Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28
  1. #1
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,652

    Carbon good to go

    Go carbon or go home!






    Nice view of Hyperflexion and extension, it took Eric 5years to rehab after this crash, I got 2.5 to go, but then he retired

    Good to go Carbonites, maybe by then the 5Spot will get dropped too and well only have the Sultan and Flux left

    .
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ThePunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    293
    having my HT snap like that is my worst nightmare.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: juan_speeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,107
    Clearly, 125+ mph runs on a carbon five spot will be the norm

    How about you also post up a horrific F1 crash where the drive is protected in the carbon fiber cockpit and walks away?

    To be fair and balanced and all...
    www.seanhannity.com <=not what you think it is.

    Homeopathy is the Air Guitar of Medicine.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,263

    metal

    That was a faired metal frame, but what does that have to do with the price of eggs?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,416
    Why would you be so sure that was a carbon frame? Yeah, I have no issues with well-constructed carbon.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: flipnidaho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,417
    If DT goes the way of the Yeti (or Ibis) model and outsourced to Taiwan using aluminum or carbon, I would still buy it if:
    1. Customer Service remains excellent
    2. Quality of ride and workmanship is the same
    3. Price is competitive
    In that order...
    I've ridden carbon frames on and off for the past 10 years and have no doubt about it's durability in the rough stuff (yes, it includes laying it down on slickrock and rockgardens and rocks hitting the down tube, chainstays at speed)...

  7. #7
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,586
    No amount of carbon can compensate for idiocy
    Life....the original terminal illness

  8. #8
    Moosehead
    Reputation: moosehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,900

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    349
    I wonder what material the chinstrap on his helmet was made from??

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ofrogg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by pdlhrd
    I wonder what material the chinstrap on his helmet was made from??
    ugh, seriously...

  11. #11
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,652
    It was a carbon frame, because I saw the TV program of Eric setting his world records, the bike was mainly developed to set the world record which he did on snow!

    Then in an attempt to set the world DH speed record on DIRT they went to Chile!

    First few runs was done on a std Giant DH bike, no problems, the first run on the carbon bike that crash happened. he spent 5years recovering!

    My point here is that carbon in my eyes is useful at the highest end, in this case it worked on snow but the DIRT side was not taken in account in the design of the bike, not a failure completely of carbon but inherent in the design for which it was intended!

    Which was obviously built for speed and aerodynamics not vibration and the terrain forces that DIRT provides!

    Probably why the last WR set was done on a std M6 FRO by another crazy French man but again on snow!

    So when I here comparisons of road bikes sales etc compared to MTB applications it just raises the whole comparison for me and how out of touch how much actual thought by those who makes such comments!

    In saying that if ya do your research and check out the comparisons of std carbon manufactures the ones you want to compare and have Turner become they have a high failure rate, higher than there alloy counter parts.

    If you want, mediocrity so be it, be careful what you wish for you may get it, I don;t think people get the differences in bikes anymore, its plain most here want everything the same regardless that they can buy a Ibis, Trek giant or GT spechy etc!

    That said Ive always said there is good carbon and bad it can be made well, Ive never said or doubted that, but is the market big enough per cost I doubt it, its got a short term life in high end frames, the market is already getting smaller, point of difference is the key as always not sameness, all blondes are not equal but I ike variety myself, I get bored of blondes all the time!

    "Carbon" has its place for sure, but it's not necessary for every manufacturer to have a competitive advantage or a competitive bike or platform!

    More performance can be had in the wheels than in the frame, if you really want performance and can pay for it then go buy some DT Swiss carbon rims, or Edge rims, half saved in the wheels is twice the gain saved in the frame!

    Most of the half arsed performance gains people waffle on about could easily be improved by the same old things that always hold people back, tuning, setup, geo, tires and even proper components for desired discipline of riding, only pros benefit form weekend frames replaced on Monday.

    GTs Fury did not dominate anything in last years DH, the only reason carbon bikes are so competitive is because more are on the start lines not purely performance, these guys are sponsored and paid to ride these bikes and sure they want to who dosen't want to race the most tech, if F1 yyou want to race the best, that does not mean we all drive around in F1 cars though I'm sure many in the US who drive Hummers would 5
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  12. #12
    tardcore
    Reputation: pjlama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    821
    Really, if he had the right gear on like a proper helmet it wouldn't have been too bad, what a tard.

