Should we all bother with Titanium ?

[larryb]

What form of EPO are you on 'larryb'? What's the go, is there another planet out there that larryb is on that I don't know about.

i use snake oil... it makes it a bit difficult to ride... but its a great rust inhibitor.
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/slideshow/?o=1gci&pic_id=161861&v=2b

i went searching for aliens, and this sign gave me a directions,
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/slideshow/?o=1gci&pic_id=160195&v=5H

Should we all bother with Titanium? yes

 

[alienator]

The idea that steel has some magical ride is about as stupid as the idea that CF is safer in a head on collision. The fact is any material, in a bike, can be made to ride harsh, noodly, or however you like or dislike. Likewise, the idea that Al frames ride harsh is pure hogwash. What really makes a difference in ride "quality" is wheelbase, tire pressure, seat, shorts, and appropriate fit. Full stop.

Steel is only real in that you can touch it. I guess it's doubly real for luddites who've bought into bad science and internet myth. CF doesn't require anal care. The idea that CF is some fragile, friable material is bubkus, too. Aluminum bikes aren't likely to fail anyone, despite what nattering ninnies say about fatique limits, and history has shown that Al bikes can last as long as someone wants 'em too. Sure Ti doesn't rust, but Ti is uber expensive, and it's just another material. That's all. There is not material that is inherently best for bicycle frames. None. Zippo.

Now, everyone can get back to the stupid cycling myths in which they've invested so much emotion and on which they've wasted so much intellect.

 

[Russ Reynolds]

Have I got the bike for you! Providing you have the cash.

Check out this little beauty carbon and Ti in the one unit.

Looks good. And the name and logo bought back memories of home. ( I'll have to watch it, I'm letting my guard down. I'm giving to much ammunition to a Bombers supporter ). Are they Tassy based ?

One straight back at ya. This one would be good to take on picnics where you could grate some cheese for ya sangas.

 

[sogood]

...There is not material that is inherently best for bicycle frames. None. Zippo.

Yep, I just want to ride on air!

 

[matagi]

That is a pretty interesting looking frame. Is it Ti?

Thylacine are actually Melbourne based.

 

[Wurm]

Now, everyone can get back to the stupid cycling myths in which they've invested so much emotion and on which they've wasted so much intellect.

Not to mention shopping hours (days/weeks) and large wads of cash (credit card debt).

 

[sogood]

That is a pretty interesting looking frame. Is it Ti?

Interesting alright. Why double layer Ti and CF in the same segment? Style? Marketing? Engineers gone wild?

http://www.titusti.com/vuelo.html

 

[KellyT]

Looks good. And the name and logo bought back memories of home. ( I'll have to watch it, I'm letting my guard down. I'm giving to much ammunition to a Bombers supporter ). Are they Tassy based ?

One straight back at ya. This one would be good to take on picnics where you could grate some cheese for ya sangas.

Yikes. A bionic Freddie Kruger attacked my dream frame ...

 

[Russ Reynolds]

That is a pretty interesting looking frame. Is it Ti?

Thylacine are actually Melbourne based.

Yep. Dunno if it is just for show or for doing the real thing. What you would gain with weight advantages, you would more than lose on wind resistance.

 

[jcthomasjr]

I got my first bike, 40 odd years ago, steel and 2nd hand (we were so poor that my dad painted the handlebars with pink housepaint to cover up the bodgey chrome, or lack of it)
My 2nd bike was 20 years ago, again steel.
My 3rd was 8 years ago again steel.
4th was Aluminium, 3 years ago.
5th. I am in the process of putting together a Carbon and it's not even finished and I have already got my eyes on a Titanium frame.

If you look at the history of of bikes from 1817 it seems that the only type I havent had is wood. Wood lasted for 30 years but hardly anyone had a bike anyway. Steel then lasted as the popular choice for 130 odd years. Aluminium for say 8 years. Carbon for 2. Of course these years are just estimates and also change in different countries. Another thing, I realise Steel ain't just steel. In the 130 odd years of steel, there would have been thousands of different steel alloy combinations.

But the question still remains before I lauch off and buy a Titanium frame, if I drew a graph of 'material of choice' for bike frames based on history, I'm only going to get 6 months out of it before it's pushed aside to make way for the new Bamboo Alloy Composite or the latest space age material 'Teridgium' which is used to make astronauts toothbrushes.

