# monocoque carbon fibre vs. tubes and lugs



## yzfrr11 (Dec 31, 2001)

The high end carbon frames are all constructed with tubes and lugs (Colnago C50, Fondriest Top Level, Parlee, Calfee) as opposed to monocoque design of the more economical carbon frames (Trek, Giant, Colnago E-1, Fondriest Domino Carbon).

Why is this? Any thoughts? I would think it is more expensive to mass produce monocoque, but apparently not.


----------



## fred (Sep 17, 2004)

yzfrr11 said:


> The high end carbon frames are all constructed with tubes and lugs (Colnago C50, Fondriest Top Level, Parlee, Calfee) as opposed to monocoque design of the more economical carbon frames (Trek, Giant, Colnago E-1, Fondriest Domino Carbon).
> 
> Why is this? Any thoughts? I would think it is more expensive to mass produce monocoque, but apparently not.


As an owner of a Look 481 which is constructed with lugs, and is available in 1cm sizing increments, I am guessing that there are 2 principal reasons: 

1) using tubes and lugs allows for a lot more sizing configurations and, in the case of a Parlee (for instance), the ability for the buyer to customize the ride characteristics, etc. 

2) a broken tube on a monocoque frame renders the frame trashed. Lugs make it repairable.


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

yzfrr11 said:


> The high end carbon frames are all constructed with tubes and lugs (Colnago C50, Fondriest Top Level, Parlee, Calfee) as opposed to monocoque design of the more economical carbon frames (Trek, Giant, Colnago E-1, Fondriest Domino Carbon).
> 
> Why is this? Any thoughts? I would think it is more expensive to mass produce monocoque, but apparently not.



Just an FYI, Trek is not monocoque. The Treks are made with lugs and tubes.

Here is a Trek BB


----------



## Guest (Oct 28, 2004)

*lugs on a carbon bike*

do not make it any more reparable than a monocoque carbon bike. as for the lugs vs monocoque, the larger mass produced frames are monocoqued because it is the best way to make the frame strong and light, quickly in large numbers. the tubes and lugs allow lower production builders to make custom sizes and geometries.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

yzfrr11 said:


> The high end carbon frames are all constructed with tubes and lugs (Colnago C50, Fondriest Top Level, Parlee, Calfee) as opposed to monocoque design of the more economical carbon frames (Trek, Giant, Colnago E-1, Fondriest Domino Carbon).
> 
> Why is this? Any thoughts? I would think it is more expensive to mass produce monocoque, but apparently not.



It's less expensive to mass produce a monocoque frame. The big expense is in the molds but, generally, it's less time per bike. If you can make enough frames to recoup the price of your molds, the rest is gravy. 

On a lug and tube bike - and there are two different ways these are made which affect prices - it is generally more expensive to build each bike but there are no giant sums invested in molds for a complete bike.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

Carleton said:


> do not make it any more reparable than a monocoque carbon bike. as for the lugs vs monocoque, the larger mass produced frames are monocoqued because it is the best way to make the frame strong and light, quickly in large numbers. the tubes and lugs allow lower production builders to make custom sizes and geometries.


Actually, on some lugged carbon bikes, broken tubes can be removed and replaced. This is better than patching a broken tube.


----------



## shokhead1 (Jan 21, 2003)

Lugs add weight and seems it would be one more thing to break.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

shokhead1 said:


> Lugs add weight and seems it would be one more thing to break.



Are butted tubes heavier than straight gauge? Overall, a well made lugged carbon bike is no heavier than an equivalent monocoque frame and possibly more durable as it concentrates more material on the highly stressed points.

Good lugs shouldn't break. I have never seen the lugs on a C40 break and those bikes have been around for many years. FWIWI have broken two monocoque frames but never cracked a frame with external lugs.


----------



## shokhead1 (Jan 21, 2003)

So who's making the sturdiest carbom frames right now,Trek,Giant,Specilized,Fuji,Felt,CD,somebody i missed?


----------



## gogogomoveit (Nov 20, 2003)

shokhead1 said:


> So who's making the sturdiest carbom frames right now,Trek,Giant,Specilized,Fuji,Felt,CD,somebody i missed?


Time maybe? Their frames are marvelous pieces of engineering. Many people will be surprised how ubiquitous Time carbon fiber is. Cannondale and Specialized have their CF forks made by Time and rebrand it to watever name they wanna call it.


----------



## BugMan (Feb 16, 2004)

*So many misconceptions here*



> The high end carbon frames are all constructed with tubes and lugs (Colnago C50, Fondriest Top Level, Parlee, Calfee) as opposed to monocoque design of the more economical carbon frames (Trek, Giant, Colnago E-1, Fondriest Domino Carbon).


Not true! LOOK is a very end maker - and probably has the longest experience and biggest technology investment in carbon frames. Their 3 best frames represent all combinations - monocoque (KG486), carbon lugs (585), and aluminum lugs (481SL).

Fondriest has models from low end (if you can call their _Domino_ a "low end" model!) to high end that are monocoque - differences in cost are a result of the composite used, details of the layering process, the percentage resin used, etc. Their lower cost models are a result of bonding separate stay and main triangle monocoque pieces.




> Lugs add weight


The LOOK 585 is one of only a handful of sub-1,000 gram carbon frames currently on the market.

