Latest News in Cycling
- Just curious is if anyone has any rider mounted video or handheld video from past Leadbelt races. Bob Arnold has a nice video posted from a few years ago but havent seen any others.
Re-surfacing brake tracks
I have a set of Easton EC 90 carbon tubular rims that I use for ’cross. They are awesome despite being a little more than four years old and showing wear on the braking surface (they are not disc brakes). Can the braking surface be resurfaced? If so, how? Do you have any experience with this?
They’re great wheels that I am not able to replace at the moment and upgrading to discs is totally out of the question right now. It seems like ’cross can wear the surface down more than road use, so I would like to think there is a solution out there besides buying new wheels. But I am not aware of how it is all done. I would love any advice you could give!
It had never occurred to me before to even think of doing such a thing. I am very interested to know as well and did some research on it. Unfortunately, the brake track cannot be resurfaced, if you mean by adding material, by any of the manufacturers I’ve contacted. Their responses are below. I also asked carbon-fiber repair firms, and only one of them would do it, and the others offered reasons for not doing so. See those responses below as well. If you were to somehow resurface it, I’m certain that it would void any manufacturer warranty you might have on the wheel.
Inherent in high-performance rims is the design concept for minimum wall thickness that will provide a “reasonable” life span. Unfortunately, this means that there is no additional sacrificial material that could be machined off in a resurfacing operation. In theory, ceramic could be deposited on the worn surface, and then ground smooth. As you may recall, I laminated a ceramic layer onto the surface of the carbon during the molding process (it was a production product for Lew rims), and also experimented with ceramic that was deposited after molding, and then ground smooth (never a Lew production process). For reasons not pertinent to this topic, neither is ideal as a current state-of-the-art solution for a new/production rim, however with significant resources (more cost than the cost of a new rim), a ceramic compound could be deposited to the braking surface of a worn rim and then ground smooth. This would be a solution/process for resurfacing a worn braking surface on a carbon rim.
Reynolds manufactures a ceramic brake track rim that is sold under the brand Pacific Rims, and it is sold as an OEM product to certain customers who request this brake track. The reason we do this is to avoid the hassle of needing to use a special brake pad. The ceramic makes the braking surface super durable and although it’s not marketed as a CX product, it would work well for that application. The down side of this rim is that the braking is not optimized for stopping power or heat-resistance, and it does not perform as well as our CTg laminate with the Cryo-Blue pad. It would, however, solve the problem Dan has experienced associated with CX use.
— Paul Lew
Director of Technology and Innovation Reynolds Cycling, LLC
I can only speak for ours, officially. But they cannot. Most brake track surfaces, ours included, are integrally constructed and are not capable of being deconstructed to resurface them.
— David Ripley
Technical PR Manager
Zipp Speed Weaponry
From DT Swiss:
On the record, we do not recommend “resurfacing” of our carbon braking surfaces due to all of the variables involved. Especially given the brake track is both a structural and functional part of the rim. This is because we simply cannot vouch for the quality, materials used or the experience possessed by the facility or technician on a repair in the field.
— Matthew McClendon
DT Swiss, Inc.
No, there is not a process that can add material to a brake track after it has worn away. I mean, you could do it, but the structure just wouldn’t be there.
Riders would do best to just ensure they keep their pads fresh and clean/clear of debris.
— Jake Pantone
Marketing and Sponsorship Manager
During normal use, the carbon on the brake surface will wear. This typically takes longer than with aluminum if the correct pads are used, however weather has a big effect on the duration. There is no process for resurfacing the braking area of a carbon tubular or clincher rim.
— Adam Marriott
Product Manager, Easton Cycling
From Mad Fiber:
No one has commercialized brake surface renewal on carbon rims. Partly it’s the obvious trend we haven’t yet outgrown, that carbon rims should be extra light. So damage befalls them usually before brake track failure. Also, many carbon rims outlast the equivalent aluminum for braking, so the incentive is weaker. But probably the strongest trend is obsolescence. We’re learning so much, several year old carbon rims are relics. This won’t always be as the technology matures.
