Darimo Carbon components, when Spain beats Germany

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.

Moderator: robbosmans

User avatar
DeiviX
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:16 pm
Location: Valencia (España)

by DeiviX

obviously has more flex than a handlebar of more than 200g. I have only felt this flex with the bike stopped, rolling with it what I noticed is that on the road bumping and grabbing the lower end of the handlebar is much more comfortable. At no time have I felt that the handlebar twists and is an annoying feeling.
forgive me my bad english

by Weenie


NiFTY
Posts: 1396
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 11:26 pm

by NiFTY

I have a thm ulna and it is stiffer than my ergonva team. Weight and stiffness aren't mutually exclusive.
Evo 4.9kg SL3 6.64kg Slice RS 8.89kg viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110579" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
pdlpsher1
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:09 pm
Location: CO

by pdlpsher1

NiFTY wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:19 pm
I have a thm ulna and it is stiffer than my ergonva team. Weight and stiffness aren't mutually exclusive.
I also have both and agree the Ulna is stiffer. But the Ulna has larger cross section than the Ergonova. If two bars have the same cross section and one is lighter, the lighter one will be less stiff assuming the same type of material is used. I wrote in an earlier response that all manufacturers have access to the best materials. If two bars have idential cross sections and materials, then weight and stiffness are mutually exclusive.

User avatar
pdlpsher1
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:09 pm
Location: CO

by pdlpsher1

DeiviX wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:48 am
obviously has more flex than a handlebar of more than 200g. I have only felt this flex with the bike stopped, rolling with it what I noticed is that on the road bumping and grabbing the lower end of the handlebar is much more comfortable. At no time have I felt that the handlebar twists and is an annoying feeling.
forgive me my bad english
Thanks for the feedback. Do you climb out of the saddle? If yes does the bar twist when you climb out of the saddle?

User avatar
DeiviX
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:16 pm
Location: Valencia (España)

by DeiviX

No, do not writhe at any time. My weight is 67kg.

NiFTY
Posts: 1396
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 11:26 pm

by NiFTY

pdlpsher1 wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:35 am
NiFTY wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:19 pm
I have a thm ulna and it is stiffer than my ergonva team. Weight and stiffness aren't mutually exclusive.
I also have both and agree the Ulna is stiffer. But the Ulna has larger cross section than the Ergonova. If two bars have the same cross section and one is lighter, the lighter one will be less stiff assuming the same type of material is used. I wrote in an earlier response that all manufacturers have access to the best materials. If two bars have idential cross sections and materials, then weight and stiffness are mutually exclusive.
This is an incredibly simplistic view. And wrong. You assume that carbon is isotropic like umforged alloy, which it isn't. Stiffneas in a plane depends on the layup angle and types of plys used. Unidirectional being stiff in one plane and flexible offplane and having poorer impact resistance than cloth. Hence its not just low mod or himod carbon, but the ratio of UD, cloth as well as hi mod, int mod used. Resin used. Compaction method used also differs between companies and greatly influences strength as voids are obvioisly a weak spot. Lastly the thm ulna has an internal rib, so yes it is a larger tube but the internal structure not to mention fibre type, resin and layup svjedule also differ.
Evo 4.9kg SL3 6.64kg Slice RS 8.89kg viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110579" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

I wonder what the theoretically lightest a bar could be made with current materials today. And I wonder what the margin of error that darimo has on these bars before a mistake would lead to a catastrophic failure. I assume mass produced bars are over built partly to account for errors in layup. Bars pushing the boundaries like these have less room for errors in layup but I guess the question is, how much of an error has to be made (and how likely is that) with these before they are sufficiently compromised.

What's Schmolke's track record with bars? Does anyone know of any that have failed?
Strava
Not for the sensitive types. My Instagram reviews
The Ex's: I've lost track...

User avatar
pdlpsher1
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:09 pm
Location: CO

by pdlpsher1

NiFTY wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 11:31 am
pdlpsher1 wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:35 am
NiFTY wrote:
Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:19 pm
I have a thm ulna and it is stiffer than my ergonva team. Weight and stiffness aren't mutually exclusive.
I also have both and agree the Ulna is stiffer. But the Ulna has larger cross section than the Ergonova. If two bars have the same cross section and one is lighter, the lighter one will be less stiff assuming the same type of material is used. I wrote in an earlier response that all manufacturers have access to the best materials. If two bars have idential cross sections and materials, then weight and stiffness are mutually exclusive.
This is an incredibly simplistic view. And wrong. You assume that carbon is isotropic like umforged alloy, which it isn't. Stiffneas in a plane depends on the layup angle and types of plys used. Unidirectional being stiff in one plane and flexible offplane and having poorer impact resistance than cloth. Hence its not just low mod or himod carbon, but the ratio of UD, cloth as well as hi mod, int mod used. Resin used. Compaction method used also differs between companies and greatly influences strength as voids are obvioisly a weak spot. Lastly the thm ulna has an internal rib, so yes it is a larger tube but the internal structure not to mention fibre type, resin and layup svjedule also differ.
I'm not sure if you have read all of my previous posts in this thread. I have said the high end carbon business is highly competitive. And all the big players have access to the same materials and technologies. It's not like Darimo has access to a secret carbon or special carbon layup that no one else can have. If I hear Darimo start calling out that their bars are stiffer and lighter because of a 'proprietary' carbon layup and high compaction, I would call that B.S. because all of their competitors are already doing it.

NiFTY
Posts: 1396
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 11:26 pm

by NiFTY

All the players do. But the margins are tighter for larger factories. So more complex layups are more labour intensive and might affect their margin more than they gain in new customers by shaving 5 grams. The other thing for a large brand is that they will sell to a broader audience so probably engineer in more tolerance to a weight limit or impact resistance for example so that they have less warranty issues to deal with. The weight weenie population is unique in that they all tend to be pretty skinny themselves, own a torque wrench and carbon paste and see prepared to make some sacrifices for a few extra grams.
Evo 4.9kg SL3 6.64kg Slice RS 8.89kg viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110579" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
pdlpsher1
Posts: 3018
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:09 pm
Location: CO

by pdlpsher1

Agreed that small carbon shops can do a better job at shaving grams. BUT except we are not talking about a few grams but a 35% weight savings (assuming a 70g. savings off of a 200g. bar). So this begs the question- what are you giving up to lose that much weight? We all know that there's no free lunch.

NiFTY- are you keeping your Ulna or are you tempted to get the Darimo? As for me personally I'd like to wait a bit and see how these bars fare in the wild. From my experience I've see uber-light carbon parts experience weight creep after the initial introduction. This tells me that the initial product was too light for whatever reason. Let's see what happens here on the Darimo in a few months....

RocketRacing
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 2:43 am

by RocketRacing

pdlpsher1 wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:09 pm

I'm not sure if you have read all of my previous posts in this thread. I have said the high end carbon business is highly competitive. And all the big players have access to the same materials and technologies. It's not like Darimo has access to a secret carbon or special carbon layup that no one else can have. If I hear Darimo start calling out that their bars are stiffer and lighter because of a 'proprietary' carbon layup and high compaction, I would call that B.S. because all of their competitors are already doing it.
Darimo makes no such claims. But i think we agree in concept.

Here is the reality that is dictated by physics, engineering, and manufacturing: Light, reliable, cheap. Pick any two.

Agreed that to a degree, all manufacturers theoretically have access to same materials and tools.

Also agreed that most could make a component to a target weight/stiffness ratio (to a point, There is a limit to everything. We agree that there is no fary dust)

So why is the market not flooded with equally stiff, equally light carbon components? Because to get a seatpost to 73g, or road bars to 122g, it costs a lot of money in high end materials. It also costs even more money to train/pay workers for the skill/time spent replicating complex layups required to optimize stiffness/flex/weight to that level (i.e. harder to automate and mass produce). And it takes certain designs to get there, and that design does not meet all user needs.

Big companies like Giant could make a post comparable to darimo, but it does not because most average products in the bike world have engineering that is dictated by a price point, not weight. Making things light AND strong takes time and money.

Giant is among the best at making reliable low, mid, and high end carbon frames cheaply, and they have a lot of tech/patients to make that possible. Darimo seems to focus on weight/reliability... and it “costs what it costs” to get there.

How is the darimo t1 seatpost so light, yet not a noodle? Smart/appropriate materials choice, and smart layups. It is also in the design. The zero offset allows for less material to hit a target stiffness/durability, because a straight tube is a simple shape to make strong.

Why is the darimo t2 (offset) seatpost not as light as the t1? Physics. There is no fary dust in carbon once you maxamize layups and material quality. To make a product that sustains that offset (curved tube), you have no choice but to use more material (add weight). The greater the bend, the heavier it would need to be. Or maybe there is a new fairy dust that could do the post for 72g... but maybe Darimo opted against it because the post would now cost three times more, and no one would buy it.

The gelo saddle is 32g or something silly. I have no idea how stiff it is. But at 500$ i won’t even consider it. In the end, price is always the major limiter for 99.9% of consumers. And that is why I will never have a sub 5kg bike.

So how can Darimo beat established weight weenie companies in price and weight without hurting stiffness/reliability? Maybe labour is cheaper in spain vs Germany. Maybe Darimo is the new kid on the block, and it taking a lower profit margin in effort to increase market share and exposure. Probably more of the latter, as most companies use this marketing strategy to enter markets: Provide more for less until you establish a brand (think Hyundai in the car world). Then slowly increase price/profit on future products (hyundai is now in the higher margin luxury line of cars).

My asessment is that Darimo is producing equal or better (lighter) products for less cost than the comparable weight weenie focused competition, so I am stocking up before demand/reputation drives up price.

User avatar
dgasmd
Posts: 1956
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:10 am
Location: South Florida

by dgasmd

RocketRacing wrote: My asessment is that Darimo is producing equal or better (lighter) products for less cost than the comparable weight weenie focused competition, so I am stocking up before demand/reputation drives up price.
Or before a few people loose their rectum, pelvis, and a dozen teeth ImageImageImageImage

mag
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:23 pm

by mag

They weigh ~25g (~20%) less than Schmolke TLOs which have also more reach and drop. Not impossible, though definitely impressive. And we don't know anything about how much they really flex or what will be their rate of failures in the real world conditions.
Last edited by mag on Sun Oct 28, 2018 12:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

RocketRacing
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 2:43 am

by RocketRacing

RyanH wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 1:53 pm
I wonder what the theoretically lightest a bar could be made with current materials today. And I wonder what the margin of error that darimo has on these bars before a mistake would lead to a catastrophic failure. I assume mass produced bars are over built partly to account for errors in layup. Bars pushing the boundaries like these have less room for errors in layup but I guess the question is, how much of an error has to be made (and how likely is that) with these before they are sufficiently compromised.

What's Schmolke's track record with bars? Does anyone know of any that have failed?
Well put. I have had similr thoughts.

I suspect you can go lighter than Darimo, but with todays best materials, i think it can only be meaningfully done with a sacrafice in modulus/strength... unless you change the design (shorter drops/reach and less material).

I suspect schmolke and darimo are near “peak lightness” while still remaining “usable” for most riders.

you could make a lighter seat post with the same strength as the darimo t1, but it would require a vertical orientation on the bike to be able to get to the lower weight.

In 5-10 years, materials may advance to allow a lighter product with the same performance, but i suspect it will be evolutionary, not revolutionary.

There was a great article on slowtwitch.com not too long ago about the concept of tri bikes reaching “peak aero.” The concept was that even with design constraints and cost thrown out the window... there was little “real world difference” between the latest $h!t-hot 15,000$ cervello p5x, and the six year old p5, or 10 year old optomized but cheap/simple felt tt bike. Things have advanced, but the gains in aero have been increasingly marginal. Only 100g of drag seperated “worst from first” and the 10 year old felt came mid pack or so!!!

RocketRacing
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 2:43 am

by RocketRacing

dgasmd wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 12:15 am
Or before a few people loose their rectum, pelvis, and a dozen teeth ImageImageImageImage
Hahaha

Hey, i weigh 60kg/130lbs so I get away with the lightest of everything!!! And as someone said before... elite riders tend to be on the lighter side (i am not elite).

Most north american (i.e bigger rider) centric “big box” carbon made for the “every-man” is too stiff for my tastes. Same for the bike clothes. The euro brands fit me like a glove. The north american centric stuff is massive.

My buddy... we watched my berk saddle/27.5 T1 seatpost flex on my road bike as he sat on it. Weight weenie gear is not for everyone. But he can also put out twice as many watts as i can... so 100g savings is meaningless to him (and lets admit it, probably meaningless to me... but i’ll take the lightness, but i keep it for the comfort/design).

Now, my t1 31.6mm post if perfect for my dual suspension xc bike. Stiff!!! But maybe i would not test my luck on a downhill bike...

It is all about finding the component that works for the needs of the specific rider. And if in doubt, order a reinforced version.

by Weenie


Post Reply