Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Why Did These Products Fade Away Or Die Out?

Notices
Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Why Did These Products Fade Away Or Die Out?

Old 11-20-14, 02:49 PM
  #26  
Slash5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,891
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 7 Posts
As for ball bearing derailleur pulleys - a lot of mountain bike pulleys are factory ball bearing equipped. Not sure why road bikes aren't - offhand I think DuraAce are. As far as plastic instead of aluminum is for noise and price.
Slash5 is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 02:53 PM
  #27  
RoadGuy
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,334

Bikes: 89 Schwinn 754, 90 Trek 1100, 93 Trek 2300, 94 Trek 1400 (under construction), 94 Trek 930, 97 Trek 1400

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Batavus View Post
I don't get the part about aluminum steerers. They are extremely common on entry to mid-level road bikes and mtbs.

I haven't bought a "new" bike from a shop since the early 1990s. I was surprised when I read that aluminum steering tubes are not common anymore. Although people are popping up saying that they are still readily available. Aluminum legs on forks are still common as far as I know. It's the aluminum steering tubes that I'm asking about. Maybe the guys that posted that they don't exist anymore were mistaken about the availability. I haven't looked at new bikes or replacement forks lately, so I don't know first hand what the current market is like.
RoadGuy is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 03:04 PM
  #28  
HillRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,521

Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!

Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1954 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 950 Times in 662 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric S. View Post
I was watching titanium come down in price in the '90s, hoping to swoop in but CF became less expensive to produce, I guess. Litespeed had a no-frills frame called a Classic; I seem to remember it getting as low as $1,500 from Colorado Cyclist before I lost track or interest.
In late 2006 I bought a Litespeed Firenze Ti frame complete with an Easton SLX90 all-carbon fork from Colorado Cyclist for $930 delivered. Colorado Cyclist was closing out all of their Litespeed frames since Litespeed had pulled their franchise due to complaints from their brick-and-mortar dealers and I jumped on the bargain. 32,000 miles later I'm still delighted with it.
HillRider is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 03:18 PM
  #29  
RoadGuy
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,334

Bikes: 89 Schwinn 754, 90 Trek 1100, 93 Trek 2300, 94 Trek 1400 (under construction), 94 Trek 930, 97 Trek 1400

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier View Post
I think the main thing with Ti BBs was that first splined (ISIS and Octolink), and then external bearing, and most recently several press-fit BB standards took over from the traditional square taper BBs, and with so few bikes using square taper BBs, there is virtually no market for the Ti replacements. And most new cranksets come with a built in spindle. All that, plus that fact that the standard size of spindle, when using a softer and weaker (per unit of cross sectional area) material resulted in unacceptably flexy and weak BBs, hence the reports of breakage and restrictive rider weight limits.



Question: Why are Ti handlebars not popular anymore?
Answer: carbon fibre handlebars

Although there are a few manufacturers who make Ti bars, a lighter and probably stronger set of bars is almost definitely available made from carbon.



Forks with aluminum steerer tubes are still very much available - both suspension and rigid forks. The very highest end forks now come with carbon steerers, but there are plenty with aluminum too. I wonder if you aren't confused about a recent thread about adapting an aluminum steerer tube for use with a threaded headset - aluminum steerer tubes were common, but very rarely threaded.




I always got the impression that those pulleys had a definite negative impact on shifting for the reason you stated (lack of floating top pulley) and their claims of less drivetrain resistance were either grossly exaggerated or completely bogus. As I recall, one manufacturer claimed an energy savings of a 50 foot climb over some distance, but properly maintained bushing derailleurs don't have enough drag to make any sort of measureable or noticeable difference. This was pretty well known back in the days of anodized aluminum parts (early-mid nineties), so the only people that had them were the uninformed, or those who wanted matching purple anodizing on every possible part (you all know who you are, so please take a moment to hang your heads in shame now). Also, the top and second from the top derailleur from Shimano have long used ball bearings instead of bushings, and a whole derailleur doesn't cost much more that some sets of aftermarket pulleys.

