tour mag aero tests a pinarello dogma and .....

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

3Pio
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

thumper88 wrote:
kgt wrote:You are not a fan of Pinarello and that's fine.
OTOH Pinarello's fame is certainly not based on marketing. Unless you consider its unique heritage (11 Tours de France wins etc.) as 'marketing'. You insist on Pinarello frames not being lightweight but that is for a reason obviously. Colnagos are even heavier for similar reasons. Such frames are definitely more sturdy than any Specialized or Cervelo and of a higher quality in terms of materials and manufacturing. If you are in the engineering department of a composites manufacturer, as you say, you already know that or you may check it out.


Sure, I can offer a few ideas as to why they would be heavier. They could be using lower mod carbon and having to increase wall thickness to make up for that. Or because of less sophisticated engineering, they could be going conservative on their layup schedules, and adding more materiel than elegant engineering might call for.
But when you move along the spectrum toward heavier laminates and more weights, you are by definition somewhat undermining the reasons for using high-end composites.
It's hard to imagine that their engineering and R&D is as good as say Specialized's, Cannondale's or Treks (and even they make boo boos). But I could be wrong.
The one thing positive thing I can say about carbon frames with greater wall thicknesses etc is that they CAN be more robust in, say, an accident, or just generally. Note the "can." That depends on engineering for the layup -- the right amount of fiber on load paths etc -- that is taking good advantage of that additional material.
In the most basic case, any bike built with thicker walls is going to stand up better to say the impact of a dropped tool.
Is this the direction you want for a race bike? I dunno, up to you. But this is weight weenies. Not let's-be-more-robust-than-Honest people tough, can and do disagree constantly on what constitutes good engineering for light bikes.
But that fork really, really made me suspicious of who was doing their engineering... of both their capabilities and motivations.



Im not even sure about quality of Pinarello's. On my FP3 there is really bad Headset design (then dont use conical bearings), so u have to tight it a lot if u dont want play.. 4500km later, i need new fork on that bike...Also marketing on previous Dogma's and shape od forks.. On dogma F8, all of the suden last shape it's not working anymore..

Colnago is heavier (im not sure that is more then 200-300 gm heavier compared to Specialissima for example), but at least they offer super ride and exceptional quality (for example alloy bedings where u press bearings in the headset, not diectly on Carbon like Dogma F8). I was fan of Pinarello for years, but as i realized, seem that they lost their enthusiasm (which bring them to be one of the best in the past), and now the sell just old fame and marketing.. Sorry if this bother some of their fans, but at least that is what i realized based on testing and analyzing by my self..

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

thumper88 wrote:Sure, I can offer a few ideas as to why they would be heavier. They could be using lower mod carbon.

Wrong
thumper88 wrote:The one thing positive thing I can say about carbon frames with greater wall thicknesses etc is that they CAN be more robust in, say, an accident, or just generally.

True
thumper88 wrote:Is this the direction you want for a race bike?

A race bike could even be dispossable after a race. We are talking about what is more robust and what is not. Minimal wall thickness always makes for a less robust frame.

3Pio wrote:Im not even sure about quality of Pinarello's. On my FP3 there is really bad Headset design

FP3 is a cheap carbon frame, you cannot expect the best quality obviously.
3Pio wrote:Also marketing on previous Dogma's and shape od forks.. On dogma F8, all of the suden last shape it's not working anymore..

They never claimed their onda forks did miracles (like a 40sec gain over a 20km course etc.). They just said that these forks are stiff and rigid, while comfortable at the same time. Nothin dramatic. Have you ever heard of Hetchins?

3Pio wrote:the sell just old fame and marketing..

"Old" fame? Is 2016 already old? And what is their marketing about really? Their Asym system? Their quality of Torayca carbon? Their 12 Tours? I see nothing exaggerating in all that.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



thumper88
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:27 pm

by thumper88

kgt wrote:
thumper88 wrote:Sure, I can offer a few ideas as to why they would be heavier. They could be using lower mod carbon.


"Wrong"


How do you know? Because they told you it was all "60-ton?"
There could be anything in that bike, anything at all


And this: "A race bike could even be dispossable after a race. We are talking about what is more robust and what is not. Minimal wall thickness always makes for a less robust frame."

I'll tell you what is robust: steel. Why not argue for steel frames? The junkyards simply are not stacked high with Madones and Tarmacs and SuperSixes. All of this is on a spectrum. But on serious rides outside of Manhattan and Silicon Valley, there's a reason the peloton suppresses smirks when someone rolls up on a Pinarello.


And this: "They never claimed their onda forks did miracles (like a 40sec gain over a 20km course etc.). They just said that these forks are stiff and rigid, while comfortable at the same time. Nothin dramatic. Have you ever heard of Hetchins?"

