cired
new member
Reged: 03/20/05
Posts: 15
|
|
When I took delivery of my new 54cm Dragonfly frame I weighed it. I think they are listed as being 2.1 lbs The real weight for mine is 6 oz heavier which is a significant amount. Even though I love the ride characteristics of my Dragonfly it seems quite a bit heavier than lets say a Scott CR1 frame or even other carbon frames.
Edited by cired (07/17/05 02:34 AM)
|
Dave_Thompson
prophet
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 717
Loc: Spokane, Washington
|
|
Is this a serious post? According to the Calfee website, the Dragonfly frame weighs the stated 2.1 lbs (2lb 1.6oz, not 2lb 1oz)) totally stripped, *no water bottle hardware* (which yours has), no seat binder, no nothin' and a *1" head tube*. Does your Dragonfly meet those criteria? If not, not terribly overweight. Worst case it's 4.4oz heavier than the website states.
--------------------
Steel lover, but then I like Ti with carbon too.
Licensed bike geek.
|
cired
new member
Reged: 03/20/05
Posts: 15
|
|
It didn't have the seat binder and the 54 cm does have the 1" head tube. It did have the water bottle hardware, I am assuming it's not just the nuts to hold the bottles on its everything including the epoxied risers and threaded studs for the cage itself. I guess you can call that possibly an once worth of hardware. Ok lets say 5-6 ounces heavier than stated. That's over a 1/4 lb. Ask anyone building up a 7K plus bike. A 1/4lb is quite a bit. Oh and Yes it was a serious post, was yours? dont be silly.
Edited by cired (07/17/05 03:43 AM)
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 322
|
|
Quote:
cired wrote:
That's over a 1/4 lb. Ask anyone building up a 7K plus bike. A 1/4lb is quite a bit.
I understand you're disappointed that your Dragonfly was not delivered as advertised. You have every right to expect it be so. However, there are manufacturing tolerances and a hand made bike will have more variance. Also, did you calibrate your balance? I realize it's probably not off by ~5 ounces, but add up the water bottle nuts, balance error, and tolerance and it may not be as bad as you think.
Having said all that, what I really most want to say is "Dude! It's a quarter fricken' pound!" Get real! Did you buy the 'Fly for bragging rights? Did really you make your final purchase decision because the frame weight came in lighter than the CR1 or C50 or whatever other carbon frames you test rode? If so, IMHO, you really need to analyze your prioritization method.
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
Dave_Thompson
prophet
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 717
Loc: Spokane, Washington
|
|
Quote:
skuke wrote:
Having said all that, what I really most want to say is "Dude! It's a quarter fricken' pound!" Get real! Did you buy the 'Fly for bragging rights? Did really you make your final purchase decision because the frame weight came in lighter than the CR1 or C50 or whatever other carbon frames you test rode? If so, IMHO, you really need to analyze your prioritization method.
Thanks skuke, that's exactly what I was thinking. BTW, 4.4 oz = 124.73788800000001 grams!
When I bought my Serotta Ottrott (frame cost well in excess of Dragonfly frame cost) I never asked how much it weighs. To this day (over a year later) I've never hung it on a scale. I was much more interested in the fit, ride and handling qualities, than I was in a 124.73788800000001 gram weight difference.
That's why I asked if the post was serious.
--------------------
Steel lover, but then I like Ti with carbon too.
Licensed bike geek.
|
cired
new member
Reged: 03/20/05
Posts: 15
|
|
Quote:
skuke wrote:
Having said all that, what I really most want to say is "Dude! It's a quarter fricken' pound!" Get real! Did you buy the 'Fly for bragging rights? Did really you make your final purchase decision because the frame weight came in lighter than the CR1 or C50 or whatever other carbon frames you test rode? If so, IMHO, you really need to analyze your prioritization method.
I never said I didnt like the frame. I very much love the characterisics of the ride as I stated. And no...."Dude" I bought the frame to put thousands of miles on it and not for pure lightness. I was just trying to make some corrections on the Dragonfly's claimed weight. My prioritization was a club ride/century bike and that exactly what I got. "Dude"...where did you get the idea I was dissapointed with the bike. I mean, Get Real! It's a Calfee Dragonfly. Ok... I am done talking with foolish kid language. Wait.... one more time.... "Dude" Have a nice fricken day. Oh what fun. I feel better now.
