# Lets talk carbon frames & parts from taiwan



## promtber (Jun 11, 2004)

I know most small frame builders all the way to the big ones are having their carbon parts and frames being made in Taiwan. Most of the companies are using the same companies in Taiwan to make the parts. It seems like anyone can buy a frame or part and put their companies name on it. Do you think most of the quality they are turning out are high quality? I’m sure some have stricter guidelines when making parts than others. I have just been seeing allot of frames and parts on web site and eBay that you have never heard of before that look the same as big name companies parts for half the price.


----------



## fmw (Sep 28, 2005)

Yes, I think the Taiwanese bicycle products are excellent. I also think the move there with manufacturing has made brand differences pretty meaningless. Yes, you can buy a no-name frame that is as good as a name frame for a lot less money.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

When you outsource your frame building you're not really a frame builder anymore, but a designer. Brand names or rather the designs behind them haven't become meaningless. There's still a large quality and performance spread amongst different brands.....it's just like giving a random guy and a sushi chef a blowfish to prepare...the first will probably end up killing his customers, whilst the other prepares a good meal.


----------



## fmw (Sep 28, 2005)

divve said:


> When you outsource your frame building you're not really a frame builder anymore, but a designer. Brand names or rather the designs behind them haven't become meaningless. There's still a large quality and performance spread amongst different brands.....it's just like giving a random guy and a sushi chef a blowfish to prepare...the first will probably end up killing his customers, whilst the other prepares a good meal.


Large quality and performance spread? Hardly. Barely perceptible, maybe. The sushi chef thing isn't even an analogy. It has nothing to do with anything related to bicycles. Sorry, I just don't buy this, despite people's strong desire to cling to the magic of the names emblazoned on their down tubes.


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

*Yes, it makes a difference*

I am not saying that todays frames coming out of Taiwan are bad frames. Taiwan, on average knows carbon fiber better than most countries, and bikes today are better than ever, and there are great deals to be had. BUT, there is a difference. I have seen CF frames with little balls of carbon or whatever rolling around inside of the top tube (from Taiwan) and I have seen CF frames warped and misaligned (from Taiwan). I have ridden frames from Taiwan, and agree that they can be quite good. I have also ridden some of the cookie cutter CF frames from Taiwan and felt that they were so uncomfortable that you should save money and buy an aluminum frame instead. In the end, you get what you pay for, and, you don't get what you don't pay for.


----------



## Insight Driver (Jan 27, 2006)

There are quite a number of small manufacturers that still make carbon fiber frames in the States. Craig Calfee is one, for example, who has been doing so for many years. I suspect most people who have gotten Tawianese frames didn't even know it because the names on the downtubes are known brands. Even Colnago has some of their frames made in Taiwan, now. The reason is obvious; cost of manufacture; manufacturing has gone to the Pacific rim because it's cheaper there. Competition is so great, though, that you do not find much in the way of poor quality except in the deep-discount third-tier bike brands. They are no better than any department store bike, when it gets down to it.

When it gets down to it, though, most people are not riding the frame, rather, they are riding wheels, bars, stems, seats and drivetrains that are for the most part, Japanese.


----------



## promtber (Jun 11, 2004)

I think 80% of carbon frames are from Taiwan. As for parts like 95% are from Taiwan. Bike Companies just give them a design and they fab it up and the worst case they pick a stock design and slap their name on it. Majority of these companies just get raw carbon frames shipped to them and they paint them in house and slap on logos.


----------



## 3465mike (Dec 7, 2004)

*US made carbon frames*

the only 2 manufacturers that still make frames domestically (in the US) are calfee and ........TREK. all TREK OCLV bikes are made by hame in wisconsin..I suggest anyone who thinks carbon Calnogo's are made in Italy,carbon Ridley's are made in Belgium, or your favorite brand A are made in their respective home country send an email to that manufacturer and ask for yourself.........most are made in one of 3 overseas factories.....


----------



## promtber (Jun 11, 2004)

Do you know what companies make most carbon frames overseas? I have heard the same their is only a few high end companies that make all carbon frames.


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

3465mike said:


> the only 2 manufacturers that still make frames domestically (in the US) are calfee and ........TREK. all TREK OCLV bikes are made by hame in wisconsin..I suggest anyone who thinks carbon Calnogo's are made in Italy,carbon Ridley's are made in Belgium, or your favorite brand A are made in their respective home country send an email to that manufacturer and ask for yourself.........most are made in one of 3 overseas factories.....


Colnago carbon frames are NOT made in Taiwan, some of their entry level aluminum bikes are, but that is all.


----------



## 3465mike (Dec 7, 2004)

promtber said:


> Do you know what companies make most carbon frames overseas? I have heard the same their is only a few high end companies that make all carbon frames.


I don't have the names of the actually carbon manufacturing factories in Tawain and China, however I can tell you that most except for those previously stated are made their...there are some exceptions I'm sure that I'm unaware of....and example is that carbon LOOK forks are made in france, but their frames are made in Asia.....but a list of definite Asian manufactured brands are: Specialized, Cannondale's Synapse, KHS, FUJI, Jamis, GIANT (gian may actually be on of the better asian carbon bikes as they even make their own carbon fibers) Calnago, LOOK, Ridley, etc..........


----------



## promtber (Jun 11, 2004)

http://news.cens.com/php/getnews.php?file=/news/2005/07/26/20050726015.htm&daily=1


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

promtber said:


> http://news.cens.com/php/getnews.php?file=/news/2005/07/26/20050726015.htm&daily=1



COME ON, look at the date of that artical, back in mid 2005 it has been proven FALSE! Taiwnese journalists just don't make the grade.


----------



## Insight Driver (Jan 27, 2006)

GW1 you have to show proof. Man, just go the Colnago official site and it says the same thing! What planet do you live on?


----------



## erock139 (Dec 5, 2005)

A must read if you haven't already.

http://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/features/bikebiz.html


e


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

fmw said:


> Large quality and performance spread? Hardly. Barely perceptible, maybe. The sushi chef thing isn't even an analogy. It has nothing to do with anything related to bicycles. Sorry, I just don't buy this, despite people's strong desire to cling to the magic of the names emblazoned on their down tubes.


I suggest you take a Felt F1C for a test ride and then a Cervelo R3. There's a huge difference in torsional stiffness between the two. The same goes for lightweight forks. Some are so flexible they're simply unsuitable to race with.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

divve said:


> When you outsource your frame building you're not really a frame builder anymore, but a designer. Brand names or rather the designs behind them haven't become meaningless. There's still a large quality and performance spread amongst different brands.....it's just like giving a random guy and a sushi chef a blowfish to prepare...the first will probably end up killing his customers, whilst the other prepares a good meal.



Yes, well stated though I think I'd substitute significant in place of large.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

fmw said:


> Large quality and performance spread? Hardly. Barely perceptible, maybe. The sushi chef thing isn't even an analogy. It has nothing to do with anything related to bicycles. Sorry, I just don't buy this, despite people's strong desire to cling to the magic of the names emblazoned on their down tubes.


