# MLD Carbon Fiber Saddle 70g



## Mdeth1313

A couple of weeks ago I took hold of my MLD (maple leaf design) carbon saddle. It's made in the USA- and it looks like a winner (if your butt fits it). The construction is outstanding. I've now got about 500 miles on it - no strange sounds, no popping, no slipping and, IT FITS MY BUTT! 
If you've thought about a carbon saddle and the toupe or kit carbonio flow have worked for you, this might be the right saddle-- remember- its still a very personal thing-- maybe yes, maybe no- but this adds to the list of possibilities.

Comes in 2 widths (130 and 144 - I think) and 2 weight limits -187lbs (mine) and 220lbs.

Its supposed to be based on specialized's toupe, but I came from using a selle italia slr kit carbonio flow (w/ cutout- pic on scale).
I did borrow a friend's toupe for a few rides before ordering the MLD, and that was working out ok as well.
I've done rides various rides over the past 2 weeks- w/ this saddle the longest ones have been 70, 70 and 107. After 2 or 3 rides of getting the setup and position tweaked, its been as comfy as my previous saddle. I ride on some crappy roads as well (dutchess county, NY- litchfield county, CT)- the 107 mile ride included some lovely stretches where the road was razed for repaving and included a climb of Mt. Washington, MA- which is just god awful in many places.
Only complaint was the underside of the saddle is not clearcoated and smooth (like the top) and the edges were roughing up my shorts- liquid electric tape solves that problem easily. Other than that, the shorts I've used on this saddle are:

Giordana tenax and max bibs (3D-OF pad)
Assos F1-Uno
DeMarchi Contour Plus
Castelli Cattivo (kiss pad)

The assos is definitely better for the longer rides, although the demarchi and giordana have held up well on 70 mile rides-- 
I've only been disappointed w/ the castelli chamois, although this may be a personal thing as I find the pad does not provide enough coverage .

Other saddles I've used (besides those mentioned)-- 
Forte (performance bike) Pro (the 197g claimed w/ cutout)- used successfully
Selle San Marco Magma Mg (the silver one w/ no padding)-- DID NOT WORK FOR ME! Hurt like hell!


----------



## 80z28s6

Where to get it???


----------



## clgtide1

*The Dreaded*

How Much...?


----------



## 80z28s6

Found it here http://fairwheelbikes.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=19&products_id=416


----------



## Mdeth1313

80z28s6 said:


> Found it here http://fairwheelbikes.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=19&products_id=416



Fairwheel bikes would be the place. If the saddle is listed as "not in stock" either call or email them-- they place orders fairly regularly- I think it took about a week for them to get mine in and about 5-6 days to ship it (AZ to NY)


----------



## Mdeth1313

Just to let you know-- still riding on it- just did a 70 mile ride today on some really abysmal roads- still no issues-- I've found another pair of bib shorts I really like w/ these though-- louis garneau ergotex 2.


----------



## Mdeth1313

*Uh oh-*

Ok- have to report the bad w/ the good-- just sent the saddle back today for replacement-- 
the pics will show what the rails looked like-- I went to adjust the seatpost clamp bolts and noticed the bolts were starting to contact the saddle underside-- this hadnt happened before-- then I looked at the saddle rails. See pics...... 

my understanding is this should not have happened (not a common occurence) and replacement should be quick. In the meantime I still have the kit carbonio flow to use.

FYI-- I'm barely 150lbs at this point, saddle was mounted on ax-lightness daedalus post and bolts were tightened to 6 newton meters..


----------



## 80z28s6

Thanks for keeping us updated!!!


----------



## Mdeth1313

another quick update-- jason at FWB told me the designer of the saddle saw the pics and said it must have been a problem w/ the resin in the rails. Something that hasnt come up before. 
should have a replacement shortly


----------



## iliveonnitro

You spent how much on that saddle?! holy crap!!


----------



## terzo rene

I love being right! My first thought seeing the original pictures was those rails are not adequate to the task. Tune/Becker, AX and others use protective wrapping of some kind and also larger diameters on their rails (and still sometimes break).


