Author Topic: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?  (Read 6592 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rando

  • 4,000 and up!
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 4,460
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #30 on: February 15, 2012, 01:58:24 PM »
Why does that bike not say "Bomb-Pop" anywhere?
Because it will be written all over the faces of the riders you drop.                                                                                                   
Cube is nowhere to be found.
No US importer but I find that is the case with a large number of the better offerings from Europe.  Rose(Red Bull) comes to mind as a prime example of a highly regarded brand you have likely never seen over here.

Offline ericm979

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 1,264
  • Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #31 on: February 15, 2012, 02:52:21 PM »
I am more comfortable on a standard geometry bike than a compact.

Imagine taking your current frame, cutting the top tube out and gluing it back at an angle.  It's now a "compact" frame but the fit is identical because the contact points- the bars, seat and BB- have not moved.

The slope of the top tube does not determine where the contact points are unless you count knees or crotch.

There are various arguments about ride and weight between level and sloping top tube frames but I think they're basically a wash, and it comes down to which one looks better to you or which one is on a bike that fits you. 

Offline tetonrider

  • 2,000 and up!
  • **
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 2,088
  • Member
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #32 on: February 15, 2012, 02:55:35 PM »
I see a lot of posts with these sub 14lb Tarmacs that have no real ultra light parts and honestly I'm baffled.  I've built well over 60 bikes for myself and others and getting a bike under 14lbs (with pedals and cages) isn't easy.   A medium SL3 frame is 890g.  A small (essentially a medium) Ridley Helium is 900g.  The bike I spec'd out above would be just over 14lbs.  It has very light brakes and a light crankset and pedals.
mine has some light parts, but i didn't choose anything that i would not race or run on a daily basis. all of the items i've had lots of experience with. no "ax lightness" stuff on here. gotta be functional and durable...and THEN i'll consider light. i essentially rode this build (yes with 606 wheel combo) during the everest challenge. fun!

here's a parts list for mine, at 13.8#:
56 frame & fork - (1235 w/ cut steerer; includes cable guide, bottle cage bolts, but no PF30 cups/bearings)
crankset...WITH power meter - 620g
di2 shifters, derailleurs....internal wiring, internal battery - 703g
keo blade ti pedals - 185g
fizik antares 00 saddle - 135g
eebrakes (love them! they also happen to be light) - 180g
404+808 (tubular) wheels, skewers, with corsa's...and glued heavily (with 11-28 cassette) - 2108g
ritchey carbon post (cut)....but WITH an internal di2 battery - 210g
pro vibe carbon bars (not the lightest) - 222g
3t arx team stem - 125g
nokon brake housing, bar tape, da chain, chain catcher, 2 cages -- ~500g

there are some other small bits (top cap, computer mount, etc) not broken out above but included in my weights.

when i weighed the full package last night it was 6,274g = 13.83#.

i had all those parts on an SL3 and rode the hell out of it last year (including tons of climbing, descents, cattle guards, some dirt roads)....all bomber.

only thing is that the weight includes tubulars which i don't ride every day, but i DO ride 404 clinchers daily. the 404CCs (+ tubes & tires) add a little weight over the 606T pair (heavily glued--i mention that because when i weigh rim + tire then compare rim + glued tire, the glue adds a fair bit).....but even with 404CCs that is at or very near 14#.

and, again, this is with d2, power meter, deep wheels, 2 cages, pedals....real world.

if i threw lightweight wheels on it, it would be 12.5-12.75#, for sure.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2012, 02:59:20 PM by tetonrider »

Offline umd

  • Waving
  • 4,000 and up!
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 4,843
  • Location: Santa Barbara
    • Strava Profile
    • Blog
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #33 on: February 15, 2012, 03:37:14 PM »
I see a lot of posts with these sub 14lb Tarmacs that have no real ultra light parts and honestly I'm baffled.  I've built well over 60 bikes for myself and others and getting a bike under 14lbs (with pedals and cages) isn't easy.   A medium SL3 frame is 890g.  A small (essentially a medium) Ridley Helium is 900g.  The bike I spec'd out above would be just over 14lbs.  It has very light brakes and a light crankset and pedals.

