|This is by far the nicest looking ti and carbon||Lazywriter|
Jun 19, 2002 5:02 PM
|combo bike every made. Nicer looking than the Seven and the Serotta for sure. WOW.|
|re: This is by far the nicest looking ti and carbon||Lazywriter|
Jun 19, 2002 5:02 PM
|re: This is by far the nicest looking ti and carbon||TimePedal|
Jun 19, 2002 5:05 PM
|Saw the bike in person at the so cal expo. Wasn't that impressive at all. Seven and the Serotta were much better looking. IMHO.|
|re: This is by far the nicest looking ti and carbon||collinsc|
Jun 19, 2002 5:07 PM
|How specifically were the Seven and Serotta better looking?|
Jun 19, 2002 7:28 PM
|This bike is a piece of artwork.. Seven and Serotta are beautiful bikes. But they are more bikes than artwork.
Jun 19, 2002 7:42 PM
|As a Serotta owner, I think I have a new friend.
Jun 20, 2002 10:04 AM
|Good to hear! One day when you have to pass your Serotta on and find a new loving home for it, you know my friend... my door will always be open for your Serotta.
hehe jk :)
|re: This is by far the nicest looking ti and carbon||Ian|
Jun 19, 2002 5:24 PM
|That is a sweet bicycle. I like how the works of art are in the background, very slick. The lugs extend a little to far down the carbon tubes for my taste, but I'm being really picky on that. Certainly one of the best looking bikes I have ever seen.
|In typical Litespeed fashion...||Nessism|
Jun 19, 2002 5:54 PM
|...the top tube and down tube are spaced close together which reduces the support of the head tube. Since they went to integrated headsets with the buldging bearing cups they have less room to spread these tubes apart.
Very very nice looking rig really. If I had Bill Gates money I would have one.
|Wow! Gorgeous, Stylish, and LUGGED!! nm||rwbadley|
Jun 19, 2002 9:34 PM
|re: This is by far the nicest looking ti and carbon||legs|
Jun 19, 2002 6:03 PM
|and come December.. they will build it any way you want.. you can chose which tubes to leave in titanium and which ones you want CF..
I would of ordered one but there is literally nothing I would change on my xl compact...
that and i dont think CF is a perfect material for the whole frame because of durability issues...
Jun 19, 2002 7:27 PM
|bike. Any cost figures?|
|re: yeah, that is very sweet||collinsc|
Jun 19, 2002 7:38 PM
|Very artful framework there. Only problem I have with these bikes (Ti/lots of carbon, ie: ottrott, odonata, cielo etc..) is that I, having never ridden one, have no idea how to classify them.
Are they Ti? Are they carbon? If I was loaded I dont think I would care, theyre all pretty enough for me.
|The thing that bothers me about the Seven Odonata||Lazywriter|
Jun 19, 2002 7:45 PM
|and I assume the other ti/carbon blends is that Seven puts a 200 lb rider weight limit on the Odonata. That bothers me because it points to an inherent "weakness" or limitation in the design.|
|The thing that bothers me about the Seven Odonata||legs|
Jun 19, 2002 8:59 PM
|all designs have different limitations.. the context in which they are used describes the appropriateness of the materials/construction to the applicatiion..
you cant build a pool on the roof of your house.. does this mean your house is flawed?
200lbs is too much weight for the design just means that there are other designs better suited for you...
it doesnt serve as a critique of the success of the design.. that methodology is too flawed for any logic (although i do understand how you arrived at this conclusion)
the wieght limit indicates the functional parameters of the design....
a tricycle isnt designed for an adult.. that doesnt mean that all trikes are poorly designed....
Jun 20, 2002 3:36 AM
|The low "maximum weight limit" actually DOES infer a weaker design.
This limit comes into play when calculating factors of safety in the structural design analysis.