Not "large" nor "barely perceptible" either. I'm sure we all agree that it's not about the names; it's about the choice of materials, use of the materials, the production methods and quality control.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

*False*



3465mike said:


> the only 2 manufacturers that still make frames domestically (in the US) are calfee and ........TREK. all TREK OCLV bikes are made by hame in wisconsin..I suggest anyone who thinks carbon Calnogo's are made in Italy,carbon Ridley's are made in Belgium, or your favorite brand A are made in their respective home country send an email to that manufacturer and ask for yourself.........most are made in one of 3 overseas factories.....



Parlee frames are manufactured in the US, carbon Colnago frames are manufactured in Italy, carbon Fondriest frames are also manufactured in Italy and Time frames are manufactured in France. Them's the facts and if you don't believe me perhaps you should email those companies and provide the proof of your original assertion yourself. 

P.S. It's Colnago, not Calnogo and yes Ridley's are made in Asia, not Belgium.

Oh... and the Mizuno forks that Fondriest uses are also made in Asia.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

promtber said:


> http://news.cens.com/php/getnews.php?file=/news/2005/07/26/20050726015.htm&daily=1



http://www.bicycleretailer.com/bicy...t_id=1001000848



> Retraction: Colnago Not Sourcing Carbon Frames from Giant
> 
> AUGUST 01, 2005 -- CAMBIAGO, Italy (BRAIN)—Reports that Colnago of Italy is sourcing full carbon frames from Giant Manufacturing in Taiwan are erroneous, say the presidents of both companies.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

3465mike said:


> I don't have the names of the actually carbon manufacturing factories in Tawain and China, however I can tell you that most except for those previously stated are made their...there are some exceptions I'm sure that I'm unaware of....and example is that carbon LOOK forks are made in france, but their frames are made in Asia.....but a list of definite Asian manufactured brands are: Specialized, Cannondale's Synapse, KHS, FUJI, Jamis, GIANT (gian may actually be on of the better asian carbon bikes as they even make their own carbon fibers) Calnago, LOOK, Ridley, etc..........


LOOK does not make their frames in Asia. LOOK owns a factory in Tunisia that manufactures all their frames... Years ago some lower end LOOKs were made in Asia but all frames are now produced in LOOK's African factory.


----------



## jimcav (Jun 15, 2003)

*okay define manufacturer?*

crumptons are built here and i am sure there are many others


----------



## 3465mike (Dec 7, 2004)

GW1 said:


> COME ON, look at the date of that artical, back in mid 2005 it has been proven FALSE! Taiwnese journalists just don't make the grade.



Calnagos are made in Tawain......sorry, but true....however this article did site trek as being an asian built under their carbon category, when in fact the only carbon bike made by trek overseas is this years 5000.....


----------



## 3465mike (Dec 7, 2004)

*I stand corrected..*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colnago


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

3465mike said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colnago


Wikipedia is open source and known not to be a highly reliable information source of record.


----------



## Mark McM (Jun 18, 2005)

*US made carbon bikes (and non-US carbon Treks)*



3465mike said:


> the only 2 manufacturers that still make frames domestically (in the US) are calfee and ........TREK. all TREK OCLV bikes are made by hame in wisconsin..I suggest anyone who thinks carbon Calnogo's are made in Italy,carbon Ridley's are made in Belgium, or your favorite brand A are made in their respective home country send an email to that manufacturer and ask for yourself.........most are made in one of 3 overseas factories.....


Aren't you overlooking Aegis, Parlee, Calfee and Serotta, who also make their carbon frames in the US?

Also keep in mind that in addition to their US made OCLV line, Trek also now sells a lower cost TCT (Trek Carbon Technology) line of carbon fiber bikes that are made in asia:

Trek TCT bikes


----------



## grampy bone (Feb 9, 2005)

*Tiawan manufacturers*

I think using the term, "Tiawanese frames" is a little vague. Unless all frames are produced at one plant in Taiwan. There are several manufacturers there, and each probably has different quality levels. Martec (Kestrel, scattante, pedal force) & Giant are two of the big ones. Giant controls their carbon frame production from beginning to end, and I doubt that any other bike company can say the same (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong). Trek does not make the carbon fiber, although they do control the frame construction. 

Comparing the Carbon Cervelo to the Felt F1C is not a fair comparison since the tubing shapes are different. The tube shape and bonding method is what accounts for the difference in stiffness. This is not a manufacturing quality difference. Don't get me wrong, I think the Cervelo is great, but can I say the quality of construction is better than the Felt? Not really. In fact, we have had some people complain about the Cervelo R2.5 having bonding separation at the seat stay. 

The point here is that some frames made in Tiawan are of very high quality (Giant), and some are not. To stereotype "Tiawanese frames" as all being low quality because of the sticker price on the bike is just ignorance.


----------



## FTF (Aug 5, 2003)

grampy bone said:


> Comparing the Carbon Cervelo to the Felt F1C is not a fair comparison since the tubing shapes are different. The tube shape and bonding method is what accounts for the difference in stiffness. This is not a manufacturing quality difference. Don't get me wrong, I think the Cervelo is great, but can I say the quality of construction is better than the Felt? Not really. In fact, we have had some people complain about the Cervelo R2.5 having bonding separation at the seat stay.
> 
> The point here is that some frames made in Tiawan are of very high quality (Giant), and some are not. To stereotype "Tiawanese frames" as all being low quality because of the sticker price on the bike is just ignorance.


 Quality of construction, and quality of the design are very different things, the Cervelo R3 is a considerably better design than the Felt, which makes it better, the construction can be of the same quality, and one product be much better than the other. Taiwan can assemble a cf frame very well, scotts, specialize Tarmac, orbea opal, etc are all high quality bikes, with very good designs that are made in Taiwan, but the thing that makes these superior is no where they are made(heck one of those bikes could be made the same place as the felt), it's the design in how they are made. Which bike is stiffer, rides better, has everything to do with design, now the design must be well excuted, but the design is what makes the bike.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

3465mike said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colnago



You are incorrect. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colnago. It's been updated.


----------



## botto (Jul 22, 2005)

funny. when i was getting sized for my Giant TCR Comp, there was a guy waiting to get sized to his replacement frame for his R2.5. the original had cracked/seperated neat the BB.




grampy bone said:


> In fact, we have had some people complain about the Cervelo R2.5 having bonding separation at the seat stay.
> 
> The point here is that some frames made in Tiawan are of very high quality (Giant), and some are not. To stereotype "Tiawanese frames" as all being low quality because of the sticker price on the bike is just ignorance.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

grampy bone said:


> Giant controls their carbon frame production from beginning to end, and I doubt that any other bike company can say the same (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong).


Time not only makes their own frames but also makes their own tubing and matte.


----------



## grampy bone (Feb 9, 2005)

FTF said:


> Quality of construction, and quality of the design are very different things, the Cervelo R3 is a considerably better design than the Felt, which makes it better, the construction can be of the same quality, and one product be much better than the other. Taiwan can assemble a cf frame very well, scotts, specialize Tarmac, orbea opal, etc are all high quality bikes, with very good designs that are made in Taiwan, but the thing that makes these superior is no where they are made(heck one of those bikes could be made the same place as the felt), it's the design in how they are made. Which bike is stiffer, rides better, has everything to do with design, now the design must be well excuted, but the design is what makes the bike.


