|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
Steel is a wonbderful material, will ride well and last formyears and years. Ti has few advantages over good steel. Not much other than no corrosion(not a big deal with steel if ya take care of it) and perhaps a wee bit l;ighter(3.5 lb steel frames are common as are to frames). Why are Ti frames not much lighter than steel frames? Ti is much stronger for the same weight than steel is, and Ti is much lighter for the same strength than steel is (although it will still take up more volume due to the its lower density, so like aluminum it will have oversized tubes). So if anyone is making a titanium frame and not using the strength/weight advantage to reduce the weight significantly, they're missing the point. Fit is key, don't expect ti to make for a magical difference in your ride. Training makes the magical difference in a ride. --Blair "I have proof." |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
I'm thinking about Serotta, Seven, Moots. I'm 5'7" 150lbs and ride
longer "fun" rides. I do love to get out of the saddle on the hills. Considering these great makers, I have heard rave reviews about all of them. Interestingly, I seem to notice alot of the owners all pretty big guys, over 6', more than 200. I am wondering if my size and riding style are not as appropriate for titanium because of the larger tubes, and in particular those bikes using the more attractively priced straight tubes. No particular reason why larger guys are riding on Ti bikes; in fact, I'd say the opposite would be true if you surveyed people in my area. If appropriately constructed, frame material isn't much of a consideration, especially for middle-of-the-road sizes. Steel and Ti, as used by most (not all)frame builders, may be a bit flexy in larger sizes. This can be dealt with by using larger-diameter tubing, but not too many people do that (partly because it gets costly and the materials may simply not be readily available in non-standard sizing, and partly because of the added weight). But you're talking middle-of-the-road stuff here, so Steel, Aluminum, Ti & Carbon can all be used to build an extremely nice frame without modification from normal building practices. Any guys more my size (or even not) have thoughts on this? Would quality steel (am riding an 853 Lemond now) serve just as well? I'd love to have a bike that soaks it up like my current, but felt faster and quicker on the hills. Most of my desire is rational, but of course there is always a degree of "bike sickness." Steel builds a very nice frame, but your weight floor (the lightest you can build something that's very durable) is about 3.5 lbs or so. With Ti you can get down to just over 3 lbs. Using aluminum, my experience is that the floor is about 2.8 lbs, while Carbon Fiber can get you down to 2.4 lbs, maybe even a bit less. There are plenty of people building bikes from these materials with lighter weights, but experience shows that doing so carries costs in terms of overall lifespan and durability under adverse conditions (crashing). I understand fit is most important, and of course all can custom fit. Thanks in advance, and may the petulant not flame. In a later post you mention that you have a longer torso and shorter legs, which, with modern sloping-top-tube bikes, is very easy to accommodate. Don't buy a custom bike because you think it's going to magically fit you better; my guess is that the current Klein & LeMond bikes, with their moderately-sloping top tubes, would work great. The reason for getting a custom bike, for most people, is to have something that offers a sense of uniqueness, a bike that was built for you and which nobody else has the exact same thing. Some people put a high value on uniqueness, and even prefer something that costs more because that, also, enhances its exclusivity. Hey, if that's what it takes for you to want to ride more, go for it. But don't assume it's necessary for the best-possible ride. In fact, by going custom you often give up technologies that don't lend themselves to one-up craftsmanship (such as the manner in which TREKs OCLV carbon bikes are built). --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com "skim500" wrote in message om... I'm thinking about Serotta, Seven, Moots. I'm 5'7" 150lbs and ride longer "fun" rides. I do love to get out of the saddle on the hills. Considering these great makers, I have heard rave reviews about all of them. Interestingly, I seem to notice alot of the owners all pretty big guys, over 6', more than 200. I am wondering if my size and riding style are not as appropriate for titanium because of the larger tubes, and in particular those bikes using the more attractively priced straight tubes. Any guys more my size (or even not) have thoughts on this? Would quality steel (am riding an 853 Lemond now) serve just as well? I'd love to have a bike that soaks it up like my current, but felt faster and quicker on the hills. Most of my desire is rational, but of course there is always a degree of "bike sickness." I understand fit is most important, and of course all can custom fit. Thanks in advance, and may the petulant not flame. skim |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