Should we all bother with Titanium?

Buy a bike that feels good to you, meets your requirements, and will last however long you hope to have it last. I own a titanium bike and an older steel bike and like both. I weigh about 160 pounds and don't worry too much about stiffness although both bikes are stiff enough for me and I have never had any problems keeping up with others or completing century rides. Just keep test riding bikes until you find one you like, regardless of the material. Just my 1.95473 cents.

 

[Mish]

Buy a bike that feels good to you, meets your requirements, and will last however long you hope to have it last. I own a titanium bike and an older steel bike and like both. I weigh about 160 pounds and don't worry too much about stiffness although both bikes are stiff enough for me and I have never had any problems keeping up with others or completing century rides. Just keep test riding bikes until you find one you like, regardless of the material. Just my 1.95473 cents.

But how more hurt am I gonna get if I buy titanium and I crash?

 

[larryb]

But how more hurt am I gonna get if I buy titanium and I crash?

No pain for you dude, have a seat on the first floor.
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/slideshow/?o=as&pic_id=31843&v=24

 

[bobbyOCR]

He be wrong, George. He meant the rabbits. Tell me 'bout the rabbits, George......

You can pet them and feed them, you can take care of the rabbits.

Back to beating the dead horse.

 

[Russ Reynolds]

But how more hurt am I gonna get if I buy titanium and I crash?

Real sore.
I reckon with this whole debate, putting aside the price, they all have their own little advantages and disadvantages but Ti is probably the best all round material for a bike frame. But going purely on looks alone, I reckon Carbon kills them all. The trouble with Ti is that although the finish looks good, the shape and tube size looks old fashioned like steel. Aluminium comes in 2nd in the looks department. The larger tube size made it look more modern and looked like you were getting more bike for your buck. But Cabon with it's moulded shape and aerodynamic lines not only looks modern but expensive.
This may be only an opinion.................but it's my opinion.

 

[JohnO]

My experience was that the peripherals are as crucial to ride quality as the frame, if not more so. I had a real numb hands problem, and that was on a carbon beam frame. Traced my difficulties to two sources: very stiff wheels and very stiff handlebars. When I replaced the uber stiff Rolf wheels with the more mildly spoked Zondas, ride improved. Also swapped out the rock hard Integralter bars for a set of CF RAM bars I found on ebay. Better.

Later, I traded for a set of Zipp 404's in tubie. I can ride those wheels all day with no gloves, and not the slightest trace of numb hands. Velvet smooth ride. Fast, too.

Curiously enough, the smoothest riding bike I have is a Cannondale tandem, with aluminum frame. Of course, it also has 5 cross laced tandem wheels and a bit more weight, so those were probably the deciding factor.

And the sweetest ride I have is a 70's vintage Falcon San Remo, their top of the line bike back then. Butted 531 steel frame, Campy high flange hubs on 3 cross lacing... just sweet, but not at all flexy. Tight handling bike.

 

[Wurm]

My experience was that the peripherals are as crucial to ride quality as the frame, if not more so. ...

When I replaced the uber stiff Rolf wheels with the more mildly spoked Zondas, ride improved.

Right about the 'peripherals'. There is so much more that influences the ride/feel of a bike than the frame material.

But about the Zonda's, I find my rear '03 Zonda to be sometimes too stiff or harsh, especially with certain tires, although I've never ridden Rolf's as a comparison.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Right about the 'peripherals'. There is so much more that influences the ride/feel of a bike than the frame material.

But about the Zonda's, I find my rear '03 Zonda to be sometimes too stiff or harsh, especially with certain tires, although I've never ridden Rolf's as a comparison.

I'm always a bit mystified that people can think wheels are "harsh" or "comfortable". It doesn't make very good sense to me since the average amount of in-plane wheel deflection under load is much less than a millimeter (yes, I can provide references). However, your tires will deflect an order of magnitude more than the wheel. I would think that even your bar tape will deflect much, much more than the wheel. This would completely obscure the variations in wheel stiffness. I would also extend this concept to frames. A frame just does not deflect much within the vertical plane. Seriously.