Is the Cervelo a better design? You seem to be stating your opinion rather than fact. Jim Felt is a very well respected bike designer. What makes a good bike is very subjective, or else everyone would ride the same bike. Also, riding one bike, and then riding another cannot tell you which has the stiffest frame because there are many components that will affect the stiffness. Are you sure its not the wheels that are stiffer, or the hubs, or the cranks? Also, lighter riders may not need the stiffness nor want it because they don't flex the frame as much. I remember reading an actual stiffness test of frames on Sheldonbrowns website where they had to mount the frame in a clamp, then applied pressure and measured the flex. Thats the only way to know for sure how stiff a frame is.

I'm not trying to get into a debate about whether the Felt or Cervelo is better. The topic is Taiwan frames. The point I think we can all agree on is that Taiwan bike manufacturers can make good frames, and not all that comes from Taiwan are cheap junk.


----------



## FTF (Aug 5, 2003)

grampy bone said:


> Is the Cervelo a better design? You seem to be stating your opinion rather than fact. Jim Felt is a very well respected bike designer. What makes a good bike is very subjective, or else everyone would ride the same bike. Also, riding one bike, and then riding another cannot tell you which has the stiffest frame because there are many components that will affect the stiffness. Are you sure its not the wheels that are stiffer, or the hubs, or the cranks? Also, lighter riders may not need the stiffness nor want it because they don't flex the frame as much. I remember reading an actual stiffness test of frames on Sheldonbrowns website where they had to mount the frame in a clamp, then applied pressure and measured the flex. Thats the only way to know for sure how stiff a frame is.


Tests from the Tour Mag. 

Manufacturer/Model | Fork | Pts | Lateral stiffness | BB stiffness | lateral stiffness of the fork | weight frame+headset(!)/fork | comfort 
*Canyon Ultimate F10 Limited SL* Smolik Motivation Race 71Pts 114Nm/° 131Nm/° 54N/mm 1179g/305g 3 
*Cérvelo R3* Cérvelo 67Pts *92Nm*/° *122Nm*/° 47N/mm 975g/376g 2 
*Storck Scenario CD 1.0* Stiletto Light UMS 63Pts 83Nm/° 106Nm/° 48N/mm 1205g/286g 3 
*Red Bull X-Lite 8000* Red Bull 60Pts 89Nm/° 103Nm/° 43N/mm 1068g/424g 2 
*Isaac Sonic LTD.* Isaac 58Pts 74Nm/° 93Nm/° 48N/mm 1048g/406g 1 
*Scott CR1 Team Issue* Scott CR1 56Pts 89Nm/° 101Nm/° 42N/mm 1001g/406g 1 
*Cube Litening GTC "SCR Edition"* THM Scapula SP 54Pts 82Nm/° 99Nm/° 37N/mm 1224g/273g 3 
*Look KG 585 Ultra "Crédit Agricole"* Look HSC5 SL 53Pts 67Nm/° 98Nm/° 43N/mm 1168g/327g 2 
*Time VXRS Ulteam* Time Avant Ulteam Safe+ 52Pts 61Nm/° 88Nm/° 47N/mm 1098g/360g 1
*Felt F1C Carbon* Easton EC90-SLX 50Pts *63Nm*/° *94Nm*/° 34N/mm 1064g/283g 4 
*KTM Strada LC Prime* KTM LC 49Pts 83Nm/° 92Nm/° 31N/mm 1163g/337g 4 
*Storck Scenario C 0.9 "10th Anniversary"* Stiletto Light 47Pts 66Nm/° 92Nm/° 38N/mm 1181g/292g 2 
*Poison Speed* Easton EC90 SLX 39Pts 48Nm/° 85Nm/° 33N/mm 1186g/282g 4 
*Santana Stylus* Easton EC90 SLX 39Pts 59Nm/° 72Nm/° 33N/mm 1213g/287g 4 

I'd say it's pretty damn stiff. They are in order from the stiffest to the most flexable, BTW. So it's considerbly lighter, AND stiffer than the Felt, yup it's a better design. It's also the lightest on in the test. The actual frame weighs in under 900 grams, but Tour has this strange way of making them all the "same" size, the R3 is a sloping design, so they padded it's weight to make it compareable to the other non sloping designs, all this weird stuff. Anyways.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

FTF said:


> They are in order from the stiffest to the most flexable, BTW. So it's considerbly lighter, AND stiffer than the Felt, yup it's a better design.


Well, that's made it easy, now, for the rest of the cycling world: you only need to look for THE uber stiff frame that is also THE uber light frame. There are apparently no other valid criteria to look at, at least according to FTF, because THE best design is the one that is stiffest and the lightest. That's apparently all there is to it.

.....or maybe that's just FTF's opinion. In the future, everyone should forward their "which frame is best" questions to the bike design savant, FTF.


----------



## FTF (Aug 5, 2003)

alienator said:


> Well, that's made it easy, now, for the rest of the cycling world: you only need to look for THE uber stiff frame that is also THE uber light frame. There are apparently no other valid criteria to look at, at least according to FTF, because THE best design is the one that is stiffest and the lightest. That's apparently all there is to it.
> 
> .....or maybe that's just FTF's opinion. In the future, everyone should forward their "which frame is best" questions to the bike design savant, FTF.


Lol, I didn't mean to come off like that. I don't think that the R3 is the best design, and I didn't say so, I said it was stiffer than the felt, which it is. Would I buy a Cervelo R3? Honestly, no I wouldn't. Would I buy it over the felt, in a heart beat. I don't think the R3 is the best design, but I do think it is better than the felt. 

This: 



> Also, riding one bike, and then riding another cannot tell you which has the stiffest frame because there are many components that will affect the stiffness. Are you sure its not the wheels that are stiffer, or the hubs, or the cranks? Also, lighter riders may not need the stiffness nor want it because they don't flex the frame as much. I remember reading an actual stiffness test of frames on Sheldonbrowns website where they had to mount the frame in a clamp, then applied pressure and measured the flex. Thats the only way to know for sure how stiff a frame is.


is why I brought out the tour test. Well, that's what tour does, they throw it in to a rig, and flex it.

You'll notice in my first post I say:



> Which bike is stiffer, rides better, has everything to do with design, now the design must be well excuted, but the design is what makes the bike.


So obviously I don't think that stiffness is everything. I've never ridden the R3, so I can't comment on the ride, but the felt is nothing special, imho. 

But if anyone wants to buy what I tell them to, just pm me.


----------



## fiddleage (Feb 14, 2006)

Lurker who just joined 

Are any of the "knockoff" tiawanese frames considered better than the others ? 

The ones I have been tempted by are 1) Pedal Force ; 2) Tommasso; and 3) Motobecane USA. - Pros and cons or is a Kia a Kia ? Others ? 

Motobecane has been bashed enough on these pages that I think I would shy away - but there seems to be some posters who are not afraid to say they love there Pedal Force's and Tommasso's

(Between small kids and budget I will probably keep riding my Guru Flite - Shimano 105 and be reasonably happy (compact frame is great for me - I have short legs and a long body. I race a few tris and do some charity rides other than that my mileage is limted by how early I can wake up before the family) .

It is fun to think about getting a new "toy."


----------



## jordan (Feb 2, 2002)

It is my impression that the quality control of the Taiwan manufactured carbon frames is superior or equal to anything made elsewhere.In fact USA manufactured carbon components and frames seem to be more problematic than Taiwan manufacture.Can anyone provide details on a poorly made Taiwan frame?I have seen many complaints about Taiwan made carbon cranksets with cracks/breakage and feel carbon cranks should be avoided in general.My point is that people need to stop bashing Taiwan carbon quality if they cannot provide any evidence of the supposed substandard quality.If anyone has examples of poor carbon quality it would be interesting to discuss them.


----------



## promtber (Jun 11, 2004)

From what I have seen most carbon frames coming out of Taiwan are the best in the world. If they weren’t good the top name manufactures would not be having them build their flagship bikes. I’m sure like any other country there are some manufactures making not high quality or designed bikes over their. But the high dollar or high quality carbon we are seeing and riding is the top notch coming out of this country. Myself I ride a Ridley Damocles and it is far the best ride I have ever used. It says Belgium on it but I know where it really came from.


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

jordan said:


> It is my impression that the quality control of the Taiwan manufactured carbon frames is superior or equal to anything made elsewhere.In fact USA manufactured carbon components and frames seem to be more problematic than Taiwan manufacture.Can anyone provide details on a poorly made Taiwan frame?I have seen many complaints about Taiwan made carbon cranksets with cracks/breakage and feel carbon cranks should be avoided in general.My point is that people need to stop bashing Taiwan carbon quality if they cannot provide any evidence of the supposed substandard quality.If anyone has examples of poor carbon quality it would be interesting to discuss them.



Taiwan is making some of the best carbon fiber raw material in the world today and they have the infrastructure in place to manufacture good bikes. You have touched on the critical component for a good frame: quality control. The quality of the bike is only as good as the process and skill that goes into it. I have seen one of these frames that was misaligned, or warped, and shifting was terrible. Another frame evidently had carbon curling up on the inside of the juncture behind the bb shell making the routing of the front derailleur cable through the monobox difficult, that is just plain sloppy. Again, this is not to be taken as a broad swipe, just that a number of the factories over there treat bicycle manufacturing as a commodity and they are pusing them out the door as fast as they can. But this goes on everywhere there is manufacturing. Quality control and skilled workers is why some producers can justify a higher price for their frames.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

jordan said:


> It is my impression that the quality control of the Taiwan manufactured carbon frames is superior or equal to anything made elsewhere.In fact USA manufactured carbon components and frames seem to be more problematic than Taiwan manufacture.Can anyone provide details on a poorly made Taiwan frame?I have seen many complaints about Taiwan made carbon cranksets with cracks/breakage and feel carbon cranks should be avoided in general.My point is that people need to stop bashing Taiwan carbon quality if they cannot provide any evidence of the supposed substandard quality.If anyone has examples of poor carbon quality it would be interesting to discuss them.


Do you have any facts to back up your claims? Exactly which US manufacturers are having problems with carbon components: Parlee, Crumpton, who?

Complaints about carbon cranksets? Exactly what complaints? And why should carbon cranksets be avoided? You've heard of Shimano Dura Ace, right? The newest Dura Ace crank was the stiffest thing going in cranks until THM Carbone produced the Clavicula crankset. It has CF arms and a CF BB axle. Imagine that: it's stiffer than the Dura Ace crank.

The problem with this whole debate Far East stuff vs. Italian vs. US vs. Whatever stuff is that most of the people pushing the debate are too lazy to actually evaluate a given product on its own terms. They instead make asinine comments like "USA manufactured carbon components and frames seem to be more problematic than Taiwan manufacture" or "and feel carbon cranks should be avoided in general."


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

*Lots of wooden nickles be thrown around in here.*



alienator said:


> Do you have any facts to back up your claims? Exactly which US manufacturers are having problems with carbon components: Parlee, Crumpton, who?
> 
> Complaints about carbon cranksets? Exactly what complaints? And why should carbon cranksets be avoided? You've heard of Shimano Dura Ace, right? The newest Dura Ace crank was the stiffest thing going in cranks until THM Carbone produced the Clavicula crankset. It has CF arms and a CF BB axle. Imagine that: it's stiffer than the Dura Ace crank.
> 
> The problem with this whole debate Far East stuff vs. Italian vs. US vs. Whatever stuff is that most of the people pushing the debate are too lazy to actually evaluate a given product on its own terms. They instead make asinine comments like "USA manufactured carbon components and frames seem to be more problematic than Taiwan manufacture" or "and feel carbon cranks should be avoided in general."


There are lots of rumours, opinions, inaccurate "info." and out right lies flying around this thread. It's one of the worst example I've ever seen on RBR outside the PO forum.

Of course that's just my opinion.


----------



## fiddleage (Feb 14, 2006)

GW1 said:


> Taiwan is making some of the best carbon fiber raw material in the world today and they have the infrastructure in place to manufacture good bikes. You have touched on the critical component for a good frame: quality control. The quality of the bike is only as good as the process and skill that goes into it. I have seen one of these frames that was misaligned, or warped, and shifting was terrible. Another frame evidently had carbon curling up on the inside of the juncture behind the bb shell making the routing of the front derailleur cable through the monobox difficult, that is just plain sloppy. Again, this is not to be taken as a broad swipe, just that a number of the factories over there treat bicycle manufacturing as a commodity and they are pusing them out the door as fast as they can. But this goes on everywhere there is manufacturing. Quality control and skilled workers is why some producers can justify a higher price for their frames.


I agree with what you say about quality control in general. However, I think most people would acknowledge that for many years the Amercian and European auto manufactures made similar statements about the poor quality of Japanese auto manufacturing, even after the quality control of the Japanese manufacturers surpassed many of those in America and Europe. My memory (and I am old enough to remember) is that consumers caught onto this before the trade manufacturer's. I also know its not always easy for someone who bought a lemon to admit they bought a lemon. Still my post ealier was intended to illicit repsonses from people who ride these bikes. In the long run consumer's will figure out the quality question.


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

rocco said:


> There are lots of rumours, opinions, inaccurate "info." and out right lies flying around this thread. It's one of the worst example I've ever seen on RBR outside the PO forum.
> 
> Of course that's just my opinion.


Ain't that the truth. Most people don't seem to ask the question of what they want the bike to do for them. They instead let the advertising people tell them what they should want. What do you want, stiffness, comfort, stability, light weight, handling, skilled workmanship, or budget. I'm not sure any one bike can be #1 in all of these catagories. As for stiffness in a crank, I don't think I can leg press the weight required to deflect a D/A crank a couple of hundreths of an inch (so I'm old) claimed in these lab tests (400 lbs if I'm not mistaking), and if I could, I don't think I could detect that small amount of deflection. I want comfort and stability to enjoy the sport for an entire afternoon, or more (my criteria), not sprint my lungs out in a criterium. That requires a certain amout of skill and experience in the construction of the frame. Not many frame makers can meet that matrix. Anybody can make a very lightweight frame, but they give up other qualities that I prefer. BUT, that is only what "I" am looking for. Don't bash me for demanding excellence in one or two of the above factors for a frame to excell in. I know what I want and I know who meets that criterea, others DO NOT. There is a price for the qualities that I demand and they simply cost more, and I am willing to pay it. And don't throw false or non-existant "facts" at me anymore because my boots don't cover my head.


