Steel frames and le Tour

"Scott" wrote in message
...

Really, you don't think that even a single rider in the field may
actually prefer a steel frame to a carbon fiber frame? And that rider
(should one exist) may be able to get that steel frame for free from
the builder?

Just for the argument - it is now possible to use a steel frame that weighs
about the same as a carbon frame. All you have to do is check out Waterford
frames. Some custom builders can obtain that Reynolds tubing and make it
even lighter.

And I can say this - my Time VX weighs within a half pound of my Basso Loto
made from steel so weight isn't a determining factor. Generally bicycle
manufacturers want their teams to ride their most expensive models as
advertisement. By the way - the Loto handles as smoothly and cleanly as the
Time VX and both of those bikes are my favorites. The C40, in comparison, is
a bit stiff so you use it when you're expecting a hard, fast ride where
steering accuracy is more important than ride smoothness.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:33:34 -0500, A Muzi
wrote:

-snip frames-
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
You think team sponsors who are going nuts spending money to get their
name into the most televised and photographed bike race in the world
wouldnt' care if some "lower-level" rider is riding something
different?
Wow.

Long history of that, actually. Especially in climbs and TT.

Dear Andrew,

Here's a re-badging gallery from the 2007 TDF:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007.../tour_tech_607

I love that stuff and hope that Huang does it again this year.

To be fair to John, it would be surprising if any Tour rider was
riding a steel frame. His notion that aluminum would be less
surprising is puzzling, since the huge tubes would tend to make the
aluminum frame noticeable at a distance.

The paucity of technical details is probably the most noticeable thing
about the coverage of the Tour. A few years ago, we had a thread about
how many pros were riding tubulars in the TDF. Despite many strong
opinions, it turned out that no one actually knows.

Heck, try to find out what tire pressures they're running or if
they're running chain-watchers.

I browsed a bit on the chain-watcher question recently and found these
examples, the first two being a metal-rod arrangements that were new
to me.

I wonder how many of the TDF riders use chain watchers? Are these few
examples so unusual that they caught the photographer's eye, or do
dozens of bikes sport the little accessories?

Metal rod 2008 TDF:
http://tour-de-france.velonews.com/photo/39313

Metal rod 2008 Roubaix:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/20...ecial_spare_FD

Plastic 2008 TDF:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2008...ce_rh_dog_fang

Plastic 2008 Roubaix:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2008...dley_X-Fire_FD

Another plastic 2008 Roubaix:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/20...pecial_watcher

Plastic in a 2008 race:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2008..._chain_watcher

Plastic in a 2007 race:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?..._chain_watcher

Zinn on chain watchers back in 2005:
"Some teams, Fassa Bortolo being a good example, have inner stops
(Deda Dog Fangs) on most of the team’s bikes."
http://tour-de-france.velonews.com/article/8254

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:47:17 GMT, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:46:26 GMT, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:


Dear Carl er cheers Dear

In this thread I didn't ask you to. I asked if you did.

Dear er cheers is that er clear Cheers?

Excuse me, I didn't mean "in this thread." I meant "today."

Dear John,

So it's a day-to-day thing?

We're supposed to shut up about what you said in this thread
yesterday?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

We can't even talk about what you said

Bret Wade a écrit profondement:

| Scott wrote:
| On Jul 10, 1:29 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
| wrote:
| On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:21:47 -0700 (PDT), Scott
|
| wrote:
| The odds for any given rider using a steel frame is not
| 1 in 10 or 1 in 100 or whatever. It's 50/50.
| Is this a joke?
|
| No. It's really quite binary. Either a rider IS or IS NOT riding a
| steel frame. Any attempt at bringing in the odds based on what a
| sampling of riders may or may not ride may be relevant to you deciding
| whether or not it's likely that a rider may be using a particular
| frame, but... for any given rider, it is as simple as IS or IS NOT.
|
| Then do you also think that there are 50/50 odds that they are riding
| a lead bike?
|
| Bret


Let me see now.

They make bikes (frames) out of
Steel
Carbon
Aluminium
Titanium
Other alloys/materials/etc (spun glass, etc)

So the absolute chance/odds is, for sake of argument only, and for any
one rider, 20 percent or one in five.

However; whilst "odds" and "probability" are often the same thing,
where it is known that most riders are on carbon frames as indicated
by the specs of the sponsors supplying the frames and inferred by the
power of the Team managers over the common gregario, with only the
"stars" possibly being able to opt for a frame constructed of some
other material; the probability of any one rider _not_ riding a carbon
frame is infinitesmal.

Davey thinks that possibly someone might be riding steel - or other
material - but he sure wouldn't bet the Ranch on it.

One would need to do some sampling to assign better probability
numbers with a satisfactory confidence level.


But Davey rides steel road and track bikes by preference and an
aluminium mountain bike because there didn't seem to be anything else
available at Decathlon. (A good value for money bike store in Europe).

Have fun guys.