I'm thinking about Serotta, Seven, Moots. I'm 5'7" 150lbs and ride
longer "fun" rides. I do love to get out of the saddle on the hills. Considering these great makers, I have heard rave reviews about all of them. Interestingly, I seem to notice alot of the owners all pretty big guys, over 6', more than 200. I am wondering if my size and riding style are not as appropriate for titanium because of the larger tubes, and in particular those bikes using the more attractively priced straight tubes. No particular reason why larger guys are riding on Ti bikes; in fact, I'd say the opposite would be true if you surveyed people in my area. If appropriately constructed, frame material isn't much of a consideration, especially for middle-of-the-road sizes. Steel and Ti, as used by most (not all)frame builders, may be a bit flexy in larger sizes. This can be dealt with by using larger-diameter tubing, but not too many people do that (partly because it gets costly and the materials may simply not be readily available in non-standard sizing, and partly because of the added weight). But you're talking middle-of-the-road stuff here, so Steel, Aluminum, Ti & Carbon can all be used to build an extremely nice frame without modification from normal building practices. Any guys more my size (or even not) have thoughts on this? Would quality steel (am riding an 853 Lemond now) serve just as well? I'd love to have a bike that soaks it up like my current, but felt faster and quicker on the hills. Most of my desire is rational, but of course there is always a degree of "bike sickness." Steel builds a very nice frame, but your weight floor (the lightest you can build something that's very durable) is about 3.5 lbs or so. With Ti you can get down to just over 3 lbs. Using aluminum, my experience is that the floor is about 2.8 lbs, while Carbon Fiber can get you down to 2.4 lbs, maybe even a bit less. There are plenty of people building bikes from these materials with lighter weights, but experience shows that doing so carries costs in terms of overall lifespan and durability under adverse conditions (crashing). I understand fit is most important, and of course all can custom fit. Thanks in advance, and may the petulant not flame. In a later post you mention that you have a longer torso and shorter legs, which, with modern sloping-top-tube bikes, is very easy to accommodate. Don't buy a custom bike because you think it's going to magically fit you better; my guess is that the current Klein & LeMond bikes, with their moderately-sloping top tubes, would work great. The reason for getting a custom bike, for most people, is to have something that offers a sense of uniqueness, a bike that was built for you and which nobody else has the exact same thing. Some people put a high value on uniqueness, and even prefer something that costs more because that, also, enhances its exclusivity. Hey, if that's what it takes for you to want to ride more, go for it. But don't assume it's necessary for the best-possible ride. In fact, by going custom you often give up technologies that don't lend themselves to one-up craftsmanship (such as the manner in which TREKs OCLV carbon bikes are built). --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com "skim500" wrote in message om... I'm thinking about Serotta, Seven, Moots. I'm 5'7" 150lbs and ride longer "fun" rides. I do love to get out of the saddle on the hills. Considering these great makers, I have heard rave reviews about all of them. Interestingly, I seem to notice alot of the owners all pretty big guys, over 6', more than 200. I am wondering if my size and riding style are not as appropriate for titanium because of the larger tubes, and in particular those bikes using the more attractively priced straight tubes. Any guys more my size (or even not) have thoughts on this? Would quality steel (am riding an 853 Lemond now) serve just as well? I'd love to have a bike that soaks it up like my current, but felt faster and quicker on the hills. Most of my desire is rational, but of course there is always a degree of "bike sickness." I understand fit is most important, and of course all can custom fit. Thanks in advance, and may the petulant not flame. skim |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Blair- Why are Ti frames not much lighter than steel frames? BRBR