----------



## jordan (Feb 2, 2002)

alienator said:


> Do you have any facts to back up your claims? Exactly which US manufacturers are having problems with carbon components: Parlee, Crumpton, who?
> 
> Complaints about carbon cranksets? Exactly what complaints? And why should carbon cranksets be avoided? You've heard of Shimano Dura Ace, right? The newest Dura Ace crank was the stiffest thing going in cranks until THM Carbone produced the Clavicula crankset. It has CF arms and a CF BB axle. Imagine that: it's stiffer than the Dura Ace crank.
> 
> The problem with this whole debate Far East stuff vs. Italian vs. US vs. Whatever stuff is that most of the people pushing the debate are too lazy to actually evaluate a given product on its own terms. They instead make asinine comments like "USA manufactured carbon components and frames seem to be more problematic than Taiwan manufacture" or "and feel carbon cranks should be avoided in general."


I am not trying to start a fight with a hothead and am not trying to prove anything, but my comments have validity based on many years of involvement with road bikes and parts.I have seen numerous photos on the internet of damaged and broken carbon cranks-usually snapped off at the pedal threads or damaged by dropped chains.Wrapped carbon parts are much more vulnerable to damage by crash impact or other mechanical damage.I have seen cracked carbon seat posts ,fork steerers and my personal Look 286 frame cracked at the head tube ruining the frame during headset installation by a respected professional mechanic and framebuilder.I have seen my friends have problems with US made carbon seatposts,handlebars and forks(slipping,cracking and fit issues).I have seen personally and read reports of broken,slipping,stripping carbon stems/handlebars.Some of these problems are due to less than perfect installation/torque specs but highlight vulnerability to damage of carbon parts.No one can offer absolute proof of quality based on country of origin and I don't claim to.No statistics exist on the topic and what I say is based on annecdotal reports as well as personal observation.


----------



## Insight Driver (Jan 27, 2006)

I have found on the internet sites showing metal cranks from Campagnolo and others that have broken for one reason or another. What's the point? Every material used for a bike part can be broken for one reason or another. Are you trying to say carbon fiber parts are more prone to breakage than steel or aluminunm? To say that you would have to show proof or otherwise you would be just blowing smoke.

Speaking of smoke, if carbon fiber has weaknesses so serious that it precludes its use a material from which bike parts are made, why are more and more manufacturers and component makers producing more carbon fiber parts? To carry this logic further it would mean that a majority of very intelligent engineers and marketers are deceived. I don't think so. Even the most respected names in cycling, such as Colnago, for one example, produced high-end carbon fiber bikes.

Calfee, Felt, Giant, Bianchi, Trek, Cannondale, and on and on. The list gets longer and longer each year. To me, this says something very good about carbon fiber bikes and parts.

As far as getting this thread back on track, it is because manufacturing is so much cheaper and quality control is so high that Taiwan is a major manufacturing center for products sold in the US. Bang for the buck, the bottom line. There is no systematic problem with products from Taiwan. And because of bang for the buck, that's why you don't see many of the highly-regarded bikes from European manufacturers, it's just too expensive to compete in the US market next to Taiwanese and other Pacific rim countries.


----------



## jordan (Feb 2, 2002)

Like I said in my last post I don't have enough data to "prove "anything but I do feel many carbon parts create problems that existed with less frequency with prior generations of alloy parts.Of course any bike part can be broken or destroyed somehow.If anybody has had experience with trouble prone or delicate carbon parts it would be interesting to discuss them in this thread.I am not trying to imply a systemic problem with Taiwan carbon parts as I have alluded to the superior quality control of the Taiwan bike industry in my first post in this thread.


----------



## Insight Driver (Jan 27, 2006)

jordan said:


> Like I said in my last post I don't have enough data to "prove "anything but I do feel many carbon parts create problems that existed with less frequency with prior generations of alloy parts.Of course any bike part can be broken or destroyed somehow.If anybody has had experience with trouble prone or delicate carbon parts it would be interesting to discuss them in this thread.I am not trying to imply a systemic problem with Taiwan carbon parts as I have alluded to the superior quality control of the Taiwan bike industry in my first post in this thread.


The problem with a perception (feeling) is that it is purely subjective. As far as carbon parts are concerned, due to the wide range of different parts, the fact that weight weenies are attracted to the lightest possible parts and the learning curve new manufacturers have to go through, yes, I agree, there are indications of carbon part breakage. Whether more than with steel and aluminum, I doubt it. Long before the internet there were regular articles in bicycle trade magazines concerning frame and part breakage. There are known weaknesses to the way metals must be joined. There are pros and cons to every material used in a machine (looking at a bicycle as a machine). Machine designers don't follow fads. What they do is incrementally improve machines and manufacturing processes, either with new materials or new methods.

Carbon fiber parts as made by some manufacturers are part of the fad of carbon fiber. There are makers of junk out there. What you don't hear about are the parts that are strong and don't break, they just don't make the news.

A good history of the materials used in bikes can be found here:
http://www.calfeedesign.com/whitepaper1.htm
Another link here is one that has been around a lot of years, yet still is relevant:
http://www2.sjsu.edu/orgs/asmtms/artcle/articl.htm

This is background and knowledge that helps to put carbon fiber products into perspective. Rather than being a fad, carbon fiber has been around over 30 years and as time goes on the technology is filtering down into the mass-market items. For example, carbon fiber parts are used in jet fighters in places where the characteristics of carbon fiber are better than the metal part they replaced.

A little knowledge is what I'm suggesting we all could benefit from.


----------



## GregPB (Feb 20, 2006)

3465mike said:


> the only 2 manufacturers that still make frames domestically (in the US) are calfee and ........TREK. all TREK OCLV bikes are made by hame in wisconsin..I suggest anyone who thinks carbon Calnogo's are made in Italy,carbon Ridley's are made in Belgium, or your favorite brand A are made in their respective home country send an email to that manufacturer and ask for yourself.........most are made in one of 3 overseas factories.....


I'm afraid you are wrong. Calfee and Trek may be made in the USA, but Aegis bicycles out of Van Buren, Maine has been making their frames by hand for the past 20 years...Aegis actually made the first all carbon Treks (Aegis frame with Trek badge) and even the Basso frames that were shipped and sold overseas. 20 years in the industry, a pioneer and still making frames with the same people and the same pension for quality. Do I think it makes a difference not being made in Taiwan? Absolutely and for reasons far beyond the bicycle frame.
(stepping off soap box now)


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

GregPB said:


> Absolutely and for reasons far beyond the bicycle frame.(stepping off soap box now)


Gee, and what reasons would those be? You know American workers aren't the only with a right to have a job.....and American manufacturers certainly don't have a monopoly on quality construction.

Who cares where the frame was made and who made it. If it's a frame that fits, pushes your buttons,and is well made, then that's a good frame to buy. Carrying a soapbox to the bikeshop only narrows your possible choices. To think that where a bike is made makes a difference smacks of a bit of racism, elitism, and 100% USDA Grade A ignorance.


----------



## GregPB (Feb 20, 2006)

alienator said:


> Gee, and what reasons would those be? You know American workers aren't the only with a right to have a job.....and American manufacturers certainly don't have a monopoly on quality construction.
> 
> Who cares where the frame was made and who made it. If it's a frame that fits, pushes your buttons,and is well made, then that's a good frame to buy. Carrying a soapbox to the bikeshop only narrows your possible choices. To think that where a bike is made makes a difference smacks of a bit of racism, elitism, and 100% USDA Grade A ignorance.


