Nano-technology and trials?

[Sonic]

Maybe we'll see some bars made with the lighter carbon nanotubes soon enough. :Sonic:

http://news.com.com/Nanotubes+race+toward+bike+parts/2100-7337_3-5341144.html?part=rss&tag=5341144&subj=news.7337.5

[mikeschiavone]

i really need to buy some nano-tech stock. soon

[digby]

the president of speedplay has a 10 pound mostly carbon road bike. With nanotubes ineverything I can see road bikes getting down to 6-7 pounds, ridiculous to think that 10 years in the future, there may be entire bikes lighter than my rear wheel.

dx32, king iso, fun bolts, michelen c16
probably 5-6 pounds right there.

[bonzai]

Technology is a wonderful thing :)

[durkie]

yes, you should invest. nanotech still scares the fuck out of a lot of people, so you should get in on the ground floor before while there are still problems holding back other people from investing

[AndyT]

aluminum 4evar!

[WhiteRavenKS]

rims that grind themselves! oh what a wonderful thing! oh wait... nevermind...

[AndyT]

You could probably hire and teach an illegal alien to grind rims and maintain bikes, give them like 50 dollars a month to do it all for you :dunno:


I'll look into it.

[uownme]

You could probably hire and teach an illegal alien to grind rims and maintain bikes, give them like 50 dollars a month to do it all for you :dunno:


I'll look into it.
Im sure they would work for less than that...

[hophopsnap]

with a 6-7 pound road bike, It would be hard to not pull wheelies, you would need a 70mm bb drop. have fun with 40mm cranks!!!

[RomanR]

All that stuff sounds cool.

But UCI has minimum weight rules for road bikes, 14.96 lbs. So with frames coming out weighing less than 1 kg, people are finding other places to put on heavier parts just to meet that rule.

[hydroboy]

with a 6-7 pound road bike, It would be hard to not pull wheelies, you would need a 70mm bb drop. have fun with 40mm cranks!!!
or just longer chain stays?

[crescentrider]

chromoly 4evar!

[kamil]

one of the more pointless applications of cnt (carbon nano-tubes) but an application none the less.

yay, now i can mix what i want to do as a profession and biking together.

i don't think you can make someone work with cnt for $50 a day, it would be a trust issue, million dollar equipment and a guy with a history of grand theft auto.... hmm..

[AndyT]

I was just talking about working on my bike and grinding the wheel, who cares about that fairy cnt shit.

[digby]

All that stuff sounds cool.

But UCI has minimum weight rules for road bikes, 14.96 lbs. So with frames coming out weighing less than 1 kg, people are finding other places to put on heavier parts just to meet that rule.
the minimum weights mainly for safety, so the peloton isnt riding bikes with frames that are only good for 6 hours of riding and then need to be thrown away. If this nano tube shit is really that strong, they may lower it someday. I think with the cdale 613 they had to glue some brass weights on it so it met the rules.

[AndyT]

I want a nano tube motorcycle jacket.


that made no sense.

[durkie]

team csc during the tour de france had to ask speedplay to make them heavier pedals. and tyler hamilton was broadcasting readings from the power meter put on his bike to make it heavier. that's neat and all, but still ridiculous...i think uci has a pretty conservative history, especially when it comes to the near-and-dear road bike.

[jmkimmel]

Random question: does UCI have minimum weights for any other types of riding? XC, DH, Trials, etc?

[digby]

nope pretty sure its just road bikes, thats the only place where it is an advantage. If they said your trials bike has to weigh at least 18 pounds, most of us could give a shit. I think Ive had one bike that was sub 20 pounds.

[tomacropod]

you have to keep in mind the role that the UCI plays in the industry. Consider XC-racing and its "no-assistance" rule. Pisses off the racing teams perhaps, but we have a market full of much better products as a result. If the UCI allowed racing teams to develop lighter and lighter road bikes, the racers would benefit, because they have a bottomless supply of equipment. Ultimately though, the public would be disadvantaged by this, as products would be too expensive and impractical for real-world use. If the UCI keeps bike development within this weight restriction then the bike companies develop stronger, better performing, and longer lasting bikes for a better price, given the weight. Remember bontrager's theorem (Strong, Light, Cheap - pick any two). If weight is kept at a constant minimum, developments will over time increase the strength and reduce the price of products. What do you know, we have lighter, stronger and cheaper products on the market now than we did 20 years ago !

- Joel

[durkie]

i think that's being too benevolent on behalf of uci. lighter and lighter road bikes do not disadvantage the public. there are tons of people that would take the opportunity to buy a 10lb road bike off the shelf. it wouldn' t be cheap certainly, but it's already not cheap.

where does a 15lb weight limit come from? as far as i can tell, it's arbitrary, because it certainly isn't based on changes in technology. "no assistance" might have been a pain in the ass at the time (i don't really know what you're referring to by "no assistance"), but really good products grew out of it, as you said. but a 15lb weight limit is no longer causing companies to push the limits of what they can engineer. they've already past that limit and are now having counteract their own excellent work.

[MegamoMidwest]

I think they should focus on wheels, think how fast a bike would be with a sub 1 pound set of wheels. damn.

[digby]

I think that limits from the late 60's early 70's, mercks time trial bike had to meet the weight requirement too I think. Some wheels are super light, I think american classics? I forgot, but theyre so light that they dont have a gyroscopic effect, which is what keeps you up when the bikes rolling, makes you have to balance like your riding in a hallway at 2 mph cuz theres no help from your wheels.

crazy light.

[durkie]

what about bearings? i think nice bearings are where it's at. phil wood offers some crazy $130 angular contact bearings that they say are to be used for olympic events. there's supposed to be some formula about reduction in bearing friction being equal to removing x pounds from your bike.

[digby]

hears one to blow your mind, they just finished developing usable plastic magnets. So in 10 years, I can see some kind of micro hydrogen based fuel cell to power all the mag-lev bearings on the bike. Zero friction, no more bearing grease. Of course, I think it has to operate in a vaccum but they'll probably figure out something for that too.

[hophopsnap]

I think all the weighloss is in the grips.

[willapaj]

A picture of the Easton wheel...

"Easton clinches it
Easton is claiming a breakthrough in carbon technology with the use of carbon nanotubes in its new Tempest carbon clincher wheels. The new carbon fibre variant is claimed to be 25 percent stronger than conventional carbon."
picture:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2004/tech/shows/?id=eurobike/part4/GF7U9443

Don't see this sort of technology being used on trials bikes anytime soon, but it's a step our general direction. :)

[oicdn]

what about bearings? i think nice bearings are where it's at. phil wood offers some crazy $130 angular contact bearings that they say are to be used for olympic events. there's supposed to be some formula about reduction in bearing friction being equal to removing x pounds from your bike.

Damn...that's tech as shit...