Titanium as a frame material

Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00. I was thinking that Titanium would give me
the best ride but now I'm rethinking that. I'm not getting it for
racing. I was never any good at that. I am more concerned with a
really nice-handling, higher-end bike for regular riding I do. My
2100 has spoiled me for anything less. Now I'm looking at a Cervelo
R3 Rival, in case anyone has any comments. I'm assuming that a good
racing bike will allow for a comfortable ride, as opposed to a Tri-
kike. Thanks.

Ken

On Aug 22, 9:47*am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
On Aug 21, 10:07*pm, OccasionalFlyer wrote:

In terms of aerodynamics the greatest benefit is the ability to form
the CF seat tube to the contour of the wheel. The composites industry
still has yet to solve the durability issue. This is one reason why I
refuse to buy a CF frame unless it has a lifetime warranty and or a
crash replacement policy. I am still surprised that consumers are
willing to ride such delicate products.



* *Years ago, Titanium seemed all the rage, but every time I see a pro
team's bikes described, they are made of carbon fiber. *What happened
to Titanium? *I know there are Titanium bikes but no pro team seesm to
use them. * I thought that Titanium was able to be light, stiff, and
dampen road vibration well. *Shouldn't that make for a good frame?

Yes. But CF is lighter and/or stiffer. It allows for easy molding into
complex shapes, too, which is useful in the aero-frame era we live in.
There's also more subtle tricks you can pull with CF that are best
summarized as the move from using CF as "black aluminum" (look up that
phrase) to specifically CF-oriented shapes and layups. CF is also
getting cheaper and cheaper as the Chinese and Taiwanese continue to
refine and commoditize the stuff, and not just for bike frames.

Ti is still a great frame material, arguably the best metal to build
with, except for the material cost and certain difficulties in
machining and welding. Mark Hickey, once a regular contributor to
rec.bicycles.tech, now sanely offline, has an active business building
mid-range Ti frames, both off-the-rack and bespoke, at Habanero
Cycles.

In the low end of the market, aluminum is an excellent performer that
can do most of what Ti can, only very cheaply and easily.

Steel bicycle frames now have no known purpose.

On Aug 23, 6:38*am, OccasionalFlyer wrote:
*Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. *I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. *I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00. *I was thinking that Titanium would give me
the best ride but now I'm rethinking that. *I'm not getting it for
racing. *I was never any good at that. *I am more concerned with a
really nice-handling, higher-end bike for regular riding I do. *My
2100 has spoiled me for anything less. *Now I'm looking at a Cervelo
R3 Rival, in case anyone has any comments. I'm assuming that a good
racing bike will allow for a comfortable ride, as opposed to a Tri-
kike. *Thanks.

Ken

Think more on the lines of the sizing and geometry of the frame.
Whether the frame can accept the size of tyre (and mudguards) you
require. Whether the frame can accept and has the clearance for
luggage racks. Are the cranks the correct length for you, are the
handlebars and brake levers comfortable. Is the saddle suitable. All
are more important than actual materials used. As a rule, stay with
what you are comfortable with, see if there are improvements to be
made in the wheels. Many lack the stability required for hard riding.

OccasionalFlyer wrote:
Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00.

-snip-

The manufacturers engage in weight-weenie contests with each other, and
whatever other contests they can concoct in order to make their product
seem superior.

My guideline is one told to me by my brother-in-law a couple of decades
ago - he said to get the bike that, when you think about it sitting in
the garage, makes you want to get out and ride. I think it's really
that simple. At the end of the day, having a little more fiber in your
diet will make more difference to your performance than anything
different between the various bikes you're looking at that could be
attributed to frame material.

Go ride some bikes and buy the one you like riding the best, regardless
of what it's made of and, within reason, regardless of what it weighs,
too. Or if you don't like any of them better than your current bike,
then upgrade your components and stick with your current frame.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

-S-

On Aug 23, 3:09*pm, "Steve Freides" wrote:
OccasionalFlyer wrote:
Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. *I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. *I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00.

-snip-

The manufacturers engage in weight-weenie contests with each other, and
whatever other contests they can concoct in order to make their product
seem superior.

