slowbill…girl not guy…but thanks.
Bogo…thanks I might try your option iii.
QR can fix but not turn around in less than 3 weeks, understandable given the holiday - very helpful nevertheless.
“I am sure you can elaborate? Or can you?”
there is always a decision to be made on whether elements ought to be external to the frame or built into it. it’s not just derailleur hangers, friend, it’s front derailleur tabs, cable housings, headsets, seat binders, water bottle bosses. things break or fail on frames, and whenever this happens one rightfully questions whether tabs, bosses, bearing races, ought to be built into the frame or added on to it.
but my comment to you referred simply referred to a statement of fact that you made. see herbert’s post. the frame is not trashed (see herbert’s post) nor is this anymore a frame-embedded part.
I am the proud owner of an 06 Seduza and I absolutely love it. However, my love is not blind. It does have a few things I would change if I could. The seatpost binder is one of them. It would seem the folks at QR didn’t think the binder was up to par and changed it for 07.
The really crazy thing though is the rear dropout system. On my medium frame, the rear tire will hit the top of the seatstay bridge long before it gets close to the seat tube cutout. I don’t see the point of having horizontal dropouts if you cant get that wheel in any closer than you could with vertical dropouts. That’s one that leaves me scratching my head every time I get my fingers greasy removing and replacing a wheel.
Oh well. It’s a badass bike and I’m glad they continue to improve it. QR is still on my short list whenever the day comes for a new ride.
Well, you did not really elaborate on the first part. You just stated that there are “decisions.” So please still feel free to tell me why I was wrong on calling that a poor design choice. Evidently that is just your opinion. I stand by not having an integrated part so it can be easily replaced when/if it does break as a much better design decision.
The frame may not be trash in 2 or 3 weeks after it is sent off to be repaired, shipped back and forth and actually repaired. As a bicycle today, it is trash because it cannot be used. You can go without water bottle bosses, but if your integrated seat post clamp breaks you are holding trash until it can be fixed.
…nor is this anymore a frame-embedded part.
WTF?
“So please still feel free to tell me why I was wrong on calling that a poor design choice.”
when i referrred to your post i was referring to your next sentence: “Basically the frame is trash if one embedded nut is stripped.” you wrote prematurely, as herbert’s post illustrates.
“*…nor is this anymore a frame-embedded part. *WTF?”
it is my understanding, tho i could be wrong, that the latest carbon QRs have binder mechanisms not embedded in the frame, that is, these parts are removable now.
the decision to change from a frame-embedded part to one that is not is a judgment call. for example, litespeed – QR’s sister company – has moved to external headsets, if memory serves. are internal headsets examples of poor engineering? it depends on whom you talk to. obviously, you don’t think so as you don’t mention this as an issue, though your frame probably really is trash if your integrated headset races are damaged.
frame-embedded parts are more solidly attached – they solve certain problems. for example, in the case of integrated headsets the frame’s head tube is not placed in high tension, as is the case with pressed-in headset cups. but, they are also much harder to fix if they go bad. so, pick your poison.
with seat binders external to the mechanism, you give up some elegance, perhaps some aerodynamics, and you’ve got yet another clamp exerting force (in the case of an external seat binder, the mechanism must bind both to the post and the frame, instead of to the post only, and this necessarily brings an element of stress to parts that otherwise would not be there).
as i said, it’s a judgment call. go through the list of carbon bikes sold to triathletes today, from isaac to BMC to look, time, pinarello, orbea, kuota, cervelo, trek, felt, and on and on, and figure out which ones have embedded seat collars. some do, some don’t. if you choose a bike with an embedded part, you’d better be careful how much torque you apply to the bolt.
speaking of bikes, i’m off to ride mine.
It is a well-known problem due to crappy design, which was subsequently changed.
It was a really, really crappy design; the clamp would only contact about 2% of the total past area. I went through 2 Luceros before bagging the model altogether. Check the side-to-side play in the seat tube/seat past overlap to see how well it fits without the clamp. In my two frames, the post would literally rattle inside the tube.
As for the frame not being “trashed”, you could also say that a car is never “totaled” after a major collision and can be rebuilt. Yes, you can cut out the seatpost nut and re-epoxy new carbon in place. But I would say that is a major break at a critical point that is not designed to be replaceable (like a hanger), closer to “trashed” than “minor repair”.
