# Easton EC90 Zero Setback Post



## Ti-Boy (Jan 20, 2003)

Anyone try this yet? Is it worth the big $? Looks like a cf version of the Thompson.


----------



## Pierre (Jan 29, 2004)

Must be expensive... if you want the same for cheap (no setback I mean)

- carbon -> Sette from pricepoint for 50$
- titanium -> Syncros. Don't know where to buy them though, but I got 2 of them on bikes I bought second hand, so people apparently like them...

Pierre





Ti-Boy said:


> Anyone try this yet? Is it worth the big $? Looks like a cf version of the Thompson.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

It's pricey because of Easton's exclusive use of carbon nanotubes. I wouldn't say it's a rip-off of Thompson's design, but it may bear some similarity.

http://www.eastonbike.com/TECH_FAQ/tech_cnt.html


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2004)

*Thomson will be better*



Ti-Boy said:


> Anyone try this yet? Is it worth the big $? Looks like a cf version of the Thompson.


I have not tried the Easton post, and I probalby won't because I am not a fan of Easton products in general. But really, if you need a zero-offset seatpost why would you look at anything but a Thomson Elite (195g) or Masterpiece (165g)? They are simple, foolproof and bombproof. They won't slip, they won't crack, and they won't break and they are just as light as any carbon post. Hmmm....


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

If you look at Easton's specs and descriptions, I doubt you'd ever have a worry about that new seatpost cracking either. It looks to be able to take at least as much stress as any lightweight Al or Ti post.


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2004)

*Marketing and real world*



AJS said:


> If you look at Easton's specs and descriptions, I doubt you'd ever have a worry about that new seatpost cracking either. It looks to be able to take at least as much stress as any lightweight Al or Ti post.


I'm not sure from your avatar if you have some vested interest in the carbon nanotube biz. I don't dispute the ultimate strength and fatigue life. However the seatpost will be inserted into a seat tube that may or may not be perfectly finished and round. Then, it will be clamped by a clamp that may or may not provide perfectly uniform pressure to hold the post. Plus, many carbon posts have very smooth finishes and tend to slip downward, leading to the user overtightening the clamp. So, the post receives additional local stress from tightening and bang, it cracks. 

I just don't see the point in using the Easton post when a Thomson is just as light and can handle the application with less chance of problems. The knurled surface of the Thomson will greatly reduce the chance of slippage. With an alloy post you can actually grease the seat tube and reduce the amount of water that is taken in during any rides in the wet (not applicable to a carbon frame).

I like the Thomson product. I use the setback model on a couple of my bikes. I would be in heaven if they made a similar post that provided even more setback.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

I have nothing to do with Easton or anyone in the CF biz. I just changed my avatar a few days ago, until I get some other pics of my daughter ready, which is my usual avatar. 

My point is if you are looking for CF parts, why not get what looks to be the strongest CF on the market, at least from what I'm aware of. If you do some reseach, you'll find that all CF components are not made the same, nor is all CF the same, and I'm not just advocating for Easton's products.


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2004)

*I'm a bit retro-grouch*



AJS said:


> I have nothing to do with Easton or anyone in the CF biz. I just changed my avatar a few days ago, until I get some other pics of my daughter ready, which is my usual avatar.
> 
> My point is if you are looking for CF parts, why not get what looks to be the strongest CF on the market, at least from what I'm aware of. If you do some reseach, you'll find that all CF components are not made the same, nor is all CF the same, and I'm not just advocating for Easton's products.


Fair enough, I guess I have not really got my head around the carbon fiber seatpost craze. Structurally, CF does not do well with compression and any point loading, and in many frames it is difficult to get the seatpost to stop slipping unless the clamp is pretty tight. This seems to lead to more than a few cracked CF posts.

Before you think I'm a complete retro-grouch, I have used full-carbon steerers on my forks since 2001. But the clamp pressure required to hold the stem tight is usually much less than at the seat tube/seatpost junction so there seems to be fewer problems. And, I am going to try a CF post on one of my bikes (not an Easton however).


----------



## Ti-Boy (Jan 20, 2003)

*EC90 Zeor*

I am a big fan of Thompson products: stems and posts. While I resisisted the cf craze initially, I have jumped in with both feet. I have a custom Parlee due to arrive within a couple of weeks. My logic is: cf frame, cf fork, so why not cf bars and post? I have only very limited time on cf posts while test riding bikes. Every one slipped whereas my Thompson has never slipped. The Easton fit the most important criteria: no setback, hence the query. I plan to pick up a torque wrench as I have a tendency to over tighten things. 

Thanks to all for the feedback.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

Eric_H said:


> Fair enough, I guess I have not really got my head around the carbon fiber seatpost craze. Structurally, CF does not do well with compression and any point loading, and in many frames it is difficult to get the seatpost to stop slipping unless the clamp is pretty tight. This seems to lead to more than a few cracked CF posts.
> 
> Before you think I'm a complete retro-grouch, I have used full-carbon steerers on my forks since 2001. But the clamp pressure required to hold the stem tight is usually much less than at the seat tube/seatpost junction so there seems to be fewer problems. And, I am going to try a CF post on one of my bikes (not an Easton however).


I hear ya Eric, I've not jumped on the entire CF bandwagon either yet, for exactly the reasons you've stated - at least not yet with seatposts. But the topic starter asked about that particular model, so I wanted to throw in what little I know about it.

