Its not just a question of material but the quality of workmanship. That's the primary reason carbon bikes are so much more expensive.
Originally Posted by
mstateglfr
there are a couple of types of aluminum used for bike frames- 6061 and 7005.
6061 is easier/cheaper to work with. That can be good as its quality and cheaper to manipulate
7005 is slightly stronger.
as for which is better in actual application...well it seems marketing material claims both are better.
a higher quality frame will have hudroformed tubes that are shaped in specific ways to make parts of the frame stiffer or more compliant, based on the frame size, riding style, etc.
a lower quality frame will mimic this with shaped tubes so it looks similar. Is the ride similar though?- maybe and maybe not.
a higher quality frame will have butted tubing. The inside of the tubing will be thinner where strength isnt needed so weight can be saved and ride feel can be improved.
this butting will be frame size specific and also specific to the style of bike. That means the length of butting will vary depending on frame size. 52cm and 64cm frames shouldnt, by default, have the same butting profile. If they do, then it should be because it makes sense and not because its what is cheapest.
a cheaper frame may have generic butting, if at all. The butting will be standardized across sizes so there is no adjusting for rider size etc in order to save money.
these are all generalizations. Sometimes an expensive frame is expensive because the brand wants to sell it for a lot.
not knowing details on frames is in part why I like steel- I enjoy the geek side of things like learning about the butting profiles, the tube diameters chosen, etc.
it seems aluminum frames are more of an unknown when it comes to details.
There are advantages and disadvantages, but they can't both be better.