Timeline for 2014 vs 6061 vs 7075 aluminium components
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 31, 2019 at 15:09 | comment | added | Eric S | Young’s modulus == modulus of elasticity. | |
| Dec 31, 2019 at 15:07 | comment | added | Eric S | Ultimate tensile strength and stiffness are two different things. 2014 may be stronger than 6061, but not at all stiffer. You have to compare the Young’s modulus for stiffness. | |
| Dec 29, 2019 at 10:31 | vote | accept | Edmund Fong | ||
| Dec 28, 2019 at 20:16 | comment | added | Jeff | ...While I cannot know the mind of the engineer and do not care for the marketing person's hype, I believe the alloy was chosen for the chainring based on 2014's availability (usually as flat rolled sheets. Easy to stamp out a few chainrings), ease of machining for the teeth profiles, and the physical properties, especially stiffness and strength to weight. | |
| Dec 28, 2019 at 20:15 | comment | added | Jeff | For the nerds: I realize it might be a stretch (ha!) for some of you to accept my paragraph that relates Tensile strength to material stiffness and then tie it to economy of energy in the activity of bicycling. Especially considering that the Watt savings in using steel chainring vs. aluminum is likely measured in the thousandths of Watts, if it can be measured at all except in comparing the results of equations on paper... | |
| Dec 28, 2019 at 19:44 | history | answered | Jeff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |