While dreaming idly about all the bike-related stuff I wished Santa might bring me (I got socks and a hug), I got to wondering about some of the Rolls Royce titanium bikes I’ve read about, but never ridden. While I have ridden some snazzy higher-end carbon bikes, I’m just an average cyclist who appreciated the ride but couldn’t really discern any crucial difference between various brands’ offerings. I got to wondering if that same thing might be true of the ti “legends”: would an average cyclist be likely to feel they were generally great but be unable to distinguish one brand’s ride from another, regardless of how exalted it might be. So, my question: Has anybody on the forum had 1st hand experience with a Moots bike, for example, or any of the other much-admired, very expensive titanium bikes? If so, was the ride “worth it/better” or was it more the subtle pleasure of riding something so grand?
I've had two (I think) a 1998 Litespeed Vortex, which at that time was the top of the heap by most analyses, and my current Lynskey R 450. Both have David Lynskey's signature on the bike and both are made with 6/4 alloy. I put 160K miles on the Litespeed and it has been my roller bike since I got the Lynskey in the fall of 2014. The Lynskey has 86K miles on it. The Litespeed replaced a top-line Italian steel bike built with Columbus SLX tubing. As far as ride, the Litespeed rode much like the steel bike, but lighter. The Lynskey likewise was just a bit lighter than the Litespeed. You can build a great bike with steel, aluminum, titanium, or CF composite. It's much more about how to incorporate geometry and flex correctly than it is about material of construction. The reason I have stuck with Ti is that (baring a frame failure) it lasts forever, doesn't scratch, and never needs paint.