My guideline is one told to me by my brother-in-law a couple of decades
ago - he said to get the bike that, when you think about it sitting in
the garage, makes you want to get out and ride. *I think it's really
that simple. *At the end of the day, having a little more fiber in your
diet will make more difference to your performance than anything
different between the various bikes you're looking at that could be
attributed to frame material.

Onion power.

Go ride some bikes and buy the one you like riding the best, regardless
of what it's made of and, within reason, regardless of what it weighs,
too. *Or if you don't like any of them better than your current bike,
then upgrade your components and stick with your current frame.

A professional gambler should preferably take a safe bet than risk for
high returns.


Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

-S-

On Aug 22, 11:55*pm, thirty-six wrote:
On Aug 23, 6:38*am, OccasionalFlyer wrote:





*Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. *I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. *I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00. *I was thinking that Titanium would give me
the best ride but now I'm rethinking that. *I'm not getting it for
racing. *I was never any good at that. *I am more concerned with a
really nice-handling, higher-end bike for regular riding I do. *My
2100 has spoiled me for anything less. *Now I'm looking at a Cervelo
R3 Rival, in case anyone has any comments. I'm assuming that a good
racing bike will allow for a comfortable ride, as opposed to a Tri-
kike. *Thanks.

Ken

Think more on the lines of the sizing and geometry of the frame.
Whether the frame can accept the size of tyre (and mudguards) you
require. *Whether the frame can accept and has the clearance for
luggage racks. *Are the cranks the correct length for you, are the
handlebars and brake levers comfortable. *Is the saddle suitable. *All
are more important than actual materials used. *As a rule, stay with
what you are comfortable with, see if there are improvements to be
made in the wheels. * Many lack the stability required for hard riding.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, luggage rack? I want to buy a high-performance racing bike
(even if I don't have the knees for it) to go out riding with no
specific destination, not a touring bike or commuter bike. That's the
job of my MTB with street tires.. I'd never leave a high-level racing
bike anywhere like outside my office, or even Starbucks, so I'm not
looking for something with that sort of feature.

On Aug 25, 3:59*am, OccasionalFlyer wrote:
On Aug 22, 11:55*pm, thirty-six wrote:



On Aug 23, 6:38*am, OccasionalFlyer wrote:

*Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. *I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. *I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00. *I was thinking that Titanium would give me
the best ride but now I'm rethinking that. *I'm not getting it for
racing. *I was never any good at that. *I am more concerned with a
really nice-handling, higher-end bike for regular riding I do. *My
2100 has spoiled me for anything less. *Now I'm looking at a Cervelo
R3 Rival, in case anyone has any comments. I'm assuming that a good
racing bike will allow for a comfortable ride, as opposed to a Tri-
kike. *Thanks.

Ken

Think more on the lines of the sizing and geometry of the frame.
Whether the frame can accept the size of tyre (and mudguards) you
require. *Whether the frame can accept and has the clearance for
luggage racks. *Are the cranks the correct length for you, are the
handlebars and brake levers comfortable. *Is the saddle suitable. *All
are more important than actual materials used. *As a rule, stay with
what you are comfortable with, see if there are improvements to be
made in the wheels. * Many lack the stability required for hard riding.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, luggage rack? *I want to buy a high-performance racing bike

That's in the engine and wheels.
(even if I don't have the knees for it) to go out riding with no
specific destination, not a touring bike or commuter bike. That's the
job of my MTB with street tires.. *I'd never leave a high-level racing
bike anywhere like outside my office, or even Starbucks, so I'm not
looking for something with that sort of feature.

Try taking a picnic in your jersey pockets. I've tried carrying a
wine bottle on a pure racer, I had to use a toestrp to hold it tight
in the bottle cage while my water bottle went in my pocket to squash
the pastries. A bag is useful and the higher any weight is the more
the bike behaves well. Much of a bikes handling is a feature of the
handler's techniques and expectations. Touring bikes can be as fast
as any racer. They are only touring when you are. A racing bike
generally excludes the features required for touring but the touring
bike can also sport skinny treads and low handlebars. Adding an inch
or two to the wheelbase is not going to prevent high speed turns.
With time you should realise that the image of a sporting bike does
not give the user anywhere near the same pleasure as the function
available on a bilke with a little bit of tyre clearance.