A customer of mine, who likes to ‘tighten’ everything, stripped his ‘captive binder nut’ (which sounds either fun or uncomfortable), I took the frame off to our local small engineering unit who retapped both sides for a larger dia bolt (M6 from M5 i think) and turned down the heads of a few bolts to fit and give some spares - for less than the price of a new tyre.
“What problem does the frame-embedded seat binder solve?”
i described this in the post. imagine a machined triple clamp resolving two seatstays into a monostay (an MTB device). same thing with external seat binders, or clamp style front derailleurs (or clamps that accept braze-on style FDs). these are all devices that have secondary and tertiary binding mechanisms (beyond that which is needed when such clamps, tabs, stays are simply part of the frame).
in each case, there are stresses that are not there when the piece is integrated into the frame. additional stress is placed on the frame, and on the part itself that needs to be clamped. but, it could be that certain other stresses are relieved. a one-piece aerobar with stem included may or may not be stronger than stem, base bar, and extensions all separate. but the base bar certainly has certain stresses applied to it by all the mechanisms that bolt, clamp, pinch, and all those bolts, clamps, wedges, etc., represent items that can in themselves fail.
an integrated seat binder must perform one duty: affix the seat post. an external seat binder must perform two duties: it must affix the seat post, and affix itself onto the frame. in so doing it stresses the frame. this stress is probably inconsequential. maybe, maybe not. and, it is itself placed in tension. on the flip side, if it breaks, you just get a new one.
“Could it be summarized that the original poster’s seat post may indeed be less solidly attached?”
now that the threads are stripped, yes, you could make that assumption. before the threads were stripped, i would say you could not make that assumption.
you know how to create a syllogism.
syllogisms are often unsuccessful.
people are often ugly.
you are a person, therefore
you and your syllogisms are often unsuccessful and ugly.
i tried to craft a couple of thoughtful explanations. obviously i wasted my time.
an integrated seat binder must perform one duty: affix the seat post. an external seat binder must perform two duties: it must affix the seat post, and affix itself onto the frame. in so doing it stresses the frame.
Dan:
Have you seen the way the old QR internal carbon seat post binder works? It ended up being designed to only to “pinch” the seatpost at its two pointy ends. The tube/post was not designed to progressively increase the contact area with more pressure from the binder, nor was it designed to squeeze the tube/post from all around. No matter what binder pressure, there would be only a very small contact point at the very aft and very front “ends” of the aero seatpost. And since you don’t want to/can’t compress carbon tubes from the outside, a traditional collar like other bikes (who can tolerate tube compression) wouldn’t be a good idea.
The point is the design was flawed from execution (only small contact points due to sloppy fit between collar and post, and post and seat tube) and conception (not a progressive friction system with and inability/inappropriate to compress the carbon seat tubes to squish against the walls of the post.)
“Have you seen the way the old QR internal carbon seat post binder works?”
i don’t recall. the first binder i saw that got QR from round to aero was the aluminum piece that i have on my tiphoon. i thought that was a fabulous piece, and i’d hoped they’d use it on all their bikes. it was four bolts that came in from the rear and clamshelled the seat post. why they didn’t just use that piece on every bike they made i don’t know. it seems to me they used it on their aluminum bikes. i guess i could check easily enough, i have a tequilo out in my garage, but i’m tired and lazy today.
Weedris (And all)
So here i sit after my lunch going through the forum and i find myself encountering an American “House of Commons”, this debate/discussion/forum of thought has been fantastic. incredibly insightful to you all and entertaining. So as the leader of the house i wish to now call “Order,order” we have a dear friend in a triathlete without a useable bike…to me there can be nothing worse!
Here’s the deal:
The first threaded seat clamp frame design of the lucero was…more pleasing to the eye, more aerodynamic and easier to produce, BUT what we were not ready for was the lack of respect for the Torque settings for the seat post clamp to be tightened, you know how it is all of you well nearly all “One more turn for good luck, one more turn for Kona,one more turn because is have put weight on”…lol (joking at this point.) the frame would not stand torque over the recommended amount, thus we had to change our design to a more triathlete and rider friendly type, it is now a more solid detachable alloy piece. Thus , we dealt with a problem of over zealous allen key users and we feel it still looks pretty nice and fast…all agree? and not saying everyone overtightens all bolts either…lol
But where does this leave Weedris? Well hopefully this is not an extra-small frame as the amount of free seat tube causes issues, but we can repair this for you, we may ask for a little contribution toward shipping and a part, but this will leave you with a fully functional bike.