Jun 20, 2002 10:49 AM
|200lbs is a low weight..?? jeez that's a good 50lbs plus more than me.. the wieght limit is not the limit for frame failure.. if you are kind of fat... and you want a t i bike.. there are options.. litespeed vortexes wiegh over three pounds.. a seven axiom can be built for the bi g boys...
knock a pound off the frame wieght of a vortex and i will bet that 200lbs is pushing the limits..
the reality is that 61% of this country is overweight.. and you are gonna blame a lightwieght frame for having appropriate limitations.. its a bit like the pot calling the kettle black...
a ford f150 has a weight limit for what it can tow.. does that mean its a piece of crap or that if i am towing heavy stuff i need a different piece of equipment?
it is the same thing ...
be real... lightweight bikes are not for heavy people...
what about that seems wrong?
a heavy bike might be too punishing for a lightwieght person...
so weaker design? NO... design for specific usage.. yes.. every design element has a trade-off..
superlight frames (in general sub2.5 lbs) are not the right tool for a 200lb bikey...
dont blame the frame..
|It has nothing to do with the design||Lazywriter|
Jun 20, 2002 1:19 PM
|of the bike? The fact that it has a weight limit is indicative of a limitation in the materials with regards to the way it was used together. A whole carbon bike and a whole ti bike won't have these limitations (usually unless it is a super light frame). It is not a bad bike and it is designed to perform like any other high end bike, but it is obviously not as strong of a construction.
If you take a 180-190lb professional cyclist and made hime ride the Odanata for a season, I bet that bike won't hold up to the abuse. There is a cyclist beneath the weight limit with a lot of power output. I would recommend the ti/carbon combo last as far as durability.
|I think it is a stupid idea.||elviento|
Jun 19, 2002 11:08 PM
|I think this is an effort of the ti bike makers to jump on the carbon fashion bandwagon, which makes little sense.
1. These guys are traditionally known for building ti bikes, and they are not proven carbon makers.
2. what advantage does this bike have over a full carbon bike like OCLV or C40? weight? structural strength? DOn't think so.
3. You may have already noticed that these ti/carbon frames actually unecessarily add many joints to the frame, which serves very little purpose. For example, from the headtube to the seattube, there are 4 joints instead of the normal 2 (ti/ti/carbon/ti/ti). more joints on a frame only leads to more weight and more strength risks. At least carbon can have a monocoque lug, while these ti lugs themselves have to be welded.
Is this really any better than the old Trek/Specialized carbon bikes with metal lugs, besides the fact these lugs are a bit fancier?
|Jeez elvis, he just said it looked nice...nm||amflyer|
Jun 20, 2002 4:25 AM
|In some sense I have to agree.||Sintesi|
Jun 20, 2002 5:07 AM
|Why bother with the ti joints or lugs if you are after a carbon ride? Why not just go all carbon? Is it because Ti bike makers are being forced to include carbon for it's gee whiz marketing effects. I dunno, maybe the combination is a really good feel but I'm skeptical. Litespeed, Serotta, Seven, Merlin, they're all into this carbo-ti combination now.
It seems like Serotta's Ottrot (sp?) keeps losing a main tube or stay and replaces it with carbon with each incarnation. Innovation? Gimmickry? Your call.
I almost felt he was just trying to stand out from the crowd by carbonizng the main triangle instead of the stays like everybody else. I guess the Ottrot owners can tell us if it changed their world or not.
|Fashion my friends...||TJeanloz|
Jun 20, 2002 5:33 AM
|Litespeed has made it clear that Merlin is going to be the upscale beauty bike of their domain. This bike is designed to be nothing more than gorgeous, which some people, myself included, believe has been achieved. I don't think this design offers any technical 'advantages' and probably has some disadvantages to an all ti or all carbon bike.
Is good looking a gimmick? Maybe. Look at another bike in their line- the Newsboy, serves no real purpose for racing/riding, but it is a marvel nonetheless.
I think sometimes we need to spend less time looking at bikes from a strictly 'will it make me faster' point of view, and entertain the notion that they can be more than that.
|Agree. There's a difference between function and beauty.||wonderdog|
Jun 20, 2002 5:40 AM
|Agree. There's a difference between function and beauty.||legs|
Jun 20, 2002 7:04 AM
|it is a bike.. you sit on it and pedal.. if you like it ...its good and if you dont you dont...
bikes over the years tend to reflect trends..
there is a recent trend to 'liven-up' carbon with lugs and also because makes building in carbon easier...
carbon has become popular for several reasons..
as has titanium..
all structural theory does not manifest as a real world experience... a bike does not encounter tremendous load... essentially it is a couple of triangles with wheels and a seat.. the angles and the materials determine a subjective ride quality..
this bike has a specific ride quality and design limitations dictated by the durability of the materials used for the application...