The wavvy wobbles don't do anything except add weight at the cost of marketing silliness. It was ridiculous and pretty much everyone knew it even then, and it has made it harder to take the company's other claims at face value.

3Pio
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

kgt wrote:
thumper88 wrote:Sure, I can offer a few ideas as to why they would be heavier. They could be using lower mod carbon.

Wrong
thumper88 wrote:The one thing positive thing I can say about carbon frames with greater wall thicknesses etc is that they CAN be more robust in, say, an accident, or just generally.

True
thumper88 wrote:Is this the direction you want for a race bike?

A race bike could even be dispossable after a race. We are talking about what is more robust and what is not. Minimal wall thickness always makes for a less robust frame.

3Pio wrote:Im not even sure about quality of Pinarello's. On my FP3 there is really bad Headset design

kgt wrote:FP3 is a cheap carbon frame, you cannot expect the best quality obviously.


FP3 is not high end bike, definetly, but compared to the competition it was not that cheap (cost was more then 2000 eur for the whole bike. In that time i could buy similar grade of bike from the competition for 1500-1600 eur). And in the lower part of the spectrum, i can expect lower quality of riding, to be heavier and not that stiff as highend, but not to be compromised quality or enigneering of the product. Seem that they was selling the look of curvy forks (similar to Dogma), and seem that they were care only about more profit doing with saving on engineering and quality of materials. Another issue i had with the bike was wheels. They choose terrible design for their MOST wheelset i got on that bike, and they were broken where spokes meet rims after a while (going uphiill, not from hitting a pothole or something). If u analyze what they done, they cared about look of the wheelset, tried to save weight with 24 spokes design and used the most terrible rims i ever seen (they were flexyest wheelset i ever tried).Probably they hoped that those bikes will buy people who actually dont ride... In same time, i have even cheaper Bianchi Sei Giorni (Single Speed Fixie), for City Commuting, and also it have a Carbon Fork. After two years of riding every day (winter, rain, hot...), jumping on the sidewalks, hitting potholes Every day, NOT even a slightly trace of play in the headset. On that FP3 i was replacing headset bearings three times in 4500 km, and now i need to replace the fork.Im riding bikes for more then 20 years, and had different bikes (in this time i have Specialized Epic Marathon Carbon from 2007, Bianchi Sei Giorni, Colnago C60 and this Fp3). Pinarello Fp3 is FIRST bike in this 20 years where i actually had this kind of issuess with the headset and the rims. And Seem that only quality parts installed on this bike is Campagnolo Veloce groupset

3Pio wrote:Also marketing on previous Dogma's and shape od forks.. On dogma F8, all of the suden last shape it's not working anymore..

kgt wrote:They never claimed their onda forks did miracles (like a 40sec gain over a 20km course etc.). They just said that these forks are stiff and rigid, while comfortable at the same time. Nothin dramatic. Have you ever heard of Hetchins?


Their marketing there was based that curvy design would damp the road vibration and make it more comfortable so better performance.Seem that that design just add weight and nothing else...(Which we can see in new design dont work anymore what they were saying..)

3Pio wrote:the sell just old fame and marketing..

kgt wrote:"Old" fame? Is 2016 already old? And what is their marketing about really? Their Asym system? Their quality of Torayca carbon? Their 12 Tours? I see nothing exaggerating in all that.


Yes, old fame.. Fame about quality of engineering, not about winning Tour De France.. We know that Tour De France etc, win who have more money to invest in winning.. They got their old reputation based on ehthusiasm when Gianni was racing and when he was still put part of his spirit in the design of the bikes.. Now look like they lost their enthusiasm, and try just to save money in production and make even more profit..

About Asym system.. It's not their design.. ASYM Systems were using TIME VXRS before Pinarello's or Look.. And what is the purpose of this design? To save more weight cutting material on the side that is not needed to have extra materials.. So how then if this technology is so advanced, Pinarello Dogma F8 is one the heaviest frame in this moment?

Torayca carbon - How good high end carbon, differ from cheap and not that good? In my opinion difference is quality of ride and weight. If u use good quality carbon, it's possible to have same quality of riding with adding less material, so that way to save weight and not compromise quality of riding or the bike.. So how then Dogma F8 using the finest carbon on the planet is one of the heavier in this moment?

Another quality of good carbon, is dampening from the road.. So if they use the best carbon on planet who does miracles why they use the rear shock on Dogma F8-K?

Just to mention that one of the parts that they save weight is pressing bearings directly to carbon (in the headset) and not like before in alloy part. When u see how they claim their weight it's smell even more like MARKETING gimmik everything (without paint, without hardware).