All my bikes still have square taper bottom brackets. I can't believe the number of different bottom bracket designs that have popped up in the past 15-20 years. As far as I can tell, manufacturers are skipping back and forth in an attempt to gain a marketing /patent advantage for the products over the competition without regard for the consumer. Buying a replacement bottom bracket for a newer bike has become confusing mess without any standard like we had when square taper was standard. Pressed in, external, ISI, Octolink, I doon;t see any advantage in any of these over square taper for the riding that I do.

I saw plenty of threaded aluminum steering tubes on on-road and off-road forks at one time, and I never saw any warnings or recalls due to breakage.

While carbon parts may be lighter than aluminum parts and stiffer or stronger in a specific designed for direction, aluminum parts do not damage as easily in an off-direction incident as carbod parts do. Aluminum chainstays are not damaged or ruined when the chain comes off and grainds/rubs on them. Aluminum tubes do not crack or crush as easily if the bikes falls over sideways as carbon tubes do. In my opinion, that makes aluminum framed bikes more practical for everyday utility use, and commuting than carbon frame bikes are. Same problem with carbon handlebars. If you have carbon handlebars and the bike falls over in an uncontrolled manner, the odds of damage are much higher that if the handlebars were made of aluminum.

I have heard of many more carbon steerer failures than aluminum steerer failures. Why is aluminum steerer failure risk unacceptable, while carbon steerer failure is downplayed now?

If I had to take a carbon steerer or an aluminum steerer, I would trust a threaded aluminum steerer more that a carbon. But, that's just me, and I have to pay for my own parts.

Last edited by RoadGuy; 11-20-14 at 03:22 PM.
RoadGuy is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 03:19 PM
  #30  
Batavus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 521

Bikes: Wabi Lightning, fixed 13.6 pounds. Cera steel road bike Campy veloce 9s

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by RoadGuy View Post
I haven't bought a "new" bike from a shop since the early 1990s. I was surprised when I read that aluminum steering tubes are not common anymore. Although people are popping up saying that they are still readily available. Aluminum legs on forks are still common as far as I know. It's the aluminum steering tubes that I'm asking about. Maybe the guys that posted that they don't exist anymore were mistaken about the availability. I haven't looked at new bikes or replacement forks lately, so I don't know first hand what the current market is like.
Well, that explains a lot. Up until a year ago I worked in a high end road and mtb shop and almost all cheaper bikes came with alu steerers. Cheaper to make and still relatively lightweight. Aluminum is most certainly not used anymore on the blades (except ultra, ultra cheap bikes which have a steel steerer and alu blades) Just to avoid confusion, I'm strictly talking road bikes here. Even the entry-level bikes come with carbon blades, they are just made from a cheaper (heavier) grade of carbon and more of it is used to make it strong enough.

Some of them are real boat anchors, but hey, the salesman can tell you that ' it even comes with a carbon fork!'

Higher end bikes have full carbon forks (including the dropouts) and can weigh as little as 300-350 grammes. But they require an expander insert plug as you cannot install a star-fangled nut in a carbon steerer because it would simply disintegrate if you did. The expander plug somewhat negates the weight savings of a full carbon fork.

Last edited by Batavus; 11-20-14 at 03:25 PM.
Batavus is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 04:26 PM
  #31  
cycle_maven
Collector of Useless Info
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
The Landrider autoshifting bike. There's one that deserved to die- a bike for people too lazy to shift gears, but energetic enough to actually move the pedals in a circle.
cycle_maven is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 04:30 PM
  #32  
dabac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,688
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1073 Post(s)
Liked 291 Times in 218 Posts
Originally Posted by Batavus View Post
I don't get the part about aluminum steerers. They are extremely common on entry to mid-level road bikes and mtbs.
+1
My Rockshox Sid Team came with an aluminium steerer, and I'd call that mid level at least.
dabac is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 06:13 PM
  #33  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 647 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times in 209 Posts
Originally Posted by RoadGuy View Post
All my bikes still have square taper bottom brackets. I can't believe the number of different bottom bracket designs that have popped up in the past 15-20 years. As far as I can tell, manufacturers are skipping back and forth in an attempt to gain a marketing /patent advantage for the products over the competition without regard for the consumer. Buying a replacement bottom bracket for a newer bike has become confusing mess without any standard like we had when square taper was standard. Pressed in, external, ISI, Octolink, I doon;t see any advantage in any of these over square taper for the riding that I do.