Edited by cired (07/17/05 04:19 PM)
|
Dave_Thompson
prophet
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 717
Loc: Spokane, Washington
|
|
Quote:
cired wrote:
I never said I didnt like the frame. I very much love the characterisics of the ride as I stated. And no...."Dude" I bought the frame to put thousands of miles on it and not for pure lightness. I was just trying to make some corrections on the Dragonfly's claimed weight. My prioritization was a club ride/century bike and that exactly what I got. "Dude"...where did you get the idea I was dissapointed with the bike. I mean, Get Real! It's a Calfee Dragonfly. Ok... I am done talking with foolish kid language. Wait.... one more time.... "Dude" Have a nice fricken day. Oh what fun. I feel better now.
Your original post sure sounded like the weight factor was a huge thing for you. Why else would you post that here? If you thought you had a beef, you should take it up with Calfee. Sure you stated that you liked the characteristics of the 'Fly, but otherwise it sounded like you were pissing on it. 124.73788800000001 grams, significant?
--------------------
Steel lover, but then I like Ti with carbon too.
Licensed bike geek.
|
cired
new member
Reged: 03/20/05
Posts: 15
|
|
Your original post sure sounded like the weight factor was a huge thing for you. Why else would you post that here? If you thought you had a beef, you should take it up with Calfee. Sure you stated that you liked the characteristics of the 'Fly, but otherwise it sounded like you were pissing on it. 124.73788800000001 grams, significant?
No Dave I was not pissing on it. As I said I was just trying to clarify the stated weight of the frame. Possibly someone else had a different weight of their frame that they could of shared. I didnt mean to ruffle your feathers as it seems it has. Having a racing back ground an extra 1/4 lb on a bike used to be significant. I guess it isnt anymore in the race crowd. Now... I just got back from a recovery ride after doing 6500ft of climbing yesturday on the Dragonfly. You know what, I didnt even think of that 1/4 lb.
Edited by cired (07/17/05 06:52 PM)
|
Dave_Thompson
prophet
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 717
Loc: Spokane, Washington
|
|
Quote:
cired wrote:
I just got back from a recovery ride after doing 6500ft of climbing yesturday on the Dragonfly. You know what, I didnt even think of that 1/4 lb.
Perfect! That's the way it should be. Enjoy that bad boy.
--------------------
Steel lover, but then I like Ti with carbon too.
Licensed bike geek.
Edited by Dave_Thompson (07/17/05 09:32 PM)
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 322
|
|
Quote:
cired wrote:
I never said I didnt like the frame.
I never said you didn't like it either. But as DT said, you certainly sounded like you had some serious issues with the weight not being as advertised.
Quote:
"Dude"...where did you get the idea I was dissapointed with the bike.
Dude, err, Mr./Mrs./Ms. Cired, I got the idea from the following quotes:
"The real weight for mine is 6 oz heavier which is a significant amount."
"...it seems quite a bit heavier than lets say a Scott CR1..."
"Ok lets say 5-6 ounces heavier than stated. That's over a 1/4 lb. Ask anyone building up a 7K plus bike. A 1/4lb is quite a bit."
I guess I was mistaken to interpret those comments to be signs of dissapointment. My apologies.
Quote:
Ok... I am done talking with foolish kid language.
Aw, c'mon. This forum is a fun place for foolish (and serious) banter. Some place to hang out when you're not riding and done with all your other daily activities. If you're gonna hide behind an anonymous screen name (like me), then you should take advantage of the ability to create a whole new persona. ie. a foolish kid. ...After all, aren't we just really talking about (way) overpriced kids toys? ...at least in the USA where bikes are rarely used for work.
Cired, I too hope you have a really nice day (and week). Get in lots of miles and enjoy your new 'Fly.
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
cired
new member
Reged: 03/20/05
Posts: 15
|
|
It was fun Skuke and Dave. Happy safe riding to both of you.