Is there actually an explainable effect going on? The way I figure it, the perceptions probably come from the differences in tires/tire pressure, saddle, bars, and position. What am I missing?

John Swanson
www.bikephysics.com

 

[JohnO]

Don't know much about the physics of wheel construction, but I do know what my hands, feet, and butt tell me.

The Rolfs (Vector Pro) are very efficient. Low spoke count, and a gazillion foot pounds of torque on the bladed spokes. Extremely stiff. But, they are rough riders - even with gloves, my hands were going numb after about an hour.

Changed to the Zondas, which are also an aero wheel, but milder spoking - mine have the old G4 spoking on the front which Campy has since discontinued. Still got numb hands, but not for two to three hours.

Two years ago, I lucked into a deal on a set of Zipp 404's. The difference in ride quality was remarkable - the Zipps are velvet smooth. I can ride all day without gloves, and no discomfort. Just hate to take them off the bike, even if it means worrying about the somewhat fragile nature of the rims, and the spectre of patching a tubie. That, and there is a noticable difference in performance, especially on fast downhills.

Most likely, the nerve irritation I was experiencing comes from high frequency vibration. The Rolfs are radially spoked in the front, and radial/1 cross on the back, torqued down very tightly due to the low spoke count. You feel everything on the road with them. I suspect the Zipps with their huge CF rim are doing a much better job of damping the very high frequency vibration.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Don't know much about the physics of wheel construction, but I do know what my hands, feet, and butt tell me.

The Rolfs (Vector Pro) are very efficient. Low spoke count, and a gazillion foot pounds of torque on the bladed spokes. Extremely stiff. But, they are rough riders - even with gloves, my hands were going numb after about an hour.

Changed to the Zondas, which are also an aero wheel, but milder spoking - mine have the old G4 spoking on the front which Campy has since discontinued. Still got numb hands, but not for two to three hours.

Two years ago, I lucked into a deal on a set of Zipp 404's. The difference in ride quality was remarkable - the Zipps are velvet smooth. I can ride all day without gloves, and no discomfort. Just hate to take them off the bike, even if it means worrying about the somewhat fragile nature of the rims, and the spectre of patching a tubie. That, and there is a noticable difference in performance, especially on fast downhills.

Most likely, the nerve irritation I was experiencing comes from high frequency vibration. The Rolfs are radially spoked in the front, and radial/1 cross on the back, torqued down very tightly due to the low spoke count. You feel everything on the road with them. I suspect the Zipps with their huge CF rim are doing a much better job of damping the very high frequency vibration.

If you detect differences, then the first place you should look for clues is the tires. The Zipps ride on tubulars and will be very different from any clincher you ride. The brand of clincher you use will make a difference, and the pressure you use will make a huge difference.

There's no such thing as a "mild" spoke. Under tension, the in-plane wheel stiffness is enormous and not subject to much variability.

John Swanson
www.bikephysics.com

 

[sogood]

I'm always a bit mystified that people can think wheels are "harsh" or "comfortable". It doesn't make very good sense to me since the average amount of in-plane wheel deflection under load is much less than a millimeter (yes, I can provide references). However, your tires will deflect an order of magnitude more than the wheel. I would think that even your bar tape will deflect much, much more than the wheel. This would completely obscure the variations in wheel stiffness. I would also extend this concept to frames. A frame just does not deflect much within the vertical plane. Seriously.

Is there actually an explainable effect going on? The way I figure it, the perceptions probably come from the differences in tires/tire pressure, saddle, bars, and position. What am I missing?

Based on current personal experience, I can definitely tell the difference in ride b/n two sets of wheels (Fulcrum Racing 5, Mavic Ksyrium ES). This is running on the same bike, same brand and model of tyre inflated to the same pressure. And I have done multiple swaps b/n these two wheels. The conclusion is that the K-ES gives a lot more damping to road irregularities than the R5. One explanation I've heard is that the shallower boxy rim depth gives a "softer" ride. Similar reason has been given for the use of shallow box rimmed wheels on the Paris Roubaix.

The difference is definitely there and I would suggest that you borrow some wheels to try it. As for the science of it, well, you may have to find a different parameter to test. I am convinced that there's got to be an observable cause.