They are not. A 'standard' ti frameset, like a Moots or Serotta or Litespeed, is about 3.3 pounds, some are heaver(Dean). Most of the steel framesets we sell-Waterford, Nobilette, Torelli are in the 3.3 to 3.7 pound range. There are very light ti framesets but they are extremely thin walled, have their own problems(like a Merlin with a crimped seattube from the front der clamp). Blair Ti is much stronger for the same weight than steel is, BRBR Yes it is but you imply that steel is somehow weak when applied to a bicycle frameset. Ti is way overbuilt. Blair- So if anyone is making a titanium frame and not using the strength/weight advantage to reduce the weight significantly, they're missing the point. BRBR I guess all the ti frameset makers, like Serotta, Seven, Litespeed, Moots, etc are missing the point then. Four thing make for a better performing cyclist -fit -fat -fitness -finesse Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302 (303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene" |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Blair- Why are Ti frames not much lighter than steel frames? BRBR
They are not. A 'standard' ti frameset, like a Moots or Serotta or Litespeed, is about 3.3 pounds, some are heaver(Dean). Most of the steel framesets we sell-Waterford, Nobilette, Torelli are in the 3.3 to 3.7 pound range. There are very light ti framesets but they are extremely thin walled, have their own problems(like a Merlin with a crimped seattube from the front der clamp). Blair Ti is much stronger for the same weight than steel is, BRBR Yes it is but you imply that steel is somehow weak when applied to a bicycle frameset. Ti is way overbuilt. Blair- So if anyone is making a titanium frame and not using the strength/weight advantage to reduce the weight significantly, they're missing the point. BRBR I guess all the ti frameset makers, like Serotta, Seven, Litespeed, Moots, etc are missing the point then. Four thing make for a better performing cyclist -fit -fat -fitness -finesse Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302 (303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene" |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you guys for these informative posts. It isn't easy filtering
out the romanticsm and dogmatism that is a real part of our enthusiasm, especially when I believe most of it! Based upon these posts, I have a real feeling that custom is not a necessity, but perhaps still viable for me. Seven in particular seems to be an incredible company. If you never seen their brochure, I am sure it is responsible for a significant part of their sales, especially "on the fence-er's" like myself. I am not touting them per se, just reporting. The technical end is impressive to me, notwithstanding the fact that they publish the weights of each frame in each size. E.G. "52cm Axiom steel: 3.70 lbs, Axiom Ti: 2.68 lbs". (These are the "Signature" Seven geometries). Check out their brochure, it is a marketing masterpiece. Will a pound help me, particularly considering the typical $1200 surcharge? Okay, I'm not naive to believe that. But as the "dream bike" I'm still thinking about it. Which leads me to this question: I understand that tube diameter/wall thickness is what actually contributes to strength and weight more than material. That being so, as the typical Ti tube is thicker than steel, I am wondering what you think contributes to what I have experienced is a "quieter" feeling. I would think the wider tube diameter would contribute to a harsher feel. Thank you. A side note: Mike J, I am mostly a lurker, but have read many of your posts throughout the years. I am very impressed by your willingness to help, knowledge, and able to keep level through "cranky times". We're close enough to you to consider you a LBS and my wife has got it in her head she wants a Trek OCLV in the next year (opposites attract eh?), so I'll give you a call to get her sized up. skim |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you guys for these informative posts. It isn't easy filtering
out the romanticsm and dogmatism that is a real part of our enthusiasm, especially when I believe most of it! Based upon these posts, I have a real feeling that custom is not a necessity, but perhaps still viable for me. Seven in particular seems to be an incredible company. If you never seen their brochure, I am sure it is responsible for a significant part of their sales, especially "on the fence-er's" like myself. I am not touting them per se, just reporting. The technical end is impressive to me, notwithstanding the fact that they publish the weights of each frame in each size. E.G. "52cm Axiom steel: 3.70 lbs, Axiom Ti: 2.68 lbs". (These are the "Signature" Seven geometries). Check out their brochure, it is a marketing masterpiece. Will a pound help me, particularly considering the typical $1200 surcharge? Okay, I'm not naive to believe that. But as the "dream bike" I'm still thinking about it. Which leads me to this