Feb 3, 2003 11:16 AM
|IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE WITH HIGH END ALUMINUM FRAMES? MERCKX!|
|they cost a lot more (nm)||C-40|
Feb 3, 2003 2:05 PM
Feb 3, 2003 4:26 PM
|Scandium is a special Aluminum Alloy developed by the Russians for the fins of missiles that were to be launched from subs beneath the polar ice caps. It has a higher strength to weight ratio than most (all) top Al's. because of this the tubes can be made thinner producing lighter bikes with equal strength than aforementioned Al. It's lighter and harder to produce hence the cost increase over AL.|
Feb 3, 2003 4:33 PM
|As c-40 stated cost more. Funny coming froma guy who must ride a (very expensive) bike of same name. A Merckx Team SC is far cheaper than a Colnago C-40 and you should read Johann Museeuw's review of 2 said bikes. C-40 you may want to skip.|
|ps -> about Museeuw||Gianicolo|
Feb 4, 2003 4:23 AM
|I haven't that much knowledge about this material as some other posters, but if you talk about Johan Museeuw's review I can help you.
To me it's very unclair what he told about it. After his last Paris-Roubaix victory he told the construction of his last bike (the Eddy Merckx) was better than his previous one (the Colnago C40). But in octobre I read on his website he was very delighted to ride on a carbon frame (the QuickStep-Davitamon Time frames) again to have this wonderfull carbon feeling back, such as he had on the C40. In his diary on his website (which is in Dutch, I believe you don't speak this language) he said carbon is the best material he has ever been riding on...
|He's a good rep. Those who pay him get the remarks. nm||Spunout|
Feb 4, 2003 9:30 AM
|He's a good rep. Those who pay him get the remarks. nm||atpjunkie|
Feb 4, 2003 6:54 PM
|true, and I can't remember did he slag the C-40 or CT-1 or both. he was quite harsh. we'll see how they (he) do on the new Times this season. going to be hard to beat the 1,2,3 at P.R of 2001 for Domo.|
|Not this again!||DMoore|
Feb 3, 2003 7:42 PM
|This silly story has been going around for years. Take a look at any SLBM, be it Poseidon, Polaris, or Russian SS-N-18, 20 or 23. They don't have fins. Missiles don't launch through ice, either. Attack boats may play around under the ice caps, but a boomer is going to have water overhead before any launch.
And Scandium is not an aluminum alloy - it's an element. What is sold as "Scandium" frame tubing from Easton is basically aluminum, alloyed with Sc among other elements. Most of Easton's "Sc" tubes aren't "thinner," they're externally butted so that much of the tube is closer in diameter to a conventional steel frame than the oversize Al tubes made common by Klein, Cannondale, et al.
Great things have been said about the ride of bikes made from this tubing - but I haven't heard a lot of positives about durability. I only have one friend who has ridden Scandium, and he broke at least two of them.
|only 2% Sc||micha|
Feb 4, 2003 3:15 AM
|"Scandium" used with the word "tubing" and "frame" is a marketing term. I've seen it called "Scamdium."
As the previous poster said, Scandium (Sc) is an element. The aluminum used to make so-called "Scandium" frames is alloyed with only about 2% Sc. It's said to improve certain qualities of the alloy to a small degree.
|only 2% Sc I stand corrected||atpjunkie|
Feb 4, 2003 10:43 AM
|thanx for theinfo. yes I knew the Scandium was a Scandium/Al alloy. I didn't make that clear in my post, much like Specialized Metal MAtrix tubings, base is always Al. Thanx for the rumor correx about sub usage. Personally I'm happy on 7020.|
|re: SCANDIUM||eddie m|
Feb 4, 2003 5:56 AM
|Scandium alloys are about 10% stronger than the next best aluminum alloys used in bicycle frames. Typically, scandium frames are built very light and are therefor not as strong or durable as other aluminum frames, but even if you replace a scandium frame every year, it might still be cheaper and lighter than the best titanium frames.|| |