Stradalli Frame Weight Limits: Cause for Concern or stating a hidden truth?
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,456
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4420 Post(s)
Liked 4,873 Times
in
3,017 Posts
I couldn't find the weights for the San Remo or the RD17, but the older RD7 48cm w/ a Dura Ace rim brake setup has a claimed weight of 14.9 lbs (https://stradalli.com/r7-full-carbon...clinchers.html)
The claimed weight of their explicit climbing platform, the Bitonto, w/ a Dura Ace Di2 rim brake set up has an absurd claimed weight of 12.9 lbs (https://stradalli.com/stradalli-bito...-wheelset.html). That is absolutely not UCI legal, haha.
So if those are worth anything, you can probably bet that when Stradalli means light, they really mean it (for better or for worse).
The claimed weight of their explicit climbing platform, the Bitonto, w/ a Dura Ace Di2 rim brake set up has an absurd claimed weight of 12.9 lbs (https://stradalli.com/stradalli-bito...-wheelset.html). That is absolutely not UCI legal, haha.
So if those are worth anything, you can probably bet that when Stradalli means light, they really mean it (for better or for worse).
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,456
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4420 Post(s)
Liked 4,873 Times
in
3,017 Posts
It didn’t go well for this 185 lb rider. Frame cracked within 6 months and warranty refused because he was 5 lb over limit. But their previous marketing strategy was more interesting 🤨
https://forum.cyclingnews.com/thread...-decide.33173/
https://forum.cyclingnews.com/thread...-decide.33173/
#28
Method to My Madness
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,665
Bikes: Trek FX 2, Cannondale Synapse, Cannondale CAAD4, Santa Cruz Stigmata GRX
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1949 Post(s)
Liked 1,474 Times
in
1,021 Posts
sir_crash_alot Going by the recent posts you started, including this one, it seems you are in the market for a road frame. Perhaps consider here: Road Frames for Sale | BikeExchange.com
I am not affiliated with BikeExchange (or any other bike company).
I am not affiliated with BikeExchange (or any other bike company).
#29
Noob Bee
Thread Starter
sir_crash_alot Going by the recent posts you started, including this one, it seems you are in the market for a road frame. Perhaps consider here: Road Frames for Sale | BikeExchange.com
I am not affiliated with BikeExchange (or any other bike company).
I am not affiliated with BikeExchange (or any other bike company).
Thank you for the resource! I will poke around that site.
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 884
Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked 773 Times
in
404 Posts
I think GCN in a recent video said that Marco Pantani ran through something like 30 frames in a single racing season (now granted those weren't actual Bianchis, they were made by an Italian artisan craftsman under the Bianchi name, but still). The trade-off between lightweight and durable is real, and in some sense, Stradalli's warranty statement reflects this...
After watching the stage 4 sprint yesterday, seeing the bars and front ends flex under the power of these riders (and seeing completely assploded crashed bikes) I can see how they can wear a bike out.
As a 190# rider with reasonable peak power - nothing lightweight for me!!
Likes For Jughed:
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,456
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4420 Post(s)
Liked 4,873 Times
in
3,017 Posts
A carbon structure will basically maintain its strength indefinitely unless physically damaged. Which can of course happen with even relatively minor accidents. I’ve also seen carbon frames snap at the point where they had been clamped on the team car roof. There was a thread here a few years ago about a Ridley frame that had broken like this. It had broken while riding along about half way up the seat tube with no obvious stress point. Someone then posted a photo of the bikes clamped on roof racks in exactly the same place where it broke.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 884
Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked 773 Times
in
404 Posts
We used to get similar claims from F1 drivers about their carbon chassis losing stiffness after half a season of racing. Having torsion tested numerous chassis, there was never any evidence to back up those claims. It was just a mind game to rationalise defeat. Funnily enough they rarely complain when winning. I expect it’s the same with pro bike racers.
