HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 109 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 6:24 pm
Posts: 4387
Location: BELGIUM
Dude, you keep picking on people for not being scientific or showing you the numbers.. I have not seen you posting anything scientific with numbers ever relating the products you seem so eager to defend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 8:58 am
Posts: 1103
Location: Tucson
strobbekoen wrote:
@alienator:
That is not what Adrien said. He did not say "stiff is always better" as an absolute. It is the same argument you and I had in a previous post where you insisted on the argument as if i said "stiff is always better" which i didn't. He didn't either.


I don't remember any such argument with you, but that's beside the point.

Adrien said:
about the stiffness, yes it is very important, almost at any place of the bike. Mavic performed serious tests with stiff and flexy components, same super powerful track guy, same position, etc... the stiffness of the components allow the rider to exploit his full potential while reaching the maximal hearth rate. With less stiff components, the rider can't exploit fully his potential. You can contact Mavic if you want to know more. They perform thousands interesting tests.

Note that it is specifically implied that less stiff components prevent a rider from exploiting his full potential. That sure sounds like a blanket statement from Mavic. And it certainly says that stiff is always better, else you won't exploit the potential you could.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:21 pm 


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 8:58 am
Posts: 1103
Location: Tucson
strobbekoen wrote:
Dude, you keep picking on people for not being scientific or showing you the numbers.. I have not seen you posting anything scientific with numbers ever relating the products you seem so eager to defend.


See, I'm not defending a product, Dude. I am defending a tenet of good engineering which is that you design a product with the characteristics it needs to perform to its design specs. The idea that stiffness must be of a certain quality no matter the wheel design flies in the face of good engineering. It's simple, dude.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 6:24 pm
Posts: 4387
Location: BELGIUM
Anyone with common sense would agree with Adrien on this. Show me your numbers to prove the contrary. Why would your questioning one thesis be more valid than the thesis ? I have not seen you posting any objective data. All you do is question other people's arguments!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:56 pm
Posts: 1280
Location: Worcester, UK
PezTech wrote:
What "Big advantage" do Lightweights "throw away" with regard to tensioned spokes?

That by pre-stressing a tension member it can effectively support "compression". Therefore as I keep saying, not only does the spoke losing tension contribute to the lateral stiffness, but also the spokes at the bottom of the wheel contribute to supporting the rim against forces from the ground. Is a common misconception that wheels hang from the top spokes - that is effectively how LWs work, but a traditionally spoked wheel with pre-stressed spokes doesn't - it stands on the bottom spokes.

See http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel/index.htm for data on how spokes becoming totally slack (as is the case from the start if there is no spoke tension) affects wheel stiffness.

The talk on here is all about how carbon has some magical properties that means you can build your wheels differently. Quick reality check here - it has no magical properties, just a better specific stiffness than steel. This means that for a given stiffness a tension spoke can be lighter, but that doesn't change the way the spoke works. There is nothing magical about the way these wheels work - you could build something much the same out of steel/alu if you wanted, but it would obviously be heavier. Spoke pre-tension would benefit them in terms of stiffness in just the same way as for a conventional wheel with no weight penalty (arguably you could then make them lighter for the same performance).

_________________
No scales on the trails


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:32 pm 
Offline
WWotY 2007
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:37 pm
Posts: 1476
Location: France.
Yes I meant stiff components are required to exploit fully the rider potential.
Keep in mind that a light and weak rider will not need as stiff wheels as a heavy powerful guy. The tests were performed with a 20kg lateral load.

Yes Alienator, you really seem like defending Lew from your posts. Take it easy and be fair.
Lew, Mavic or Lightweight: from all of them I would prefer to have a Lew 2008 wheelset, even though they were tested as the most flexy! ;) (just to let you see I don't defend any of the two other!)

_________________
RAR wheels
Roues Artisanales


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 8:58 am
Posts: 1103
Location: Tucson
Adrien wrote:
Yes Alienator, you really seem like defending Lew from your posts. Take it easy and be fair.


Well, that's the beauty of reading text on a screen: your free to assume things to be a certain way even if there not that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 8:58 am
Posts: 1103
Location: Tucson
strobbekoen wrote:
Anyone with common sense would agree with Adrien on this. Show me your numbers to prove the contrary. Why would your questioning one thesis be more valid than the thesis ? I have not seen you posting any objective data. All you do is question other people's arguments!


Well, then there you go. Take your common sense and run with it, Dude. Before you run off though, Dude, by the definition of Scientific Method, theses are to be questioned, dude. That's what it's all about.

What data am I supposed to provide, especially since I'm just supporting sound engineering principles? Dude, pull up some data if you want to support your pet thesis, but remember it's the one with the thesis that is required to provide the data.

Doesn't it suck when that whole science and scientific method thing get in the way, dude?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 6:24 pm
Posts: 4387
Location: BELGIUM
Be a little bit more critical of yourself before you tell people of using scientific verbage. You are not the only person granted to this privilege. To be honest i am getting tired of you picking on people while not providing any substantial arguments yourself.

Quote:
Doesn't it suck when that whole science and scientific method thing get in the way, dude?

I guess this tells the story. You are obviously the only one capable of grasping science and scientific methods.

Quote:
What data am I supposed to provide, especially since I'm just supporting sound engineering principles? Dude, pull up some data if you want to support your pet thesis, but remember it's the one with the thesis that is required to provide the data.

What thesis ? What engineering principles ? You never provided anything constructive. You just enjoy picking out whatever it is that you think is not scientific. The best sailors stand ashore don't they ?


Last edited by strobbekoen on Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 10:01 pm
Posts: 2914
Location: london
and whats wrong with the word dude its one of my favourites?
tikka

_________________
:)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:44 pm 
Offline
WWotY 2007
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:37 pm
Posts: 1476
Location: France.
alienator wrote:
Adrien wrote:
Yes Alienator, you really seem like defending Lew from your posts. Take it easy and be fair.


Well, that's the beauty of reading text on a screen: your free to assume things to be a certain way even if there not that way.


I wrote "you seem".

Now I think it's better to go back on topic. Will Lew propose a lighter wheelset to reply to the lightest wheelset of the world?

_________________
RAR wheels
Roues Artisanales


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:56 pm
Posts: 1280
Location: Worcester, UK
alienator wrote:
What data am I supposed to provide, especially since I'm just supporting sound engineering principles?

Since you don't seem to understand how a normal tension spoked wheel works and why the parts of a LW / Lew being carbon don't make any difference to the engineering behind it, then I'd suggest you're not actually, dude. Since I'm basing my argument on well researched principles, I'd suggest it's you who needs to come up with some proper arguments to support your theory if you think carbon spoked wheels work differently, dude.

You'll note that I agree with you, tikka, dude :D

_________________
No scales on the trails


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:49 am
Posts: 2080
Location: Denmark
As far as I know, carbon has it´s strengths in elongation, not compression, where it´s rather weak. That makes it different from metals. Hence the different construction methods and designs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:56 pm
Posts: 1280
Location: Worcester, UK
Carbon does just fine in compression provided it is supported in an epoxy matrix. Otherwise carbon bike frames (where the top tube, seatstays and seattube are in compression) wouldn't work. Then again metal spokes don't do so well in compression either due to buckling!

_________________
No scales on the trails


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:16 pm
Posts: 10
Location: O.C.
I don't really want to get this thread more heated, but I must ask this since it's not yet been answered. alienator, DO YOU OR DO YOU NOT WORK FOR LEW? How about an honest answer?

alienator wrote:
A well designed product is as stiff as it needs to be, as strong as it needs to be to meet it's performance targets. It does not have to meet some generic "wheel's must be built like this" ideal.


That would be fine if every company would design a custom wheel for every customer. If not they must be built to some generic standard as they need to work for almost any rider that gets on them. Certainly my 208lbs needs a stiffer wheel than someone weighing half as much.

strobbekoen wrote:
Dude, you keep picking on people for not being scientific or showing you the numbers.. I have not seen you posting anything scientific with numbers ever relating the products you seem so eager to defend.


But he did post something scientific relating to products.
alienator wrote:
I know some have raised questions about the design, and some have questioned whether they've done any CFD and/or wind-tunnel time. LEW claims that the spoke profiles coupled with the rim profile is more aero than a 100mm rim with metal spokes (I'm assuming bladed spokes). While I may be somewhat gullible, I find it hard to believe that they'd make such a claim without having done the tests to back it up. And those tests would have to be wind tunnel tests. I think CFD testing for a spinning wheel, especially with a lot o' spokes, would be a nightmare.


It seems quite convenient to require others to post links to published data yet not require it for yourself or your company.

_________________
Master of quotes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:18 pm 


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 109 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], ms6073, pdlpsher1 and 48 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Challenge Criterium Tubular - only 1375 miles & kaboom

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Road

ricorob

20

1649

Sun Sep 08, 2013 1:28 pm

ninjaman View the latest post

This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Lightweight Urgestalt

in Road

petepeterson

2

964

Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:55 pm

Powerful Pete View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Lightweight Logo's

in Road

BeeBee30

10

1460

Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:26 am

petepeterson View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Need lightweight tool

in Road

addictR1

14

820

Sat Mar 29, 2014 9:13 am

Marin View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Would you do this with a lightweight bike?

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

in Road

Hbrown

49

3788

Sat Jan 25, 2014 1:28 pm

sugarkane View the latest post


It is currently Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:51 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB