UCI Homologation Program

[Carl S]

Hi everyone. I hope this isn't too spamy. I just wanted to let you know that the Framebuilders' Collective has entered into an agreement with the UCI to provide to all custom framebuilders a portal to qualify their frames for the UCI sticker. The program offers a 20% discount on the fee and a simplified and streamlined process. If you are interested you can learn more at the Framebuilders' Collective website. There is no fee to the Framebuilders Collective and the Collective does not receive any monies or profit in any way from this program. It is simply an effort to provide a service to our community.

http://www.framebuilderscollective.org/

[Dave Kirk]

The word is getting out - cool.

Dave


Frame builders unite and UCI listens and reduces approval costs

[Carl S]

The word is getting out - cool.

Dave


Frame builders unite and UCI listens and reduces approval costs

Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen that.

[thegroundup]

Well as soon as I can get these forms filled out, im in. Reguardless of what I think of this rule, my elite track racing customers need to see this sticker on my frames. Thank you for taking on this burden.

[Thylacine Cycles]

Send me the 400 bucks along with the 700 for the TIG pedal, then I'll only be out of pocket 1700 bucks.

[EricKeller]

is this a one time good deal?

[Dave Kirk]

is this a one time good deal?

Are you asking if this is a special limited time offer? If so then no it isn't. It's the everyday price and program for the lil' guys.

Dave

[e-RICHIE]

is this a one time good deal?

the fee (that i paid) was a one time fee. the caveat is that if i choose to use tube diameters that are not the
ones specified in my app, i simply have to notify them to add the dimension to my file. since all the bicycles are
made to order, the smallest to largest design parameters i used at the front end are the boundaries i chose to
stay within. i might also note that frames made before 2011 are not under UCI scrutiny and will need no label(s).

[EricKeller]

sorry I was unclear. I just wanted to know if I have to do this now or if I can wait. Thanks.

I still think it's pretty cool to see little guys listed with the big manufacturers.

[Tom Kellogg]

sorry I was unclear. I just wanted to know if I have to do this now or if I can wait. Thanks.

Eric:

No rush, unless you think that one of your current or near future builds might be ridden in a UCI sanctioned event. The program is not time limited. The UCI has teamed up with TFC in an effort to make it not only easier on the small builders, but also to make it easier on the UCI. Because of the way that TFC set it up, there is less for the UCI guys to do. The information comes to them complete without their having to do anything. TFC has set this up simply to make things simpler and a bit less expensive for the small builders. The process that a builder would go though on their own is in fact fairly simple anyway as Richard discovered when the UCI's new requirements were implemented. He felt that he needed to get going pretty quick because of the significant number of his frames being ridden in UCI races. Before he began the application process, he was almost as in the dark as the rest of us, but he soon discovered that it really wasn't a huge deal. The TFC system simply makes it an even less huge deal.

[e-RICHIE]

<cut> The process that a builder would go though on their own is in fact fairly simple anyway as Richard discovered when the UCI's new requirements were implemented. He felt that he needed to get going pretty quick because of the significant number of his frames being ridden in UCI races. Before he began the application process, he was almost as in the dark as the rest of us, but he soon discovered that it really wasn't a huge deal. The TFC system simply makes it an even less huge deal.

i got involved because it's part of the sport's system of rules, and we all knew about this long before the stories broke this past autumn. i also had a hard time with the detractors on the various boards who were posting about how the UCI was bad for doing this, and how Big Box Bike Inc was finding ways to collude with the governing bodies to keep framebuilding small. my motivations came from several perspectives atmo. i couldn't believe that so many people whose wares had no overlap at all with the events that these rules centered around had such strong and misplaced points of view. despite what anyone thinks of rules, or of a rule, we don't play the game without them. and, as tom knows, the label issue in question is not about a new rule at all. anyway - the process was simple, it took no time at all, and we're good to go. folks should realize that there is no US/THEM thing going on surrounding this "approved by..." stuff in the news. they should realize that bicycles made before 2011 are not touched by any of this. they should realize that, unless they plan to race in UCI C1 and UCI C2 events, there is no pressing issue to let this ordeal into their world. as i mentioned, i sent more money keeping my club's name in the usac database than i wired to switzerland along with my application. for me, it's part of being in the sport and managing a team. if the team never existed, this news story would be something i might only have read about but hardly cared. here's my post from yesterday that speaks to it.

i'm only gonna fire one salvo - the longer you wait, the more you're likely to spend. when i got in, with the exchange rate and the wire fee, my account was debited about $525. the swiss franc is much stronger now, so sign up, take the TFC discount, and get it done now - or forever hold your peace.