One reason that Tarmacs come in light without a lot of ultra light parts is that the Specialized crank is very light. Iirc, it was 6-something with BB. I've become decreasingly concerned about my bike's weight over the last few years so I don't have accurate current information about my SL2, but an old spreadsheet from my old SL shows it at just under 14lbs with clinchers. The spreadsheet is the sum of weighed parts (not claimed weights), but I also had weighed the complete bike and it was within a few grams. My SL2 I got to mid-13 at one point with race wheels, but I have since swapped in some heavier replacement components for cost reasons. I don't have much in the way of ultra-light components, my zero gravity brakes being the only thing, really.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 02:19:26 PM by umd »
Vicelord: if I stay in the right position I could win any of the races I've been in
---------------------------------------------
Vicelord: Stop being dicks to me.
ls01: then man up
Herbie53: ok, but vaginas tend to attract a lot of dicks

Offline shovelhd

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 6,520
  • Location: Western MA
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #34 on: February 15, 2012, 09:57:26 PM »
Imagine taking your current frame, cutting the top tube out and gluing it back at an angle.  It's now a "compact" frame but the fit is identical because the contact points- the bars, seat and BB- have not moved.

The slope of the top tube does not determine where the contact points are unless you count knees or crotch.

There are various arguments about ride and weight between level and sloping top tube frames but I think they're basically a wash, and it comes down to which one looks better to you or which one is on a bike that fits you.

I disagree.

Offline Herbie53

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 1,077
  • Who is John Galt?
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #35 on: February 15, 2012, 11:11:51 PM »

« Last Edit: February 15, 2012, 11:20:30 PM by Herbie53 »
Sadly this is bike racing and not everyone gets a pony.

Offline tetonrider

  • 2,000 and up!
  • **
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 2,088
  • Member
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #36 on: February 15, 2012, 11:51:22 PM »
One reason that Tarmacs come in light without a lot of ultra light parts is that the Specialized crank is very light. Iirc, it was 6-something with BB. I've become decreasingly concerned about my bike's weight over the last few years so I don't have accurate current information about my SL2, but an old spreadsheet from my old SL shows it at just under 14lbs with clinchers. The spreadsheet is the sum of weighed parts (not claimed weights), but I also had weighed the complete bike and it was within a few grams. My SL2 was lighter, I got it just under 13 at one point with race wheels, but I have since swapped in some heavier replacement components for cost reasons. I don't have much in the way of ultra-light components, my zero gravity brakes being the only thing, really.

more recent generations of the s-works crankset have shaved even more weight (e.g. 2011/2012 arms are ~20g lighter than 2009/2010 arms, though they look really similar). bb30 bearings are 40g (2) and pf30 cups are 15g (2).

a 130bcd crankset with 53/39 da rings (not the crappy light specialized rings) *with* a power meter is 640-660, and a compact is 620-640. the quarq adds about 90-100g vs the lightest specialized spider.

so.....the standard crankset is around 600 WITH bearings & cups, just as umd said. it's light but also a really good crankset, too.

Offline shovelhd

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 6,520
  • Location: Western MA
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #37 on: February 16, 2012, 07:44:42 AM »
The standard Quarq S975 is 800g and change.

Offline jmilliron

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 1,213
  • Location: San Francisco Peninsula
    • Strava Profile
    • Race Journal
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #38 on: February 16, 2012, 10:33:51 AM »
764g for my (edit; compact) GPX S975 Quarq (not including magnet or BB). 

My Addict was at 13.8 lbs, ready to race, but I've gone and replaced some parts with heavier ones.  Would take a bit too much money to get back down sub 14.  Can't make myself care enough at the moment.

(read: I wish EE Brakes weren't so expensive.)

Offline Herbie53

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 1,077
  • Who is John Galt?
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #39 on: February 16, 2012, 10:42:38 AM »
If perfect fit and light weight are the priorities with cost being a lesser factor I think a full custom Guru is pretty hard to beat.

Custom layup, custom geo, perfect fit and silly light.

Dream bike.
Sadly this is bike racing and not everyone gets a pony.

