# Hi-mod?



## masornia925 (Jan 14, 2011)

What's the difference between a Supersix that is Hi-Mod and one that is not? (weight, design, paint?) Im currently looking at a 2010 Supersix 2 frameset that is not Hi-Mod and was wondering the difference between the two?


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Different carbon blend. The Hi-Mod is a few grams lighter (100-150gr maybe? I don't remember exactly), stiffness, feel and whatever else is identical.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

hi mod is also more brittle, meaning they're more likely to explode on a crash


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> hi mod is also more brittle, meaning they're more likely to explode on a crash


Do you have any proof of this, or are you just making this stuff up? And even if true, who cares? How many Hi-Mod or EVO frames have you personally seen explode in the last few years?


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Hi-Mod carbon fibers alone are more brittle yes, not by that much and certainly not to the point it is an issue. Anyway, once laminated and mixed with the resin, it isn't fragile and not a reason to worry.

And note that each frame (Hi-Mod + regular-Mod SuperSixes) have a few different carbon blends in different areas of the bike to optimize the strength, weight and stiffness. There is some Hi-Mod and some regular Mod carbon in each and some various medium-Mod too...


----------



## zamboni (Sep 11, 2003)

My friend had two of his 08 himod S6 frames crack above the hanger, it's strange that happen at the same spot on both frames.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Propofol said:


> Do you have any proof of this, or are you just making this stuff up? And even if true, who cares? How many Hi-Mod or EVO frames have you personally seen explode in the last few years?


Why companies like Calfee & Pinarello like to mention that their hi-mod carbon is reinforced with material like boron or kevlar? It's public domain information. Google around eh.

Most things in nature become more brittle when they become harder. Diamond is hard but also can be brittle. No need to get emotional.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

zamboni said:


> My friend had two of his 08 himod S6 frames crack above the hanger, it's strange that happen at the same spot on both frames.


Not surprising. It's only been within the last 1-2 years that manufacturers are latching on the notion of reinforcing hi-mod frames to make them less brittle. It's still an evolution process. Cannondale doesn't engineer their own carbon, so they just use whatever Taiwan gives them, and Taiwan tend to lag a little compared to guys like Calfee.


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> Why companies like Calfee & Pinarello like to mention that their hi-mod carbon is reinforced with material like boron or kevlar? It's public domain information. Google around eh.
> 
> Most things in nature become more brittle when they become harder. Diamond is hard but also can be brittle. No need to get emotional.


I'm not getting emotional. I'm merely doubting your statement that these frames are more apt to "explode" in a crash, which you have provided zero proof of such.

My question about "who cares?" still stands - because whether or not high modulus carbon is more brittle is irrelevant - which justifies my other question that you failed to answer. How many Hi-Mod and Evo explosive failures have you personally witnessed or have been documented? Google doesn't provide that information eh?

And no, cracks near a joint do not qualify as "explosive".


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Don't worry mate. I'm not motivated to debate public domain info. Just disregard what I said.


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> Don't worry mate. I'm not motivated to debate public domain info. Just disregard what I said.


OK. In other words, you have no proof, just speculation on your part.

Pretty obvious you have no idea what the definition of "public domain" is.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

lol you're trying too hard to show up an internet nobody you don't know. Relax?


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> lol you're trying too hard to show up an internet nobody you don't know. Relax?


Whatever. The fact that you refuse to answer the question shows that you're trying too hard to not admit that you're simply talking nonsense. Relax?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

maybe I refuse because I find your attitude to be that of a pissy wife and acting all like you're entitled to any thing you ask? 

Do yourself a favor and go read up on the Calfee site. Calfee, the premiere carbon repair expert, knows much more than me about high mod. I mentioned Calfee hoping that you would recognize that name and would take the initiative to follow up on that name and their website as it gives some info on their carbon technology. I also mentioned Pinarello using kevlar to reinforce their hi-mod frames, hoping that you would also follow up on it too. But instead, you came back at me insisting on the proof you so seek. Use your mind and apply yourself.

BTW, no Calfee or Pinarello frame has ever exploded, yet they chose to reinforce their frame anyway. Why did they bother to reinforce then? See where I'm going with this? It's better to over engineer, no?
This is not an abstract concept now is it?

And what kind of a fool would be asking for proof of a postmortem catastrophic failure before he'll engineer his product accordingly. A smart guy would think about a theoretical failure before it happens, not wait for it. Not a far fetched idea ya know.

Furthermore, there are also other benefits of a reinforced carbon frame, even if they don't explode. Like resistant to chips from rocks & pebbles. You would know this had you bother to do a little digging on the net.

Relax.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

I just checked my first post in this thread, and this is what i said

*hi mod is also more brittle, meaning they're more likely to explode on a crash *

Nowhere did I mention the Supersix, only that hi-mod is more brittle.
I did use the word "explode", but I thought everyone would see the gross exaggeration in it (a poor humor attempt by me, of course) but yet they would still see the validity of my statement. I also mentioned "more likely", and nowhere did i mention anything in the absolute term.

But apparently, my poor writing mixed in with poor humor has led to some interesting reaction in here!


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

You don't get it, do you. First of all, quit telling people to relax. It's stupid and serves no purpose.

Second, I've heard of Calfee and Pinarello, thanks. I couldn't care less about what they do to reinforce their high modulus frames. You're trying to prove a negative by saying "no Calfee or Pinarello frame has ever exploded, therefore that proves that high modulus carbon is susceptible to explosive failure in a crash." That is a complete fallacy of reasoning.