[Archibald]

i also had a hard time with the detractors on the various boards who were posting about how the UCI was bad for doing this, and how Big Box Bike Inc was finding ways to collude with the governing bodies to keep framebuilding small. my motivations came from several perspectives atmo. i couldn't believe that so many people whose wares had no overlap at all with the events that these rules centered around had such strong and misplaced points of view. despite what anyone thinks of rules, or of a rule, we don't play the game without them. and, as tom knows, the label issue in question is not about a new rule at all. anyway - the process was simple, it took no time at all, and we're good to go. folks should realize that there is no US/THEM thing going on surrounding this "approved by..." stuff in the news. they should realize that bicycles made before 2011 are not touched by any of this. they should realize that, unless they plan to race in UCI C1 and UCI C2 events, there is no pressing issue to let this ordeal into their world. as i mentioned, i sent more money keeping my club's name in the usac database than i wired to switzerland along with my application. for me, it's part of being in the sport and managing a team. if the team never existed, this news story would be something i might only have read about but hardly cared. here's my post from yesterday that speaks to it.

The range of responses from folks coming to it now is really no different than your own. Once the knee jerk responses have passed, I'm sure it'll all calm down but there will always be some folks who'll boil in their own water over it.

[e-RICHIE]

The range of responses from folks coming to it now is really no different than your own. Once the knee jerk responses have passed, I'm sure it'll all calm down but there will always be some folks who'll boil in their own water over it.

that must make you feel real good - huh.

my chronicles, from the beginning include that, until i made a contact, i too was reacting to news from the press.

from my link above -

"through the months going back to the late autumn, i have read opinions from detractors whose points of view basically focus on the negative; the UCI is out to get us OR big business wants to keep framebuilding down on the farm OR why do we have to pay when all along it has been free, yada yada blah blah blah. the irony is that, at the very beginning, i also embraced similar feelings."

i acted with complete transparency and, in real time, credited those whose information helped clarify the very issue that the news agencies were not in sync with. the folks at the UCI couldn't have been more helpful (to me) and further encouraged me to let others know by way of my V thread what the application process entailed. but the transparency part of the equation was the most rewarding component of it all - no secrets.

[Jonathan]

Tom,
Thanks for the clarification. You've said it well.

Will you be getting your track bikes approved? I'm guessing you've had as many frames as anyone make it to natz and worlds.

[Tom Kellogg]

Tom,
Will you be getting your track bikes approved? I'm guessing you've had as many frames as anyone make it to natz and worlds.

I do need to get our track frames certified before too long. Of course there is no need to cert. existing frames since they are grandfathered anyway. You never know when someone decides to go to Nats. or Worlds. Over the years, I figure that over 20 of our bikes have been ridden in the worlds. And Nats? I have no way of keeping track, a hundred? So yes, and we may do cross frames at the same time since we do seem to do at least a few a year.

[Archibald]

Of course there is no need to cert. existing frames since they are grandfathered anyway.

Which begs the question on how that will actually be enforced for small builders where the "year" of manufacture could be hard for a line judge to determine. I have to think it would really come down to taking the rider's word for it.

[e-RICHIE]

Which begs the question on how that will actually be enforced for small builders where the "year" of manufacture could be hard for a line judge to determine. I have to think it would really come down to taking the rider's word for it.

there's going to be a transition period, after which license holders with a frame without a label will have to provide an evidence of the production’s date of its frame atmo. my guess is that this season is the transition period.

[e-RICHIE]

there's going to be a transition period, after which license holders with a frame without a label will have to provide an evidence of the production’s date of its frame atmo. my guess is that this season is the transition period.

ps after reading TK's post again, i would also add that the app fee was for one discipline rather than all three, since he mentioned 'cross as well as track.

[Tom Kellogg]

ps after reading TK's post again, i would also add that the app fee was for one discipline rather than all three, since he mentioned 'cross as well as track.

Correct. The UCI needs to do it that way since the disciplines generally do require differing frame materials for some builders. In our case, we frequently use double OS tubing on our piste frames but pretty much never do on our cross frames.

[e-RICHIE]

Correct. The UCI needs to do it that way since the disciplines generally do require differing frame materials for some builders.

i assumed it was because each of the three disciplines have their own unique design markers and boundaries that relate to the linear measurements. i'm fuzzy on some of the fine print since my stuff was sent in so long ago bin laden was still alive, but that's beside the point. the material used, as long as it fits into the tubular category, also is specified as being the smallest diameter you'd choose through to the largest, just as the frame geometries submitted are. they're giving us a wide berth as long as the info is in the database at the front end.