----------



## Forrest Root

Mdeth1313 said:


> another quick update-- jason at FWB told me the designer of the saddle saw the pics and said it must have been a problem w/ the resin in the rails. Something that hasnt come up before.
> should have a replacement shortly


I don't know how much I'd trust that Jason fellow. It's likely he's a buddy buggerer and violator of small woodland creatures. That's what you get for not shopping at Nashbar or Performance Bike.


----------



## Forrest Root

terzo rene said:


> I love being right! My first thought seeing the original pictures was those rails are not adequate to the task. Tune/Becker, AX and others use protective wrapping of some kind and also larger diameters on their rails (and still sometimes break).


Well. Obviously. Clearly you can tell everthing about a component just by looking at it from the outside.


----------



## Mdeth1313

terzo rene said:


> I love being right! My first thought seeing the original pictures was those rails are not adequate to the task. Tune/Becker, AX and others use protective wrapping of some kind and also larger diameters on their rails (and still sometimes break).



I guess you'd be the holy master of carbon rails. Last I heard it seems mine were a fluke. I've also heard of a test done where they mounted this type saddle on an ax-lightness seatpost and went at it w/ the torque wrench. At 9Nm the bolt snapped off- nothing but a small indent on the rails-- but I'm sure you're right and I've wasted my money. 

maybe tonite I'll even lose some sleep over this. maybe. nah.


----------



## bikenerd

Forrest Root said:


> I don't know how much I'd trust that Jason fellow. It's likely he's a buddy buggerer and violator of small woodland creatures. That's what you get for not shopping at Nashbar or Performance Bike.


seems to me that if he's likely a buddy buggerer, you're likely a buggeree, no?


----------



## terzo rene

Yes you can tell something about a component by looking at it. 1" thick steel is stronger than 0.5", and small diameter solid carbon rails of the same material are weaker than larger diameter ones - unless you believe that the MLD guys have discovered some magic pixie dust that allows them to override physics.

Sure it might hold up fine but in carbon saddles weight is king and when the competition is all using more material in that area and sacrificing weight loss you have to wonder about the engineering that has gone into the product or the tradeoffs they chose. When even limited road testing would have highlighted the need for smooth edges to protect your $300 shorts, it doesn't exactly make me confident they've done much.


----------



## Mdeth1313

terzo rene said:


> Yes you can tell something about a component by looking at it. 1" thick steel is stronger than 0.5", and small diameter solid carbon rails of the same material are weaker than larger diameter ones - unless you believe that the MLD guys have discovered some magic pixie dust that allows them to override physics.
> 
> Sure it might hold up fine but in carbon saddles weight is king and when the competition is all using more material in that area and sacrificing weight loss you have to wonder about the engineering that has gone into the product or the tradeoffs they chose. When even limited road testing would have highlighted the need for smooth edges to protect your $300 shorts, it doesn't exactly make me confident they've done much.



Ummm, I dont own $300 shorts- I blew all my money on this inferior carbon saddle :cryin: 
:idea: 

again- my understanding is when there is not problem w/ the resin, these rails are supposed to be the strongest part of the saddle.
I'm not going to argue about this-- I'm going to get my replacement and see what happens and then come back and post. you keep looking though!


----------



## alexedge

What I can't understand is why in the world you would spend $350 for the SSM Magma Mg (130g) when you can get an SLR Kit Carbonio (125g) for $200? Considering that the SLR actually has PADDING?

When I first saw the Magma Mg and its price/weight I couldn't understand why anyone would buy it.

Unless the only reason is to add a big shiny piece of polished magnesium to your bike?


----------



## Mdeth1313

alexedge said:


> What I can't understand is why in the world you would spend $350 for the SSM Magma Mg (130g) when you can get an SLR Kit Carbonio (125g) for $200? Considering that the SLR actually has PADDING?
> 
> When I first saw the Magma Mg and its price/weight I couldn't understand why anyone would buy it.
> 
> Unless the only reason is to add a big shiny piece of polished magnesium to your bike?



Either I'm a little confused or you're a little confused, because I never paid $350 for anything mentioned.

I had a magma mg- that cost 149.99. It was horrible- fortunately, the shop I bought it from allowed me to return it-- I then purchased the slr kit carbonio- I paid $160 for mine- I used that until I got my MLD saddle- that's the $350 one. 
As for the padding- I'm actually using my kit carbonio until my replacement MLD gets here (any day now)-- the MLD fits my butt better and is more comfy w/ no padding-- trust me, I know-- doing a 107 mile ride in 95 degree temps will be a pretty good test.


----------



## alexedge

Mdeth1313 said:


> Either I'm a little confused or you're a little confused, because I never paid $350 for anything mentioned.
> 
> I had a magma mg- that cost 149.99. It was horrible- fortunately, the shop I bought it from allowed me to return it-- I then purchased the slr kit carbonio- I paid $160 for mine- I used that until I got my MLD saddle- that's the $350 one.
> As for the padding- I'm actually using my kit carbonio until my replacement MLD gets here (any day now)-- the MLD fits my butt better and is more comfy w/ no padding-- trust me, I know-- doing a 107 mile ride in 95 degree temps will be a pretty good test.


Wow, ok, your LBS must have really awesome sales, since MSRP on that saddle is $350.00, so you got 50% on a brand-new model! Do they have a website (your LBS)?

And yeah, I understand some bare (unpadded) seats are quite comfortable, I'm riding one. I mainly just didn't understand why you would pay twice as much for a seat thats not any lighter. But apparently you didn't...


----------



## DIRT BOY

alexedge said:


> Wow, ok, your LBS must have really awesome sales, since MSRP on that saddle is $350.00, so you got 50% on a brand-new model! Do they have a website (your LBS)?
> 
> And yeah, I understand some bare (unpadded) seats are quite comfortable, I'm riding one. I mainly just didn't understand why you would pay twice as much for a seat thats not any lighter. But apparently you didn't...


You can get that saddle here:
https://fairwheelbikes.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=19&products_id=485
It is $350!

You can get the BECKER Raod saddle for $340
Proven desgin that is comfortable and sells well!

https://sales.light-bikes.com/


----------



## Mdeth1313

DIRT BOY said:


> You can get that saddle here:
> https://fairwheelbikes.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=19&products_id=485
> It is $350!
> 
> You can get the BECKER Raod saddle for $340
> Proven desgin that is comfortable and sells well!
> 
> https://sales.light-bikes.com/



Wow- I thought the magma mg had fallen off the face of the earth-- I thought it should have, considering it came in way over its claimed weight and it hurt like hell to ride it- I guess they just jacked up the price- as the original msrp was somewhere around 199. 

I looked at the becker, but I need 1 major thing in a saddle-- recessed channel-- no channel, I go numb.


----------



## Mdeth1313

IT'S HERE! IT'S HERE- MY REPLACEMENT HAS ARRIVED! It's also 2g heavier-- bastards!
I'm gonna go install it-- edges are much smoother than the 1st one.


----------



## Mdeth1313

Just an update-- coming up on a week and the rails have held thru a couple of 20-30 mile rides, a 55 mile ride and a century (w/ some of the most horrific road conditions I've ridden recently). As advised, I backed off the torque on the rails from 6Nm to about 4.5Nm and I've had no problems.

BTW- this saddle is the most comfortable I've ever ridden-- the shape is working perfectly for me.


----------



## Mdeth1313

Ok,
here's the latest-- I'm now waiting to hear whether or not the MLD saddle is compatible w/ halfpipe/beam type seatpost clamps. Not getting into the details, but I was told not to use my ax-lightness post w/ the saddle until further notice. 
I looked at the options and I think I'm going back to my easton ec90 post-- at 300mm, it weighed in @ 155g, the ax post is 125g and I can cut a pretty decent part of the easton post down- which should get it into the low 140's, possibly the 130's. Even at 150g, that would add 25g back on the bike-- switching back to my slr kit carbonio would add over 60g back on AND the MLD is the best fitting saddle my butt has ever known. 
Never dull-- I'd consider trying another saddle, but this one works so well and the freaking bike was under 13lbs before I switched out to the mld.

its been interesting to say the least, but if the rails wont hold on ax and the other lw posts, it may rule it out for many folks.


----------



## Juanmoretime

I think a saddle or post change may fix it although not both. Madcow will make it right for you. Maybe start trying the AX line of saddles? An Endurance would be close!


----------



## RHankey

If one were to design a clamping device to break seat rails, I don't think one could come up with a better design than the post you appear to have. I'd be afraid to use that post with anything other than steel seat rails. I'd suggest using a post with a better seat clamp design.


----------



## Mdeth1313

RHankey said:


> If one were to design a clamping device to break seat rails, I don't think one could come up with a better design than the post you appear to have. I'd be afraid to use that post with anything other than steel seat rails. I'd suggest using a post with a better seat clamp design.


I know what you mean- there are actually quite a few seatposts designed w/ that type of system-- strangely enough- some of them make carbon saddles w/ carbon rails that work w/ their posts.

I probably would have been able to switch out and try one of those other saddles, but I opted to switch to an easton post b/c:

its only 36g heavier than the old post and the way the easton fits in my frame, I can chop off a good chunk at the bottom end and bring that # down. 

more importantly, its a carbon saddle and its made in the US. This way if anything goes wrong, things are handled quickly- it doesnt take forever to get a response from someone in germany and then you start w/ shipping back and forth. More than that- this is the most comfortable saddle I've ridden since I picked up cycling in 1997-- giving that up for 36grams would be, well, stupid, especially when the bike was under 13lbs BEFORE I switched to the saddle. (incidentally, keeping the post and switching to my old saddle would have been a 60-65g weight penalty).


----------



## alexedge

RHankey said:


> If one were to design a clamping device to break seat rails, I don't think one could come up with a better design than the post you appear to have. I'd be afraid to use that post with anything other than steel seat rails. I'd suggest using a post with a better seat clamp design.


Yeah, I've never been able to figure that one out. I would assume that most companies that design and produce carbon fiber or machined aluminum products would have at least one ENGINEER working for them - but it doesn't take an engineer to see that the clamp setup on some of these posts seems almost _intended_ to break rails. A three-year old would grasp it immediately.

One of the first great design books I ever read was _Engineer to Win: The Essential Guide to Racing Car Materials Techology, OR, How To Build Winners That Don't Break_, by Carroll Smith. The chapters had names like _Introduction to metallurgy_, _Plastic and elastic deformation of metals_, _ Alloying and heat treatment of steels_, _Non-ferrous metals and their metallurgy—Composite materials_, _*Metal fatigue—Or why things break*_, _*Threaded fasteners—An educated re-look*_ (_re_-look because he had already written a WHOLE BOOK about fasteners!), and finally _*The joining of materials—Riveting, bonding & welding*_. There's more, but I've only listed the ones most relevant to cycling (or design of anything, really, especially anything you want to be strong AND light). There's a TON of great info in here, you should buy it.

But the reason I bring it up is because one point he hammers home over and over is that you should NEVER design anything that puts the a bolt in double shear. Bolt are pretty similar to seat rails (thin metal tubes that hold weight), and I'll explain double shear in a second. But he repeatedly brings up how many otherwise excellent race cars he's seen lose a race due to this fundamental design law.

Nearly every part on our bicycle is subjected to some form of stress, usually more than one kind. Tension (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensile_stress) and compression (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressive_stress) are the most common types, and I won't explain them here (Wikipedia links are included for the REAL beginners) other than to say that most materials are strongest under these types of stresses, and designers try to (or at least Smith tells them to try to) design systems (a 'system' would be, say, the interface between fork steerer, headset, and stem, or even the simple interface between seatpost and seat tube) where they avoid shear stress - it is possible, for example, to design a bolted joint (two pieces of _x_ bolted together, one of the most common 'systems' in the world) that is only under tension, but most designers end up failing and putting the bolt in shear.

Shear stress is where the stress is applied from a direction parallel to the face of the material, rather than in tension or compression where the stress is applied in a perpendicular direction. This might not make sense, so I found an illustration:










Now, I don't have my copy of _Engineer to Win_ with me right now, so I don't remember the explanation of exactly why (I never claimed to be an engineer or anything), ut Smith basically explains to readers that when you put a bolt through something with a hole in it (like bolting two pieces of metal together), that connection will be much weaker and much more likely to fail if it is loaded in shear. And a bolt through a piece of metal so the bolt is holding some weight seems very similar to a seat rail through a seat clamp.. I may be able to post more on this later when I get access to the book back at my apartment. But basically, think about the difference between grabbing a solid metal bar at each end and pulling on it (tension), or pushing on it (compression) vs trying to slice it in half basically using a guillotine (which is what some of these seat post clamps look like).