I saw plenty of threaded aluminum steering tubes on on-road and off-road forks at one time, and I never saw any warnings or recalls due to breakage.

While carbon parts may be lighter than aluminum parts and stiffer or stronger in a specific designed for direction, aluminum parts do not damage as easily in an off-direction incident as carbod parts do. Aluminum chainstays are not damaged or ruined when the chain comes off and grainds/rubs on them. Aluminum tubes do not crack or crush as easily if the bikes falls over sideways as carbon tubes do. In my opinion, that makes aluminum framed bikes more practical for everyday utility use, and commuting than carbon frame bikes are. Same problem with carbon handlebars. If you have carbon handlebars and the bike falls over in an uncontrolled manner, the odds of damage are much higher that if the handlebars were made of aluminum.

I have heard of many more carbon steerer failures than aluminum steerer failures. Why is aluminum steerer failure risk unacceptable, while carbon steerer failure is downplayed now?

If I had to take a carbon steerer or an aluminum steerer, I would trust a threaded aluminum steerer more that a carbon. But, that's just me, and I have to pay for my own parts.
You are moving the goal posts. Your initial post was generally focused on titanium parts that were no longer available, and most of the explanations mentioned the rise in popularity of carbon. Now you seem to be implying that carbon has replaced aluminum, which is definitely not true. Aluminum is the most common material for almost every part of most bikes today.

Also, aluminum steerer tubes are not considered an unacceptable risk - they are extremely common. They are only rare if you are looking for a threaded steerer tube - but all threaded steerer tubes are rare now.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 06:59 PM
  #34  
saddlesores
Senior Member
 
saddlesores's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Thailand..........Nakhon Nowhere
Posts: 3,504

Bikes: inferior steel....and....noodly aluminium

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 983 Post(s)
Liked 257 Times in 173 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier View Post
I always got the impression that those pulleys had a definite negative impact on shifting for the reason you stated (lack of floating top pulley) and their claims of less drivetrain resistance were either grossly exaggerated or completely bogus. As I recall, one manufacturer claimed an energy savings of a 50 foot climb over some distance, but properly maintained bushing derailleurs don't have enough drag to make any sort of measureable or noticeable difference. This was pretty well known back in the days of anodized aluminum parts (early-mid nineties), so the only people that had them were the uninformed, or those who wanted matching purple anodizing on every possible part (you all know who you are, so please take a moment to hang your heads in shame now). Also, the top and second from the top derailleur from Shimano have long used ball bearings instead of bushings, and a whole derailleur doesn't cost much more that some sets of aftermarket pulleys.
matching purple is for sissy posers! i got red anodized to go with my seat post
clamp and headset spacers!

all my derailers were the plastic non-bb variety, the kinds that would last 50,000
miles, but you gotta grease the bushing plate thingies a couple times a year,
usually when the buggers start to make squeeling noises.

tried out a pair of snazzy cnc-aluminimum sealed-bearing pulleys. wow, methought,
sealed bearings? never have to clean and grease 'em again! aluminimum? bet
those'll last even longerer than cheap ole' plastic!

nope. those alu dealies wore down to nubbles in less'n 10,000 miles....that's
with properly cleaned and lubeded chain, changed every 4-5000 km. they still
spin nice, but as bits break off the teeth, sometimes the chain wants to snag.

switched back to the (regreased) oldfangled plastic pulleys i'd thrown in the junk bin.

the lack of float on the top pulley is just poor design. they coulda built in the same
feature, but then they'd have to make two models. just lazy.
saddlesores is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 07:15 PM
  #35  
fietsbob
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 43,599

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 197 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7607 Post(s)
Liked 1,343 Times in 850 Posts
a Carmichael Ti Pulley. pair is still tikin' ... Among the machined bushings included were a pair combined, wider inside than the bearing thickness,

that is how they solved the Shimano float function, it slid sideways freely.


Friction shifting , RD Campag Euclid. I didnt need them.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 08:26 PM
  #36  
HillRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,521

Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!

Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1954 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 950 Times in 662 Posts
Originally Posted by RoadGuy View Post
......standard like we had when square taper was standard.
Well, let's see. ISO and JIS tapers. Italian, English, French, Swiss and Raleigh threading. Dozens of different lengths. Symmetrical and asymmetric. They sure were standard alright.
HillRider is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 09:21 PM
  #37  
rydabent
Senior Member
 
rydabent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,716

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3114 Post(s)
Liked 960 Times in 576 Posts
IMO titanium frame bikes will be on the road decades after CF frame bikes are reduced to junk.
rydabent is offline  
Old 11-20-14, 09:37 PM
  #38  
well biked 
biked well
 
well biked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,427
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked 121 Times in 67 Posts
As has been stated already, aluminum steerer tubes are still very common on new bikes in bike shops, particularly mountain bikes. Personally, I've never owned a suspension fork that didn't have an aluminum steerer tube (and I've owned suspension forks over a pretty wide time span), and that includes the Rockshox Reba fork on my 2014 bike, which is about a $3000 retail bike. For that application, aluminum's a good material for a steerer tube. There are cheap suspension forks with steel steerer tubes, and very expensive, very lightweight models with carbon steerer tubes, but aluminum steerers are extremely common. Aluminum steerers are also fairly common on road bikes, particularly entry level models with carbon fork blades/aluminum steerers. But full carbon forks are extremely common, too, even on entry level road models.
well biked is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 03:12 AM
  #39  
MichaelW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: England
Posts: 12,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Switching the material but keeping the design/dimensions is almost always a bad move.
The strength/weight ratio of steel/Ti/alu is about the same but they vary in density. If you use the small cross-section of a design made for steel and swap for the same volume of Ti, you have less weight and less strength.

The only time this is a acceptable option is for use by smaller, weaker riders.

Each material has its own optimal dimensions.
MichaelW is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 07:57 AM
  #40  
HillRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,521

Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!

Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1954 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 950 Times in 662 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
IMO titanium frame bikes will be on the road decades after CF frame bikes are reduced to junk.
We certainly agree here. My oldest Litespeed was purchased in late 1995, has over 70,000 miles and should last forever.

Originally Posted by MichaelW View Post
Switching the material but keeping the design/dimensions is almost always a bad move. The strength/weight ratio of steel/Ti/alu is about the same but they vary in density. If you use the small cross-section of a design made for steel and swap for the same volume of Ti, you have less weight and less strength.
This is exactly what happened with the first aluminum and Ti frames. The aluminum frames were notoriously flexy and the first Ti frames were both flexy and fatigue failure prone due to the small diameter tubing and poor choice of alloy. It took a few tries before the manufacturers settled on the correct materials and tubing dimensions to make them durable and practical.

Last edited by HillRider; 11-21-14 at 08:04 AM.
HillRider is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 08:08 AM
  #41  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 647 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times in 209 Posts
Originally Posted by HillRider View Post
We certainly agree here. My oldest Litespeed was purchased in late 1995, has over 70,000 miles and shoukd last forever.
My Ti MTB, although a Russian built frame of unknown alloy, is the only MTB to ever last me more than two years without breaking - going on 11 or 12 years old now. And most of the miles over the past two years have been with a rigid fork on rough singletrack. To be fair, I never had an aluminum mtb frame that fit me well enough for my liking, and so I got rid of them before I had a chance to evaluate long-term durability. I recently broke my first aluminum frame - a touring bike I had been riding extensively off-road. All my other broken frames were supposedly good quality steel.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 08:43 AM
  #42  
Dan Burkhart 
Senior member
 
Dan Burkhart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Oakville Ontario
Posts: 7,944
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 870 Post(s)
Liked 494 Times in 284 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier View Post
My Ti MTB, although a Russian built frame of unknown alloy, is the only MTB to ever last me more than two years without breaking - going on 11 or 12 years old now. And most of the miles over the past two years have been with a rigid fork on rough singletrack. To be fair, I never had an aluminum mtb frame that fit me well enough for my liking, and so I got rid of them before I had a chance to evaluate long-term durability. I recently broke my first aluminum frame - a touring bike I had been riding extensively off-road. All my other broken frames were supposedly good quality steel.
All your other broken frames? Maybe you're just hard on stuff?
Dan Burkhart is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 08:59 AM
  #43  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 647 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times in 209 Posts
Originally Posted by Dan Burkhart View Post
All your other broken frames? Maybe you're just hard on stuff?
I don't deny that. But as hard on stuff as I am, my Ti frame keeps on tickin'