Please contact me direct dean.jackson@americanbicyclegroup.com we will have this sorted ASAP for you.
TO ALL! If there is a problem, we as manufacturers do not wish for it to happen, we try and design around it, we also try and imagine what athletes and others such as baggage handlers may do to a bike…but sometimes even we cannot predict what may happen with a certain, piece of the bike.lets all see design as a solution of one problem, but also possibly the creation of another, but in the end it is all done for the BETTER.
And the only real way to understand how QR feel and see the problem is to CONTACT THEM, forums are great but as Dan wisely states, “contact the company first”, i love this forum, but sadly my boss also pays me to do other things and we cannot catch this and all the other “Lesser” triathlon forums as quickly and effectively as we would like.
So looking forward to hearing from you Weedris, we will put this right for you, and if we cannot, we will find a solution.
Thank you all for a stunninly good debate…
“Now then Mr Brown, your turn for question time i think.”
Tea & Biscuits anyone?
Dean Jackson (English -Limey)
Marketing Manager
QROO.
*when i referrred to your post i was referring to your *next sentence…
Since you said I was wrong twice in one sentence, and there was only two parts to the sentence and you choose to include both in the quote, that seems unlikely. But whatever…
*obviously, you don’t think so as you don’t mention this as an issue, though your frame probably really *is trash if your integrated headset races are damaged.
Actually I had started to include a sentence or two including those, but stopped because I did not feel like putting much more time on this. I think integrated headsets are a terrible idea, and always have thought so. I remember talking about it with a large bike shop owner, and he thought it was stupid as well. However, it easier to ride with slightly “indexed” steering than it is without a seat post clamp. My preference would be to have both working correctly.
…if it breaks, you just get a new one.
Bingo! That is good design for consumer products!
And speaking of integrated parts, the front derailleur hanger on my old GT Vengeance was welded onto the frame. When I put a 56 front chainring on it, I had to file part of it off so I could get the Shimano front derailleur to go high enough. I am sure that weakened it, but I had no choice. In the back of my mind I was already thinking about how manufacture a decent clamp to replace it. Every bike I have bought since then has had a clamp-on front derailleur.
“but stopped because I did not feel like putting much more time on this.”
in this narrow context you and i are in agreement.
Weedris (And all)
So here i sit after my lunch going through the forum and i find myself encountering an American “House of Commons”, this debate/discussion/forum of thought has been fantastic…BUT what we were not ready for was the lack of respect for the Torque settings for the seat post clamp to be tightened,
“Debate”? About what? This is a pretty simple product flaw issue.
Oh, I forgot, you blame it on us “stupid users”, not a crappy design.
Just because the seat post rattled in the tube and the collar would only push against a sliver of post doesn’t mean that users aren’t stupid!
FYI - mine was top-shop done with torque wrench and it wouldn’t hold at your torque. The reason i got rid of two was because either you had to torque it as reccommended and have your seat slip, or over torque it and risk tearing the nuts out of the carbon.
You get points for helping the owner, but lose them for trying to spin it so that a common problem is the user’s fault.
Dear all,
this is the last of my posts on this subject.
Reggiedog, by putting speech marks around Stupid users you made it look like this was something i referenced and quoted. Sorry reggiedog but i did not, and would never say such a thing. having been a triathlete and active competitor since 1985 ,yes it had just started then…lol have full respect and understanding for all those in the triathlon world.
Thank you all,
Dean
Thank you and looking forward to working this through with Weedris.
RD - just because a product was replaced by a superior one does not mean that the original design was flawed. It seems to me that the highly praised P2C and P3C’s use a very similar system to the old QR seatpost clamp. You simply need to be careful and torque the bolts to the required spec.
excellent reply. folks with your level of patience and diplomacy are an asset to ABG.
and i think it is difficult for most folks to grasp that all designs have flaws. and all designs have advantages. yes, some designs have higher failure rates than others in one mode, but lower failure rates than others in another mode. and perhaps most important: design is an evolutionary process, ideally undergoing refinement and improvement with each generation …
RD - just because a product was replaced by a superior one does not mean that the original design was flawed.
As I wrote (which you obviously didn’t read): I had two of them with the same problem and checked both out. I have also seen several other cases of this - in addition to the op - so it is reasonable to have the opinion that the design was flawed.