What bike would you choose for robust high mileage but reasonable weight and ride quality?

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

Imaking20
Posts: 2032
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

mattr wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 3:50 pm
Because statistically, a frame with less material will *tend* to fail earlier (fatigue, crash, overload, whatever). There are clever things that can be done with optimisation, most brands don't have the budget or technical know how to do it well. So they accept a level of failure and have these marvellous warranty programs. Or not. Very few manage to optimise well, and you pay through the nose for it. And the frames tend to have no redundancy built in (so the top tube cracks if you rest your leg/weight on it while waiting for your mates.)
If you're going to start a response with "statistically" - you should probably bring some statistics. And cite resources. Please and thank you.

I've also had some pretty light bikes and always rest on the top tube. No cracks yet! I'll chalk that up as another internet wives tail that gets overused.
No one said that. In fact, if you were to look at the cost/weight of frames as compared to failure rates, you'd have an uptick at both ends, lightweight, well made expensive frames would have a *slightly* higher incidence of failure (but a good warranty), heavy, cheap frames would as well, because they were badly made. But you can go whistle for your warranty
It was rhetorical. Categorically claiming that lighter is less durable is also implying that heavier is more reliable. Which seems to me the same as *insert stereotype about any group of people*. Point being, categorical statements like that don't serve anyone. In motorsports, heavier parts are often heavier because they're cast rather than forged, cnc, etc. The cast parts are also more likely to fail (speaking from experience).

So yeah, I think the right answer for the OP is "it depends." And we can probably get away from wives tails about this material or that - instead focusing on who does QUALITY regardless of their medium.

As a couple high zoot Italian manufacturers were mentioned - I'll throw in that the finish work on my Specialissima and Dogma (fd tab, Rd hanger and spacing, inside of tubes) were both a lot better than my Colnagos. Not to say I think the Colnago frame is going to fail - but it's like driving a really nice car with lots of bells and whistles and then the bells and whistles break. You'll still have transportation, but it may be a little busted.
Current:
Acid Minty

Retired:
Wilier Wonka | The Dentist | The Bucket List | Specialissima | Evo | T2 | Blue | Project C6.0 | Felt AR FRD | Colnago C59 | S-Works Tarmac SL4| S-Works Venge | Wilier Cento1 SL | Tarmac SL2

by Weenie


User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

Thanks for some really great replies. I was pleasantly surprised to read some very constructive comments and get some guidance. :thumbup:

It's good to discuss things but I think mattr was making a generalization that more material is tougher, no flame wars needed over small points or opinions. Surely quality of construction is key. I'm still not clear on what's going to be stronger a higher or lower end frame? Lower has more material, but higher end will be of higher quality, therefore equal - unsually? :noidea:

It's good to know that Scott make or made strong bikes, but I suspect that the far eastern production facilities have likely changed multiple times since. But it does suggest that they make/made strong designs. I had a day on a medium/low end 2017 Addict, and honestly wasn't enthusiastic about the unforgiving ride quality.

I think I might give up the idea of a fully steel bike, I've got a flexy steel frame MTB, a rigid CX that I use as commuter, and had at least three other steel frame bikes over the years. I know compared to CF, it's just not going to do it for me really, as pretty as retro race bikes are. Although something in the back of the garage, well maybe.

So what I need is a modern bike with a bullet-proof repuatation, maybe something like a Trek, Giant etc where making often warrantied bikes going to cost them a lot of money. I'll stay away from smaller brands this time. Looking at an Ultegra level TCR, but any other opinions welcomed. :thumbup:

flying
Posts: 1933
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:16 am

by flying

Lewn777 wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:03 am
I'm still interested in more opinions of anyone that has a fully steel retro bike. Still trying to figure out the point in getting an artisan made 'forever' frame and then the builder slapping a Made in China carbon fork on it.
I see a lot of really nice steel these days & especially coming out of Girona at ex-pro Christian Meier's shop
https://theservicecoursegirona.com/bike-choice

But as you say pricey
So along those lines that Holdworth Comp Frame
https://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/FRHOCO/ho ... n-frameset

Seems like such a crazy deal with Triple butted Columbus Spirit tubing

I'm not really thrilled by the orange or grey choices but still great price eh?

PinaRene Built up a nice one
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=146326

mattr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: The Grim North.

by mattr

It's as bad as the drilling holes in handlebars thread.

Tens (hundreds?) of thousands of test pieces, tear downs, detailed analysis, distilled over several decades into a series of detailed design guidelines and calculations to show how things behave under load and the (statistically proven) effect of making a change, all of a sudden it's not as good as "I've drilled some holes in my handlebars and they haven't failed yet."

FFS, the mind boggles.

No, i haven't snapped 5000 frames, or even 50 frames, to build a full statistical model. More expensive frames are far far more durable than cheaper ones, how could they not be, just look at that logo. So pretty.

User avatar
themidge
Posts: 1179
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:19 pm
Location: underneath sweet Scottish rain

by themidge

Sounds like the OP should go for a frame on the high end of mid-range. That should have similar quality to super high-end frames but have slightly lower grade (less brittle) carbon fibre.

To be honest though, there are so many other features to look for in a high-mileage bike like mudguard eyelets and wider clearance that frame weight is unimportant.

I'm firmly on the side of rim brakes normally, but I'd say if you're riding enough to start wearing out rims/discs then disc rotos are cheaper and easier to replace.

ichobi
Posts: 953
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:30 pm

by ichobi

themidge wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 10:18 am
Sounds like the OP should go for a frame on the high end of mid-range. That should have similar quality to super high-end frames but have slightly lower grade (less brittle) carbon fibre.

To be honest though, there are so many other features to look for in a high-mileage bike like mudguard eyelets and wider clearance that frame weight is unimportant.

I'm firmly on the side of rim brakes normally, but I'd say if you're riding enough to start wearing out rims/discs then disc rotos are cheaper and easier to replace.

This is actually a good advice. Frames that use less high modulus carbon is less brittle. A tad heavier but you dont have to baby it. Some high end frames can be quite brittle in the place that dont need strength (top tube for example). so if you accientally drop a wrench on it, it usually goes kapoop.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post