Page 5 of 7

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:19 am
by C-40
divve wrote:C-40, that's just laughable. Anyone who has $2K+ to spend on a frame set is looking for more than just function. To think or even assume any different is a display of poor reasoning.


Divve- I "think" that you are agreeing with me- I think that nearly everyone here is interested in more than weight- craft and aesthetics are important even if they have nothing to do with weight or racing success. That said, aesthetics without weight concerns is questionable also.

Now that out of the way, if people on this site think that Superlites c-dale exhibits a high degree of craft and "flawless" welding, then I am utterly speechless.... One can plainly see the step between the tubes and the non-functional weld filler. It is as plain as day. I am shocked because when it came to titanium frames, everyone agrees about what is the state-of-the-art: MOOTS and I would be the first to agree. In the same breath you want to compliment the c-dales????? PUKE in terms of craft. Obviously, they win lots of important races on these bikes and I don't want to confuse one set of facts with the other.

Can someone post some images of really fine aluminum bikes with nice wleds for s-lite to see? Or is it the nature of aluminum fabrication to be sort of choppy and sometimes even clumpy???

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:19 am
by Weenie

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:37 am
by cyclemanpat
here is a not very good picture of a weld on my 2000 TCR alloy frame.

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:54 am
by Superlite
It is as plain as day. I am shocked because when it came to titanium frames, everyone agrees about what is the state-of-the-art: MOOTS and I would be the first to agree. In the same breath you want to compliment the c-dales????? PUKE in terms of craft. Obviously, they win lots of important races on these bikes and I don't want to confuse one set of facts with the other.


Oh come on! Yeah, my frame looks like a piece of junk because the welds are not up to your super high standard. :lol:

Just a thought, not 100% certin on this, but Ti and steel welds can be much smaller then alu welds can they not? Perhapes that is why they look better?

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:59 am
by divve
I think the Cannondale welds look okay in their own way. It's not comparable to Moots or even Seven for that matter. Compared to Lightspeed however it's not worse looking just different. No idea regarding the level of craft but they do hold up well.

Check out the Merckx Team SC if you get the chance. The welds look more refined than Cannondale welds. Could be filed away as well I guess but they do look better.

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:05 am
by Scapin/Dean
Welding aluminum is considerably more difficult than steel and titanium if asthetics is your goal. Due its very high heat conduction/dissipation it solidifies very rapidly and doesn't form a nice 'puddle' that can be worked by the torch flame-front, as with steel or ti. Also, due to the nature of the metal it requires considerably more material at/in the weld in order to achieve the required strength. If your goal is beautiful welds, then aluminum will not be your material of choice.

BTW, I think the new Trek in the original post is a very nice looking bike. The paint job is OK, but I would prefer it in yellows or reds. Change out that BU (butt-ugly) DA group (industrial - thats the discription that best fits the DA group) and it would be a great bike from both an asthetic and functional point-of-view.

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:26 am
by C-40
Scapin/Dean wrote:Welding aluminum is considerably more difficult than steel and titanium if asthetics is your goal. Due its very high heat conduction/dissipation it solidifies very rapidly and doesn't form a nice 'puddle' that can be worked by the torch flame-front, as with steel or ti. Also, due to the nature of the metal it requires considerably more material at/in the weld in order to achieve the required strength. If your goal is beautiful welds, then aluminum will not be your material of choice.

Now we are getting the facts!!!! Great reply!!!!!!


BTW, I think the new Trek in the original post is a very nice looking bike.

But don't you find it to be similar to every other 5000 series frame????


The paint job is OK, but I would prefer it in yellows or reds. Change out that BU (butt-ugly) DA group (industrial - thats the discription that best fits the DA group) and it would be a great bike from both an asthetic and functional point-of-view.

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:29 am
by C-40
Oh come on! Yeah, my frame looks like a piece of junk because the welds are not up to your super high standard. :lol:

I never said that your bike looks like a pece of junk....... I said that the welds do not exhibit a high level of craft......... Hey, your standards are about as high as I have seen on this site.......
Just trying to get you to "see" with your own eyes......



Just a thought, not 100% certin on this, but Ti and steel welds can be much smaller then alu welds can they not? Perhapes that is why they look better?[/quote]

I think that what you said above is true and partially explains that my expectations are too high for aluminum........

Al welds...

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:41 am
by Ye Olde Balde One
Here is my fave AL weld....

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:48 am
by C-40
Now that is in keeping with the "honest' approach of the weld type found on the Moots bikes. No grinding and trying for the fillet look, ala C-dale.

Whose frame is that??

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:08 am
by Bruiser
bobalou wrote:I tell you something else about the Giants, no small thing, they've got probably the best warranty service of all the manufacturer's, at least in the US. I've seen frames replaced no questions asked and within a weeks time.


ROFL.

Sounds like the Aust and US Giant reps are very different. Warrenty and product service is one of the reasons I steered away from Giant. I had to threaten them with legal action before they would inspect the frame (out contracted rep had told me my 99 frame was >9 years old).

C-40, look over the number of responses re:welding finishes. I think the participation in this thread speaks for itself.

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:29 am
by C-40
C-40, look over the number of responses re:welding finishes. I think the participation in this thread speaks for itself.[/quote]


Huh?????

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:31 am
by Bruiser
Look UP, this was an active thread last night.

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:36 am
by C-40
Last night it was about paint, tonite it is about welding- don't you sort of think that welding is more imporant than paint???? And certainly unchangeable.......

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:41 am
by Bruiser
Neither was about the strength or weight of frames. Appearance is very important in the finish of a frame. (I'm in a diff time zone)

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:52 am
by C-40
Bruiser wrote:Neither was about the strength or weight of frames. Appearance is very important in the finish of a frame. (I'm in a diff time zone)


If weight is what a WW is about then all we need is the "listings" portion of this site- pretty straight forward. And strength should be as objective as weight- what is the basis for measuring strength??- I realize the German magazine measure strenth but is it objective and is too much strength sometimes too much of a good thing but I digress here and I don't know if anyone else really cares about the philosphical basis of what we are approaching here.

But I am confused by your response- do you care about appearance/craft or not??

Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:52 am
by Weenie

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com