Today, there’s no agreement on resin systems for carbon bike equipment and that chemistry is key. Various systems are not compatible for a dozen reasons. You’d have to know everything proprietary about the original system to succeed. The very fact of widespread, successful carbon frame repair shows how much less is expected of them (gram for gram) compared to wheels and rims. You can often just layer it on thoughtfully and without regard for any thermal events. And the resulting weight increase is acceptable.
But I still dream of some sort of plasma/ceramic paint that fixes the worn brake track. We’ll probably all be switched to disks before that comes around.
— Ric Hjertberg
Founder, Mad Fiber
I am assuming by “resurface” he means sanding down or otherwise abrading the existing surface to make it smooth again, since laminating a composite to an existing structure is beyond the experience of the average person.
The brake surfaces are intended to accommodate wear due to the natural abrasion of the brake shoes. For the most part, this wear is imprecise, so the laminate of the brake track is constructed with the knowledge that wear will occur. So it stands to reason that controlled wear, in this case intentionally resurfacing the brake tracks (by sanding them down), shouldn’t be any worse than brake shoe wear. But there are limitations.
Carbon fiber does not have good abrasion resistance, so the brake track area typically has a non-carbon fiber scrim (typically fiberglass) as its top surface. When you wear through this layer, your rim’s days are numbered. Also, any layup requires overlap of the plies, so in some areas of the brake track the abrasion layer scrim will be twice as thick where layers overlap. When you start to wear through the scrim, there will be areas of the brake track that are worn down to the carbon fiber, and other areas that are still scrim. The friction of the different materials will also be different, which could be one of the reasons that the user is experiencing uneven braking. So in this case, refinishing means removing all the remaining scrim so that the only thing that remains is the carbon.
At some point, the brake track is simply worn too thin, and the wheel is done. This situation is no different for an alloy rim. Also, at some point the rim is simply worn out, and needs to be replaced.
— Brad Hunter
Answers from carbon fiber repair professionals
From Calfee Design:
Generally, no. Rims have the potential to become heated beyond the glass transition temperature of the epoxies we can use for repairs. This would cause the material to become soft and gum up the brake pads, potentially locking up the wheel, causing an accident. Having said that, a person could resurface it with epoxy but make sure to never let the rims get too heated while braking. Best to transfer the fancy rims to a disc compatible hub and never use rim brakes on them again. One should not use rim brakes on carbon rims unless you are prepared to replace them when worn out.
— Craig Calfee
Founder, Calfee Design
From Broken Carbon:
Unfortunately I can’t. I don’t know anyone that can, as a matter of fact. It’s just too hard to get the width uniformity required for consistent braking.
— Brady Kappius
Founder, Broken Carbon
From Spyder Composites:
Yes we do/have, but only if we can’t talk the customer into a new set of hoops through their LBS. The way I see it, if the owner is experiencing brake wear problems he is using the wrong pads, the wrong rims, or the equipment is past its useful life and he/she needs to treat themselves to a new set of wheels.
We do have a device similar to a truing stand we use to machine the brake surface before and after we coat the rim.
— Frank Moir, Owner
From Ruckus Components:
We used to offer this as a service but don’t anymore. It just turned out to be too much work on our end.
— Shawn Small
Disc/caliper brake combo
With the trend toward disc brakes on road bikes, why bother with a disc on the rear? It would make carbon rims without special braking surfaces possible, but isn’t the vast majority of stopping power in the front? With front disc and rear caliper, people could retrofit existing bikes just by replacing the fork.
You could run a standard rim brake on the rear and a disc on the front. That’s how mountain bikes used to be when disc brakes first came out — a V-brake on the rear and a disc brake on the front. Then you only buy one wheel, one brake, and the fork.
Feedback: Avoiding derailleur hanger damage when shipping a bike
After having a handful of occasions where my hanger has been bent despite removing the derailleur, I leave the derailleur on the hanger but remove the hanger/derailleur combination from the frame. This eliminates the need to carry a DAG in your box.
Feedback: Anti-seize lube
I read about your pet peeve regarding copper-based anti-seize. I’ve been using moly-based engine assembly lube where anti-seize lube is needed. It works great and doesn’t have issues with copper flakes like other anti-seize compounds. You can pick some up fairly cheap at most auto parts stores.