question: I understand that tube diameter/wall thickness is what actually contributes to strength and weight more than material. That being so, as the typical Ti tube is thicker than steel, I am wondering what you think contributes to what I have experienced is a "quieter" feeling. I would think the wider tube diameter would contribute to a harsher feel. Thank you. A side note: Mike J, I am mostly a lurker, but have read many of your posts throughout the years. I am very impressed by your willingness to help, knowledge, and able to keep level through "cranky times". We're close enough to you to consider you a LBS and my wife has got it in her head she wants a Trek OCLV in the next year (opposites attract eh?), so I'll give you a call to get her sized up. skim |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"
that offers a sense of uniqueness, a bike that was built for you and which nobody else has the exact same thing. Some people put a high value on uniqueness, and even prefer something that costs more because that, also, enhances its exclusivity. Hey, if that's what it takes for you to want to ride more, go for it. But don't assume it's necessary for the best-possible ride. In fact, by going custom you often give up technologies that don't lend themselves to one-up craftsmanship (such as the manner in which TREKs OCLV carbon bikes are built). --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles Those technologies also limit how Trek can build their bikes, if you look at the trail numbers, determined by how many different forks Trek can afford. The 5xxx bikes vary from 6.2 in small to 5.0 in large sizes. A small builder would just bend the fork blades to keep consistent handling across different sizes. If you look the geometry charts you'll see Treks 23xx frames use the same length chainstays for all sizes, so you have different weight distribution, more weight on the front end as bike sizes increases. There are trade offs in using any building material, and even at the 5$k that Trek charges for some of the OCLV bikes they can't afford to match fork rake and head angle. Where a small builder with a big wooden block and a pair of Reynolds fork blades can precisely match fork rake and head angle and cut chainstays proportional to frame size. You pays you money and takes your choices. Scott Goldsmith |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"
that offers a sense of uniqueness, a bike that was built for you and which nobody else has the exact same thing. Some people put a high value on uniqueness, and even prefer something that costs more because that, also, enhances its exclusivity. Hey, if that's what it takes for you to want to ride more, go for it. But don't assume it's necessary for the best-possible ride. In fact, by going custom you often give up technologies that don't lend themselves to one-up craftsmanship (such as the manner in which TREKs OCLV carbon bikes are built). --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles Those technologies also limit how Trek can build their bikes, if you look at the trail numbers, determined by how many different forks Trek can afford. The 5xxx bikes vary from 6.2 in small to 5.0 in large sizes. A small builder would just bend the fork blades to keep consistent handling across different sizes. If you look the geometry charts you'll see Treks 23xx frames use the same length chainstays for all sizes, so you have different weight distribution, more weight on the front end as bike sizes increases. There are trade offs in using any building material, and even at the 5$k that Trek charges for some of the OCLV bikes they can't afford to match fork rake and head angle. Where a small builder with a big wooden block and a pair of Reynolds fork blades can precisely match fork rake and head angle and cut chainstays proportional to frame size. You pays you money and takes your choices. Scott Goldsmith |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
RE/
I seem to notice alot of the owners all pretty big guys, over 6', more than 200. Can't speak for others, but the reason I bought my "custom" SevenCycles was to get a frame that fit my too-long bod. If I were within the normal range of sizes, I would have been just as happy or happier with one of the several off-the-shelf frames I've owned. -- PeteCresswell |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 | Mike Iglesias | General | 4 | October 29th 04 07:11 AM |
titanium frame repair/recommedations? | raciere | General | 2 | July 11th 04 04:07 PM |
FA: 56cm TST Sandvik Titanium Road frame NEW! w/ carbon fork $465 | Sam | Marketplace | 1 | June 23rd 04 04:17 AM |
FA: 56cm TST Sandvik Titanium Road frame NEW! $465 Ends May-20-04 19:41:16 PDT | Sam | Marketplace | 2 | May 20th 04 03:31 AM |
FAQ | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 27 | September 5th 03 10:58 PM |