Where to clamp bike to work on it?

Derk wrote:
Peter Cole wrote:

I think seat posts are one of the least favorable places to use CF.
Off-topic but too interesting not to sha I know a guy who builds up
racing bikes professionally. He used an iron saw to cut a rather big
marking in his CF seatpost, so he could easily set it back to that point if
he needed to adjust it. I would have nightmares riding on a bike with a
damaged carbon fiber seatpost, but he didn't pay much attention to it. He
laughed when I expressed my fears.

Derk

While I'm sure there are people like this, I think there are lots more
who will overtighten clamps. In frames, CF gets you lots of performance
(for lots of $$), in other places, much less to gain, lots more to lose.

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 06:13:18 -0700, jim beam
wrote:

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
"jim beam" wrote in message t...
| Paul Cassel wrote:
| wrote:
|
| I also have an Al frame and thought a carbon seatpost the way to go. I
| got a USA Alien and found no difference in the ride AT ALL. I think the
| idea of carbon being softer is when you have carbon seat and chain stays
| which may absorb some vibration, but the straight tube transmitted all
| the vibration just like the old Al seatpost did.
|
| no, it's a real physical effect. if you don't notice, that's fine for
| you, you don't have to use one, but don't deny existence for everybody else.

But is there enough material to make a difference? Taken to an extreme, if you had a seatpost in which 11 inches was aluminum and only one inch carbon, would you expect to feel any difference at all? If not, how long does it need to be before you actually do notice a difference? Would a standard road bike with maybe 6 inches of exposed post be enough for seatpost material to be relevant?


i thought of making that distinction, but decided to ague the facts.
you're absolutely right, i doubt someone with 3cm of post showing can
feel a thing, but with a correctly sized modern frame, i.e. with maybe
20cm of post showing, it's a no-brainer.

Dear Jim,

Do you know of any blind testing, with the posts wrapped with tape, in
which riders notice any difference between seat posts?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:16:49 +0200, Derk wrote:

wrote:
Do you know of any blind testing, with the posts wrapped with tape, in
which riders notice any difference between seat posts?
TOUR tested/measured seatposts and found that titanium seatpost are more
comfortable than any other seatpost.

Derk

Dear Derk,

Interesting-- thanks.

Do you have a link or any details of the testing procedure?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

wrote:
Do you know of any blind testing, with the posts wrapped with tape, in
which riders notice any difference between seat posts?
TOUR tested/measured seatposts and found that titanium seatpost are more
comfortable than any other seatpost.

Derk

wrote:

Do you have a link or any details of the testing procedure?
I'll try to look it up. I have loads of cycling magazines here, but I'll do
my best to find the right one.

Derk

wrote:
On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:16:49 +0200, Derk wrote:

wrote:
Do you know of any blind testing, with the posts wrapped with tape, in
which riders notice any difference between seat posts?
TOUR tested/measured seatposts and found that titanium seatpost are more
comfortable than any other seatpost.

Derk

Dear Derk,

Interesting-- thanks.

Do you have a link or any details of the testing procedure?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel


The measure deflection under a specific vertical load.

Lou

In article
,
" wrote:

On Aug 8, 1:39*am, Michael Press wrote:
In article
,
" wrote:
I've got a Lemond Alpe D'Huez that I¹m growing increasingly fond of.
One thing I¹ve noticed is at higher tire pressure, road vibration is a
bit much on my rear. *90ish feels a bit slow. *100-110 feels good.
120 feels real good on perfectly smooth, brand new pavement but when I
hit cracks in the pavement it¹s not the most comfortable thing in the
world. *One of the things that I think could help with this a tad is a
carbon post. *My concern then is where to clamp the bike to work on
it? *I¹m afraid putting enough pressure to properly secure the bike on
a carbon post would crack it. *The aluminum front triangle of the
frame is also insanely thin * flicking it with your finger nail feels
like you could dent it. *I¹d be afraid to clamp to this as well.
Ideas?