Someone gave me a Nashbar Reynolds 853 mtb frame a couple years ago. My friend thought my Ti frame was super comfy and ordered the Nashbar one because it has similar geometry, but then realized he much preferred his full suspension mtb. The frame looks well made and very light, but I doubt I will get a long life out of it if I ever build it up.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 10:53 AM
  #44  
RandomTroll
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by cycle_maven View Post
The Landrider autoshifting bike. There's one that deserved to die- a bike for people too lazy to shift gears, but energetic enough to actually move the pedals in a circle.
If it got more people out of their cars, motorcycles, motor-assisted bicycles (yuck!), it was for the good.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Voltaire?
RandomTroll is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 11:11 AM
  #45  
HillRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,521

Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!

Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1954 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 950 Times in 662 Posts
Originally Posted by RandomTroll View Post
If it got more people out of their cars, motorcycles, motor-assisted bicycles (yuck!), it was for the good.
Those Autoshift bikes were so dreadfully bad that I expect they discouraged anyone who bought one from ever bicycling again. One of the problems with this and most other X-Mart BSO's is that they give a terrible first impression to potential riders, most of whom never come back and try something better.
HillRider is offline  
Old 11-21-14, 11:21 AM
  #46  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 647 Post(s)
Liked 285 Times in 209 Posts
Originally Posted by HillRider View Post
Those Autoshift bikes were so dreadfully bad that I expect they discouraged anyone who bought one from ever bicycling again. One of the problems with this and most other X-Mart BSO's is that they give a terrible first impression to potential riders, most of whom never come back and try something better.
Correct.

The old 'why would I pay $500 for a bike when I don't even enjoy riding my $79 bike' syndrome.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 11-22-14, 03:02 PM
  #47  
sickz
Senior Member
 
sickz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: los angeles
Posts: 366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i see no benefit from titanium handlebars other than changing up the natural frequency of your handlebars (when compared to alum, steel, carbon)
sickz is offline  
Old 11-22-14, 06:05 PM
  #48  
arex
Abuse Magnet
 
arex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,804

Bikes: '91 Mtn Tek Vertical, '74 Raleigh Sports, '72 Raleigh Twenty, '84 Univega Gran Turismo, '09 Surly Karate Monkey, '92 Burley Rock-n-Roll, '86 Miyata 310, '76 Raleigh Shopper

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked 96 Times in 48 Posts
Originally Posted by sickz View Post
i see no benefit from titanium handlebars other than changing up the natural frequency of your handlebars (when compared to alum, steel, carbon)
Why? Is titanium prone to cracking?
arex is offline  
Old 11-22-14, 06:31 PM
  #49  
FBinNY 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 36,718

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 131 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4749 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 745 Times in 464 Posts
Originally Posted by arex View Post
Why? Is titanium prone to cracking?
It can be, but that's not the issue. To take full advantage of Ti's properties, you'd have to increase the tube diameter (as is done with frames). Since you're constrained by standards for clamp diameter, and the grip diameter of a taped bar, that's not generally an option. So, aluminum whose lower density allows using more metal (by volume) works out fine for bars. CF also works, but also calls for larger diameters, which is why we've moved from the old 26mm clamp size to 31.8mm.

Can you make a decent Ti bar, of course. But the cost/weight/stiffness numbers make it a poor choice for the job.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

“Never argue with an idiot. He will only bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.”, George Carlin

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.

Last edited by FBinNY; 11-22-14 at 06:57 PM.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 11-22-14, 06:51 PM
  #50  
HillRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,521

Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!

Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1954 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 950 Times in 662 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY View Post
CF also works, but also calls for larger diameters, which is why we've moved from the old 26mm clamp size to 31.8mm
Corrected as shown. There is a move toward 35.0 mm also but it hasn't gone mainstream yet, if ever.
HillRider is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.