A few examples of these terrible (but light) designs:

*AX Lightness*









*Extralight*









*USE Alien*









Sorry for the long post, congrats to those who read the whole thing. I just don't understand, these companies obviously have some good engineers working there, they make other excellent and well-designed products, but these seat post heads are a joke, especially with carbon rails becoming so common on today's seats. This is what a seat rail clamp should look like:










Even supporting only about 3/4ths of the rail will work, as long as you support it on both sides in the same place, like, say, Campy Record:










Now Fairwheel is never gonna want to sell me anything because I dissed many of the posts they sell. But I honestly believe these clamp designs are terrible - and DANGEROUS if someone clamps a carbon-railed saddle on there!!!


----------



## jeremyb

bikenerd said:


> seems to me that if he's likely a buddy buggerer, you're likely a buggeree, no?



bikenerd has the best signature ever!

keep it up Frank.


----------



## Forrest Root

alexedge said:


> Yeah, I've never been able to figure that one out. I would assume that most companies that design and produce carbon fiber or machined aluminum products would have at least one ENGINEER working for them - but it doesn't take an engineer to see that the clamp setup on some of these posts seems almost _intended_ to break rails. A three-year old would grasp it immediately
> .....blah....blah.....blah....
> Now Fairwheel is never gonna want to sell me anything because I dissed many of the posts they sell. But I honestly believe these clamp designs are terrible - and DANGEROUS if someone clamps a carbon-railed saddle on there!!!


Well, first thing is you don't know dick about the guys at Fairwheel, so that pretty much makes you an arse for even mentioning them the way you do.

Second, have you even bothered yet to model and test these seatpost designs. You know what Frances: they work pretty damned well.

Absolute engineering statements are freakin' useless because they say nothing about the application, intendended loads, and etc.

I'm assuming your comments here reflect why you ended up in engineering and not science. You know, it's that lack of being able to see the big picture thing.


----------



## Juanmoretime

I feel the love!


----------



## Mdeth1313

Juanmoretime said:


> I feel the love!



I guess we should all break out in Elton John music (Can you feel the love?)

This has to be my favorite cycling forum site. :mad2:


----------



## stevesbike

The BIG picture is that rails themselves are the design weakness. Having a few contact points doesn't allow energy to be distributed optimally. The better design is something like what selle italia is doing with their superlight railless saddles. The basic point about clamp design is right by the way...


----------



## alexedge

Forrest Root said:


> Well, first thing is you don't know dick about the guys at Fairwheel, so that pretty much makes you an arse for even mentioning them the way you do.
> 
> Second, have you even bothered yet to model and test these seatpost designs. You know what Frances: they work pretty damned well.
> 
> Absolute engineering statements are freakin' useless because they say nothing about the application, intendended loads, and etc.
> 
> I'm assuming your comments here reflect why you ended up in engineering and not science. You know, it's that lack of being able to see the big picture thing.


Wow man, I think you took my post a lot the wrong way. I don't know anything about the guys at Fairwheel, but considering that most of the cyclists I have met tend to be cool people, I expect they are good guys. I think it's really cool that they have a forum on their site where you can discuss products with them, with other riders who have bought the product, and with a few of the company reps.

I was JOKING about them being pissed off at me, I thought that was clear from the way I wrote it, but obviously not. Communicating over the internet is always difficult because there is nothing to judge someone's intent by other than the words - no tone of voice, no smiles or frowns, etc. If I had said that to you in real life, you would have known 100% that I was joking around. Sorry that I didn't make that clear.

As to the rest, well, all I did was state my opinion - that seat clamps that put the seat rails in double shear are a poor design, and cause unnecessary stress on the seat rails. Someone at Selle Italia obviously agrees - their 'Carbonio' saddles with the carbon rails instruct you specifically NOT to use seatposts with this type of clamp design.

It's clear that you disagree with my opinion of these seatpost clamp designs, but there's no reason for you to be so rude about it. We both have differing opinions, and now we've both shared them. Let's just agree to disagree.

Personal attacks are completely unwarranted in a situation where we're discussing facts. But I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that the only reason you insulted me was that you misunderstood my post, and thought I was insulting the people at Fairwheel, which got you pissed off. So I apologize for the confusion my joke created.


----------



## Forrest Root

I wasn't rude. I was blunt.

Like it or not, opinions are not illuminating at all when it comes to definining technical merits, and they only serve to reinforce myth or bad info. With all the effort to which you went to find pics and tutor the masses on engineering tenets, your post certainly read nothing like an opinion.


----------



## Mdeth1313

Ok children of the corn! Time to stop butchering the adults! 

Interesting stuff- as the OP, I'd like to add some stuff here--

my previous saddle- a selle italia kit CARBONIO flow, was used for a few thousand miles on an ax-lightness daedalus post- no problems whatsoever.

I've been offered a potential solution to the problem, but my ax post is out of commission at the moment-- Don at MLD is awesome-- in the end, I'm probably going to stick w/ my easton post, as the difference in weight is/will be minimal once I cut down the easton post.

The MLD has been/still is the best fitting saddle (FOR ME) I've ever used. It also happens to weigh in at 70g and cant be used w/ the halfpipe/beam type posts. That said- its worth every freaking penny to me because its more comfy than the (much cheaper, much heavier) traditional saddles. Even w/ switching back to the easton- between post lengths and everything else, I'm talking about 10-30g difference-- the kit carbonio saddle weighed 65g more than the MLD- I still come out ahead.

As for all the techno type stuff, I'd still like to know why ax makes saddles w/ carbon rails AND the daedalus post if it's bad karma for those 2 types to get together (kind of like louie anderson and delta burke f---ing it out- like there's a bed that can hold that action (thanks sam)).

Just my two fitty.


----------



## alexedge

Forrest Root said:


> I wasn't rude. I was blunt.
> 
> Like it or not, opinions are not illuminating at all when it comes to definining technical merits, and they only serve to reinforce myth or bad info. With all the effort to which you went to find pics and tutor the masses on engineering tenets, your post certainly read nothing like an opinion.


I was referring to you calling me 'an arse'. I think that's usually considered rude. But as I said, it seems like you were reacting to what you perceived as an insult to some people you consider friends, so I'm not upset about it.

Both our posts are OPINIONS because neither of us have done testing on the seatpost designs in question (I'm talking about lab-type destructive testing, not "I rode it for six months and nothing broke"). So in my educated opinion, based on my understanding of the principles of physics, design, and engineering, a seat clamp which places the seat rails in double shear will be more likely to cause seat rail failure than a clamp which supports the seat rails on both sides for a good portion of their length (ie Thompson).

Now, you implied that your opinion is educated as well - from your condescending statement about me being an engineer and not a scientist, I gather that you ARE some sort of scientist. So, you offered the educated opinion "they work pretty damned well."

Absolute engineering statements are NOT useless, as long as they are specific. Like the one I made above: _a seat clamp which places the seat rails in double shear will be more likely to cause seat rail failure than a clamp which supports the seat rails on both sides for a good portion of their length_.

Since you criticized me for failing to model and test these seatpost designs before forming an opinion about them, I'm assuming that you have modeled and tested them before forming your opinion about them. So why don't you share your test results with the rest of us so we can see how the seatposts I mentioned can hold up to exactly the same stresses as a Thompson without causing seat rail failure (which is what you've implied by disagreeing with my criticism of those designs).

I'm being sarcastic, of course - I'm fairly certain you don't have any test results, which makes you something of a hypocrite, since you tell me I can't make any statements about the strength of a design without testing it, then follow that by making your own statement about the same topic - telling me I'm wrong.

In fact, that's pretty much all you've done - tell me "you're wrong". You haven't offered any facts to support your opinion, haven't explained anything (the way I explained the distribution of force in my original post), and in all reality haven't said anything of worth other than "I'm smarter than you, and I say you're wrong, and also that you're an arse".

I'm sure you'll respond to this post with some more pseudo-technical mumbo-jumbo, but as I'm sure everyone can see, this argument that you've started is basically over unless you can provide some factual information, or at least some explanation in support of your theory that all the above mentioned seat clamp designs are equal.


----------



## Mdeth1313

Oh crap- flame on. 

Cant we all just get along.

Arent there better things to fight about.

Couldnt we put these efforts towards solving the universal health care issues

How bout this one-

Give me an f-ing break. Take it to your own topic- biznitches!

Run Forrest, Run!


----------



## alexedge

Mdeth1313 said:


> Oh crap- flame on.
> 
> Cant we all just get along.
> 
> Arent there better things to fight about.
> 
> Couldnt we put these efforts towards solving the universal health care issues
> 
> How bout this one-
> 
> Give me an f-ing break. Take it to your own topic- biznitches!
> 
> Run Forrest, Run!


My apologies to you, sir. I did feel that my original post was at least mildly relevant to the subject at hand, but everything since then (ie between myself and forrest) has been a complete threadjack. Sorry!


----------



## Forrest Root

alexedge said:


> I was referring to you calling me 'an arse'. I think that's usually considered rude. But as I said, it seems like you were reacting to what you perceived as an insult to some people you consider friends, so I'm not upset about it.....blah....blah.......blah.....rationlization after rationalization.....blah......blah......blah......


See, I'm not the one that stepped in and made a claim: you are. I suggested that your "engineering" comments were not worth much, given it was unlikely you'd actually considered the problem to any depth at all. And you did affirm that you didn't actually consider the problem. Nice. I guess at your job, you can just cover up for such lapses with the appropriate "safety factor." It appears that at no time did you even bother to factor in your great ruminations anything related to the loads under which and the enironment in which such posts operate. 

Yeah, you're prolly right. I'm sure that everyone that made one of those posts is an idiot and does not possess your vast engineering knowledge.


----------



## alexedge

Forrest Root said:


> See, I'm not the one that stepped in and made a claim: you are. I suggested that your "engineering" comments were not worth much, given it was unlikely you'd actually considered the problem to any depth at all. And you did affirm that you didn't actually consider the problem. Nice. I guess at your job, you can just cover up for such lapses with the appropriate "safety factor." It appears that at no time did you even bother to factor in your great ruminations anything related to the loads under which and the enironment in which such posts operate.
> 
> Yeah, you're prolly right. I'm sure that everyone that made one of those posts is an idiot and does not possess your vast engineering knowledge.


Where exactly did I "affirm that I didn't actually consider the problem"?

I like how instead of responding to my statements you can just make stuff up.

I also don't know where you get the idea that I didn't consider the loads or environment. Again, you're fabricating.

You should really let this argument go, as all you're doing is ruining mdeth's thread and making yourself look like an 'arse'. If it makes you feel better, here:

"Your scientific knowledge is obviously superior to my engineering knowledge, you probably have more degrees on your wall than I do, and as such, you must be correct when you say that under the loads applied during normal use, a seatpost design which places the seat rails in double shear is not any more likely to cause seat rail failure than one which doesn't."

There, does that satisfy you? I tried to suggest we just agree to disagree (ie accept that we have differing opinions and that neither of us is going to convince the other of our "rightness") but you just can't seem to let it go. So now I've agreed with you. Please let this drop. It's no longer even remotely relevant to the thread topic.

*If you absolutely must continue this, please PM me instead of posting here!*


----------



## Forrest Root

alexedge said:


> "Your scientific knowledge is obviously superior to my engineering knowledge, you probably have more degrees on your wall than I do, and as such, you must be correct when you say that under the loads applied during normal use, a seatpost design which places the seat rails in double shear is not any more likely to cause seat rail failure than one which doesn't."


You clearly don't get it, especially if you think capitulation or adulation from internet forum members would get somebody off. I guess that's how you roll.


----------



## terzo rene

Re the AX post and saddles, their saddles have always had either a steel sleeve or an aramid layering over the carbon rails so the post is likely less of an issue than with bare CF rails. In the steel sleeve days they also specified that the clamp could be no closer than 1cm from the end of the sleeve.


----------