Offline EDR

  • 4,000 and up!
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 4,830
  • Your Simian Overlord
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #40 on: February 16, 2012, 11:56:43 AM »
Like is said I've had a ton of bikes in my garage and the only thing I can say is my scale must weigh heavy.  I weighed my climbing wheels this morning.  Reynolds KOMs  claimed weight is 1098g.  On my scale with Vittoria Evo CX tubulars and a DA cassette they were 1998g or 4.4 pounds.  My bike minus wheels is 10.4 pounds so 14.8 total.  My build:

2008 Ridley Noah
SRAM Red shifters/RD
DA 7800 FD
3T Team Ergosum Bars/ARX Team stem 120mm
Fizik soft touch bar tape
Nokon cables (considerably lighter than stock housing)
Rotor 3D ti Cranks compact 172.5 with Extralight rings 50/34
KNC 10sl ti chain
Specialized Romin Pro saddle
Rotor chain keeper
TRP 960 brakes (110g per caliper with Swiss Stop yellow pads)
Keo Ti HM pedals
SuperG carbon cages

As you can see none of the parts on this bike are heavy most are either in or just above what would be considered weight weenie territory.  All this comes to 10.4 lbs. 

Offline jmilliron

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 1,213
  • Location: San Francisco Peninsula
    • Strava Profile
    • Race Journal
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #41 on: February 16, 2012, 12:07:22 PM »
That Noah is silly heavy.  Shoot, my Medium Damo is 1250g for the frame and 375 for the fork.  Need to build it up soon.

If perfect fit and light weight are the priorities with cost being a lesser factor I think a full custom Guru is pretty hard to beat.

Have they fixed their quality control and, more importantly, customer service problems?  I've heard nothing but horror stories...

Offline Herbie53

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 1,077
  • Who is John Galt?
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #42 on: February 16, 2012, 12:28:48 PM »
That Noah is silly heavy.  Shoot, my Medium Damo is 1250g for the frame and 375 for the fork.  Need to build it up soon.

Have they fixed their quality control and, more importantly, customer service problems?  I've heard nothing but horror stories...

I have not heard that, are there a lot of stories?
Sadly this is bike racing and not everyone gets a pony.

Offline carpediemracing

  • Media Team
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 860
  • Location: CT
  • New Member
    • Strava Profile
    • Sprinter della Casa
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #43 on: February 16, 2012, 12:32:15 PM »
Bottom line fit wins.

I like a 73 deg head tube angle with a 43 mm rake fork, very classic, very predictable. I prefer the 1-1/8 to 1-1/4 taper steerer tube forks, the Cannondale I had was really nice on descents. My Tsunamis were built with the same front end specs, built as rigid as possible, but there's a bit more flex with the 1-1/8" straight setup than the absolutely rock solid System Six.

I want a low profile front wheel unless speeds stay under 45 mph (i.e. zillions of switchbacks). The rear wheel should have a 60 or 90 mm tall rim.

Climbing, meh. Anything climbs poorly when the rider climbs poorly. I climb only a little faster than someone riding on the boardwalk on a sunny vacation morning who's riding to the store to buy a newspaper. I'm more concerned about the descent.

Curiously enough when a young Eddy Merckx had something like 15 frames built for a 21? stage Giro, the heaviest frame was designed for a mountain stage. He was more concerned with the descents than the weight on the climbs.
aka sprinterdellacasa blog/youtube

Offline ericm979

  • 1,000 and up!
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 1,264
  • Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California
Re: Ultimate Climbing Frameset?
« Reply #44 on: February 16, 2012, 12:40:48 PM »
If perfect fit and light weight are the priorities with cost being a lesser factor I think a full custom Guru is pretty hard to beat.


The weightweenies board was all over the Guru until the production models came out and were a lot heavier than claimed.  I think there were also some reliability issues as well.

My dream WW bike would be a Ruegamer Uberlight but the woman who was making them ran out of the special tubing and then quit the frame business.  Crumpton has made a few extra light frames recently so that'd be my next choice.  I might head over to Sacramento to the hand built bike show and check them out.   I'm not sure I am willing to use the WW parts that seem to be required for a special expensive WW frame.  Or spend the money for that matter.