for mechanical. I guess my point is that in the right hands carbon can be reworked to accommodate changes in technology in the future. I have attached some pics of the clean DI2 install. We now have an awesome riding travel tandem with electronic shifting so no more cable issues every time the bike is put together.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
image001.jpg (46.7 KB, 41 views)
File Type: jpg
image002.jpg (49.6 KB, 38 views)
File Type: jpg
image003.jpg (77.6 KB, 45 views)
File Type: jpg
image005.jpg (95.4 KB, 42 views)
File Type: jpg
image006.jpg (88.7 KB, 44 views)

Last edited by akexpress; 12-31-12 at 12:36 PM.
akexpress is offline  
Old 12-31-12, 12:45 PM
  #21  
waynesulak
Senior Member
 
waynesulak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971

Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
I give credit to the boutique builder who knows his craft. I have a Santana Arriva that was modified by removing the lateral tube and moving the canti posts to fit 650B wheels. I also replaced the fork with a custom steel fork . We chose not to place Santana decals on the bike so no one recognizes it as a Santana. That is just as well because I don't expect that Bill at Santana would agree with what we did to his design. When it comes to adapting a bike, steel has an advantage because there are so many qualified people that work with it. Ours was done by a local builder and not shipped across country to the builder.

We love the bike and it didn't take long before we set faster personal bests on our normal routes lowering times on our previously owned stock CoMotion Speedster and Santana Noventa. The 38mm tires at 75-80 psi also give a very comfortable ride compared to tires at 120-130 psi

Last edited by waynesulak; 12-31-12 at 01:49 PM.
waynesulak is offline  
Old 01-01-13, 12:36 PM
  #22  
Sprout97 
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Orange Park, FL
Posts: 188

Bikes: 2004 Co-Motion Speedster

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
(Disclaimer: I've only ridden steel tandems, but I have previously owned steel, aluminum, & carbon half-bikes.) Carbon is a much more comfortable ride than Al. That said, when I moved from the Cannondale R200 to my Specialized Roubaix, I noticed that while the Specialized' turn-in was sharper (& faster) than the C-Dale, it was also a lot more nervous (the term I'm using to describe the carbon frame's resonance). How much that tendency exists -- or doesn't -- exist in a tandem frame should be left to the long-experienced carbon tandem folks like Mark, Rudy, et al.
__________________
Jeff

Learn from other people's mistakes. You won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

2004 Co-Motion Speedster
2010 (Specialized) Carmel comfort (my neighborhood bike)
2008 Raleigh comfort (wife's neighborhood bike)
Sprout97 is offline  
Old 01-01-13, 11:50 PM
  #23  
Team Fab
Senior Member
 
Team Fab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 376

Bikes: Comotion Supremo, Trek T1000, Comotion Supremo Triple

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by waynesulak
I believe that we often put too much focus on the material and not enough on the design used to build a bike with the material.

For example steel bikes include anything from heavy straight gauge tubing to 10/7/10 tubes to ultra thin 7/4/7 tubes. Large diameter 7/4/7 tubes are .4mm thick for most of there length and when used in large diameters make a very stiff fairly light bike. In my book the very large diameter 7/4/7 tubes used by some builders are not durable because they are easy to crush or dent like a coke can. Steel is generally pretty durable as a material but the design of those bikes sacrifices the durability in the name of stiffness and weight saving. Designing the bike with smaller diameter tubes would make them much less crushable but the bike has more flex. Using large diameters with thicker tube walls would provide stiffness and durability but add weight. In the bicycling industry today added weight usually means a drastic reduction in sales volume.

I know much less about carbon but if I have read Craig Calfee's writing correctly a similar situation exists for carbon bikes. He has chosen to design his bikes with smaller diameter thicker walled tubing to provide for durability and as a result doesn't build as light a frame as many others. Those big tubed light weight single frames are not nearly as resistant to damage as a Calfee. For example below is a quote from his web site regarding the 953 gram dragonfly frame:






Contrast that approach with that used by Cannondale:





Cannondale's frame is stated to be 258 grams or 27% lighter than a Calfee Dragonfly and the Cannondale uses a larger diameter tubes. It seems reasonable to conclude that the Cannondale's tubing with 27% less material spread over a larger tube diameter would not be as resistant to impacts as the Calfee frame.