--
Davey Crockett
-
Davey sez it's safer to hunt with Cheney than to Drive with Kennedy
Just ask Mary-Jo Kopechne- Oops, sorry, you can(t - She's Dead
http://www.ytedk.com/chapter3.htm

On Jul 10, 1:41*pm, (Booker Bense) wrote:
In article ,

Scott wrote:

Think about this... *You talk about the difficulty in finding an
example of someone using a steel frame. *Well, of course. *The whole
point of the discussion hinges on the fact that we're talking about
someone using a non-standard team frame DISGUISED to look as much like
the team issue bike as possible. *Unless you're talking about a top
pro, where would you ever see info on what bike they're riding? *You'd
never even hear about some guy on a team who just happened to have a
steel bike. *That does not mean it is or isn't happening. *It just
means that it would be hard to point to an example of it if it were
happening.

Dude, it's not 1990... You are completely bat**** if you think
there's a steel bike in the pro peleton. It would be instantly
obvious ( thin straight tubes.... ), bikes can't be "disguised"
that much anymore.

I suspect many of the riders in the TDF have NEVER ridden a
lugged steel bike in their entire lives. Certainly, never raced
on one.

_ Booker C. Bense

Try to follow my point. I'll type slower if that'll help. I didn't
say that anyone is riding a steel frame. I said it's possible, and I
wouldn't be surprised if someone was.

You and I agree on one thing, most of them have not ridden a lugged
steel bike. Hell, I've owned a number of steel bikes over the years,
currently own two, and I've never ridden a lugged steel bike. Current
state of the art steel frame building rarely involves lugs.

Jay Beattie a écrit profondement:



| Steel was used in Paris-Roubaix in 2006. See http://tinyurl.com/z4w5y
| Note the cyclocross-like bike further down the page with conventional
| 32 spoke wheels, tied and soldered. Jobst would give them an ear
| full! -- Jay Beattie.

Tied and soldered. That's a Blast from the Past.

But the wheels Davey used way back in thr Grass Tracks - late 40's early
50's _ were cane with shellac-ed on tubulars. Low flange hubs but three
cross and tied and soldered

--
Davey Crockett
-
Justice, Kennedy Style
http://www.ytedk.com/epilogue.htm

In article ,
Bob Schwartz wrote:

wrote:
Dear John,

Were you ignorant or not?

The odds either way are 50/50.

Good summation.

On Jul 10, 2:03*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Jul 10, 2:21*pm, Scott wrote:



Now, back to your initial paragraph. *You don't understand
probability. *The odds for any given rider using a steel frame is not
1 in 10 or 1 in 100 or whatever. *It's 50/50. *They either are, or are
not, using a steel frame. *The odds would be different if we defined
our terms differently, say, what are the odds a rider would choose
frame A (steel) vs frame B (Ti from builder x) vs frame C (Ti from
builder y) vs frame D (carbon fiber from xyz) vs frame E (carbon fiber
from abc) and so on.

You keep using that word, odds. I do not think it means what you think
it means.

What you meant to say, and probably would have said, if you weren't at
_odds_ with people that disagreed with you, is that there are two
possibilities - either a steel frame or another frame. *Both the odds
and probability of a rider in the Tour day France riding a steel frame
are extremely remote - roughly akin to you admitting that, "okay, I'm
wrong." *Deal with it.

R

Let's use poker as an example, since many of us have either played the
game or have seen it played on TV. If you watch poker on TV, the
commentators often refer to the odds of a given card being played.
The numerical odds are clearly defined, because there is a finite set
of possibilities which are easily shown. There is no human element to
the odds of a given card being played.

When you talk about the odds of how a given player will play a hand,
or how a typical player might play a hand, then you inject lot's more
possibilities, and certainly not all can be known. The odds of how a
given player will play a particular hand are much more difficult to
predict, especially if you know little about a player's style.

I'm suggesting that it is not appropriate to use the notion of the
odds of a pro cyclist choosing to use a steel bike, which is agreeably
slim, as proof that there are no steel bikes in the Tour. Hell, take
the lottery example that's been raised... the odds of winning the
lottery are so slim as to be practically nonexistent, yet people do it
all the time. How can that be?

Are the odds great that there's a steel bike in the Tour? No. Is it
possible? Yes. Would I be surprised if there was one? No.

In article ,
(Booker Bense) wrote:

In article
,
Scott wrote:

Think about this... You talk about the difficulty in finding an
example of someone using a steel frame. Well, of course. The whole
point of the discussion hinges on the fact that we're talking about
someone using a non-standard team frame DISGUISED to look as much
like the team issue bike as possible. Unless you're talking about a
top pro, where would you ever see info on what bike they're riding?
You'd never even hear about some guy on a team who just happened to
have a steel bike. That does not mean it is or isn't happening. It
just means that it would be hard to point to an example of it if it
were happening.

Dude, it's not 1990... You are completely bat**** if you think
there's a steel bike in the pro peleton. It would be instantly
obvious ( thin straight tubes.... ), bikes can't be "disguised" that
much anymore.

I suspect many of the riders in the TDF have NEVER ridden a lugged
steel bike in their entire lives. Certainly, never raced on one.

That's quite possibly true, perhaps even likely. Well, maybe some of
the old guys like Zabel have even raced on lugged steel, but most of the
born-in-1980-or-later contingent haven't.

RicodJour wrote:

Quit trying to hijack the thread. We're beating up on Scott at the
moment.

This is turning into a nice thread. I love July around here.

--
Bill Asher