How is then possible that Colnago C60 is almost same weight of Dogma F8, and Colnago dont put everywhere words like Assymetric, Ultra Light, Toracay carbon.. And in same time have much better paint job, actually care about quality (bearings pressed in alloy not directly in carbon or alloy chainstays, or design of bottom bracket, in same time is Made in Italy (versus saving producing in Taiwan), and cost even less then Dogma F8?In same time, at least in my test rides i found out that C60 is stiffer then Dogma F8 and much more comfortable. If that Taracay and Assymetric does a lot, then Dogma F8 should be much lighter, stiffer better bike then bike like C60 (who "dont" use all that technology :), but seem that they have much better engineering not based on just marketing), but in reality it is not (im really glad that i had a chance to test ride them both otherwise i would buy dogma F8 eating all that marketing words).

Dogma F8 X-Light? Even less Engineering, and ridiculous Weight limit (seem that they just put thinner material and that's it). And we saw what happened this year on TDF with that frame..

Sorry, i really liked Pinarello's but i just open my eyes and find out that they become another generic non enthusast company who care about profit and nothing else.. They really need to get back their enthusiasm from the old fame (from 80's and 90's).

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

thumper88 wrote:How do you know? Because they told you it was all "60-ton?"

Because I 've discussed issues like that with a friend with a phd in composites who also produces handmade carbon frames.

thumper88 wrote:The wavvy wobbles don't do anything except add weight at the cost of marketing silliness. It was ridiculous and pretty much everyone knew it even then, and it has made it harder to take the company's other claims at face value.

Nothing ridiculous. These forks were sturdy, stiff and comfortable as advertised. It's ok if you don't like the design. I liked it a lot btw.
Last edited by kgt on Tue Oct 04, 2016 8:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

3Pio wrote:Yes, old fame.. Fame about quality of engineering, not about winning Tour De France..

Quality of engineering? Really? Have you seen Wiggins hour record Bolide?

3Pio wrote: And what is the purpose of this design? To save more weight cutting material on the side that is not needed to have extra materials..So how then if this technology is so advanced, Pinarello Dogma F8 is one the heaviest frame in this moment?

The purpose is not to save weight but to make a more balanced frame. And hi-tec does not always mean ultralight.

3Pio wrote: How is then possible that Colnago C60 is almost same weight of Dogma F8

It's not the same weight but I agree that Colnago frames are of a higher quality in terms of manufacturing.

3Pio wrote:... find out that they become another generic non enthusast company who care about profit and nothing else..

Generic? No. Care about profit? Sure. Anyone who has a company should care about profits.

User avatar
jekyll man
Posts: 1570
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:23 am
Location: Pack filler

by jekyll man

@3Pio

The "quality parts" (your phrase) used on your FP3 are also the wheel provider. Rebadged Khamsins / Fulcrum R7's from what i remember.

Also before comparing a C60 with an F8 and dissing the weight and the ride of the Pina, perhaps a better comparison would be the Colnago Concept. Semi aero but both will be heavier than a 65.1 or C60, with ride characteristics associated with more "aero" designed tubes.

Pinarello admitted a long time ago that the ribbing in the downtube was inherited from the original Dogma FPX Magnesium that customers expected to see, not because it did anything. Its like GT and their triple triangle designs.
The Onda fork was just a good performing fork, no matter what weight it is.

I'm not a Pinarello fanboy (i cant afford 1 anymore ;)), I've had one, the first carbon Paris which was a good if not inspiring bike to ride. It was a bit wooden, but that was 10 years ago.
I've now got an Oltre XR2 which is from a company that i thought was trading on past glories. A few years ago, it probably was, but I can honestly say it's the best bike i've ever ridden. It's light, stiff, comfortable with a very high build quality, with a nod towards "everyday aeroness".
I think even KGT might be impressed ;)
Official cafe stop tester

3Pio
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

kgt wrote:
3Pio wrote:Yes, old fame.. Fame about quality of engineering, not about winning Tour De France..

kgt wrote:Quality of engineering? Really? Have you seen Wiggins hour record Bolide?


Quality of engineering we get from them in End Production bikes for money we are paying. It's pitty if they have technology for Hour Record Bolide, but in same time to offer End User bike with pitty engineered headset for example...

3Pio wrote: And what is the purpose of this design? To save more weight cutting material on the side that is not needed to have extra materials..So how then if this technology is so advanced, Pinarello Dogma F8 is one the heaviest frame in this moment?

kgt wrote:The purpose is not to save weight but to make a more balanced frame. And hi-tec does not always mean ultralight.


To have the balanced frame and stiffness with no excessive weight to achieve that. But anyway.. It's not just Pinarello who use the f Assymetric frame.. I just google it,Colnago have it, Specialized have it, Cervelo use it... Seem that only Pinarello put that much hype about word "ASSYMETRIC" which is pure marketing.. Or maybe Pinarello is 20% more Assymetric, so because of that better? :)




3Pio wrote: How is then possible that Colnago C60 is almost same weight of Dogma F8

kgt wrote:It's not the same weight but I agree that Colnago frames are of a higher quality in terms of manufacturing.