OccasionalFlyer wrote:

Sorry, luggage rack? I want to buy a high-performance racing bike
(even if I don't have the knees for it) to go out riding with no
specific destination, not a touring bike or commuter bike. That's the
job of my MTB with street tires.. I'd never leave a high-level racing
bike anywhere like outside my office, or even Starbucks, so I'm not
looking for something with that sort of feature.

Check out aluminum. The Cannondale aluminum racing frames are pretty
comfortable, at least compared to the SP steel frames of the past. And
they're pretty responsive and inexpensive. So more money's left over for
parts, esp wheels. I'm currently riding an aluminum Cannondale with
Ultegra and Mavic Elite wheels...rides great and I have money left over
to pay for the kids' colleges.

Or look at the newish category of "performance" bikes with slightly
longer wheelbases like the Specialized Roubaix. I think of them as being
fairly fredly, but some have eyelets for racks, and seem to ride pretty
well. I think these bikes are similar to what were once categorized as
century bikes by some here in the states.

Or get a cyclocross bike. You get a comfortable ride, sometimes eyelets,
something good enough for fast club rides, and endless style. And hipster
cred, if that's important to you.

Well, that's what I think.

Jim
--
Jim
Jim Feeley
POV Media

On Aug 25, 5:36*am, thirty-six wrote:
On Aug 25, 3:59*am, OccasionalFlyer wrote:









On Aug 22, 11:55*pm, thirty-six wrote:

On Aug 23, 6:38*am, OccasionalFlyer wrote:

*Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
fiber. *I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
comjponentry, etc. *I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
I've seen above $2500.00. *I was thinking that Titanium would give me
the best ride but now I'm rethinking that. *I'm not getting it for
racing. *I was never any good at that. *I am more concerned with a
really nice-handling, higher-end bike for regular riding I do. *My
2100 has spoiled me for anything less. *Now I'm looking at a Cervelo
R3 Rival, in case anyone has any comments. I'm assuming that a good
racing bike will allow for a comfortable ride, as opposed to a Tri-
kike. *Thanks.

Ken

Think more on the lines of the sizing and geometry of the frame.
Whether the frame can accept the size of tyre (and mudguards) you
require. *Whether the frame can accept and has the clearance for
luggage racks. *Are the cranks the correct length for you, are the
handlebars and brake levers comfortable. *Is the saddle suitable. *All
are more important than actual materials used. *As a rule, stay with
what you are comfortable with, see if there are improvements to be
made in the wheels. * Many lack the stability required for hard riding.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, luggage rack? *I want to buy a high-performance racing bike

That's in the engine and wheels.

(even if I don't have the knees for it) to go out riding with no
specific destination, not a touring bike or commuter bike. That's the
job of my MTB with street tires.. *I'd never leave a high-level racing
bike anywhere like outside my office, or even Starbucks, so I'm not
looking for something with that sort of feature.

Try taking a picnic in your jersey pockets. *I've tried carrying a
wine bottle on a pure racer, I had to use a toestrp to hold it tight
in the bottle cage while my water bottle went in my pocket to squash
the pastries. *

Amateur. The beverage of choice is the radler, which is an even mix of
beer and 7-up (the literature says "lemonade," but it means the fizzy
lemon stuff that Germans call by that name, so you can easily
substitute with any lemon-lime soda, including a nice Italian lemon
soda if you want the super-euro experience). It should be mixed ahead
and decanted into water bottles.

On Aug 22, 10:35*am, "William R. Mattil"
wrote:
On 8/22/2011 11:47 AM, Ryan Cousineau wrote:



Steel bicycle frames now have no known purpose.

Other than propel a rider down the road you mean ?

Nothing wrong with steel. Except that the snobs won't like it. Which is
an attraction actually.

Bill
--

William R. Mattil

I did not expect a decent-sized catch while using such a crudely tied
fly.

Bill, I was wrong. As penance, I pledge to spend a month riding the
following bicycle in Greece, repeating "snobs don't like this, snobs
don't like this":

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rcousin...in/photostream

My penance starts in late September. You may heap your pity and
sympathy on me.