> Furthermore, there are also other benefits of a reinforced carbon frame, even if they don't explode. Like resistant to chips from rocks & pebbles. You would know this had you bother to do a little digging on the net.


Maybe if we were discussing the general benefits of reinforced carbon, this would have come up. But we weren't, were we? At least, I wasn't. But since this is the first time you're mentioning this, I don't see how or why I would have bothered to do a "little digging on the net" on this subject.

The bottom line is, you are completely off base with your original statement that high modulus carbon frames, reinforced or not, are more susceptible to catastrophic explosive failure and STILL have not provided any sufficient evidence to back it up. The fact that you cannot provide any, and I do not see any documentation of such from ANY carbon frame manufacturer (yes, I "did a little digging on the net"). Quit being a stubborn ass and just admit you're wrong, and move on instead of trying to change the subject and telling people to relax.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Calfee and Pinarello have more experience than you when it comes to hi-mod carbon. If they reinforce their carbon, then it's because they think it's necessary. Or did you think they do it for bragging right? You, on the other hand, seem to know nothing about carbon. A know nothing who sounds like a nagging wife. 

I know you couldn't care less. That's your recurring theme. Couldn't care less, but keep coming back to try to say something. A know nothing who couldn't care less but keeps coming back like he cares about his proof. I think I understand you.

My fallacy here is I let myself sucked into a playground skirmish with a know nothing who thinks they know more about carbon than Calfee and Pinarello. I surrender to you, sir. 

And relaxx! lol


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> I just checked my first post in this thread, and this is what i said
> 
> *hi mod is also more brittle, meaning they're more likely to explode on a crash *
> 
> ...


Yes, and it would be more likely to splinter and impale someone through the eye as well, right? Theoreticals mean nothing.



> But apparently, my poor writing mixed in with poor humor has led to some interesting reaction in here!


Yes, we'll just excuse all this to your poor writing and poor humor.



> Calfee and Pinarello have more experience than you when it comes to hi-mod carbon. If they reinforce their carbon, then it's because they think it's necessary. Or did you think they do it for bragging right? You, on the other hand, seem to know nothing about carbon. A know nothing who sounds like a nagging wife.


I don't deny Calfee and Pinarello have more experience with and knowledge of carbon than I do. But I'm not having this discussion with Calfee or Pinarello, am I - I'm having it with you, and it's evident that you know even less than I do, since all you can do is make generalizations and references to company websites that say nothing to support your ridiculous statements.

You think Calfee or Pinarello would make a dumb statement like "more likely to explode in a crash"? All I asked for was some evidence to back up what you were saying, and yet again you've failed to provide it. I may be a "know nothing" but I know better than to spread lies, misinformation, and speculation like you do.

"Nagging wife"? "Pissy wife"? Projecting some of your marital problems here on the forum, are we?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

can you stop your know nothing whines? Go learn something instead?

And you were having a discussion with me? Funny, I didn't feel like so. I felt like I was listening to a know nothing talking at me, demand proof, while disregarding one of the foremost carbon authority in the industry. Stupid.


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> can you stop your know nothing whines? Go learn something instead?
> 
> And you were having a discussion with me? Funny, I didn't feel like so. I felt like I was listening to a know nothing talking at me, demand proof, while disregarding one of the foremost carbon authority in the industry. Stupid.


Are you done? First it was "relax", then it was "pissy/nagging wife", now it's "know nothing". Are you going down some list of things you've written down to try to attack people personally instead of actually discussing the topic at hand? What's next? "Poo-poo head"?

You're right though - this isn't a discussion. Mainly because you choose to make personal attacks rather than provide evidence backing up your statements.

And "one of the foremost carbon authority (sic) in the industry" did not make the statement about explosive damage - YOU did. Quit trying to be the spokesperson for Calfee and Pinarello, you're no more qualified than I am and you're just making them look bad.

EDIT: after seeing some of your previous posts, it does look like you're more a cause of problems here than anyone else. http://forums.roadbikereview.com/sp...sl3-build-268914-post3707986.html#post3707986 is a good example. And it looks like you're a kid, a self-admitted recent "n00b to road bikes", in college with just a small background in chemistry here in LA (I'm guessing UCLA), and you're essentially trying to pass yourself off here as a know-it-all when in reality you don't know anything. Seriously, just shut up. You have no credibility.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Personal attack? I see you like to play the victim card. You're an omega. Now go search for my internet history, instead of searching for carbon fiber knowledge. Stupid.


----------



## Propofol (Jul 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> Personal attack? I see you like to play the victim card. You're an omega. Now go search for my internet history, instead of searching for carbon fiber knowledge. Stupid.


Pretty ironic that you're making yourself out to be some kind of expert on carbon fiber when all you have done is point people to Google, Calfee, and Pinarello without actually making any definitive or credible statements of your own. There is nothing about that that makes ME a victim.

The bottom line is, all I did was challenge you to back up what was essentially a misguided, overgeneralizing claim. So far you have been unable to do that, and instead acted like an overdefensive child. There's really nothing more to say, but I suspect you are the kind of person who needs to get the last word in, so by all means go ahead. I'll respond if and when you actually present something useful to this thread.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Propofol said:


> There's really nothing more to say


lol about time you get a clue


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Moderators Note*

That's enough- I suggest you two deploy the ignore feature.


----------