  13. #13
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,652
    Quote Originally Posted by pjlama
    Really, if he had the right gear on like a proper helmet it wouldn't have been too bad, what a tard.
    Yeah I here ya, that's part of the point I was making those at the highest levels are pushing it to the limit.

    Neck braces were new then, he was more focused on aerodyamics and peformance than protection, even the best can come down hard, something we take for granted until the s h i t hits the fan!

    I'm sure he or the desingers ever expected the bike to do that either otherwise they would never have trusted it so much. when he crashed he was well over 100mph and not even 3/4 way down.

    Still looked impressive.
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  14. #14
    Delirious Tuck
    Reputation: thefriar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,296
    Quote Originally Posted by trailadvent
    My point here is that carbon in my eyes is useful at the highest end, in this case it worked on snow but the DIRT side was not taken in account in the design of the bike, not a failure completely of carbon but inherent in the design for which it was intended!
    I'm confused... Let's ignore cost for a second and location of manufacture, if carbon can be designed with intent for dirt use and it provides equal or better performance to alu or steel in terms of frame life, stiffness, weight, and durability then doesn't it have the same place in the manufacturer's quiver as the other materials?

    It used to be the most common bike material was steel. Then there was Aluminum once manufacturers begun to understand how to design it, the economics around it, and adapt it for mtb use it became the standard frame material.

    When alu entered the stage it wasn't a whole sale jump, there was experimentation, failure, and success. It seems to be carbon is moving in the direction of becoming the material of choice for some manufacturers, especially on their high end frame options.

    Most folks riding high end boutique bikes, or the majority of that market segment of buyers, probably have the disposable income to replace frames every year or two which means they're willing to shell out for the latest and greatest or to "buy speed" with reduced weight. There are probably a bunch of these buyers that like turner but aren't homers and will buy an ibis mojo b/c they think the carbon weight savings will make them a better rider, DT has to consider them into the equation.

    If the carbon bikes could be made in the US I'd be all for it, if not, then I'd need to know like flipnidaho that I'm still getting everything I associate with turner today before I pulled the trigger.

    All this said, I'm venturing to a niner SS air 9 carbon, but I don't think I'd move to carbon on my beefier bikes just yet... which is kinda Santa Cruz's strategy if you look at it... Blur XC then Blur LT and now Nomad... I'd probably have waited another 6-9 months for the Nomad carbon if I were SC but they see their sales numbers and demand for their Blur carbons so I don't think they'd have pulled out the Nomad carbon if they didn't think demand was there...

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,263

    TA contact info:

    Hey TA, rumors are that the V10 will be carbon sooner than later and Santa Cruz wanted your contact info to have you test the proto. You game?! They know you are not a fan of the material and thought you would be the perfect person (except for the captain of Team BOngRACHO who is testing for Chumba) to be 'converted' to the magical material, or as most who have been in the industry for awhile will say, the new aluminum.

    DT

    ps. No carbon from Turner Bikes yet, just more metal from Sapa for 2011.

  16. #16
    Just roll it......
    Reputation: ebxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,490
    Quote Originally Posted by thefriar
    All this said, I'm venturing to a niner SS air 9 carbon, but I don't think I'd move to carbon on my beefier bikes just yet...
    My wife just got a Remedy 9.9 last week and I gotta say it sure feels/looks amazing. 27 lbs with a joplin and pedals too. Crazy light. After the first ride, she decided we'll be selling her other AM bike (Slayer SXC)....didn't even think twice.

    TA, from the look and age of that Giant, I'll say that his frame was aluminum. Even if it was carbon, I don't know how you'd manufacture against 130 mph speeds/forces?

    EB

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,353
    Back in 88 I had a chainstay break on my GT Karakoram K2. I ended up off the trail, slightly skinning my shin, and had to walk back to the car (over two blocks!).

    BEWARE THE UNSAFE STEEL FRAMES. DANGER, DANGER!!!!!
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3
    [QUOTE=trailadvent]
    More performance can be had in the wheels than in the frame, if you really want performance and can pay for it then go buy some DT Swiss carbon rims, or Edge rims, half saved in the wheels is twice the gain saved in the frame!

    I would like to see the evidence for that exact frame/wheel weight ratio as described here. If you can provide some links, it would be perfect. Or is that just your estimation?