carbon tends to have a shorter life for various reasons.. the grain structure in carbon tends to dampen vibration..
carbon mates well with titanium because of similar thermal expansion rates.. (as opposed to that trek or vitus from yesteryear with small aluminum lugs)
these qualities are non-hierarchical.. and largely subjective..
an all carbon bike is not always better than a lugged titanium and carbon bike...the both tend to rely on lugs...
lugs do not mean there are 'too many joints' in the frame affecting the integrity...
frames rarely break in the lugs.. those tend to be the strongest parts of the frame.. and when you count the connection of pedal to crank, crank to bottom bracket. bb to frame.. seat post to seat tube, head tube to headset to stem to handle bars to brake hoods.. you can see that there are already several points of connection... the bike by design has 'too many joints'
we can pound eachother in debate over stuff that makes no real world difference...
dont forget to ride..
turn the cranks...
this bike will likely have a smooth and lively ride..
it will be easy to produce custom orders
it responds to current trends it mirrors the products of their rival brands..
the purpose of the bike is to sell units...
the reality about any carbon bike is that it likely will not maintain the same ride quality on day one as it does on day 3,000.... so what..?
so many of the opinions being expressed about the frame have little basis in reality..
you can talk to the frame designer (tom kellogg) regarding the geometry.. and you can talk to chris at merlin about the logisitics and the evolution of the frame and the marketing...
get legitimate information..
I think the ponit of the post was to say.. doesn't this look cool..?
sure ti does..
or no it doesnt..
I know one thing.. it looks better in pictures than in real life..cause i have seen it..
|I have no idea how it rides. I'm not even all that curious||djg|
Jun 20, 2002 7:42 AM
|find out. Frankly, I'm inclined to think there's no real point to it, so far as functional design is concerned. OTOH: I do think it looks pretty damn cool--one of the funkier crosses between the techno and the retro I've seen.|
|I have no idea how it rides. I'm not even all that curious||legs|
Jun 20, 2002 7:55 AM
|yeah.. i love the idea of the lugs being kind of like Rococo? Moorish (sic) architecture..
as a designer i love it when new technology is used
in 'old' ways...
I am willing to admit that some bikes are pretty cool looking....
hell.. marcel breuer was influenced by bicycle design when he designed the wassily chair at bauhaus..
this bike looks amazing in these pics
|Its rideable art! Very cool! nm||Miklos|
Jun 20, 2002 5:55 AM
|This is art||Mel Erickson|
Jun 20, 2002 5:39 AM
|not science. IMHO they just wanted to build a distinctive bicycle, as a work of art. Appreciate it for what it is, a beautiful expression of the artists mind. Who cares if it performs the best, lasts the longest, etc. It's art.|
Jun 20, 2002 7:00 AM
|I agree the bike is stylish, but it is not art at least not to me. Art infers the efforts of an artist to produce it, and there is none of that here. Those tubes or lugs are laser cut and each one will be the same, no hand work involved, just code in a computer operated machine. Since carbon fiber tubes are cheaper to produce than titanium tubes, the bike will not be any more difficult or costly to build, yet they will charge a premium for it. It is marketing gimmickry in the best PT Barnum sense.|
Jun 20, 2002 7:43 AM
|I am an engineer/machininst/CNC programmer. I see works of art produced on a CNC every day. That bicycle is a work of art no matter how it is produced.
What I don't recognise as art are abstract paintings that look like some pre-schooler painted them.
But thats just me.
|no, you don't||Gangsta|
Jun 20, 2002 10:08 AM
|The work of art may be in the original drawing or the conceptuals, but post-processors and G-code does not art make. What you see coming off your machines everyday is just the product of a machine doing what it is told, over and over again, with no thought, no feeling, no uniqueness. A CNC machine is akin to a printing press, it just copies and everyone knows a copy is not art, it is only a copy.|
|That seems small minded,||TJeanloz|
Jun 20, 2002 10:23 AM
|Does this mean that a perfect reproduction of the Mona Lisa is not beautiful? Or that recorded sound isn't either (point granted that recorded isn't the same as live)? But seriously, how snobbish is it to say that only the original is beautiful, when a copy is, in fact identical (even down to the artisans' imperfections.)?|
Jun 20, 2002 11:56 AM
|No one said the copy could not be beautiful, I said that a copy is a copy and the original is the "art". You allude to this yourself with your example of recorded sound implying the difference between the original and the copies.