Cired
|
vaxn8r
contributor
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 222
|
|
Cired, I can see the "disappointment" in finding the weights not jiving. What I've found over the last few years is claimed weights are rarely true weights. Mavic, for example is famous for underestimating their wheel weights, often by over a 100g per wheelset.
Not being a frame builder...in fact, I'm only just an avid bike rider, but it seems to me you've got a lot of man-hours on this Dragonfly. I doubt any two Dragonflys are exactly the same. I'd bet there is a D'fly that weighs 2lbs 1 oz. I just think it's probably impossible (short of mechanizing the entire manufacturing process from tube production to cutting to glue set-up to final sanding) to get two D'Flys exactly the same.
Your bike looks way cool. I want to see more close ups. I got a Tetra Pro last year and am still in love with it.
|
Spectrum
new member
Reged: 08/04/05
Posts: 1
|
|
While I don't ordinarily focus too much on weight, there is an economic factor here that makes this issue worth discussion.
As I read this thread, the frame in question was 2 lbs. 7 oz. vs. the 2 lbs. 1.6 oz. listed by Calfee, a difference of 5.6 oz. Calfee says it weighs its frames without water bottle hardware. Perhaps I am wrong, but I did not understand this to mean without the bonded on threaded studs, which would seem an unequal comparison to a frame that didn't require them. Anyway, removing nuts from the water bottle holders would reduce this a bit, so lets say it is about a 4.5 to 5 oz. difference.
Although I completely agree that weight does not define performance in a high end bicycle, I would be interested in knowing the explanation for an apparent variance of approximately 14 to 15%. This is not insignificant. After all, Calfee states that the Dragonfly Pro and the Tetra Pro have the same ride quality, and emphasizes the Dragonfly's lower weight - 0.4 pounds, or 6.4 ounces.
The extra cost for the Dragonfly frame is $1,200, not a small price to pay for that weight savings. Now, it may well be that the Tetra Pro is also 15% heavier than the stated weight of 2.5 pounds, in which case, the higher cost would still result in a meaningful weight savings, depending on the particular frames involved. Or, you might get a Dragonfly that weighs only an ounce or two less than a Tetra - hardly worth $1,200 in my book.
Granted, aesthetics and passion often rule these choices far more than numbers, a fact I know from personal experience. But, if a 15% variance from stated weights can be expected, perhaps Calfee should say as much, so its customers can factor that into their purchase decisions. Remember, Calfee has made the choice to emphasize weight in marketing their frames. In light of that, it is not unreasonable to expect to have all the relevant facts.
|
flythebike
captain
Reged: 08/26/04
Posts: 272
Loc: N. Virginia, USA
|
|
Is that frame nude? I can't tell for sure from the picture.
My 56 cm Dragonfly with the cabernet red paint and a 1 1/8 inch head tube weighed in at 2 1/2 pounds. I was a little disappointed by that weight as well. But I don't think that I have lost either sleep or races because of it.
I also don't think that the claimed weight included anything to do with the water bottle hardware, not even the carbon patches/mounting screws, much less nuts. Keep in mind other frames are going to be carrying those things, but they aren't going to be weighed with any of it.
What is happening now is that Calfee is a "2nd generation" of Carbon frames. It is a carbon lugged frameset, rather than a "1st generation" with aluminum lugs. For all the fine qualities of Craig's design, the quality of the build, and the relative ease of repair that this design offers, it does add weight over a one-piece design like the Scott.
However, a friend of mine broke two Scott frames this year. He somehow tore off the derailler with the hanger, so that was trash. Of course that would be a quick and easy fix on a Calfee. Scott warrantied it. Then he was taken down in a mass pileup, and the top tube was smashed. Again, the bike was trash, while that would be a possible fix on a Calfee. Since we are not pros here but living in the 'real-world' I think that the quarter pound extra compared to the other uber-chic, uber-light bikes out there is worth it.
|
Lon
sage
Reged: 12/20/03
Posts: 595
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
My Fly was a little higher but to tell you the truth I can't remember exactly what it was. I did not really consider it worth worrying about.