    Askromx

  19. #19
    banned
    Reputation: cruso414's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,102
    I have broke the last 2 bikes I owned and neither was a carbon bike. Luckily neither was a catastrophic failure so I count myself lucky. The first was a Jet 9 and the second was a Lynskey Ti frame. Both were warrantied extremely well but it proves that anything can break. BTW, I'm 185 and ride mostly XC/AM.

  20. #20
    I just wanna go fast...
    Reputation: bdamschen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by cruso414
    I have broke the last 2 bikes I owned and neither was a carbon bike. Luckily neither was a catastrophic failure so I count myself lucky. The first was a Jet 9 and the second was a Lynskey Ti frame. Both were warrantied extremely well but it proves that anything can break. BTW, I'm 185 and ride mostly XC/AM.
    OMG. That means if you had been riding a carbon bike instead, you probably would have died in a fiery explosion rather than just simply breaking your metal frame.

    There's still people that won't ride aluminum frames out there because they say they only trust steel. They're usually crust old men that people don't listen to anymore because they sound crazy.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    874

    Smile

    The new Boeing 787 has more parts coming out of the autoclave than milling machines.
    Designed properly and used for its intended purpose a carbon frame can provide the proper amount of flex far easier than aluminum on a bicycle.
    The Factory Ducati Moto GP Team has been running a composite frame for the last 2 seasons. They got the handling down this year and should be in the hunt for a world title. For now I am quite happy with my 09 Flux and almost done building up an 08 RFX .

    As stated above, wether Turner builds future bikes here or Taiwan, the customer service
    is what brings people back to the product.

  22. #22
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,652
    [quote=askromx][quote=trailadvent]
    More performance can be had in the wheels than in the frame, if you really want performance and can pay for it then go buy some DT Swiss carbon rims, or Edge rims, half saved in the wheels is twice the gain saved in the frame!

    I would like to see the evidence for that exact frame/wheel weight ratio as described here. If you can provide some links, it would be perfect. Or is that just your estimation?

    Askromx[/quote

    I'm sure I could dig out links for you, but if you notice I neither spend all day online here nor do I intend too I have a life and try to get on with it the best I can in my condition.

    Look it's not rocket science but anyone with race experience or is really honest in frame manufacture that's competed at any level would tell you that.

    The fact is many frames today in alloy are so good and so strong for weight compared to even a few years back, the benefit is really small. especially in FS.

    If you go back awhile and read an article by GHEY MBA roadie poofta's May 2007 its interesting to compare the people's philosophies to now and I can say after being an observer of some of these guys for over 10yrs they are pretty good at chopping an changing there minds when you here what they are saying now!

    2 things though stand out and always have, taken into account what I said on the quality of many alloy frames from nearly all manufactures even mass produced hydrofomrned coy's.

    Rotational weight, nothing new if you’ve been around cycling for awhile so I wonder what you’ve been doing or have ridden owned and experienced? I’ve raced and owned road bikes MTB and Moto for over 20years, in nearly every discipline you could name for both, that does not make me a know it all but it does one thing it makes me no sucker either I know what works and what doesn’t.

    I’ve built up my own DH rigs, my current one astounds people when they take it for a spin and pick it up, its no GHEY weight weanie build but everyone, everyone has been impressed by its feel and lightness, and with 2ply tires not ghey single ply's just to make the scales look good.

    HOW, mainly cause of my wheel build, the stiffness for one, as well as weight!

    I always choose straight gauge spokes for me as I'm a bigger rider so I flex things lighter riders don't, so stiffness is important to me, almost more so than durability a rim is not that expensive, I hate riding on a flexy wheel, why I won’t use double butted alloy spokes or alloy nipples, always brass, always straight gauge, also both are easily sourced and replaced.

    if you knew your bikes and wheels, you wouldn’t never have asked this question, I hate a flexy wheel it is slow to accelerate and feels terrible like a flat or off tire, total crap. so what’s the point of having a stiff frame or structure if ya wheel is crap, same for dishing building of a wheel, I won’t sacrifice a wheels stiffness and integrity so I can run a 10spd 36t to climb better when the wheels is fleixer DUH, a stiffer wheel climbs faster!

    The amount of BS in this industry is astounding and from people who have 1: never tried it, or 2: never experienced it may sound the same but they’re not!

    I'll give ya an example, of the BS in this industry.

    CARBON frames are not NEW!

    Carbon has been around for years both in MTB and ROAD..

    Ive had Carbon for years in bars, my 94 Cdale Super V had a carbon swingarm, Ive said that before.