- by Molly Hurford When Marianne Vos’s name popped up on the start list at Sea Otter, you could see the ripple of excitement that went through the crowd. Vos has claimed almost every title available, from Gold medalist to multiple-time-and-discipline World Champion, and now she’s taking...
...view the full story & post your comments at our site: http://cxmagazine.com
SAN FRANCISCO (VN) — One of his most impressive rides didn’t even end well. It ended in a crack high on the mountain, bleeding time to Tejay van Garderen.
But one can learn a lot about a rider in his defeat. And last week at the Amgen Tour of California, much more was learned about Lawson Craddock, the feisty Texan who rides for Bontrager.
Because you see, most young guys are thrilled to even be in the conversation of a mountain stage at a major American race. Craddock found himself at the front of the race, laboring up Mount Diablo next to van Garderen (BMC Racing) during stage 7. Did he try to hold wheels and finish in the lead group? Did he fade away? Did he attack?
He attacked. He attacked and cracked, some excruciating pedal strokes later near the pinnacle of the hors categorie Diablo. But those seconds he lost at the finish ramp? No one really cared about those seconds because in the loss, Craddock showed his mettle: Take a swing, one never knows.
“I kind of just recently found some climbing legs in me. I’m not really used to being able to climb with guys like Tejay,” Craddock said. “I was even more surprised that my legs felt really good. So why not try a move? And I did. I was surprised it was so steep at the end, but that’s racing, you know? It was incredibly cool to just attack that group.”
Cool, indeed. Bontrager was met with raised eyebrows at the 2012 Amgen Tour, as some other proven domestic teams were left out of the race. This year, 12 months removed from the revelatory ride of Joe Dombrowski (Sky) while he was in the Bontrager-Livestrong kit up Mount Baldy, no one wonders if Bontrager riders should be there, or if they should be in classes or on summer vacations.
Craddock, 21, won the Best Young Rider’s jersey at last week’s race, and two of his Bontrager teammates — Gavin Mannion and Tanner Putt — took second and third in the classification. In the GC, Craddock finished eighth, 5:24 behind winner van Garderen.
“A year ago at this race, no one knew who we were. People were doubting us even being in this race. And to come here and prove them all wrong, and to get to know some of the other guys, the more experienced guys in the peloton, not only that, you start to build a relationship,” Craddock said. “Not only that, but it’s really cool we’re being treated with respect. I think we’ve done a lot to deserve it.”
In addition to the GC pursuits of Craddock, teammate Jasper Stuyven was undaunted by the big names in the sprint finishes, taking fifth on stage 1, and Nate Brown earned the Most Courageous award for a daring ride and late attack during stage 4 into Santa Barbara.
“I think the whole team really did it this week. I’m the one standing up at the podium, but the other guys — they’re the real heroes of the week,” Craddock said. “It’s an incredible honor to be a part of such a tight group of guys. I can’t be happier with how the week went, and I’m really excited for what the rest of this year has in store for us.”
A pro contract is never assured until it’s in hand, but it’s increasingly likely for Craddock, whose ride in California turned heads. “The Bontrager kids, they have incredibly bright futures. Lawson Craddock? I’m a big fan of his,” van Garderen said. “He’s going to be taking my spot one day.”
Craddock hopes that day comes sooner, rather than later. “The young rider’s jersey — for me it’s one of my favorite jerseys to win and to wear,” he said. “I’d like to think I pull of white pretty well. I’ve been dreaming about this for my entire life. I’ve been racing bikes since I was 10. I’ve always wanted to make it to the WorldTour.
“And to have a result that has a really good shot of getting me there? It’s awesome. I love racing my bike. I love being competitive. I love to suffer. And I think that all the hard work that I’ve put in in the last 10 years is really starting to pay off.”
Here's a link to a video of the Cat 2 start at Brommelsiek. It runs about 20 minutes total.
Seven months after the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency described Lance Armstrong’s U.S. Postal Service team as having run “the most sophisticated, professionalized, and successful doping program that sport has ever seen,” the disgraced team’s ownership structure — which includes the banned cyclist himself — retains a quiet role in professional cycling.
