cutting the Time VXRS seat-post? integrated design...

so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter wrote:
so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post.
In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to
pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website.

-ilan

On Jun 13, 1:02*pm, wrote:
On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter wrote:

so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post.
In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to
pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website.

In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost
design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the
bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should
not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are
being sponsored. In part this is because the possible
advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and
in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking
about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop.

They should just start putting warning stickers on
bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK
AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who
aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits
off your marvels of modern technology.

Ben

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:27:08 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost
design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the
bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should
not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are
being sponsored. In part this is because the possible
advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and
in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking
about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop.

Word.

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:27:08 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

They should just start putting warning stickers on
bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK
AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who
aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits
off your marvels of modern technology.

At races, I used to something for racing with a label that said "Use
of this product in a manner inconsistent with its labelling may be a
violation of federal law."

After a while I started thinking I'd be better of without it.

On Jun 14, 12:27*am, "
wrote:
On Jun 13, 1:02*pm, wrote:



On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter wrote:

so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post.
In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to
pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website.

In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost
design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the
bike, and even then it's questionable. *Fat Masters should
not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are
being sponsored. *In part this is because the possible
advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and
in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking
about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop.

They should just start putting warning stickers on
bikes: "CAUTION MAY EXPLODE IF YOU LOOK
AT IT WRONG" to discourage all you people who
aren't certified bicycle engineers from cutting bits
off your marvels of modern technology.

Ben

Actually, the Look integrated seatpost is more reliable than a regular
post, if the clamp loosens or breaks, then the post cannot fall into
the seat tube. I talked directly to their rep here in France and he
said that they were required by EU law to keep spare parts for it for
at least 5 years (assuming the company lasts that long, of course).
You also have quite a margin of adjustment, about 4cm with a minimum
of 1mm spacers, which means you only have to cut the post once, and it
probably won't have to be recut if you sell the bike (as I wrote
previously, a Paris bike shop told me that this was not the case and
that you could never readjust saddle height without recutting the
frame, the rep was not pleased when I told him about this). This is
not true for any of the other brands, as far as I know. Also, the
extra stiffness from integrated seat post can be counteracted by the
use of elastomer spacers.

-ilan

On Jun 13, 11:50*am, walter wrote:
so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? *i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

[crossposted to rbt since the query was also posted there]

Okay, having just dealt out righteous retribution to
Fat Masters and integrated seatmasts elsewhere in this
thread on rbr, I will attempt a serious answer to this question.

For classic diamond frames, the rule of thumb has
usually been that you want the seatpost to extend at
least 1-2cm below the lower toptube-seat tube junction.
This because there is a strong bending moment
exterted by your (my) fat butt and it is best if this is
taken up by a seattube that is braced by the toptube.

For example, some MTB and compact frames have
a seat tube that extends several cm above the top tube.
If you stick a seatpost in there and the end does not
reach all the way down to the junction, your butt is trying
to bend the seat tube _above_ the top tube junction,
where it is unbraced and weaker. A failure here will
damage seatpost, frame, and butt.

I have not seen a Time VXRS DOHC 2.2L in person, but
looking at web pictures, it has a fairly skinny carbon tube
extending way above the top tube junction. My guess is
that this tube is designed to withstand the load of a Fat
Master butt when the mast has a substantial length of
seatpost inside. The seatpost makes the mast stiffer against
the Fat Master bending moment. With a 300mm post
on a road frame, it may run all the way down to the tube
junction or even below it, which would probably be the safest.

Your conclusion from this could be that the integrated seatmast
is partly marketing hooey that doesn't save as much weight
as one might think, due to the extra long post, or the need
to make the mast thick to resist bending. I just can't
imagine how one could think a bicycle marketing department
would stoop that low, though.

Ben

On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "
wrote:
On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, wrote:



On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter wrote:

so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post.
In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to
pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website.

In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost
design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the
bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should
not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are
being sponsored. In part this is because the possible
advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and
in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking
about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop.


So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science
fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING
them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good
enough for me.
-Paul

On Jun 14, 3:21 am, "Paul G." wrote:
On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "
wrote:



On Jun 13, 1:02 pm, wrote:

On Jun 13, 8:50 pm, walter wrote:

so i'm checking out one of those time carbon bikes w/ the integrated
seatmast.

the included seatpin is about 12"/30cm long and says in big letters:
DO NOT CUT.

that seems surprising to me...if the benefit of an integrated design
is supposedly lighter weight, then why cant you cut the length of the
inner seat-pin to minimize the total weight? i'd think all you would
need is 3-4cm of seatpin inserted inside of the mast...but this DO NOT
CUT limitation means you've got about a foot of seatpin material
inside of the extended seatmast.

anyone have any info on what the deal is w/ cutting the seatpin w/
time's integrated seatmast designs?

In my opinion, the best integrated seatpost design is Look's E-post.
In particular, the other systems, including Time's won't allow you to
pack the bike in a box. Check it out on Look's website.

In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost
design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the
bike, and even then it's questionable. Fat Masters should
not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are
being sponsored. In part this is because the possible
advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and
in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking
about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop.

So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science
fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING
them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good
enough for me.
-Paul

http://www.wolhauser.com/cxm.jpg

-ilan

On Jun 13, 6:21*pm, "Paul G." wrote:
On Jun 13, 3:27 pm, "
wrote:

In my opinion, nobody should use an integrated seatpost
design unless they're being paid/sponsored to ride the
bike, and even then it's questionable. *Fat Masters should
not use an integrated seatpost design even if they are
being sponsored. *In part this is because the possible
advantage or aero benefit is of no use to Fat Masters, and
in part it's to keep me from havin to listen to hem yakking
about their integrated aero seatmasts at the coffee shop.

So right. Jesus Christ, these new fangled bikes seem like science
fiction to an old timer like me, though I still can't grok THROWING
them. Regular seatposts were good enough for Eddy, so they're good
enough for me.
-Paul

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:E...RecordBike.jpg

http://www.cyclingnews.com/sponsors/...ears/?id=pics/
EddyHourRecord

Not sure if these are actually the same bike, but though
drilled handlebars may have been good enough for
Eddy, they are not good enough for me. Although I note
he doesn't seem to have had the seatpost drilled.

Speaking as somebody who's broken quite a few freewheel
hub axles (I hardly break anything else, just those damn axles),
I'm not against innovation. I'm against *stupid* innovation.

Ben