What was interesting was the reaction of my shop. They weigh everything they put on or build and weight variances are common. They had found some of the highest from Colnago. The owner still just got a C-50 for himself and his number 2 man. (They are not a Calfee dealer.) The former number 2 loved Colnago as well.
They carry Scott and their weight is fairly consistent. However I would never swap my Fly or a C-50 for the Scott. I think a poster hit the nail on the head with production carbon build techniques leading to a difference. Give me handmade any time!
I know one thing...I'll be dead before my Fly is. I don't know if I would feel safe on many of the new super light frames in 5 years. It seems so much that they are using a more dense carbon but it sure is getting thin. If I am going super light give me boron and carbon. I remember when Craig first announced the Fly project he said essentially that he did not want to go that light with conventional carbon fiber. I also remember that maintaining the ride and stiffness were major factors along with a minimum of a 25 year life span. I found it interesting that Trek has added Boron to the bottom bracket of the tour bikes this year.
Oh well back to looking at my bikes. Crushed toes, broken back and concussion repercussions have probably brought my season to an end.
Happy and safe riding.
|
bike_boy
new member
Reged: 03/09/05
Posts: 10
Loc: East Texas
|
|
I know what you mean. I was a little disappointed w/ the weight on my 56-cm D-Fly w/ 1-1/8" steerer. I do not remember what it was. But the ride is sweet. And I can guarantee you are going to be happier w/ it than a more readily available ultra-light bike from various big names. I kind of wonder if the D-Fly gained a little w/ the newer sculpted lugs. Which I can accept. It is an absolutely gorgeous frame.
As far as Serotta's go, I think the weight conscious will probably be shopping somewhere else. Their selling feature is that they will tune the bike to my paltry 130-lb weight.
Enjoy.
|
vandeda
new member
Reged: 12/17/04
Posts: 14
|
|
Quote:
bike_boy wrote:
I kind of wonder if the D-Fly gained a little w/ the newer sculpted lugs. Which I can accept. It is an absolutely gorgeous frame.
Enjoy.
Funny you mention that bike_boy. I remember before the sculpted lugs they quoted the weight at 2 lbs, now with the sculpted lugs they quote the weight as 2.1 lbs. Hmmmm .... I guess the wondering is over 
Dan
|
flythebike
captain
Reged: 08/26/04
Posts: 272
Loc: N. Virginia, USA
|
|
FYI
Last weekend I broke my rear Zipp 404. Evidently I had cracked it at some point, and then when I went to sprint on it to finish a crit, it yielded at the point of damage, cracking and de-laminating. This also caused my chain to throw. No, I didn't crash. I got the chain back into the small ring and finished the sprint as best I could, taking third (at Altoona - Cat 4). I'm having the wheel rebuiit as a Pave Cross, which has a bit more carbon: 30-40 grams heavier. Point being, a little more weight might not be such a bad thing, properly applied.
Yet, if you pay for somthing to be 2.1 pounds, it ought to be 2.1 pounds, right?
Mark Kerlin
|
Pintsized
journeyman
Reged: 02/27/05
Posts: 90
Loc: Corvallis OR
|
|
Hey Fly..or Mark..
This is off topic, yet here we are..
I was visiting my brother last week, sort of in your neck of the woods (near Baltimore). The temp was 90+ degrees with about 90% humidity. How on earth do you folks ride, much less race, in that stuff? You must be tough cookies back east. Ouch.
|
flythebike
captain
Reged: 08/26/04
Posts: 272
Loc: N. Virginia, USA
|
|
Well it really makes the race much harder like that. We had a 50 mile road race over difficult terrain under those conditions a few weeks ago, and only 20/75 riders finished. My old broken hip was cramping and after 25 miles, I realized there was just no way I was going to hang on. It wasn't like I even blew up, I just let go of the driftwood. The forecast for Saturday is similar for the District 20 championship road race, 48 miles over flatish ground. I'm actually hoping that the heat will increase the difficulty level because the race won't be that selective due to the course. I just carry a lot of water, and drink up. As far as training goes I do that in the morning and late afternoon/evening to beat the heat. Don't drink too much though, a local bike cop trainee just died from over hydration/not enough sodium in his system on Tuesday.
|
skuke
captain
Reged: 12/22/03
Posts: 322
|
|
Quote:
Lon wrote:
Oh well back to looking at my bikes. Crushed toes, broken back and concussion repercussions have probably brought my season to an end.