    Treks Y bike
    Cannodales Raven
    Dimanond backs V bike which was pretty hawt actually but cost a F****N earth as did the other 2
    Treks had carbon hardtails for years and many fail, Ive seen em Ive seen them go to warranty.

    Like I said I applaud carbon rims and for the price they are it should be double the price so DICKWADS, SHOW PONIES and Magpie wannabe riders can't afford them, because they will be whining and winging when they fracture it, break it or chip it. And those stupid enough with big pockets that can't use it for the intended use well they deserve each other.

    ITS plastic no matter what color ya paint it.

    PTO
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  23. #23
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,652
    Part 2

    The CARBON GT FURY [hawt bike love it, but wouldn’t own it] but can see why a pro would [note very small market even XC is small]


    Did it dominate!!!!!!!???? Well hello no!
    Hannah had some good results but noting new over his career, Didn't even win a round of the WC!

    Interesting to know though at his home track where he spent significant time testing and training to purely win the Worlds on his CARBON wonder, He failed!!!!

    All the experimentation by others on dicky AM bikes, single crown forks and carbon frames all 3 categories were won on true DH bikes on the flattest pedaliest course of all time! SC V10 ist 2nd Mens open pro, Womens open pro Turner DHR, Juniors Ancillotti DHP Kiwi junior yeahhaa

    Where a carbon bike should have had its most and biggest benefit, this course was tailored for Hannah he trained on it all year, yet 2 10" rigs not modified frames ligth weight versions or carbon were running full coil shocks 10' spanked his arse!

    Where did they make the biggest gains! WHEELS................

    Weve had GT Furys race throughout our series, not one that I know of has won a single round of DH, and some top riders on them too! I maybe wrong but Turner DHrs prominent, Lappierre and I'm sure a few others but off top of my head can't remember!

    In the real world our bikes get shuttled, not hand kept by mechanics, they're on shitty trailers bouncing up and down hills to get to the top, carbon does not react to this treatment well..

    A winning bike is one that lasts like the rider.

    HELLO

    The Wheels the wheels, the wheels!

    Always the wheels, for Peaty's race run they removed the seals, cleaned out the grease, lubed with light oil for one run, made the wheels as light and stiff as possible to reduce rotational weight and improve acceleration.

    Even Peaty said he had to brake in totally different places compared to his practice wheels, basically the same but std, no mods, because his race wheels, polished an friction reduced were so much faster.

    END of story, if you've raced Road bikes on std rims hubs vs a top set or even carbon you'd never have asked its night and day.

    Ive raced on HED vs Kysyuriums and Nuetrons, Eurus G3s I had traing wheels vs race wheels training tires vs race tires, you notice a significant difference and MTB is no difference! You'd never have asked if you've had a set of decent hand built wheels, hubs spokes vs a std factory built set. Its night and day.

    THE only reason you see so many carbon bikes is because of fashion,
    If the development is continued at the same rate, there's little between them, even at the XC races I debate it till the cows come home, there's always been very light bikes and if Julien was paid to race an ally HT I'd bet he''d still win, racing has always been about win on Sunday, sell on Monday, anyone that's says different is selling something or a dam liar!

    This is not new its always been the case, and look up, sicklines, DIRT, cyclingnews Pinkbike etc there's many articles here on the value of wheels vs frame alone.

    Like Ive said alloy frames are so good now especially for MTB, its the little details that let them down, now we are heading back into overly light overly priced and ya only have to see the responses by manufactures to those who are critical of it, no one, likes the truth, some of us have been through this more than a few times, but let the dirt fall where it may!


    I'm going to throw this out there, if ya know anything about the recession and moto X dirt bikes, look into the history of the big four, what happened to the European brands when the Japanese came along, now KTM have done to the Japanese what they di to the Euro's!

    They have not listened to the market they have followed trends that they believe will sell more and are best, they would never have envisioned in the 90s that in less than 10 short years KTM would be the biggest selling dirt bike brand in the world, and also out sell 4strokes by the 2strokes in a year of recession [ it had been building] why because of value, because they listened to they're loyal market not one time wanna be after the lasted fad, they didn't do this by dropping there pants and going to Taiwan or selling out and trying to be something there not they played to there strengths and listed to there core market and grew steadily over time, STAYED the course!

