max5480

Been riding 60-120 miles on my weekend ride and I'm getting sick of my harsh carbon frame (though I love it).

It has all Campy parts which I also love the feel of and function.

But I'd like to get a ride that smooths out some of the roughness and also accommodates a wider tire.

So, in your own opinion, which would be the better choice: swapping the frame for a high end titanium Lynksey or Moots or purchasing a complete Salsa Colossal 2 (steel) with disc brakes (also noticed the Niner RLT steel but a little more than I want to spend).

Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks,

Max

Steamer

If the funds were available, I'd have to give this some consideration:

https://calfeedesign.com/adventure/

qclabrat

those are a lot of different variables
which carbon frame are you on now?

are you limited to one bike?

your price points are very different between the Ti vs steel frames

also which wheels are you rolling on?

StephenH

You need good brakes. There's lots of threads on disk vs rim- and as best I can tell, as a disk user, there's just not a lot of reason to choose one over the other. So I wouldn't worry about that aspect at all, get the bike you like and whatever brakes it comes with ought to work.

Steel vs titanium vs carbon= can't help there at all.

cale

You mean for a person in the OP's position, not in general? Right?

StephenH

Well, I meant in general for road usage at least. It's not like all the rim-brake users I know are crashing into trees for lack of proper brakage.

cale

It's not going to take crashes for most riders to see the benefits of road discs.

ronfinch

Rim or disc brakes won't be the reason your rim brake friends are crashing into trees. Every reasonable quality type of brake, set up properly, I have come across, has worked according to the type of situation it was designed for. Also, aren't carbon bikes supposed to have a comfortable ride (terrific road damping qualities of carbon according to this I quickly googled Why You Should be Riding Steel and not Carbon | Road Bike News, Reviews, and Photos I guess different manufacturers carbon will ride somewhat differently.

You could consider tyres that inflate to a lower psi, or a different frame geometry, if you want a more comfortable ride. You never know! Dit - you could even try stretching properly before/after your ride!

guidoStow

Another win for the Bicycle Marketing Industrial Complex.

guidoStow

To improve your ride quality choose a Steel or Ti frame that takes the widest possible tires. 32 minimum for 700c, 42 for 650b. Get a geometry that is comfortable for you. A Steel or Ti fork will further enhance your comfort.

cale

Sage, guidoStow, just sage.

Jarrett2

Does not compute...

joewein

What makes a bike ride less harsh is (in this order):

• Wider, low-PSI tyres that smooth out a lot of the road roughness, which calls for sufficient frame and fork clearance. Lower tyre pressure can reduce energy losses from wheel bounce and from suspension effects in soft body tissue, so they're not necessarily slower.
• A frame that is not optimized for putting down a lot of power in sprint finishes (built very stiff) but feels a bit more springy and lively instead. Oversized, shorter tubing tends to make frames stiffer. Longer and/or smaller diameter tubing with thinner walls tends to be more springy.
• A longer head tube that makes it easier to raise your bar to offload your hands, arms and neck.
• A more relaxed geometry with less steep seat and head tube angles.
• Longer seat and chain stays. They will also help tyre clearances (see above).
• Longer wheelbase (partly a consequence of the previous item)).

To summarize, ride comfort is more a function of tyre choice and bike geometry than material. If your current carbon frame rides harshly it's not because it's a carbon frame but because it's probably built stiff and runs with narrow high pressure tyres. You can build a good long distance bike from any of the common materials (chromoly steel, titanium, carbon and even aluminium). Each of these materials has its advantages. Steel and Ti tend to make for the most long-lived (and repairable) frames, while carbon is cheaper to build light (until you crash it).

I share your interest in disk brakes for my next bike. If you you end up riding in the rain like I often do on long rides or around town, it seems they can make a lot of difference. I am currently looking at the Soma Cross Check Disc frame and a few other potential candidates for a long distance ride custom build.

79pmooney

I don't get it either. But then, I have spent maybe one mile on CF on well paved parking lots so I am no judge. My bikes are steel and ti. I have observed, almost as sure a clockwork, the Cycle Oregon CF riders slowing so abruptly upon hitting chip seal that I almost have to use my brakes. And sighs of relief when the chip seal is over. Those of us riding ti or steel just look at each other and shake our heads. (I often look forward to the chip seal because it has always felt to me to have lower rolling resistance.)

Ben

cale

This comment I just left after reading the exact same sort of argument you put forth....

In my line of work, this is known as a negative sale. A negative sale is one that relies on the portrayal of a rival product as poor so that it makes an alternative seem strong. The "sale" doesn't require that the individual state anything positive about their own product or preference. The hope is that the listener will be so turned off by this portrayal that the alternative suggestion, empty of any claims, is elevated to a higher standing. Sound familiar?

max5480

You can look at my pedal room if you want to see what bike I'm riding. I'm not a newb and know the differences between subtle changes in geometry as well as quality in materials.

I guess my question was kind of vague, but put simply; if two bikes were the same price, one titanium with campy parts, the other steel with SRAM apex and disc brakes, which would you rather ride over long distance?

hueyhoolihan

i just realized... my life is a "negative sale".

cale

That's good!

cale

Which would you rather drive across the US, a Cadillac Escalade or a Dodge Viper? I just can't see why anyone would make such a mix of their comparison unless solely for the purpose of stirring the pot.

rhm

Assuming the frames under consideration also have the same geometry and same tire clearance, and knowing nothing more than "titanium" and "steel" then I guess I'd go for the titanium. I don't know much about titanium but am curious about it. Steel could tempt me, depending on the specifics of the steel. The disc brakes do not tempt me; I'm sure they're fine, but... they're brakes.

joewein

I don't understand why you link reusing the existing parts to the choice of frame material: If you can swap your Campy parts from the carbon frame onto a Ti frame, why not to a steel frame? And you can get either steel or Ti frames for either type of brake. Why tie the two together in your choice?

OK, if you go for disk brakes you won't be able to re-use the Campy caliper brakes, but you could still use your existing Campy brifters with something like the Avid BB7 (mechanical) or TRP HY/RD (cable actuated hydraulic), along with cranks, derailleurs, etc.

joewein

In the last two years I've heard of a handful of cases amongst my friends and acquaintances of people who have had to have their Ti frames rewelded or replaced under warranty because of cracks appearing in various places. I have not heard such stories from people riding steel bikes. Ti doesn't rust, but that doesn't mean all frames will last forever.

Trouble is, for the price of a high quality factory-made Ti frame that won't suffer such problems you can get a very good custom built steel frame with perfect geometry and the best tubes for the purpose. The Ti frame may be a few hundred grams lighter but the steel frame will probably ride better for the same money.

unterhausen

steel bikes break too. I am not convinced steel and discs go together that well. The problem is the fork has to be beefed up to be anything better than marginal

rhm

Yeah, interesting point. Being beefed up, as you describe, might defeat the purpose of having a steel fork.

Since I joined Bike Forums I have seen countless posts in which riders compared the ride qualities of frames. Steel frames, mostly; 531 of various kinds, Columbus of various kinds, and so on. At first these posts made no sense to me at all. I gradually began to realize that the guys writing these posts all weigh well over 200 lbs. Few guys my weight (165) have much to say about frame flex. The few that do are the ones who have sought out frames made from especially thin walled tubing. Not long ago @southpawboston (I think it was him, anyway) bought such a frame and found the fork on it too beefy, and had a lighter fork made.

cale

Guys your weight don't have to worry much about stiffness, or compliance for that matter, because your weight isn't sending that same shock waves through the frame as ours is. You ride lighter, hence you ride more comfortably.


Good for you. (with sincerity, please.)