??? what happened Lon?
Godspeed to your recovery efforts.
--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151
|
Lon
sage
Reged: 12/20/03
Posts: 595
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
It was a car accident so I don't even have a good "biking war" story.
Thanks for your kind words. I get a little better every day.
I was very sick and went to the doctors. He sent me for blood work. All I remember is starting up the street from the hospital where I went for blood work. The accident happened about 3 blocks from there. I hit a car head-on, then one next to me (probably trying to get around me as it was a city street) and then I crossed the street and plowed into a parked car. It doesn't seem from the police report that I ever touched the brakes since I only do about 20 to 25 on that street. When the paramedics came they listed me as critical and I was unconcious. They even called homicide because my vitals were so bad they thought someone shot me. They got me stable and in a trauma center and here I am with no recollection of anything until the trauma folks got me concious.
I am just hoping that everything heals to a point of me being able to ride relatively pain free. The foot he said is 3 months minimum to even use it. It is all metal pins/rods right now.
In a related vein does anybody want to buy an FSA Mega Expo SL-K compact crank with about 300 miles on it? It is a 175 and my foot won't do that for awhile if ever so back to my 172.5 triple.
|
flythebike
captain
Reged: 08/26/04
Posts: 272
Loc: N. Virginia, USA
|
|
Lon
I broke my foot in half in 2001, along with broken femur (dashboard smashed it), and on the other leg I broke my ankle. This year I am one of the top 5 cat fours in my district, one of the most competitive in the nation. I'll soon be a three. Given time and tenacity, significant recovery is possible.
Mark Kerlin
|
Pintsized
journeyman
Reged: 02/27/05
Posts: 90
Loc: Corvallis OR
|
|
Thanks for picking up on Lon's message, you two.
I have another story, about a neighbor. He was riding in some long distance race in 1998, I think, and a truck collided with him. He almost lost one leg (he kept it, in fact) and had significant damage in the other and in the hip and God knows where else. He had pins all over the place and did phys therapy for about a year. Then he started riding again (started up again in haelth club spin classes, I think) and came back just fine. It took a while, but he's now riding stronger than ever...sort of a Lance story. Today he rides fast centuries and time trials regularly. This year, his race across OR team came in second in the 4 person teams and he has done the RAO a couple times since his accident.
My humble (and easy for me to say) suggestion is, buy yourself a membership to 24 Hour Fitness (or some other place that has cycling classes) very soon. It'll give you something to look forward to, and it may not be long before you can use it.
|
Lon
sage
Reged: 12/20/03
Posts: 595
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
Thank you very much for the encouraging words. I just worry about age and healing. Today a pin worked out and I was back in the ER. They decide more on Tuesday.
They are saying 3 months to use it as a "foot." I am riding a Life Cycle for now 15 minutes in PT and using my heel. I am determined to ride again.
Thanks again. I appreciate it very much. 
|
flythebike
captain
Reged: 08/26/04
Posts: 272
Loc: N. Virginia, USA
|
|
It is harder to recover from things as you get older, because you don't produce as much growth hormone after you turn 35. But tenacity works at any age.
|
rocklandbike
new member
Reged: 06/17/04
Posts: 16
|
|
Is there anyone here who has had their frame weigh in at the Calfee claimed weight or lower? If this is an issue of tolerance, there should be some hitting the mark, and some hitting under it. So far all the comments have been that their frames were also heavier than claimed.
|
Jas0n
journeyman
Reged: 01/26/04
Posts: 62
Loc: Westchester, New York
|
|
i weighed my fly before i shipped it out for everyone's info: 56cm came in at 996 g without binder, nude finish. when i ordered it, it was advertised at 2 pounds for 54cm.
--------------------
eat to live, live to ride
if it ain't rainin, it ain't trainin
|
Previous
Thread Index
Next
Threaded
Dragonfly 54cm Frame Weight (picture)
Edit
Reply
Quote
Re: Dragonfly 54cm Frame Weight (picture)
Car Accident