For the slippage/tightening problem, here's another one you might look into: the Columbus XLR8R -

http://www.columbustubi.com/pdf/Carbon_Components.pdf


----------



## clgtide1 (Jul 24, 2002)

*EC90 Owner*



Ti-Boy said:


> I am a big fan of Thompson products: stems and posts. While I resisisted the cf craze initially, I have jumped in with both feet. I have a custom Parlee due to arrive within a couple of weeks. My logic is: cf frame, cf fork, so why not cf bars and post? I have only very limited time on cf posts while test riding bikes. Every one slipped whereas my Thompson has never slipped. The Easton fit the most important criteria: no setback, hence the query. I plan to pick up a torque wrench as I have a tendency to over tighten things.
> 
> Thanks to all for the feedback.


I installed my EC90 right after Christmas. Specs are listed as torque each bolt to 50-60 inch lbs or 6-7NM. Love the zero setback. Love the look of the post. Love the fact I have yet to see another one on the road yet. I have a Thomson on my other road bike (Yeti Road-Project) In my opinion it is much easier to adjust than the EC90. Easton puts in nifty stainless hardware that prevents you from being able to strip the bolts and trash the post. Problem is that the bolts are almost too short to provide easy adjustment.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

clgtide1 said:


> I installed my EC90 right after Christmas. Specs are listed as torque each bolt to 50-60 inch lbs or 6-7NM. Love the zero setback. Love the look of the post. Love the fact I have yet to see another one on the road yet. I have a Thomson on my other road bike (Yeti Road-Project) In my opinion it is much easier to adjust than the EC90. Easton puts in nifty stainless hardware that prevents you from being able to strip the bolts and trash the post. Problem is that the bolts are almost too short to provide easy adjustment.


Is yours an '05 model? Only the new '05s have the nanotube resin AFAIK. I'd like to see how they're holding up for people. How much do you weigh?


----------



## clgtide1 (Jul 24, 2002)

*Yes It Is A 2005*



AJS said:


> Is yours an '05 model? Only the new '05s have the nanotube resin AFAIK. I'd like to see how they're holding up for people. How much do you weigh?


I did get the 2005 version. It has the nifty CNT Composite logo on the post. The finish is more of a matte carbon as opposed to shiny. Have not had a problem with it slipping. The front of the post is marked as you can see your seatpost height at a glance. I weigh between 150-155. I have had great luck with Easton products in the past. I just sold my CT-1 seatpost to a friend. It was originally on my Blur then transfered it to my Litespeed. 
It has over 13,000 miles and it is still going strong. So far the new post only has about 800 miles so kinda early to tell how it will hold up. Hope this helps......


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

Well, that's a pretty good report on the older unit you had. Myself, I've always had a lot of respect for Easton products, both their Al and CF stuff. They do an ungodly amount of materials R&D and have some of the best gearheads around. 

I had one of their original Monkey Lite MTB bars back when CF bars were a new thing and so many other brands were breaking. But that sucker took a helluva beating and never gave me any probs. (It helps not to over-tighten!) In my book, Easton is right up there in the top echelon with mfg's like Campy, Sidi, Columbus, Look, Brooks, etc. though they don't have as long a history as some of those.

I've got 50 lbs. more weight than you to consider. Naturally the '05 post is too new yet to have much rider critique, but I've talked to a couple of geeks at Easton and they've assured me that the nanotube CF items they have made so far, (the 58mm wheels, your seatpost, 4 road forks, and a couple of MTB bars) are some tough mo-fos.

One example: even their lightest road fork, the '05 EC90 SLX, has no rider-weight limit. For a sub-300gm. fork, that's amazing.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

BTW - I'm puzzled about why Easton hasn't done a few CF cranksets yet. I think they'd do at least as well as FSA does sales-wise if they kept their prices reasonable.


----------



## clgtide1 (Jul 24, 2002)

*EC90 Stem*



AJS said:


> Well, that's a pretty good report on the older unit you had. Myself, I've always had a lot of respect for Easton products, both their Al and CF stuff. They do an ungodly amount of materials R&D and have some of the best gearheads around.
> 
> I had one of their original Monkey Lite MTB bars back when CF bars were a new thing and so many other brands were breaking. But that sucker took a helluva beating and never gave me any probs. (It helps not to over-tighten!) In my book, Easton is right up there in the top echelon with mfg's like Campy, Sidi, Columbus, Look, Brooks, etc. though they don't have as long a history as some of those.
> 
> ...


Trying to justify switching my Look HSC to my other bike. That gives me a great (lol) excuse to buy the EC90 SLX. I already have the Equipe bars waiting semi patiently for my EC90 stem to arrive. LBS says at least 2-3 more weeks till Easton ships it. My brother lucked up and found one of the new stems on Ebay. Totally new instalation method. Local very competent shop had a nitemare trying to get it to tighten properly onto his steerer tube. Eventually trashing the mechanism. Easton wants to evaluate but has already promised a new stem. I also have the first generation of Monkey Lite bars on my Blur. They have held up to multiple crashes and unfortunate encounters with trees....


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

clgtide1 said:


> That gives me a great (lol) excuse to buy the EC90 SLX. I already have the Equipe bars waiting semi patiently for my EC90 stem to arrive.


Tell your bro' to get one of those steerer bung plugs from FSA or Columbus. They fit inside the top of the steer tube so you don't crack it when tightening. They don't weigh much, about 40 gm. Also tell the LBS to dust off the torque wrench they probably have never used and start using it, (if they even have one). If that damages their egos, take the bike somewhere else.

Of course none of that helps if the LBS can't figure out how to properly mount the stem in the first place. I don't get it - what's so hard about the EC90? Did they strip the threads? I haven't had a "hands-on" yet with the new collet-style mounting it has, but how hard can it be?

If I ever get another MTB, the first part I'll make sure it has is the Monkey Lite XC or SL. I'm definitely sold on them.


----------

