[Closed] The Empire Strikes Back

Where have I seen that before?

Oh yes...

[img] [/img]

😉

Wouldn't fancy cleaning that swinging arm.

Nah, it was this one:
[img] [/img]

A mate of mine had a Kirk like that 20 years ago. The dropouts actually dropped out.

using similar construction methods...

that's reason alone to walk away

casting, what a crap way to make a bicycle frame.

i feel a bit bad criticising, because i'm sure the empire guys work very hard, but they really should stop flogging this horse.

hang on, 'machined from solid' ?

and i didn't think it could get any worse...

LOL @ Flash.

Aye, stupid construction method used to make inferior but different looking product.

Well, just like the dh bike, it attracts the haters clearly.
Personally I like folk who approach things differently. Whether tings work well or not, it all helps push innovation and that can only be good.
🙂

Things that don't work generally only reinforce existing ideas that do work, innovation is about introducing new ideas and making them work, so if this bike does that then it is innovative, but if it doesn't, it isn't.

I like it and fair do's to them for giving it a go - but its too expensive at £2.5k for the frame.

I like it and dislike it in equal measures.

It annoys me I can't make a decision on it

but its too expensive at £2.5k for the frame.

i'm not surprised if they're machining from solid...

most of the material they buy-in must end up in the scrap bin,

Things that don't work generally only reinforce existing ideas that do work,

Nothing about the bike 'doesn't work', all approaches have positives and negatives, but I admire the guy for trying to innovate.
Not much comes off the drawing board perfect but rather evolves, and I think anyone trying to be different is up against a lot of resistance.

Anyway, different strokes for different horses..

most of the material they buy-in must end up in the [s]scrap[/s] recycling bin,

Just like Hope's bins I'd imagine.

Looks cheap and tacky.

hang on, 'machined from solid' ?

and i didn't think it could get any worse...

Machined from solid is bad? Why?

wasteful, more exspensive (for long run anyway) and weaker.

Thought, IIRC, most of it was investment cast with minimal machining afterwards..?

Why weaker?

richmars - Member

Machined from solid is bad? Why?

start off with a big lump of expensive material, throw most of it in the bin.

the CNC machine that did the work will cost at least £50/hour to run, and that frame represents hours and hours and hours of machining.

richmars - Member

Why weaker?

(for the cast bits) alloys suitable for casting, are almost always weaker. but that's ok, because it's very hard to cast thin walls, so there'll be loads more material than is needed...

(for the machined bits) they'll have very little - if any - control over the grain structure.

Lots of things are machined from solid, the 'waste' is recycled.
If it's designed correctly, the complete frame will be as 'strong' (whatever that means) as any other frame.

richmars - Member

Lots of things are machined from solid

yes they are, but it's still a very expensive way to do things.

the 'waste' is recycled.

yes it is, but empire are buying great big expensive lumps of 'new' material, and spending loads of time and money just feeding most of it into the scrap bin.

it's the old 'fly to buy ratio'...

If it's designed correctly, the complete frame will be as 'strong' (whatever that means) as any other frame.

maybe, but they've spent loads of money in the process.

machining is expensive, and it can go wrong (tools wear, and can break, scrapping a part). machining processes should be designed out if possible, not designed IN.

machining processes should be designed out if possible, not designed IN.

I'm not saying it's a great frame, but knocking it because it's machined is, I think, the wrong reason.

Reminds me of this sort of thing...

[img] [/img]

richmars - Member

You wouldn't have many bike bits without machining.

very true, but it should be avoided if possible.

eg, stems should be forged, and then finish-machined for lightness, bolt-holes, etc. not machined from solid.

handlebars should start off life as a drawn tube, not by drilling a hole down the middle of a 800mm long solid bar.

knocking it because it's machined is, I think, the wrong reason

it's very wasteful, and expensive. good grounds for criticism.

would you pay £200 for handlebar that WAS made by drilling a hole through a 800mm long, solid bar? a £200 handlebar without any weight/strength/fatigue resistance benefits?

Since when has cost been the over-riding factor for anything, from bikes to watches? If there's a benefit, even just in marketing terms, what's the problem?
Your handlebar example isn't that good, as it would be hard to justify a machined bar, but there are reasons why machined parts (including frames) sell.
Every part can be made in a number of ways, the designer can choose the most appropriate, based on many criteria. Cost is just one.

mud will never stick to that...

Bindun [url= http://singletrackmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/new-empire-for-the-masses/ ]See here[/url]

Personally I like it - but then I don't ride in the mud. 😉

got to wonder if the frame wouldn't benefit from a bit of post-machine forging...

I wouldn't like that to fall on me after a crash: All those edges...ouch!!

for the machined bits) they'll have very little - if any - control over the grain structure.

Yeah but they could buy billets with the ruling dimension in the same orientation as the grain structure; with both being in the best suitable orientation to cope with the forces that will act on the frame when both being machined and then subsequently being riden

😆 😆 😆 😆

While I like that Empire choose to approach frame design from a totally different angle I have to agree with everyone pointing out that it's pretty much the most inefficient and costly way of making a (Relatively speaking) heavy and brittle frame when compared with plain old welding tubes together...

What I would like to see them have a crack at is carbon, there is perhaps the argument that taking their non-tubular construction ideas and applying them to designing some mould tools for a composite frame has some posibilities, pretty much every comercially available carbon frame uses internal bladders to produce various tubular forms, but I think moulded 'I' and/or C sections might actually work quite well and even have potential cost benefits???

As for the their new effort it's yet another exotic, expensive Enduro/AM bike which when you strip away the different construction method and aesthetics looks rather similar in suspension layout and geometry to an Orange, why not save £1K and buy an Alpine 160 or a Five?

Why not save even more money and buy a Santa Cruz Heckler?

"Post-machine forging". Lol.

It looks to me like several forgings machined, welded together and then finish machined for detail and alignment (threads, bearing bores, etc).

I think the original AP-1 DH bike was prettier.

Lets look at it another way. Mr empire has built his own frame, if someone wants to buy one then that makes his frame even cheaper, if a few people buy one then he could well end up with a frame that cost him nothing.

Wouldn't we all like a free custom frame?

It's not a solution to anything, it's just an alternative.

I want to like it, I really do...

...but what does it do that an Orange Five doesn't - I read that Empire slavishly copied the Five's geometry? It's more expensive than a Five, much more difficult to clean, is heavier than a Five and is a product of an untried manufacturing process.

It's not a 5, therefore it's shit.

Where have I seen that before?

Oh yes...

It's [s]not[/s] a cnc machined 5, therefore it's shit.