I¹m sure some of you will tell me to ride @ 90psi, it¹s plenty and
absorbs the road better. *Thing is, most of the roads I ride on are
really, really smooth and the higher pressures just feel faster (not
to mention they seem to reflect a slightly faster overall average at
the end of my ride, for the same course with the same perceived energy
output). *I can actually see the shape of the tire deform a bit @ 90,
at 110 it seems to pretty much hold its shape. *There¹s a chance I¹ll
find I¹m no faster (nor do I feel any faster) @ 120 than at 105-110,
but I won¹t know until I can try it without lifting off the saddle for
every crack in the road (few and far between as they may be).

I inflate to ~120 psi, then do not inflate again until
the tires are 75-85 psi; then back up to 120 psi. I have
high resistance to any sort of bicycle maintenance, including
tire inflation. I enjoy riding.

I seem to get more flats below 90 psi. I weigh about 195ish.

As jaybeee says, I am a light weight.

--
Michael Press

In article ,
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:39:59 -0700, Michael Press
wrote:

I inflate to ~120 psi, then do not inflate again until
the tires are 75-85 psi; then back up to 120 psi. I have
high resistance to any sort of bicycle maintenance, including
tire inflation. I enjoy riding.

I guess I don't enjoy riding enough and waste 2 (two) minutes a week
on inflating tires... I guess I should reevaluate my priorities.

Why should you reevaluate your priorities?

--
Michael Press

John wrote: I guess I don't enjoy riding enough and waste 2 (two) minutes
a week
on inflating tires... I guess I should reevaluate my priorities.

Michael wrote: Why should you reevaluate your priorities?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It seems John needs to reevaluate your ability to enjoy sarcasm.

On Aug 8, 2:43*pm, Derk wrote:
wrote:
Do you have a link or any details of the testing procedure?

I'll try to look it up. I have loads of cycling magazines here, but I'll do
my best to find the right one.

Derk

I'd be interested in this too. Regardless of what other posters may
say, I notice a difference in effort and speed running 90PSI vs. 110.
I'm actually comfortable enough @ 110, part of which I figure has to
do with my carbon fork and rear triangle. I'm just looking for a
smidgen of extra comfort, maybe something to allow me to run 115 or
120 with the comfort I currently run 110. Even if I find I don't
notice a difference running 120 and decide to stick with 110, my
current preferred pressure, an extra dab of comfort wouldn't hurt. If
ti is the way to go, so be it. If carbon is the way to go, again, so
be it. It's my understanding, however, that al is the least comfy
(stiffest) of seat post materials, and that's what I've currently got
so it seems I could get a comfort improvement with no performance
sacrifice using a different post. Of course, price will play a factor
- if a ti post runs 2-3x what a carbon post does, I may not make the
leap. As it is, however, I've got a few dollars in my "bike fund"
since I bought a leftover bike nad spent substantially less than I
planned for a bike I still like a whole lot, and a new seat post seems
like one of the better places to spend the $. Well, that, a pair of
padded boxers for when I want to wear normal athletic pants, a rain
jacket & rain pants (for the ss commuter - I'm going to try to keep
this one out of the foul weather) and maybe, just maybe a new set of
pedals. I've read the ones that are on the bike are inherent to
problems, but I've yet to notice any. My only other SPD pedals are
all M545 SPD platforms, and while not cheap they're bulky and heavy,
not quite appropriate for this bike I don't think.

It seems I lucked out on this bike in a lot of ways. I like the
width, shape and feel of the bars. The seat seems comfy as any I’ve
had, though it’s yet to get the 100miles in a single ride test.
Trivial as it may be, I love the color – a combination of metallic
blue (my favorite color) and carbon, with a blend of the two in the
fork. The components seem to be doing just fine, although I am a bit
suspect due to prior research about the Bontrager Race Lite GPX
cranks.

I’ll cross that bridge if it becomes an issue, however – I have a good
feeling about the shop and from what I hear if it becomes an issue
within a reasonable amount of time Trek will do what they need to do
make it right. (That’s right Mike, I bought a Trek product. It was a
leftover at my favorite shop, they gave me what I considered a great
deal, they’ve always taken great care of me in the past even with my
outdated, beat up old Ventana and I felt they’ve treated me right
through the course of this sale.) The only other upgrade that I could
think may help me would be better tires, but being so new to road
biking I don’t know if I’d see any difference, so I’ll probably run
what I’ve got until they wear or I tear one. All the “fastest tire,
rolling resistance, TPI, best flat resistance, best no-matter-what”
tire threads give me a headache anyway.