Though it no longer has a financial stake in the Luxembourg-based RadioShack-Leopard UCI ProTeam, Austin-based Capital Sports and Entertainment (which, along with Tailwind Sports, co-owned the Postal Service team) is the registered team representative for the Bontrager Cycling development squad, officials with USA Cycling confirmed.
Capital Sports and Entertainment (CSE), which was also the managing entity behind Armstrong’s Discovery Channel and RadioShack teams, is owned and operated by the rider’s longtime agent, Bill Stapleton, and business partner Bart Knaggs. Media reports have consistently named Armstrong as a “partner” and a “minority shareholder” in the company.
Contacted by VeloNews, both Armstrong and Knaggs declined to go on record when asked to define Armstrong’s personal stake in CSE.
In October, following USADA’s reasoned decision, UCI president Pat McQuaid stated that Armstrong “had no place in cycling,” adding, “He deserves to be forgotten in cycling.”
Several former riders who have admitted to doping now run pro teams, including Bjarne Riis, who manages Saxo-Tinkoff; Alexander Vinokourov, who manages Astana; Neil Stephens, who manages Orica-GreenEdge; and Jonathan Vaughters, who manages Garmin-Sharp. None of those men, however, have received lifetime bans from an anti-doping agency.
When Armstrong turned down an opportunity in February to sit down and share his experiences with USADA, he missed his final opportunity to see his lifetime ban reduced to eight years.
The Bontrager team began as Trek-Livestrong in 2009, in tandem with Armstrong’s comeback, and has spawned the careers of riders such as former maglia rosa Taylor Phinney, Giro d’Italia stage winner Alex Dowsett, and Sky neo-pro Joe Dombrowski.
However, Armstrong’s continuing connection to cycling drew a sharp rebuke from anti-doping officials.
“Mr. Armstrong has a lifetime ban from sport, and under the rules is not allowed to operate or have ownership in any part of a licensed cycling team,” said USADA spokesperson Annie Skinner.
Just how CSE has managed to retain its role as the principal behind the Continental development squad is a question neither the sport’s global governing body, the UCI, nor USA Cycling have been willing to answer in detail.
Questioned by VeloNews, a spokesperson for the UCI directed questions to USA Cycling, noting that the vetting and registration of Continental cycling teams falls under the sole jurisdiction of the sport’s national federations.
“The UCI is not aware of any reason that would have prevented [the] Bontrager Cycling Team from being registered,” said UCI communications manager Devra Pitt Gétaz.
USA Cycling, in turn, pointed to its own compliance with UCI rules governing the team registration process.
In an e-mail to VeloNews, USAC communications director Bill Kellick explained that “the Bontrager team met all requirements and obligations” and that “neither USADA nor the UCI has informed us that there is any issue with CSE managing the Bontrager team.”
USADA’s Skinner took aim at the governing bodies in a statement to VeloNews, suggesting her agency might intercede in the matter.
“USA Cycling and [the] UCI should be monitoring who owns and operates the teams they grant licenses to. If Mr. Armstrong has ownership in Capital Sports and Entertainment, it would obviously be a serious issue that, after UCI publicly announced that Mr. Armstrong has no place in cycling, he would be allowed by cycling’s leadership to maintain ownership in a licensed team. We will inquire further about this with the appropriate governing bodies.”
While the combination of Armstrong’s lifetime ban and partial ownership would seem to invalidate CSE’s eligibility as a team license-holder, UCI rules surrounding the eligibility of these fiduciary “team representatives” are unclear as written. Incorporated bodies must provide documentation of their legal operation, a list of officers and a balance sheet at the time of registration, along with the submission of a team roster and rider contracts.
Left murky is the distinction, if any, between “team representatives” and “staff” — who must hold licensure and is held to clear standards related to violations of the UCI’s anti-doping code.
USA Cycling’s Kellick confirmed that everyone holding a license with the Bontrager team is eligible to do so.
Pressed as to why the potential ownership stake of a banned athlete would not be problematic to the national federation, Kellick clarified that the existing application process does not require the identification of every person who holds an interest in a team’s owner. USA Cycling would not make Bontrager Cycling’s registration documents available to VeloNews.
