![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast. the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: DO NOT CUT. that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material inside of the extended seatmast. anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ time's integrated seatmast designs? |
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > seatmast. > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > DO NOT CUT. > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > inside of the extended seatmast. > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > time's integrated seatmast designs? In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. -ilan |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 1:02*pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > seatmast. > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > DO NOT CUT. > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are being sponsored. In part this is because the possible advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. They should just start putting warning stickers on bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits off your marvels of modern technology. Ben |
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:27:08 -0700 (PDT), "bjw@mambo.ucolick.org"
<bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote: >In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost >design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the >bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should >not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are >being sponsored. In part this is because the possible >advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and >in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking >about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. Word. |
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:27:08 -0700 (PDT), "bjw@mambo.ucolick.org"
<bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote: >They should just start putting warning stickers on >bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK >AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who >aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits >off your marvels of modern technology. At races, I used to something for racing with a label that said "Use of this product in a manner inconsistent with its labelling may be a violation of federal law." After a while I started thinking I'd be better of without it. |
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 14, 12:27*am, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org>
wrote: > On Jun 13, 1:02*pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > seatmast. > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > bike, and even then it's questionable. *Fat Masters should > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > being sponsored. *In part this is because the possible > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > They should just start putting warning stickers on > bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK > AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who > aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits > off your marvels of modern technology. > > Ben Actually, the Look integrated seatpost is more reliable than a regular post, if the clamp loosens or breaks, then the post cannot fall into the seat tube. I talked directly to their rep here in France and he said that they were required by EU law to keep spare parts for it for at least 5 years (assuming the company lasts that long, of course). You also have quite a margin of adjustment, about 4cm with a minimum of 1mm spacers, which means you only have to cut the post once, and it probably won't have to be recut if you sell the bike (as I wrote previously, a Paris bike shop told me that this was not the case and that you could never readjust saddle height without recutting the frame, the rep was not pleased when I told him about this). This is not true for any of the other brands, as far as I know. Also, the extra stiffness from integrated seat post can be counteracted by the use of elastomer spacers. -ilan |
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 11:50*am, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > seatmast. > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > DO NOT CUT. > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > inside of the extended seatmast. > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > time's integrated seatmast designs? [crossposted to rbt since the query was also posted there] Okay, having just dealt out righteous retribution to Fat Masters and integrated seatmasts elsewhere in this thread on rbr, I will attempt a serious answer to this question. For classic diamond frames, the rule of thumb has usually been that you want the seatpost to extend at least 1-2cm below the lower toptube-seat tube junction. This because there is a strong bending moment exterted by your (my) fat butt and it is best if this is taken up by a seattube that is braced by the toptube. For example, some MTB and compact frames have a seat tube that extends several cm above the top tube. If you stick a seatpost in there and the end does not reach all the way down to the junction, your butt is trying to bend the seat tube _above_ the top tube junction, where it is unbraced and weaker. A failure here will damage seatpost, frame, and butt. I have not seen a Time VXRS DOHC 2.2L in person, but looking at web pictures, it has a fairly skinny carbon tube extending way above the top tube junction. My guess is that this tube is designed to withstand the load of a Fat Master butt when the mast has a substantial length of seatpost inside. The seatpost makes the mast stiffer against the Fat Master bending moment. With a 300mm post on a road frame, it may run all the way down to the tube junction or even below it, which would probably be the safest. Your conclusion from this could be that the integrated seatmast is partly marketing hooey that doesn't save as much weight as one might think, due to the extra long post, or the need to make the mast thick to resist bending. I just can't imagine how one could think a bicycle marketing department would stoop that low, though. Ben |
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org>
wrote: > On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > seatmast. > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > being sponsored. In part this is because the possible > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good enough for me. -Paul |
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 14, 3:21 am, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> > wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > > seatmast. > > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would > > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > > bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should > > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > > being sponsored. In part this is because the possible > > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science > fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING > them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good > enough for me. > -Paul http://www.wolhauser.com/cxm.jpg -ilan |