Not all carbon bikes are alike just like not all steel bikes are alike so it is hard to talk about materials without looking at how they are designed and manufactured.

I have been impressed with Calfee's careful design. He doesn't build the 650B low trail tandem that I want but if he did I would be tempted to buy one.
Having owned and crashed several times on a Kuota KOM a very large diameter thin walled CF frame(tubes bigger than the Cannondale in the pic). I am not sure that just because it is thin walled it has less crash strength. The tubes were so thin on that bike you could just squeeze them in your hand, yet they did not break when I crashed. Maybe I was lucky or ? That bike was the stiffest I have ever ridden.
Team Fab is offline  
Old 01-02-13, 10:57 AM
  #24  
waynesulak
Senior Member
 
waynesulak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 1,971

Bikes: Custom 650B tandem by Bob Brown, 650B tandem converted from Santana Arriva, Santana Noventa, Boulder Bicycle 700C, Gunnar Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
There is a random element in any risk. I am sure you have seen guys at the Tour de France carrying bikes over the finish line after a crash where the carbon bike frame is in multiple pieces while others in the pile up are riding similar frames through the finish.

Unlike steel carbon can be designed to add or subtract strength in any orientation. Maybe I oversimplified by mentioning only wall thickness in my previous post. I know that weave orientation and method of manufacture also can play a part. The basic point I was attempting to make is that it is very difficult for the consumer to tell how the carbon frames were designed so I think trust in the design and manufacture is even more important with carbon than steel.

There are some knowledgeable carbon folks on this list and maybe they can add there opinions.

Last edited by waynesulak; 01-02-13 at 11:08 AM.
waynesulak is offline  
Old 01-07-13, 01:05 PM
  #25  
ksisler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,739
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by TandemGeek
With all due respect, I would suggest you open up your aperture a bit with regard to "factually relevant" considerations.

Yes, steel and aluminum pre-date composites as does titanium and magnesium. However, while there are examples of composite frame failures out there -- many of them celebrated by those who are overly fond of steel -- there are very few examples of composite tandem frame failures and long-term fatigue was not the issue. The latter is also true of most modern steel and aluminum tandem frames where the failures tend to be rooted in material flaws or process escapes in manufacturing / welding.

What's probably more useful information is how reliable composite tandem frames have proven to be by the people who actually ride them... and in particular who ride them a lot. In this regard, there are many Calfee tandems with 10's of thousands of trouble-free miles on the road; ours is best described as having moderate use as it approaches 20,000 miles; about 4,000 miles of use a year. There are other teams whom we know who log closer to 8 - 10,000 miles a year on their Calfee tandems, including one of the older Calfee Tetra Tetra models from early 2000 and newer Dragonfly models that are used for weekly brevets and endurance events.

In practice, these well-made composite frames have had no reliability or durability issues. Those who know a thing or two about composites will also tell you that long term fatigue life will also be a non-issue.

So, while it is a fact that steel, aluminum, & titanium tandems have a great track record for reliability, there are examples of frame failures that suggest they are prone to material and process escapes with a very low frequency of occurrence. The steel and aluminum tandem frames that spend 99% of their lives sitting unused in garages and basements and get sold with less than 1,000 miles really doesn't add to the body of knowledge of how reliable or durable they are. But we do know there are examples of very high-mileage steel, aluminum AND composite tandem frames that suggest they are all excellent materials. While Paketa's early magnesium V2 tandems had some material and process escapes, those problems appear to have been addressed and the frames that are seeing very heavy-duty use. In fact, some of the strongest tandem teams are now winning national-level events on Calfees and Paketa tandems.... which I would argue is a very strong testament to the strength and predicted reliability of those materials to hold up under some of the most demanding use.

Just some food for thought, as there are various different ways to measure "material experience" and I think most of us "get that".
TG; I have no issue with your analysis. You have clearly advocated and supported your views with factual examples and with a minimum of emotional endowment. I think the OP & other readers will find it additive and useful toward framing tandem decisions in future. Thanks/appreciated

/Kerry
ksisler 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.