Define "work of art." Is a polaroid of the Mona Lisa art? Art is more than mimicry, it is also conception, an original idea. In this case it is a modeling exercise that looks very, very much like the old Bob Jackson arrowhead lugs cut into ti tubes using a laser. There is nothing original in the design or the application. So is it art? Maybe to you but to me it is mimicry, unoriginal, and designed to seperate a fool from his money. I take it you want one.
|no, you don't||legs|
Jun 20, 2002 10:36 AM
|I will remind you that there is no answer to the question: what is art? in contemporary culture art is determined by context.. marcel duchamp.. (from a long time before you were born).. making art from readymades.. (found objects).. the dutch and northern european painters using optical devices to render figures... apprentices painting the details in the paintings of the old masters...
also and in more recent time andy warhol used mechanical means of reproduction in his art.. and even more recenty jeff koons uses carfts people to fabricate his art..as does richard serra.. these guys are fairly big guns in the art world.... actually i can list dozens of artists if not hundreds...
so i think you might wanna do some research before you make grand conclusions.. besides, its a bike.
and everything is art in the eye of the beholder...
even tom kellogg said (this morning) '"ts just about the most beautiful frame i have ever seen"
usually things that are hand made are considered craft.. art and mechanical methods of expression go far back ... its argued that even vermeer used something resembling a camera obscura....
so you are wrong an many levels.. (sorry).. and last time i checked.. editions are the most highly collected form of art...go to one of the art auction houses online and see for yourself...
the method of fabrication is merely a step in the process...
welcome to the 20th century.. cause these idea are old.. and after that come on in to the 21ts century.. you will like it here...
|I'm awake, do you have my coffee ready?||Gangsta|
Jun 20, 2002 12:11 PM
|If there is no answer to "what is art" then how are we to determine which of us is right or wrong? Based on your first statement, doesn't that make the rest and your own grand conclusion blather and self-inflation?
I'll humor you. We can assume by your post that you talked to Tom Kellog this morning (nice name dropping by the way). Can we assume that Tom is involved in this project? Can we assume your comment "even tom kellogg said (this morning) '"ts (sic) just about the most beautiful frame i have ever seen" may be more than biased?
As far as the value of "art" which is considered more valuable, the original, or the editions? Now, bring me my coffee and fetch me my slippers.
|Was Tom Kellog involved?||Mel Erickson|
Jun 20, 2002 1:21 PM
|He was only the designer! So what if he was biased in making his comment. I would assume an artist would like his own art. Also, what does the value of art have to do with whether it's art or not? I have numerous prints and artist proofs, signed and numbered by the artist, on my walls. Some were were signed with a personalized note. They vary in value from, probably, $50 to $500. I think they're all beautiful, that's why they're hanging on my walls. I also think they're all art. I also have several original oil paintings done by my brother-in-law. Couldn't place a value on them because he's never really sold his works, they're art. I've got original photographs I've taken and enlarged hanging on my walls, art too. I've got stick drawings done by my niece's and nephew's hanging on my fridge, guess what, art too. What makes art is not the method used to produce it, nor the producer, but the beholder. If you think it's art, it is! There are as many definitions as there are people. We're both right!|
|no, you don't||klay|
Jun 20, 2002 10:40 AM
|. What you see coming off your machines everyday is just the product of a machine doing what it is told...
...possibly by an artist.
It's just a different kind of paintbrush.
Jun 20, 2002 12:20 PM
|I believe you are correct. I agree than an artist could use a CNC machine as his tool for communicating his art; art which he conceived, modeled, programmed. Once the artist is taken out of the equation, it is just reproductions and the spark of originality, of creation, of art is lost. Reproduction is not art, it is only the reproduction of art, mimicry, and to me that is an important distinction.|
|"Art is subject to interpretation.....||Miklos|
Jun 20, 2002 1:22 PM
|and with an open mind you will find much more art and beauty in this world than someone with a closed mind"
quote by Miklos- 06/20/02
|What it really needs to set it off||Mel Erickson|
Jun 20, 2002 8:46 AM
|is a set of Campy Delta brakes - and lose the imitation cowhide tape.|
|it says Merlin on it....(nm)||collinsc|
Jun 20, 2002 10:54 AM