#21
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
|
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
Tom Sherman wrote in message ...
Marci Taylor wrote: ...Also, aluminum is less flexy which should provide more speed. A good example of this is the tour easy (cromoly)vs the gold rush (aluminum). They are very different performing bikes. The aluminium alloy frame will be stiffer than the steel only if tubing with a significantly higher moment of inertia (larger diameter and/or greater wall thickness) is used. Aluminium alloys typically have an elastic modulus in the range of 70-80 GPa, while the elastic modulus of steel is around 200 GPa. So a steel tube will be almost three times as stiff as an aluminium alloy tube of the same diameter and wall thickness. Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) Hi Tom: That is interesting. Obviously you have some good knowledge on this as I do not. I am wondering though, why then the tour easy is reported to be much slower than the GRR with same component package. Bob Bryant of RCN news reports MUCH greater speeds on the GRR than the Tour EAsy with same conditions/rider/etc. What do you think? Also, Bob Bryant, if you are reading this, maybe you could comment. Marci |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
Tom Sherman wrote in message ...
Marci Taylor wrote: ...Also, aluminum is less flexy which should provide more speed. A good example of this is the tour easy (cromoly)vs the gold rush (aluminum). They are very different performing bikes. The aluminium alloy frame will be stiffer than the steel only if tubing with a significantly higher moment of inertia (larger diameter and/or greater wall thickness) is used. Aluminium alloys typically have an elastic modulus in the range of 70-80 GPa, while the elastic modulus of steel is around 200 GPa. So a steel tube will be almost three times as stiff as an aluminium alloy tube of the same diameter and wall thickness. Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) Hi Tom: That is interesting. Obviously you have some good knowledge on this as I do not. I am wondering though, why then the tour easy is reported to be much slower than the GRR with same component package. Bob Bryant of RCN news reports MUCH greater speeds on the GRR than the Tour EAsy with same conditions/rider/etc. What do you think? Also, Bob Bryant, if you are reading this, maybe you could comment. Marci |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
Tom, can we as readers (and riders) then conclude that the tubing used
on the GRR must have thicker walls than the TE (as I see no difference in tubing diameter)? Jim Reilly |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
Tom, can we as readers (and riders) then conclude that the tubing used
on the GRR must have thicker walls than the TE (as I see no difference in tubing diameter)? Jim Reilly |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
stratrider wrote: Tom, can we as readers (and riders) then conclude that the tubing used on the GRR must have thicker walls than the TE (as I see no difference in tubing diameter)? I recall the GRR as having larger diameter tubing than the TE - would someone from Easy Racers or a dealer inform us of the actual tubing diameters (and wall thicknesses if available). Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Rans V2 Formula?
stratrider wrote: Tom, can we as readers (and riders) then conclude that the tubing used on the GRR must have thicker walls than the TE (as I see no difference in tubing diameter)? I recall the GRR as having larger diameter tubing than the TE - would someone from Easy Racers or a dealer inform us of the actual tubing diameters (and wall thicknesses if available). Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|