A carbon structure will basically maintain its strength indefinitely unless physically damaged. Which can of course happen with even relatively minor accidents. I’ve also seen carbon frames snap at the point where they had been clamped on the team car roof. There was a thread here a few years ago about a Ridley frame that had broken like this. It had broken while riding along about half way up the seat tube with no obvious stress point. Someone then posted a photo of the bikes clamped on roof racks in exactly the same place where it broke.
A carbon structure will basically maintain its strength indefinitely unless physically damaged. Which can of course happen with even relatively minor accidents. I’ve also seen carbon frames snap at the point where they had been clamped on the team car roof. There was a thread here a few years ago about a Ridley frame that had broken like this. It had broken while riding along about half way up the seat tube with no obvious stress point. Someone then posted a photo of the bikes clamped on roof racks in exactly the same place where it broke.
The claims I heard them make was that frames felt "dead" by the end of the tour. Is it not possible that the stresses they put the frames under cause micro damage that changes the characteristics of the structure?
#33
Noob Bee
Thread Starter
What if the structure is so lightweight/lightly built that it gets physically damaged from "normal" use? By "normal", I mean a 1800w++ pro rider putting the structure thru its paces over the course of a grand tour, or series of grand tours - where they exceed or come close to the max the design capabilities of said structure?
The claims I heard them make was that frames felt "dead" by the end of the tour. Is it not possible that the stresses they put the frames under cause micro damage that changes the characteristics of the structure?
The claims I heard them make was that frames felt "dead" by the end of the tour. Is it not possible that the stresses they put the frames under cause micro damage that changes the characteristics of the structure?
Edit: On that note, hockey players who "know" will tell you the performance differences in terms of kick between the mid-grade and upper-end sticks is minimal, the difference is weight-savings, as top end sticks are feather-light. Interestingly, the prevailing wisdom is that if you want a stick for pure performance (weight+kick) you get top end, but if you want a durable stick with kick, go mid-grade.
Last edited by sir_crash_alot; 07-05-23 at 07:40 AM.
#34
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,539
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3891 Post(s)
Liked 1,940 Times
in
1,385 Posts
We used to get similar claims from F1 drivers about their carbon chassis losing stiffness after half a season of racing. Having torsion tested numerous chassis, there was never any evidence to back up those claims. It was just a mind game to rationalise defeat. Funnily enough they rarely complain when winning. I expect it’s the same with pro bike racers.
A carbon structure will basically maintain its strength indefinitely unless physically damaged. Which can of course happen with even relatively minor accidents. I’ve also seen carbon frames snap at the point where they had been clamped on the team car roof. There was a thread here a few years ago about a Ridley frame that had broken like this. It had broken while riding along about half way up the seat tube with no obvious stress point. Someone then posted a photo of the bikes clamped on roof racks in exactly the same place where it broke.
A carbon structure will basically maintain its strength indefinitely unless physically damaged. Which can of course happen with even relatively minor accidents. I’ve also seen carbon frames snap at the point where they had been clamped on the team car roof. There was a thread here a few years ago about a Ridley frame that had broken like this. It had broken while riding along about half way up the seat tube with no obvious stress point. Someone then posted a photo of the bikes clamped on roof racks in exactly the same place where it broke.
and
https://www.limit-fatigue.com/limit-...-life-fatigue/
and
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...8/1/012017/pdf
I was under the impression that CF had no known fatigue limit, but that's because I was dealing with overbuilt structures which were designed for minimal flex. One assumes that quality CF bike frame manufacturers put strain gauges on their test frames when they hand them over to the test riders, so they're not just going by feel. The idea is that a good CF bike frame doesn't flex in such a way as to absorb power from the rider. When I got my CF frame in 2000, I noticed a huge difference in my ability to accelerate it compared with the 80s steel frames I had been riding, which felt like I could rip the bars off in a sprint. Otherwise known as stiffness. I would assume that a CF frame optimized for weight rather than stiffness would have a shorter service life. Obviously, pros look for a balance there. BTW, steel frames have a shorter fatigue life than CF if stressed similarly.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
Likes For Carbonfiberboy:
#35
Noob Bee
Thread Starter
Here ya go: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6829243/
and
https://www.limit-fatigue.com/limit-...-life-fatigue/
and
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...8/1/012017/pdf
I was under the impression that CF had no known fatigue limit, but that's because I was dealing with overbuilt structures which were designed for minimal flex. One assumes that quality CF bike frame manufacturers put strain gauges on their test frames when they hand them over to the test riders, so they're not just going by feel. The idea is that a good CF bike frame doesn't flex in such a way as to absorb power from the rider. When I got my CF frame in 2000, I noticed a huge difference in my ability to accelerate it compared with the 80s steel frames I had been riding, which felt like I could rip the bars off in a sprint. Otherwise known as stiffness. I would assume that a CF frame optimized for weight rather than stiffness would have a shorter service life. Obviously, pros look for a balance there. BTW, steel frames have a shorter fatigue life than CF if stressed similarly.
and
https://www.limit-fatigue.com/limit-...-life-fatigue/
and
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...8/1/012017/pdf
I was under the impression that CF had no known fatigue limit, but that's because I was dealing with overbuilt structures which were designed for minimal flex. One assumes that quality CF bike frame manufacturers put strain gauges on their test frames when they hand them over to the test riders, so they're not just going by feel. The idea is that a good CF bike frame doesn't flex in such a way as to absorb power from the rider. When I got my CF frame in 2000, I noticed a huge difference in my ability to accelerate it compared with the 80s steel frames I had been riding, which felt like I could rip the bars off in a sprint. Otherwise known as stiffness. I would assume that a CF frame optimized for weight rather than stiffness would have a shorter service life. Obviously, pros look for a balance there. BTW, steel frames have a shorter fatigue life than CF if stressed similarly.
#36
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,539
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3891 Post(s)
Liked 1,940 Times
in
1,385 Posts
Fascinating stuff. It's interesting to think about this research and information from a non-pro perspective, where most of us likely aren't putting the kind of stress on a weight-optimized frame that a pro would, and in theory could extend the life of a CF frame longer. At the same time, perhaps even under normal person loads a lightweight frame would still degrade faster than a more overbuilt structure.
An aside . . . research says that the catastrophic implosion of the Titan took .01 seconds or less, IOW as it is said, they never knew what hit them. They did not experience the collapse. I think the above papers shed some light on that disaster especially the discussion of single broken carbon fibers.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
Likes For Carbonfiberboy:
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,456
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4420 Post(s)
Liked 4,873 Times
in
3,017 Posts
What if the structure is so lightweight/lightly built that it gets physically damaged from "normal" use? By "normal", I mean a 1800w++ pro rider putting the structure thru its paces over the course of a grand tour, or series of grand tours - where they exceed or come close to the max the design capabilities of said structure?
The claims I heard them make was that frames felt "dead" by the end of the tour. Is it not possible that the stresses they put the frames under cause micro damage that changes the characteristics of the structure?
The claims I heard them make was that frames felt "dead" by the end of the tour. Is it not possible that the stresses they put the frames under cause micro damage that changes the characteristics of the structure?
1800W sounds like a lot, but in engineering terms it’s not a big challenge.
Specialized used the Aethos as a showcase for how light you can safely go in a well designed frame without imposing low rider weight limits. 585g frame and 270g forks. The S-works Tarmac is around 800g so very unlikely to be compromised in terms of stiffness.
Don’t the riders feel “dead” by the end of a GT? It sounds highly subjective to me. Have pro teams got to the point of regularly testing their bikes yet like we routinely do in F1? That I don’t know. But I suspect the frames can easily go the distance without measurable degradation if not crashed or abused.
Likes For PeteHski:
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 884
Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked 773 Times
in
404 Posts
Great insight guys… I’m a controls engineer, materials are not my thing.
So if I understand y’all, there is really no degradation and only one failure mode - complete failure.
So if I understand y’all, there is really no degradation and only one failure mode - complete failure.
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,456
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4420 Post(s)
Liked 4,873 Times
in
3,017 Posts
Most carbon failures are from manufacturing defects, crash damage or other abuse such as over-clamping tubes on bike racks.