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 6:21*pm, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> > wrote: > > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > > bike, and even then it's questionable. *Fat Masters should > > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > > being sponsored. *In part this is because the possible > > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science > fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING > them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good > enough for me. > -Paul http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:...rRecordBike.jpg <http://www.cyclingnews.com/sponsors...years/?id=pics/ EddyHourRecord> Not sure if these are actually the same bike, but though drilled handlebars may have been good enough for Eddy, they are not good enough for me. Although I note he doesn't seem to have had the seatpost drilled. Speaking as somebody who's broken quite a few freewheel hub axles (I hardly break anything else, just those damn axles), I'm not against innovation. I'm against *stupid* innovation. Ben |
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 7:21 pm, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> > wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > > seatmast. > > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would > > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > > bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should > > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > > being sponsored. In part this is because the possible > > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science > fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING > them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good > enough for me. > -Paul People like you are killing the economy. tf |
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 6:27 pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 14, 3:21 am, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> > > wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > > > seatmast. > > > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would > > > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > > > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > > > bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should > > > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > > > being sponsored. In part this is because the possible > > > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > > > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > > > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science > > fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING > > them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good > > enough for me. > > -Paul > > http://www.wolhauser.com/cxm.jpg > > -ilan AaiiiEEE! Et tu, Eddy? -Paul |
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 8:51 pm, thefro...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 13, 7:21 pm, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> > > wrote: > > > > On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > > > seatmast. > > > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would > > > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > > > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > > > bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should > > > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > > > being sponsored. In part this is because the possible > > > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > > > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > > > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science > > fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING > > them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good > > enough for me. > > -Paul > > People like you are killing the economy. > > tf |
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Jun 13, 10:00 pm, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 8:51 pm, thefro...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Jun 13, 7:21 pm, "Paul G." <carb...@egine.com> wrote: > > > > So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science > > > fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING > > > them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good > > > enough for me. > > > -Paul > > > People like you are killing the economy. > > > tf I think gas prices are doing that. Sure glad I'm not driving hundreds of miles to races every weekend like I did back in the day. -Paul |
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In article
<18a29f9e-6643-4832-a947-4b2358ea2829@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, ilanpsi@gmail.com wrote: > On Jun 14, 12:27*am, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> > wrote: > > On Jun 13, 1:02*pm, ilan...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter <wamann...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated > > > > seatmast. > > > > > > the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters: > > > > DO NOT CUT. > > > > > > that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design > > > > is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the > > > > inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would > > > > need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT > > > > CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material > > > > inside of the extended seatmast. > > > > > > anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/ > > > > time's integrated seatmast designs? > > > > > In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post. > > > In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to > > > pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website. > > > > In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost > > design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the > > bike, and even then it's questionable. *Fat Masters should > > not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are > > being sponsored. *In part this is because the possible > > advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and > > in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking > > about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop. > > > > They should just start putting warning stickers on > > bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK > > AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who > > aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits > > off your marvels of modern technology. > > > > Ben > > Actually, the Look integrated seatpost is more reliable than a regular > post, if the clamp loosens or breaks, then the post cannot fall into > the seat tube. I talked directly to their rep here in France and he > said that they were required by EU law to keep spare parts for it for > at least 5 years (assuming the company lasts that long, of course). > You also have quite a margin of adjustment, about 4cm with a minimum > of 1mm spacers, which means you only have to cut the post once, and it > probably won't have to be recut if you sell the bike (as I wrote > previously, a Paris bike shop told me that this was not the case and > that you could never readjust saddle height without recutting the > frame, the rep was not pleased when I told him about this). This is > not true for any of the other brands, as far as I know. Also, the > extra stiffness from integrated seat post can be counteracted by the > use of elastomer spacers. > > -ilan And the spare E Posts are readily available! http://www.glorycycles.com/loepor5se.html $350 !?!? None of my frames cost that much. And I bought my CX frame new. -- Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/ "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls." "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them." |
|