The real weight difference is less then 70-80 gm, maybe less.. (i was comparing few days ago, based on real word measuring), and this compared to Art Decor frame. If u opt for more bare finish of C60 probably they would weight very similar... Im a bit busy in this moment to google for real weight pictures, but i can do it later if u like..

And in same time there is on market other brands whcih are ligher and still aero compared to to Dogma F8...(Canyon, Bianchi, Trek...)



3Pio wrote:... find out that they become another generic non enthusast company who care about profit and nothing else..

kgt wrote:.Generic? No. Care about profit? Sure. Anyone who has a company should care about profits.



Of course.. But also they need to provide something except just pure Marketing as Pinarello is doing this days.. They just become another Specialized on the market.. Just generic, no passion, no enthusiasm, just words like "More Assymetric" "Stiffer 20%", "5% lighter (and asterisk on Weight is showed without paint and hardware)....

Maybe u like this.. But i'll always put my money in the brands that actually really like riding and have passion for that.. Not just passion for money as i feel Pinarello does this days...As i said, im lucky to had chance to test ride them in the flesh, for same distance same wheelset, similar climb on the ride.. Otherwise i'll eat that marketing my self and probably would regret after i discover that i bought just marketing buying Dogma F8...

3Pio
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

jekyll man wrote:@3Pio

The "quality parts" (your phrase) used on your FP3 are also the wheel provider. Rebadged Khamsins / Fulcrum R7's from what i remember.

Also before comparing a C60 with an F8 and dissing the weight and the ride of the Pina, perhaps a better comparison would be the Colnago Concept. Semi aero but both will be heavier than a 65.1 or C60, with ride characteristics associated with more "aero" designed tubes.

Pinarello admitted a long time ago that the ribbing in the downtube was inherited from the original Dogma FPX Magnesium that customers expected to see, not because it did anything. Its like GT and their triple triangle designs.
The Onda fork was just a good performing fork, no matter what weight it is.

I'm not a Pinarello fanboy (i cant afford 1 anymore ;)), I've had one, the first carbon Paris which was a good if not inspiring bike to ride. It was a bit wooden, but that was 10 years ago.
I've now got an Oltre XR2 which is from a company that i thought was trading on past glories. A few years ago, it probably was, but I can honestly say it's the best bike i've ever ridden. It's light, stiff, comfortable with a very high build quality, with a nod towards "everyday aeroness".
I think even KGT might be impressed ;)



The wheelset provided in my Fp3 was by MOST, which is Pinarello brand for parts.. Another saving they done on that bike, was installing MOST HandleBar with 100mm reach (reach that nobody using it), so i had to switch to 80mm reach handlebar..
About Colnago Concept we still need to check actual weight . I can see that is very similar weight of C60, but let's wait for real measurings from end users..

I had a test ride on Oltre XR for few days.. in 10 days, i rode 550 km.. The longest ride i done on that was 252 km in about 10 hours.. Very comfortable bike.. I believe that Oltre XR2 is even better. And while test riding i could not find any benefit of aero design compared to non aero i rode before..

And pictures from that test ride :)

Image

Image

Since i dont trust in AERO marketing this days (and based on my personal tests as well), actually i was torn to buy Specialissima.. I didnt buy it because 53 cm is a bit on small side (like 2-3 cm spacers under the stem), and 55 is a bit big (i needed 105 mm stem), and also no chance to try the Specialissima..My fitter also had opinion that sizing is not perfect on Specialissima/Oltre for me.. One of the things that i like in Pinarello offering this days compared to Specialized or Bianchi is bigger size choice... At the end when i tried C60, i just feel in love :) so my search was over.. Anyway i put Specialissima before Dogma F8, at least is lighter for climbing and probably more comfortable (if the sizes they offer fit u..)

trimenc
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 2:39 am
Location: North Carolina

by trimenc

How are those 3 bigs being held in that position???? :noidea: :noidea: :noidea: :noidea:

3Pio
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

trimenc wrote:How are those 3 bigs being held in that position???? :noidea: :noidea: :noidea: :noidea:


Benefit of Assymetric and Aero design :)

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

You weren't riding the red/white one were you? Because it's really impossible to tell how a Bianchi rides unless it is Celeste.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

3Pio
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

Calnago wrote:You weren't riding the red/white one were you? Because it's really impossible to tell how a Bianchi rides unless it is Celeste.


I was riding the first from the left, Oltre Celeste :) If i were buying Bianchi, definetly Celeste..And my City Bianchi (Pista Sei Giorni), is white-celeste colour :) (there was no full celeste version of this)

Post Reply