Al 6061 vs 7005
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: England
Posts: 12,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Al 6061 vs 7005
Which is supposed to be better for bike frames?
Is the choise to use one or t'other made on technical or business grounds?
Does it depend on the scale of manufacture, eg the size of your heat treatment oven or the warehouse space to leave your frames to age?
Is the choise to use one or t'other made on technical or business grounds?
Does it depend on the scale of manufacture, eg the size of your heat treatment oven or the warehouse space to leave your frames to age?
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 3,059
Bikes: Homebuilt steel
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2156 Post(s)
Liked 416 Times
in
330 Posts
I'm not an expert on such matters but I do know that 6061 requires a post weld heat treat while 7005 does not. That said, 6061 is still popular among some large framebuilding houses like Cannondale. Properly heat treated 6061 is adequately strong, fairly cheap, and not overly brittle.
Last edited by Nessism; 04-26-07 at 07:39 PM.
#3
Senior Member
Check out this site for materials properties: https://www.matweb.com
Typically 7005 is about 20-30% stronger with 60-80% more fatigue resistance than 6061 with the same stiffness. It's a little harder to weld though. Yeah, and no post-welding heat-treatment necessary. I wonder if this patent has any effects on the use of 7005 in bike-frames: https://www.freepatentsonline.com/5507888.html. The royaltee fees to the patent-holder may dissuade many manufacturers from using it maybe.
Typically 7005 is about 20-30% stronger with 60-80% more fatigue resistance than 6061 with the same stiffness. It's a little harder to weld though. Yeah, and no post-welding heat-treatment necessary. I wonder if this patent has any effects on the use of 7005 in bike-frames: https://www.freepatentsonline.com/5507888.html. The royaltee fees to the patent-holder may dissuade many manufacturers from using it maybe.
Last edited by DannoXYZ; 04-25-07 at 07:16 PM.
#4
Industry Maven
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Wherever good bikes are sold
Posts: 2,936
Bikes: Thylacines...only Thylacines.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Almost all frames are 7005 these days, or versions thereof, whether low-end or high-end (See: Easton Elite). 6061 is a pain in the ass, as this sad sap who's solution heat treated frames before will attest. 7005 just needs an artificial age, which is much lower temp and much easier to do than a solution heat treat followed by an artificial age.
Having said that, solutioning frames isn't a massive hurdle if you're geared up for it.
There's no royalty to be paid on 7005 frames that I know of. That patent excerpt is vague and appears to be alluding to a manufacturing process rather than an alloy type, or a combo of both. Anyone who can afford the tubes and knows how to weld can weld up a 7005 frame.
Vote #1, 7005!
No, wait! Steel is Real!
No, wait! Ti is Fly!
Having said that, solutioning frames isn't a massive hurdle if you're geared up for it.
There's no royalty to be paid on 7005 frames that I know of. That patent excerpt is vague and appears to be alluding to a manufacturing process rather than an alloy type, or a combo of both. Anyone who can afford the tubes and knows how to weld can weld up a 7005 frame.
Vote #1, 7005!
No, wait! Steel is Real!
No, wait! Ti is Fly!
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,104
Bikes: Too many to count
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I might be wrong on this since I'm not a materials expert, but to my knowledge you don't absolutely have to post heat-treat aluminum after building.
#6
Senior Member
Originally Posted by bellweatherman
I might be wrong on this since I'm not a materials expert, but to my knowledge you don't absolutely have to post heat-treat aluminum after building.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Athens, Ohio
Posts: 5,104
Bikes: Custom Custom Custom
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Why deal with Aluminum. Its harder to weld, ride quality isn't as nice. The only reason I would consider Al would be for absolute highest stiffness to weight ratio at the lowest cost.
#9
Senior Member
Originally Posted by nitropowered
Why deal with Aluminum. Its harder to weld, ride quality isn't as nice. The only reason I would consider Al would be for absolute highest stiffness to weight ratio at the lowest cost.
But the early alloy frames were made with standard-size tubing as steel. Look at the Vitus-979 and Peugeot Galaxy/Comete from the '80s. They were more flexible than steel frames and ride-quality was actually better. People did complain about these wet-noodle frames but many TDF champions rode a Vitus-979 to victory. The softer frames weren't any slower.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,104
Bikes: Too many to count
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Why do people assume that aluminum = stiff? The 80s aluminum frames from Vitus were skinny tubed flexy noodles, but wow! They were quite comfy on long rides. And why do people assume that steel is just the right amount of stiffness without being too stiff/harsh? If a steel frame's stiffness can be tuned with the use of larger/smaller wall thicknesses and bigger/smaller tube diameters, why can't the same be said of aluminum? There are a lot more variables involved than just the metal.