Apparently in your world, others are not allowed to have their own opinions or express them. Did I say you should think that way? No. Do I think you care? Obviously not. Do I buy all US made products? No. Do I sacrifice quality in order to purchase only American made products? No. Do I think the US made carbon fiber bikes are significantly better than those made in overseas? Not necessarily. Am I willing to pay more for an equal quality product made here in the USA? Yes. Are you? I doubt it.
Therein lies the difference in our opinions, nothing more.

Just out of curiosity...if a frame fits, pushes your buttons, is well made and is manufactured by underpaid workers forced to work under poor conditions in order to reward the conglomerate instead of the people it employs, does that make it a good frame to buy? That type of mentality is the true ignorance.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

GregPB said:


> Apparently in your world, others are not allowed to have their own opinions or express them. Did I say you should think that way? No. Do I think you care? Obviously not. Do I buy all US made products? No. Do I sacrifice quality in order to purchase only American made products? No. Do I think the US made carbon fiber bikes are significantly better than those made in overseas? Not necessarily. Am I willing to pay more for an equal quality product made here in the USA? Yes. Are you? I doubt it.
> Therein lies the difference in our opinions, nothing more.


Just wanted to know what those reasons were to not buy a frame made overseas.



GregPB said:


> Just out of curiosity...if a frame fits, pushes your buttons, is well made and is manufactured by underpaid workers forced to work under poor conditions in order to reward the conglomerate instead of the people it employs, does that make it a good frame to buy? That type of mentality is the true ignorance.


So, you know for a fact then that workers at Martek, Topkey, and other overseas bike manufacturing facilities are working in poor conditions? As for would I, yup I would buy there if that frame did it for me. The only way worker salaries can increase (to the bloated level of US labor and union labor) is to increase demand. When industry started in this country working conditions were crap. Unfortunately that seems to be the progression of things in developing industrial countries. Without money going to those countries, though, they never develop better working places.


----------



## GregPB (Feb 20, 2006)

alienator said:


> Just wanted to know what those reasons were to not buy a frame made overseas.
> 
> 
> 
> So, you know for a fact then that workers at Martek, Topkey, and other overseas bike manufacturing facilities are working in poor conditions? As for would I, yup I would buy there if that frame did it for me. The only way worker salaries can increase (to the bloated level of US labor and union labor) is to increase demand. When industry started in this country working conditions were crap. Unfortunately that seems to be the progression of things in developing industrial countries. Without money going to those countries, though, they never develop better working places.


This is an interesting statement completely unsubstantiated by fact: "The only way worker salaries can increase (to the bloated level of US labor and union labor) is to increase demand."

I like what Chris King has to say on the subject and perhaps his message, which incidently is the same as mine will get through to you. Be a conscientious consumer, not just a consumer.
http://www.chrisking.com/asiamfg/


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

GregPB said:


> This is an interesting statement completely unsubstantiated by fact: "The only way worker salaries can increase (to the bloated level of US labor and union labor) is to increase demand."


No, it is substantiated by history though. It's not always the case, but it is often the case. Of course it is complicated by the political landscape in a given country, but so are economics in this country.



GregPB said:


> I like what Chris King has to say on the subject and perhaps his message, which incidently is the same as mine will get through to you. Be a conscientious consumer, not just a consumer.


Sorry, you're holier-than-thou tone...."....message...is the same as mine will get through to you" is both insulting and way off the mark. I don't live in some Pollyanna world, and I understand the realities of the world marketplace and all of its implications. I also know that I won't substitute my own thought for that of someone elses, i.e. the Chris King blurb on Asia manufacturing. It's very hard to see the writing in that link as objective. He obviously has a vested interest in people buying his products as opposed to someone else's, but his piece has no real critical analysis of said problem. None. Did CK carefully check to be sure that every single material, tool, instrument, diode, or whatever at his company's facilities didn't come from a place that mistreats its workers? Did you check to make sure that every single product in your house, that every single product you own or component of any product you own came from a factory where workers are unfairly treated? Well, when you've done that, insured that every single item that is purchased with your money has come from a place that treats its workers according to your standards, then you might have some right to lecture or preach or go bowling with CK. Until then, you'll just sound like a hypocrit.


----------



## GregPB (Feb 20, 2006)

alienator said:


> No, it is substantiated by history though. It's not always the case, but it is often the case. Of course it is complicated by the political landscape in a given country, but so are economics in this country.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you're holier-than-thou tone...."....message...is the same as mine will get through to you" is both insulting and way off the mark. I don't live in some Pollyanna world, and I understand the realities of the world marketplace and all of its implications. I also know that I won't substitute my own thought for that of someone elses, i.e. the Chris King blurb on Asia manufacturing. It's very hard to see the writing in that link as objective. He obviously has a vested interest in people buying his products as opposed to someone else's, but his piece has no real critical analysis of said problem. None. Did CK carefully check to be sure that every single material, tool, instrument, diode, or whatever at his company's facilities didn't come from a place that mistreats its workers? Did you check to make sure that every single product in your house, that every single product you own or component of any product you own came from a factory where workers are unfairly treated? Well, when you've done that, insured that every single item that is purchased with your money has come from a place that treats its workers according to your standards, then you might have some right to lecture or preach or go bowling with CK. Until then, you'll just sound like a hypocrit.


so what your'e saying then is...don't try to make conscious consumer decisions because it's too difficult? I've never said that all of my consumer decisions have been made according to my own standards and for that I am a hypocrit...but I am trying. And when it comes to making a purchase where I know for a fact that certain standards in the workplace are upheld, and the product is of the same quality...I'll purchase that product over the cheaper one. This round and round is useless...don't bother responding to this post. You are right. I'm wrong. Smile...it's all good.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Can't we find some middle ground? Buy certain products where you can quite easily make a conscious choice and some stuff that's cheap. For instance, I always get a CK headset together with my porn.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

divve said:


> Can't we find some middle ground? Buy certain products where you can quite easily make a conscious choice and some stuff that's cheap. For instance, I always get a CK headset together with my porn.


Divve always knows what to say. And as per usual he's dead on. In fact, at least one of every porn site I subscribe to has a proven record of treating its employees fairly. The others are improving, treating their employees "nearly ok."

My pink CK HS didn't come with any porn, but I did take it to a sorority party and photographed in various poses w/ sorority girls. It's a photo spread I call "Headsets Gone Wild."


----------



## collectorvelo (Oct 30, 2003)

*rational conclusion*

after reading all the posts and advertising and magazine articles that I have come across; it seems there is one rational conclusion

it is better to have a one-peice carbon fiber frame than a glued together one And that it is not possible to tell which brand is higher quality [and many are from the same frame builders anyway]

in addition; it seems that unlike steel, Ti, or aluminum frames - on a carbon frame what you see is the quality of the finish only [so most expensive paint looks like best] -- the actual 'workmanship' is not out there to see as clearly as on a metal frame


----------



## bwana (Feb 4, 2005)

collectorvelo said:


> after reading all the posts and advertising and magazine articles that I have come across; it seems there is one rational conclusion
> 
> it is better to have a one-peice carbon fiber frame than a glued together one And that it is not possible to tell which brand is higher quality [and many are from the same frame builders anyway]
> 
> in addition; it seems that unlike steel, Ti, or aluminum frames - on a carbon frame what you see is the quality of the finish only [so most expensive paint looks like best] -- the actual 'workmanship' is not out there to see as clearly as on a metal frame



I think you could get a lot of disagreement about the one-piece necessarily being better. Many people consider Parlees to be one of the best carbon frame manufacturers, if not the best, and they are glued together. This is just another can of worms.


----------



## collectorvelo (Oct 30, 2003)

*can of worms*

I think it is fine to Glue together a Can Of Worms


but a carbon fiber frames is better if made in one peice; at least from a structual point of view

Glued joints on bike frames are famous for moving, flexing, and even coming apart

The reason a maker would use them is to save money; no other logical reason


----------



## colker1 (Jan 2, 2003)

GregPB said:


> This is an interesting statement completely unsubstantiated by fact: "The only way worker salaries can increase (to the bloated level of US labor and union labor) is to increase demand."
> 
> I like what Chris King has to say on the subject and perhaps his message, which incidently is the same as mine will get through to you. Be a conscientious consumer, not just a consumer.
> http://www.chrisking.com/asiamfg/


this is so SILLY it hurts my brain. anyone who falls for this kind of hype needs a mental check.. we, adults, know that most of us are not exactly full of joy over working 9 to 5 in a factory or anywhere. we also know that work is not slavery, anywhere. anyone w/ a job has respect for that and knows others who don't have a job. it's the same in america or asia. installations may differ but no one is forced to work in taiwan. biccyle factories employ skilled workers not slaves.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

collectorvelo said:


> I think it is fine to Glue together a Can Of Worms
> 
> 
> but a carbon fiber frames is better if made in one peice; at least from a structual point of view
> ...


To my limited knowledge I think it depends greatly on how you glue the stuff together. A complete component already consists of layers of material that are separately "glued" together and you're able to bond new layers onto existing ones, which in turn form a new "one-piece". 

Fatigue testing by the EFBe and Velotech in Germany has shown that a well made modern tub to tube joined frame can withstand twice the load they normally set for race grade frame testing. Meaning, that as far as strength/durability is concerned, construction method probably shouldn't factor in as a selection criteria for your frame choice.


----------



## elviento (Mar 24, 2002)

I two feel that's an overgeneralization. Glue has been used to create some of the strongest machines working in pretty extreme conditions. Incidentally, some of the most respected carbon manufacturers use lugs (hence glue). 

As for manufacturers trying to save money, I don't see anything wrong with it as long as they are not cutting corners. A product has to be commercially viable.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

elviento said:


> I two feel that's an overgeneralization. Glue has been used to create some of the strongest machines working in pretty extreme conditions. Incidentally, some of the most respected carbon manufacturers use lugs (hence glue).
> 
> As for manufacturers trying to save money, I don't see anything wrong with it as long as they are not cutting corners. A product has to be commercially viable.



That's true. The B-58 Hustler was a big glue-up job.......and supersonic.


----------



## patchito (Jun 30, 2005)

GW1 said:


> COME ON, look at the date of that artical, back in mid 2005 it has been proven FALSE! Taiwnese journalists just don't make the grade.


Bicycle Retailer published a similar article that they were forced to retract b/c of pressure from Colnago. Those in the now, however, confirm that the stories are actually true.


----------



## Pierre (Jan 29, 2004)

I read 'Calfee and Trek' are US-made. But aren't the tubes made in Taiwan ? A while ago there was a thread about how to make a full made-in-US bike, and the consensus was that Trek's tubes come from Taiwan and they are bonded / painted in WI. Well, to me this looks closer to 'made in Taiwan' than to 'made in USA'. Also, I've read recently on this same forum that Colnago frames are now made 100% in Taiwan. 

By the way, I don't mind the 'made in Taiwan', pretty much all I wear / use is made in China/Taiwan/Singapore. Probably only what I eat isn't....

Pierre


----------



## tsheasby (Oct 7, 2005)

*woot for bikes*

i like bikes and frooot looops. sugar makes me bike real real fast.


----------



## Mark McM (Jun 18, 2005)

*Glued together can*



collectorvelo said:


> but a carbon fiber frames is better if made in one peice; at least from a structual point of view
> 
> Glued joints on bike frames are famous for moving, flexing, and even coming apart
> 
> The reason a maker would use them is to save money; no other logical reason


From a purely structural point of view, of course it would be best if there were continuous fibers throughout the structure. But from a practical standpoint, that's not always possible. Sometimes it is just not possible to create a complete structure from one single mold. In those cases, bonding together sub-structures may be the only viable alternative. If the joints are designed and constructed correctly, it can be quite adequately strong, rigid and reliable.


----------



## Mark McM (Jun 18, 2005)

*Source of Trek's carbon tubes*



Pierre said:


> I read 'Calfee and Trek' are US-made. But aren't the tubes made in Taiwan ? A while ago there was a thread about how to make a full made-in-US bike, and the consensus was that Trek's tubes come from Taiwan and they are bonded / painted in WI. Well, to me this looks closer to 'made in Taiwan' than to 'made in USA'. Also, I've read recently on this same forum that Colnago frames are now made 100% in Taiwan.


I don't believe there was any thread where the consensus was that Trek's tubes come from Taiwan. In fact, Trek's tubes come from McLean Quality Composites, headquartered in Utah, who also supplies tubing to Calfee, Parlee and Seven Cycles. MQC is owned by McLean-Fogg, who also own Reynolds Composites, makers of wheels, forks, and other components.

McLean owns factories in Utah, California and China, so there's a possibility that the bicycle tubing doesn't come from the US - but it definitely doesn't come from Taiwan.


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

patchito said:


> Bicycle Retailer published a similar article that they were forced to retract b/c of pressure from Colnago. Those in the now, however, confirm that the stories are actually true.



Sooo...are you one of "those in the 'now' "?


----------



## collectorvelo (Oct 30, 2003)

*Which Would You Pick?*

you seem to know a lot about Carbon-Fiber;
my question is - given the choice from a quality frame maker of either
a one-peice [monoquc] frame or a peiced together [glued] frame
which would you take?

If they are the same price?
If the monoquc is $200 more?
if it is $400 more?

as in theory we debate; but in life we must pick one or the other [unless you buy both]


----------



## Insight Driver (Jan 27, 2006)

collectorvelo said:


> you seem to know a lot about Carbon-Fiber;
> my question is - given the choice from a quality frame maker of either
> a one-peice [monoquc] frame or a peiced together [glued] frame
> which would you take?
> ...


You don't have an answerable question. There need to be conditions. The frames would have to be of the same dimensions, with the same torsional and lateral stiffness since those factors affect fit and feel of a bike. The only way to compare apples to apples, so to speak. As it has been said, over and over, you do not buy a bike based on material, you buy it based on design and function. You don't get a time trial bike to single track riding. You don't bounce down rocky sloaps with a road bike. A Cat 1 racer and fifty year old recreational rider need different geometry in their bike.