Speaking of CSE principals Stapleton and Knaggs, Armstrong voiced disappointment over questions concerning the propriety of the group’s ownership.
“Those guys had nothing to do with the decisions that generations of cyclists made, myself included,” Armstrong told VeloNews.
However, a federal whistleblower lawsuit, filed by former U.S. Postal rider Floyd Landis, contradicts Armstrong’s claim.
In the suit, filed by Landis in June of 2010 and published in January by the New York Daily News, Landis describes a 2002 contract negotiation in which Stapleton allegedly referenced his knowledge of Landis’ doping and offered the team’s assistance with the practice. Knaggs is also described as having been complicit in the team’s doping, participating, according to Landis, in a dinner conversation about selling team bikes to finance the doping program.
Armstrong, Stapleton, and Knaggs are each named as individual defendants in the Qui Tam suit, along with U.S. Postal manager Johan Bruyneel and Tailwind Sports backer Thomas Weisel. CSE, Tailwind, and Montgomery Sports are also named as defendants. In February, the U.S. Department of Justice notified a federal court of its decision to join Landis’ action, but chose not to pursue Stapleton, Knaggs, or CSE.
This decision led to speculation that settlement agreements with the CSE principals may have been in the works, although Knaggs and Stapleton declined to comment on the matter when questioned by VeloNews. Weisel was also excluded in his personal capacity, though the DOJ has retained its rights to pursue each defendant at a later date.
As for the Bontrager development team, team manager Axel Merckx was quick to separate the misdeeds of the past from the stars of cycling’s future.
Merckx, the son of cycling legend Eddy Merckx, was categorical in his insistence that the Bontrager team is a separate entity than the teams run by Bruyneel and Armstrong in the past.
“[We are] a totally different team, based only on development,” explained Merckx of his young squad. He describes CSE’s day-to-day role in the team as minimal. “We exist to help these kids and to give them the opportunities and exposure they need to make the next step to the ProTour.”
Merckx — who, like each Bontrager rider, is an independent contractor paid by CSE — spoke candidly with VeloNews about the challenges associated with his team’s affiliation with the U.S. Postal structure.
“The most difficult thing has been the fear that these kids would have to deal with the consequences of the past. It’s always been my biggest concern,” said Merckx. “It’s not fair to them and it’s not fair to their futures. They were just kids when all this was going on. We’re talking about 10 and 15 years ago. It just wouldn’t be fair to link everything together with them.”
Noting that most of his riders are 21 or younger, Merckx pointed to last week’s Amgen Tour of California as an important proving ground for the team. Bontrager rider Lawson Craddock, a seven-time national champion, earned the best young rider’s jersey for the team in California.
“This is such an important event in their lives,” said Merckx of the chance to race on television against the sport’s biggest names. “It’s something they will remember the rest of their lives, even if they never make it to the ProTour level. We’re not here to win the race, we’re here to show the public that the future of cycling is alive, and to do it in a positive manner.”
Like Merckx, Trek Bicycles spokesman Eric Bjorling told VeloNews that the company’s decision to continue as a title sponsor (via its Bontrager brand) stems from a desire to support cycling’s future. Trek, which severed its personal ties with Armstrong in October 2012, sees the development team as a different conversation, Bjorling said.
“The program has been so separate from the other parts of Capital Sports that we’ve been involved with,” Bjorling said. “There are different employees managing it, a different structure to it and different people involved with it, so nothing that we’ve seen in the management of the team has really caused us too much concern.”
Armstrong likewise disavowed any practical relationship with the team, or its sponsors.
“If they want to fault us for starting a development team five years ago, that produced Taylor Phinney, Joe Dombrowski, Lawson Craddock, and many others, well, have at it,” Armstrong told VeloNews. “The truth is, I don’t have any involvement. I have no relationship with Trek, or Bontrager, or the team.”
As for the propriety of the squad’s license, USA Cycling declined to comment on potential next steps.
“We will not discuss publicly what consequences may ensue if the composition of a team’s ownership is challenged as standing in violation of any rules,” explained Kellick. “Our procedures, including the question of whether action is pending in a particular matter, are private out of respect for the parties’ rights.”