RDV4ROUBAIX said:Aaaaaaaa! Taiwan. Try again.
SlantParallelogram said:Not true, they planned on shifting the production out of the PA plant, but due to all of the hate mail they got they decided to keep the production there. All other Cannondale frames are now built in the far east EXCEPT for the CAAD9 and the Capo frames. They still have the "handmade in USA" honor to them.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:Damn! Guess I haven't kept up with what the Cannon is up to. I thought it was just their carbon rigs that were manufactured here. Never would buy one of their bikes anyway, being anti big brand and all. No offence if you're into them of course.
SlantParallelogram said:Oh no offense taken. The funny thing is that 20 years ago in the 1980's I really hated the Cannondale frames with their oversize wrist thick tubing. However, they were tig welding aluminum years before it became the industry standard. So that is why I have a new found respect for them.
SlantParallelogram said:I grew up racing ChromeMoly frames with Columbus or Reynolds tubing. Aluminum frames are so much lighter.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:My first MTN bike was a big red Cannondale, can't even remember the model, I was 14. I really don't like the ride quality of aluminum road bikes, It's much better than it used to be, but still, I'm mostly on steel or carbon. Aluminum and Century long gravel road rides and races don't mix well.
L29205 said:Klein?? years before Cannondale. Too bad Trek let that brand die.
In the late 80's and early 90's Cannondale may have been a bit lighter then CroMo but lacked the ride-ability on the road IMO.
SlantParallelogram said:That is true about Klein, but they weren't really a "major" brand. Aluminum frames did have a harsh ride. I suppose that might be a problem for longer rides, but for the local criterium they were fine.
I bought a brand new top of the line Italian frame in the early 90s with Columbus SLX tubing and I paid through the teeth for it. It had all the classic Italian details with the fancy chrome lugs and everything. It was top of the line for then, but compared to cheap aluminum frames of today it is heavy as hell.
I suppose that if that same ChromeMoly steel tubing was used to build a frame today and was TIG welded instead of being brazed with heavy lugs then it would be at least 1/2 a pound (or maybe even a full pound) lighter. That plus the steel fork that came with it was almost as heavy as the whole frame.
So a modern ChromeMoly steel frame that is TIG welded without lugs and uses a carbon fork would probably be at least 1.5 to 2 pounds lighter. The biggest advantage about aluminum is that aluminum is cheap as hell. Well that and it won't rust from the inside out like I am sure my steel bikes are probably doing right now.
L29205 said:I do beg to differ on the local Crit assessment, I feel that is one of the times you need a great handling. I found while riding Al frames in crits any bumps in the corners would make the bike slide to the side due to the lack on compliance in the frame. A perfectly smooth crit I would agree the weight and stiffness of Al makes them great.
RDV4ROUBAIX said:Carbon, Aluminum, or Steel? Make yourself heard.
richwagmn said:When I got back into it, I picked up a used carbon trek 5200. What struck me about carbon over alu, was the lack of resonance in the frame. You'd hit a bump and it was over with. The alu frame seemed to resonate over bumps (to me). Compare to my old steel frames, the carbon bike was a rocket when standing up to accellerate. So much less flex. Also, felt more stable to me in hard cornering.
SlantParallelogram said:Steel is a really nice material. The only downside is the cost (oh and rusting from the inside out)
SlantParallelogram said:I didn't really ride any welded aluminum frames back then. I mean I did ride some, but they either belonged to other people, or they were new bikes for sale at the shop where I worked, so I didn't do any hard cornering on them.
I did ride some of the bonded aluminum frames of the time like the Vitus Aluminum and Raleigh Technium frames of the time. They had aluminum tubing that was threaded at the ends and coated with glue, and then screwed into steel lugs. Those frames weren't that light, and were super flexible.
Were the Cannondale and Klein frames of the time really so stiff that bumps in the corners caused a slide? I can understand that being a problem. That doesn't seem to happen with the modern frames with carbon forks and rear triangles.
Steel is a really nice material. The only downside is the cost (oh and rusting from the inside out). The cheap ChromeMoly tubing is heavy. The really light ChromeMoly tubing is really expensive. Whereas Aluminum seems to be fairly cheap in general.
L29205 said:Vitus I really don't feel classifies as an truly competitive frame. I know several pros rode them in the mountain stages of the tour in the early 80's but they were designed around the same tube size and geometry as steel. Not really out of the box type of thinking.
BTW I have a Rossin Columbus SL framed bike from the early 80's that I started riding Crit's on and I have yet to find any rust on it. Inside or out (camera inspected).