    And look at them now, the Japanese must be wondering what the hell has happened in less than 20years they have lost they're dominance they were destined to have forever, nothing lasts forever, and dis en franchise ya market that helped you grow to your own expense, like the Pantene add it won't happen straight away but it will happen!

    If I was buying a bike right now it would be orange! I also see the new 350SX is dominating the MX 1s um no surprise really.

    Carbon in MX is only for Factory pro's don't see that mainstream do ya !
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  24. #24
    trail fairy
    Reputation: trailadvent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,652
    Quote Originally Posted by cruso414
    I have broke the last 2 bikes I owned and neither was a carbon bike. Luckily neither was a catastrophic failure so I count myself lucky. The first was a Jet 9 and the second was a Lynskey Ti frame. Both were warrantied extremely well but it proves that anything can break. BTW, I'm 185 and ride mostly XC/AM.
    Of course anything and any material can break, I didn't show that to highlight carbon is weak!

    I love Carbon, if people stopped trying to make assumptions and understood where I'm coming from and trying to justify there positions then maybe we can have an intelligent discussion, I'm not poking that at you, just in general,

    The point was here was a bike made to win a World speed record, designed with the very best materials at the time, lightest and strongest for its intended purpose!

    But taken out of its element from snow and onto a proper mountain [ no jumps] the carbon structure could not handle the vibrations and a catastrophic failure was the result, I wanted to highlight how carbon goes when it does, Ive had first hand experience at over 30knots on water and it was still dam messy and painful, thankfully for me it was a rare occurrence, I only broke a couple of masts and booms over nearly 15years.

    The KEY point here is that MTB is different to the road, to road biking and road motorcycling, you guys are comparing pros and pro teams to JRA riders, who are most of the market and potential market Turner seem keen to expand on, if DWL didn't bring them over why is carbon going too.

    To get the strength to quality durability to compare with say Carbon wheels, compare and std 19 set in ally vs carbon is twice the price, that's twice the price of alloy with I9s

    So how is that going to attract more buyers and a bigger market, DWL didn't do it did it, otherwise we would have more bikes/range! Not that its not been successful, but it hasn't gone on and catched more potential market in fact it seems it has lossed some as well!

    So in order to do that, something has to be compromised!

    Where its manufactured!
    How its manufactured
    and the quality!

    Now I tell ya Colnago for example used to I;'m not sure if they still do used to have its Italian made frames lugs for the C40 and C50 handmade in the Ferrari factory each to the specc for each frame size, not the same mold and geo like Giant and Specialised used in they're Taiwanese factories!

    Colnago also had lower end frames made for more mass prod in Taiwan, ugly as sin bikes I'd never have touched one with a barge pole period I don't by a Colnago to have it diluted in some cheap arse factory, I;d rather go buy a bike that I know it is what it is, or more likely buy a Cassati or Scarpin

    Its like buying a Ferrari off a factory line from the f*************G Hyundai factory with a Stallion on the F*********G side, well ya know what ya can do with that s h i t.........

    You guys might sell out like ya have to ya car industry and many other American businesses and industries fine, just don;t come on here in a year or so winning and *****ing about it! I will be waiting

    Thats my point if there's some other way well it will be interesting to see where the Dirt lands, but it seems like they're is less and less of a point of difference every year, so why buy high end might as well go by a Giant, which is what I'm seeing here more and more, Ive never seen so many GTs and Giants on the trails like I did last week in Roto Vegas not carbon ones either, here at least people are looking for value, the difference in performance now is not as much as many would have you believe maybe where hurting more I know a lot of LBS have gone to the wall and while Ive seen a few carbon frames in shops its rare, I can;t even give away a near brand new set of carbon brakes last year I sold a set used for a year for what I nearly paid for them at pro prices!

    I don;t know what planet some bike manufactures are living on the money is not out they're, as always they res a sector with deep pockets but not the main, I just don't get the business plan what so ever!

    Carbon will go up as well with more demand, so that will mean less quality to keep costs of frames from exploding its B 101, the same thing happened mid nineties in sailing almost a shortage for awhile costs exploded, a $700 mast ended up being nearly $1500 and settled around $1000 for a %100 carbon mast and depending on brand that quality varied as did price up to $1500 per mast, heel i never even used to squint at that, now I crap myself, lol
    Just riding a muddy trail. . ..

    MAXXIS 4C!
    Helmet for your neck

    Leatt FAQs


  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ofrogg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    120
    wow...

    just

    wow...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •