Canyon unveils Ultimate CF Evo Disc: 5.95kg at $10,099

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
RedbullFiXX
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 6:13 am

by RedbullFiXX

Is it just a bicycle thing that constant improvements in material science, rigorous testing, and R&D are just marketing ?
This seems to buck the trend compared to motorsports advancements is the same areas
Cyclocross, in general, is about riding the wrong bike for the conditions.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 6615
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

RedbullFiXX wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:48 pm
Is it just a bicycle thing that constant improvements in material science, rigorous testing, and R&D are just marketing ?
This seems to buck the trend compared to motorsports advancements is the same areas

It can be a little bit of both, but weight savings is weight savings. We can revisit this topic in a few years after a string of fork failures occurred or didn't occur.

But yes, it's funny when Time gets heralded for using a resin-transfer process instead of pre-preg, but in other contexts (nasty, nasty disc brake bikes,) improved construction suddenly doesn't matter.

by Weenie


RedbullFiXX
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 6:13 am

by RedbullFiXX

I assume we can all agree that in comparison from the 1990's, carbon frames are far lighter, stiffer, more durable, and more aero ?
Cyclocross, in general, is about riding the wrong bike for the conditions.

User avatar
wheelsONfire
Posts: 3810
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:15 am
Location: NorthEU

by wheelsONfire

Calnago wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:45 am
spartacus wrote:
CAAD8FRED wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 4:21 pm
Calnago wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 3:09 pm
“It’s a bike made for the mountains — feather-light for climbing, and equipped with disc brakes for fast or harrowing descents.”

Hmmm, at that weight, with discs no less, I’ve no doubt descending at speed in the mountains on this would indeed be a “harrowing” experience.
A lightweight disc brake bike comes out and now instead of complaining about the discs you complain about the weight being too low.
:beerchug:
I’ve explained this stance before. To get a disc brake bike as light as an equivalent rim brake bike, all else being equal, that weight reduction has got to come from the frame/fork. As such, the most structural part of the bike is simply not as strong as it would be otherwise. Consider that a very reasonable weight difference between a disc brake bike and an equivalent rim brake bike is ~400-500grams. So, given that an already lightweight frame may weigh under 1000grams, would you really want to be taking away 50% of the material from the most important part of the entire bike. I wouldn’t. Because of this, at any given weight, a rim brake bike will always be able to made stronger using exactly the same materials etc. So you see where I’m heading... safety and ride quality is really getting compromised here. Like someone implied.. a sub 300gram disc brake fork might be considered a little too light by some, myself included. You can ride it, I’ll pass thank you. Yes, at some point a bicycle can get just too light. So to see a disc bike this weight... have fun.
Totally agree. Disc brake (during braking) does apply uneven force on the frame. So you'd need to reinforce the frame to void this from happening.
I wouldn't mind riding a disc brake bike, but i'd rather have a bike well thought out, than dropping weight.
My guess is that disc brake framesets will keep on developing quite alot (talking only braking while keeping ride feel intact).

Same with wheelsets, i'd rather have a stiffer hub and more spokes, instead of selling this out. This is also why i doubt an equal disc brake bike could hammer a rim brake bike talking weight and ride feel.
Bikes:

Ax Lightness Vial EVO Race (2018.12.21)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156137
Paduano Racing Fidia (kind of shelved)
Open *UP* (2016.04.14)


Ex bike; Vial EVO D

Sock3t
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:20 am

by Sock3t

RedbullFiXX wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:39 pm
I assume we can all agree that in comparison from the 1990's, carbon frames are far lighter, stiffer, more durable, and more aero ?
Unless it's specialized. Then the three boggies come out to circle jerk each other and say it's just marketing.

Jugi
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:10 am

by Jugi

RedbullFiXX wrote:I assume we can all agree that in comparison from the 1990's, carbon frames are far lighter, stiffer, more durable, and more aero ?
We don't have to go back that far to see drastic improvements in construction. According to some professionals (unfortunately can't provide a direct quote) some high end carbon frames from ten years ago were so fragile, they were held together essentially by the paint layer. The unfortunate "my frame cracked while sitting on the top tube" cases happened and construction was improved, albeit for some time frames gained weight in the process.

I believe today's frames have dropped back (or even surpassed) to those ultralight weights. Concurrently durability, strength and designed compliance have improved significantly.

User avatar
Dilbert
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:54 am
Location: South Africa

by Dilbert

Valy wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:57 am
....More CFRP bikes are lighter than steel, even though the best examples of carbon fibre do not have as high a young modulus / UTS as fairly standard steel....
The best composites have surpassed steel some time ago.
M60J has a laminated stiffness that is 1.75x that of steel, and T1100 laminate has a UTS that is 1.5x that of high tensile steel, at 5x lower density.
Im not sure how much of this get used in frame construction - it may not be available to factories in the East due to export restrictions.

User avatar
Valy
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 11:16 pm

by Valy

Dilbert wrote:
Valy wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:57 am
....More CFRP bikes are lighter than steel, even though the best examples of carbon fibre do not have as high a young modulus / UTS as fairly standard steel....
The best composites have surpassed steel some time ago.
M60J has a laminated stiffness that is 1.75x that of steel, and T1100 laminate has a UTS that is 1.5x that of high tensile steel, at 5x lower density.
Im not sure how much of this get used in frame construction - it may not be available to factories in the East due to export restrictions.
That's interesting. Looking at the material sheets of t800*, even that is higher than the best steels for UTS. It's proving hard to find consistent information about steels. I got the previous idea from CES material selector - pretty useful software. Kind of like a starting point for material selection.


robertbb
Posts: 1613
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

by robertbb

Boshk wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:40 am
robertbb wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 6:21 am
Boshk wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:06 am
wow, didn't know the frame was that light, figured it would be 900+

Can probably drop weight further by 200-300g if you have SR 11 speed or Red 11, but way more $$$$$ than Chorus.

My C60 is 8.1kg haha....and thats not even a ready-to-ride weight....no water in both bottles, no Cycliq camera.
It's a crazy light frame. But it feels very solid.

I save a 1-200 grams more switching from my Ultra 35 clinchers to the Ultra 35 tubulars. And that's weight where it actually counts - at the rim.
Long debate I know...clincher vs tubs but I'm gonna ask anyway

How much of a difference is there besides the obvious weight saving, going from my
-Bora One 35 AC3 (not Ultra)clincher with GP4000 25mm to
-a used set of non-AC3 Bora Ultra 35 Tubular......no idea what the guy has on it though....so I'll probably have to re-do the glue and new tires
Well, I bought the tubulars (3d brake surface) first and used them on my "A" bike for about 2 years. Never punctured, and always carried a spare, but always had this awkward feeling when setting off that if something went wrong I wouldn't get home. No matter how many times I read the gluing tubulars thread, I never felt comfortable. I've since switched to Efetto Mariposa tape (and also switched tyres from Vitorrias, which would lose 10PSI of pressure over the course of a half-day ride, to Continental Competition butyl-based tubulars). The added bonus of the Conti's is that they are extremely strong tyres... most unlikely to flat unless you hit something that that would cut any tyre in existence.

Then one day Wiggle showed up some NOS Ultra 35 clinchers with the 3d brake surface with a decent discount and that was an opportunity too good to pass up so I pulled the trigger. Since then, I ride the clinchers 95% of the time, and reserve the tubulars for my annual alpine adventures (we have a thing here called the 7 peaks where you gotta bag them in your own time over the course of a Summer - https://www.ridehighcountry.com.au/7-peaks/)... mostly just for the added confidence when descending more than any (real or perceived) advantage when climbing.

Hope this helps!

Honestly, I'm sure I could not tell the differences blindfolded. But you know, never ridden blindfolded! :wink:

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

by mattr

RedbullFiXX wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:48 pm
Is it just a bicycle thing that constant improvements in material science, rigorous testing, and R&D are just marketing ?
Don't think the bike industry does any material science.

They just flick through the catalogue and decide what they want. The actual materials science was done years ago in other industries.

Like Treks much advertised and hyped OCLV ballcocks, that was ~20 year old aerospace tech. All these T800/T900/T1100 nomenclatures, they are all off the shelf materials, most will have been for at least 5-8 years before *whoever* announced their new latest and greatest tech.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 6615
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Think of it as timeshifting. There is still a progression being made in the bike industry thanks to material innovation. It doesn’t matter if they were developed years ago. Today’s hardware is made of stronger composites and with better techniques.

User avatar
Powerful Pete
Moderator
Posts: 4138
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:22 am
Location: Lima, Peru and the Washington DC area - it's complicated.

by Powerful Pete

Folks - this thread went way off the rails. I have cleaned it up. Please stay on topic. No insults or name calling. Discuss the new Canyon frameset/bike here. Have a question or an issue? PM me.

Thank you.
Road bike: Cervelo R3, Campagnolo Chorus/Record mix...
Supercommuter: Jamis Renegade...
Oldie but goodie: De Rosa Professional Slx, Campagnolo C-Record...
And you can call me Macktastik Honey Pete Kicks, thank you.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Seems like a lot of posts that had nothing to do with the chihuahuas and their chewtoy were deleted as well. Any time a super light bike is introduced it is bound to spark a discussion about how light might be too light, even on Weightweenies. I don’t think that’s a bad thing. It may not be specifically related to this particular bike, but it’s certainly a relevant discussion in light of it. Too bad some of that discussion got thrown out with the bath water. Oh well. We’re gonna run out of chew toys soon.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
Powerful Pete
Moderator
Posts: 4138
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:22 am
Location: Lima, Peru and the Washington DC area - it's complicated.

by Powerful Pete

Sorry calnago, true, some good posts got deleted with the bad. I had no issues with the occasional post on related bikes. But things degenerating into insults and name calling, nope. No time to parse post-by-post. I am sure you understand. Enough said on this. Let's keep it on topic or we can lock the thread.
Road bike: Cervelo R3, Campagnolo Chorus/Record mix...
Supercommuter: Jamis Renegade...
Oldie but goodie: De Rosa Professional Slx, Campagnolo C-Record...
And you can call me Macktastik Honey Pete Kicks, thank you.

paradigmz
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 9:07 pm

by paradigmz

Seems a lot of theory and conjecture is spouted about but who has actually tested the difference between the old and new slx disc? Has anyone done an actual analysis of the difference in ride quality where it matters most on the road. Considering the company has at least two tour de france teams they wouldn't put them in jeopardy much less the general public?

by Weenie


Post Reply