How the frame is put together does not matter. In steel there is the debate over lugged and welded. In aluminum it's the debate over types of alloy. Seems in carbon there is debate over single-piece versus glue up. Thing is, early glue up bikes from the 70's had bonding problems. This is the 21st century and all the major players plus many small builders of carbon bikes you both methods equally as well. There are only theoretical advantages to monocoque construction. There are also difficulties. Whatever you use for a bladder must remain inside the frame. There may not be adequate compaction due to the inner bladder tending to bridge across tight angles.

Mandrel-wound tubes, made with computer-controlled winders can have very uniform, run to run accuracy and repeatablility. Proplery molded lugs and modern adhesives create joints that are intrinsically stronger than the base materials being joined.

A monocoque frame from one manufacturer may be heavier than the tube and lug frame. It might be somewhat mis-aligned. Maybe you can't get the exact geometry that is optimal for you in the monocoque design, but can in the tube and lug design.

Too many variables go into making a bicycle frame from any material to say one is best.


----------



## collectorvelo (Oct 30, 2003)

*very interesting - but is it helpful*

I think what you say makes a lot of sense
However, it is not too helpful unless you can ride every option bike many miles each

For me, i know of all the bikes I own [dozens] and all the bikes I have riden; every bike that has felt very smooth in ride has been steel

For Carbon_fiber; I do not know much - but it seems the one-peice design is more expensive to produce and might be less likely to have joint cracks later [since there are no joints]

I have riden several carbon fiber frames and so far they all seem to ride exactly alike. Little smoother than aluminum frames I have. Not as smooth as any high grade steel frame I have or have ever riden. In general my experience is for smoothness it is hard to beat a Reynolds Frame

Maybe its all in my head; but it feels like its in my hands and butt


----------



## shabbasuraj (May 14, 2005)

I love Taiwanese frames. Awesome quality. PRC is getting better by the year. 

This is the reality.

Regarding labour... seems like Marx was right on the money.









A classic read about the bike biz....

http://www.slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/features/bikebiz.html


----------



## collectorvelo (Oct 30, 2003)

*Great Post _ Thanks*



shabbasuraj said:


> I love Taiwanese frames. Awesome quality. PRC is getting better by the year.
> 
> This is the reality.
> 
> ...


this is an article everyone should read, if they are interested in the bike biz

please post it in its own message for those who have never seen it

thanks for posting it here


----------



## shabbasuraj (May 14, 2005)

collectorvelo said:


> you seem to know a lot about Carbon-Fiber;
> my question is - given the choice from a quality frame maker of either
> a one-peice [monoquc] frame or a peiced together [glued] frame
> which would you take?
> ...




This is not a fair question as stated by other forum members...

Those in the know (regarding the bike biz)... have usually come to a consensus that the overall quality of a frame/bike is not a function of the materials that a frame is constructed with.

Sure it is a factor but....

If one is going to get into details...

A frame's overall quality has more to do with how it is made as opposed to what it is made with.

After this one can get into other subjective details.. where there are really no answers... but rather personal preferences.


----------



## Mark McM (Jun 18, 2005)

*One piece vs. multiple compent frames - carbon fiber and metal*



collectorvelo said:


> my question is - given the choice from a quality frame maker of either
> a one-peice [monoquc] frame or a peiced together [glued] frame
> which would you take?


Let me answer it this way - if it were technically possible, I'd prefer metal (steel, aluminum or titanium) frames to be made from one continuous piece of metal, instead of having to be welded or brazed together. But with current technology, that's not the best way to make a (metal) frame. The strongest and toughest metals and alloys are not conducive to one piece fabrication - and those metals which can be cast in one piece are typically structurally inferior materials. Sure, there have been one piece cast metal frames - but they been technical failures (do a google search on "Kirk Precision magnesium frames" for just one such example). Instead, the seperate frame components for metal frames (tubes, BB shell, dropouts, etc.) are fabricated seperately and joined together.

Sometimes, the best shape for a carbon fiber frame is just not conducive to single piece fabrication technology. In those cases, it is better to fabricate seperate components and join them together.


----------



## GW1 (Dec 27, 2005)

Insight Driver said:


> GW1 you have to show proof. Man, just go the Colnago official site and it says the same thing! What planet do you live on?



First, I appologize for replying so late, but I have been searching their website(those wacky Italians can make navigation so confusing), but I can't find reference to what you refer too. I must be missing it, can you provide the link?


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

*That's false in this day and age...*



collectorvelo said:


> Glued joints on bike frames are famous for moving, flexing, and even coming apart



Ah FYI... the bonding process for joints on bike frames has evolved a tad over the past 35 years. Welcome to the new century.

Exxon Graphtech photo courtesy of Dave Hickey  ...Sorry Dave, I almost forgot.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

collectorvelo said:


> Glued joints on bike frames are famous for moving, flexing, and even coming apart


Wow.......I must have been really lucky with the 14 LOOK frames I've owned over the years..Not one has fallen apart...My oldest LOOK was glued together in 1988 and I still ride it every week....

I'm not suggesting that LOOKs are superior to Asian carbon frames. There is excellent quality coming out of Asia. My point is glued frames are not weaker. To say glued frames are weaker than monoquoque is hogwash.....


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

Dave Hickey said:


> Wow.......I must have been really lucky with the 14 LOOK frames I've owned over the years..Not one has fallen apart...My oldest LOOK was glued together in 1988 and I still ride it every week....
> 
> I'm not suggesting that LOOKs are superior to Asian carbon frames. There is excellent quality coming out of Asia. My point is glued frames are not weaker. To say glued frames are weaker than monoquoque is hogwash.....



Perhaps he meant they're joint are famous for moving on the molecular level...


----------



## Friction_Shifter (Feb 8, 2006)

back in 93 when I was a grad student in ithaca, there was another grad student who built his own carbon fiber mountain bike frame. he got all the carbon fiber, epoxy, and balsa wood for free(he may have paid for the wood, I'm not sure)It was kind of a sideways Y design that he built in 3 (or 4)pieces then joined all 3 pieces as his last step (with more carbon fiber and epoxy). So it was neither a (true)monocoque or lugged frame. The frame rode great and was very true. He was constantly telling people to take it for a spin and try to break it. No one could. How that fits in with the rest of the responses I don't know but thought I'd share. I guess what it means is that an individual can build a very strong carbon fiber bike frame.


----------



## brerabbit2 (Dec 10, 2004)

collectorvelo said:


> you seem to know a lot about Carbon-Fiber;
> my question is - given the choice from a quality frame maker of either
> a one-peice [monoquc] frame or a peiced together [glued] frame
> which would you take?
> ...


I don't know much about all these new road bikes - parts and stuff but I do know a little bit about logic and plastic/composites:

I think that logic dictates given your unrealistically narrow parameters:

1) single quality frame maker 
2) monoc is more expensive

to choose the less expensive frame - this is because - my friend who is a plastic adhesive engineer says that todays modern bond/glue is ALWAYS stronger than the material

If parameters are:

they are both the same price - then I would choose the lighter one regardless of construction as long as both had the same warranty and equipment

just because something is more expensive does NOT mean it is better functioning

- ie
tag heur watch vs timex

ruth chris steak vs my own steak
evian water vs home filtered

but those are over-simplifications 

from my readings- and from my friend who is a leading composites expert - 
monoc costs more because it is more labor intensive - 
plusses are that it can be more customized in reaction to pedaling input and rider feedback - I think that means it would "ride better"

anyway -


----------

