Canyon Aeroad - Read if you planning on purchasing one

[Patchelicious]

When I was a kid, I would have my GF sit on the handle bars and give her a lift home, never had one of those brake.

 

Buttons have u tried the GF test on this canyon?

Maybe lifting girls home on your canyon top tube could be a test to see if they should become a GF in the first place?

[Thor Buttox]

This thread has taught me not to load carbon excessively if you are prone to carbo load excessively.

 

Lesson learnt.

[dirtypot]

I'm busy watching the Vuelta, and I have to call bull ****.

 

Those pros are definitely sitting on their top tubes:

 

Screenshot - 2018-08-29.png

 

Screenshot - 2018-08-29_1.png

 

Clearly, the bikes to buy if you like tube squatting are:

Cannondale

BMC

Argon18

 

Yay BMC!!  Love my bike even more now.

I don't sit on my TT but at least I know I can if I want to.

[Patchelicious]

Yay BMC!! Love my bike even more now.

I don't sit on my TT but at least I know I can if I want to.

I sense a 21 page BMC warranty thread in our near futures.

[CAAD4]

Yay BMC!! Love my bike even more now.

I don't sit on my TT but at least I know I can if I want to.

 

To be sure, you might want to go for colonic irrigation first....

[Pure Savage]

or they're not fatty 86kg riders...

 

 

 

 

(sorry OP)

????????????

[dirtypot]

I sense a 21 page BMC warranty thread in our near futures.

Seems unlikely. 

[FrankG]

.

Edited August 30, 2018 by FrankG

[button]

Given that I am one of the jerks on this thread a more even reply is probably in order...

 

I would probably also be a little hot under the collar if I broke 3 frames (oddly enough I have - in the mid 80s I and the team broke a bunch of Columbus SLX frames - yeah I'm that old).

 

The top tube sitting thing still irks me though - if in doubt add some maths I always say:

 

A frame weighs around 1kg - let's break (ha ha) that into 4 equal sections - rear triangle and 3 main tubes - let's say each one weighs a quarter of the total so a top tube weighs 250g.

 

Button weighs 86kg but only partially sits on the top tube - maybe 2/3 of his weight - ~60kg.

 

Roads are not flat so point loading happens when we hit dips/speed bumps/potholes - let's say 1g (running gets up to 3g) so the load is now 120kg. On a 250g tube. That is only a few mm thick (check the pic that Button posted).

 

So we're expecting a 250g tube to support 480 times its weight in it's weak direction that it was not designed or intended to support? That is mad.

 

Given that the max rider weight is 120kg on this frame (if this thread is to be believed) - if we use the model above we're expecting a 250g tube to carry 2/3 of 120kg and doubled = 160kg. 640 times its weight.

 

Personally I'd say you'd be mad to sit on your top tube. The "standing on your top tube" analogy sounds silly but you're doing exactly that when you top tube ride. If "hanging 120kg off your top tube" works better for you then think about that before you super tuck.

 

Practically it has worked and many people do it but from an engineering point of view I'd say it's a bit silly. And kinda pointless from an energy saving point of view.

 

This thread has performed its duty - to warn heavier riders that perhaps the Aeroad frame is not for them if they like to sit on the top tube a lot.

 

100%... and when you write it out it seems so logical. This is, however, the problem then - "Practically it has worked and many people do it"

 

When you get to the other side of a climb and you bleeding from your eyeballs and other riders around are aero-tucking, doing a simple engineering analysis and math problem is not an option and its so easy to follow suite. What makes it even easier to get into this position is that you have seen it before - without issues. And people cant use the monkey see monkey do argument because inherently that is how humans learn EVERYTHING! Bad and good... If every time a pro sat on a TT and went straight through the bicycle you would not even attempt the position. It seems logical the way you explained it but its frequency leads to it being less common a logic as some may think.

 

And never mind my weight. By your calculations a 60kg rider is still expecting the top tube to support over 150x its weight...

 

And surely by this example bike manufacturers need to make consumers more aware of this issue? Or as some alluded, add 100-200g of carbon to the top tube and stop compromising your frames to make outrageous marketing statements.

 

Is it Friday yet?

[button]

or they're not fatty 86kg riders...

 

 

 

 

(sorry OP)

 

 

Shots fired! Although I could probably cut out a croissant or two 

[CAAD4]

At least it's becoming light hearted now and less heavy... Good.

[button]

When I was a kid, I would have my GF sit on the handle bars and give her a lift home, never had one of those brake.

 

Buttons have u tried the GF test on this canyon?

 

Don't be ridiculous... thats not 'normal bike use' 

[DieselnDust]

100%... and when you write it out it seems so logical. This is, however, the problem then - "Practically it has worked and many people do it"

 

When you get to the other side of a climb and you bleeding from your eyeballs and other riders around are aero-tucking, doing a simple engineering analysis and math problem is not an option and its so easy to follow suite. What makes it even easier to get into this position is that you have seen it before - without issues. And people cant use the monkey see monkey do argument because inherently that is how humans learn EVERYTHING! Bad and good... If every time a pro sat on a TT and went straight through the bicycle you would not even attempt the position. It seems logical the way you explained it but its frequency leads to it being less common a logic as some may think.

 

And never mind my weight. By your calculations a 60kg rider is still expecting the top tube to support over 150x its weight...

 

And surely by this example bike manufacturers need to make consumers more aware of this issue? Or as some alluded, add 100-200g of carbon to the top tube and stop compromising your frames to make outrageous marketing statements.

 

Is it Friday yet?

Ok I admit it, I tried an aerotuck this one time. Hit a bump and nearly got bucked off the bike.

“That was pretty stupid” was the first thing that went through my head.

Not only that but my quads felt right after so I figured I can probably go faster if I feel more confident. Never bothered with it again. No monkey see monkey do. Just a quick assessment of the risks.

I also think pro cyclists have far fewer working brain cells so I tend not to follow their example. If I did I’d be doping long time

[eddy]

 

add 100-200g of carbon to the top tube and stop compromising your frames to make outrageous marketing statements.

 

Is it Friday yet?

I don't think it is as simple as adding 200g of carbon to the TT.

 

Each tube is engineered to do a specific job, and it is the function of the seat tube to support the rider's seated weight.

 

Ensuring that the TT can also be used as a saddle and must be designed and tested as such, will have far reaching consequences to the entire science of frame design (and not only for Canyon and Spez)

[Slowbee]

Don't be ridiculous... thats not 'normal bike use' 

you have never given your GF a lift on your bike ?

[button]

you have never given your GF a lift on your bike ?

 

Maybe she knows something I don't?