For me, experience, technology investment, and process control are more important in choosing a carbon frame brand than whether their models are lugged or monocoque. That choice comes down to fit and feel once you've tried the models you're interested in. I'm partial, of course, but I see few companies that can match LOOK in those areas. Other than Giant, Trek, and a handful of other companies, most carbon frame makers outsource part or all of the frame manufacturing process to Taiwan/Chinese companies, slap a coat of paint on the frame in their European "factory", and then claim it is "Made in Italy." I've heard some people snickeringly refer to these as "Cheuropean" frames


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

BugMan said:


> For me, experience, technology investment, and process control are more important in choosing a carbon frame brand than whether their models are lugged or monocoque. That choice comes down to fit and feel once you've tried the models you're interested in. I'm partial, of course, but I see few companies that can match LOOK in those areas. Other than Giant, Trek, and a handful of other companies, most carbon frame makers outsource part or all of the frame manufacturing process to Taiwan/Chinese companies, slap a coat of paint on the frame in their European "factory", and then claim it is "Made in Italy." I've heard some people snickeringly refer to these as "Cheuropean" frames


Uhh, Giants are made in Taiwan.


----------



## BugMan (Feb 16, 2004)

*brain burp!*



Sherpa23 said:


> Uhh, Giants are made in Taiwan.


Right you are - my mind was saying LOOK, but my fingers were typing GIANT


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Looks are made in Africa.


----------



## BugMan (Feb 16, 2004)

*Yes, but...*



divve said:


> Looks are made in Africa.


...in their own factory in Tunisia.


----------



## fred (Sep 17, 2004)

BugMan said:


> ...in their own factory in Tunisia.


and only some of the models, not all. The higher end is still made in France


----------



## Max-Q (Feb 6, 2004)

BugMan said:


> Not true! LOOK is a very end maker - and probably has the longest experience and biggest technology investment in carbon frames. Their 3 best frames represent all combinations - monocoque (KG486), carbon lugs (585), and aluminum lugs (481SL).
> 
> Fondriest has models from low end (if you can call their _Domino_ a "low end" model!) to high end that are monocoque - differences in cost are a result of the composite used, details of the layering process, the percentage resin used, etc. Their lower cost models are a result of bonding separate stay and main triangle monocoque pieces.
> 
> ...



Hey Bug Man, I hope you aren't talking bad about my C-50!  Which model of Look were you riding when you beat me?  I'll get you back next year. Speaking of carbon frames, you'll have to see my new Giant.


----------



## BugMan (Feb 16, 2004)

Hey Max Q - I thought I knew who you were.




Max-Q said:


> Which model of Look were you riding when you beat me?


That was an '04 KG486. I've turned it back into a road bike for the off-season 'cause the ride is soooo much sweeter than the C'dale.




Max-Q said:


> I'll get you back next year.


I relish the challenge!  




Max-Q said:


> Speaking of carbon frames, you'll have to see my new Giant.


Well, meet up w/ me on one of the Sunday team training rides - we can bore the others with our "my carbon bike is better than yours" routine


----------



## Max-Q (Feb 6, 2004)

BugMan said:


> Hey Max Q - I thought I knew who you were.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've been down with an illness since August, shortly after the BB incident. I haven't been able to ride at all yet. In fact, I just returned to work for the first time in two months. I was darn near a veggie for a while. I'm going to start riding the KT trail until I can get my equilibrium back in order then I can ride the road again.


----------



## Ricky2 (Apr 7, 2004)

*Lower manufacturing standards in Tunisia*



fred said:


> and only some of the models, not all. The higher end is still made in France




With the exception of South Africa, the quality controls of most industrial manufacturing plants in Africa, Tunisia included, are very bad. Look chose Africa as a destination of manufacture, not out of strict controls, but purely based on cost. They have moved their high end production to Africa as well.


----------



## topcarb (Aug 27, 2004)

yzfrr11 said:


> The high end carbon frames are all constructed with tubes and lugs (Colnago C50, Fondriest Top Level, Parlee, Calfee) as opposed to monocoque design of the more economical carbon frames (Trek, Giant, Colnago E-1, Fondriest Domino Carbon).
> 
> Why is this? Any thoughts? I would think it is more expensive to mass produce monocoque, but apparently not.


Just to clarify. The Fondriest Top Carbon is monocoque, with extra plies at the seat/head tube clusters and BB area. It looks lugged, but is not, unlike the Trek, which looks monocoque, but is not (as the picture shows).

tc


----------



## Kiwi Rider (Sep 27, 2002)

Further to this, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't the Domino a lugged main triangle too? I recall them saying that they cover up these lugs in a 'patented' fashion.

_"The “joints” sections are then wrapped with carbon strips in an exclusive patented process"_

Maybe they are only talking about the rearstays being joined to the frame, but the shape of the headtube/ top tube and down tube interface looks like it's had this process appilied to it aswell.

The Lex is full monocoque along with the TF1, and the remainder of the carbon frames have the rear stays joined to a monocoque main triangle, I understand that 

From the Fondriest newsletter for the new Domino Plus

*Highlights:*

- High Modulous carbon
- *Full carbon frame - tube/lug construction
*- Domina Carbal fork
- Revised tube set for 2005
- Better road feel for 2005
- Aluminum power/price, carbon comfort
- Modified compact geometry - less slope

I thought it was lugged


----------

