Maelochs

Okay ... you convinced me not to keep dreaming of Ti ...

prairiepedaler

Hi, thanks for the input on the matter. Many Titanium riders here! I like the look of an unfinished metal frame that doesn't rust in it's natural state and I thought that Titanium might have a similar ride, repairability and weight (if not lighter) than steel. Certainly the price would be greater than steel - boy is it ever. I think steel is, well, a steal in terms of what it offers in a bicycle and by the sounds of opinions in this thread it's all around appeal will probably have me remain with it. I remember looking at a Lightspeed about 30 years ago when they first started making them and thought a Titanium bike was quite exotic. I'm not a racer but I do rely on bicycle transportation so am always looking to make life easier energy saving wise.

I've never ridden an Aluminum bike either and I hear real bad things about carbon in the fork area especially. I think a stripped down aluminum speedster might be fun to try in the future for comparison. Thanks everyone

Drew Eckhardt 

When I built my bike up in 1997 I spent less for a titanium frame than if I opted for one of the steel frames I considered.

Once you're budgeting $1000 for a frame you can have your choice of steel, titanium, aluminum, or carbon fiber.

At that price the titanium frame will weigh less than the steel and come with no paint to chip over the years that follow.

Maelochs

Not a thing wrong with carbon forks ... the only people who say otherwise are delusional. Carbon forks have been around fro a few decades and failure is exceedingly rare--except among the delusional, who get caught when they wear their cycling helmets and forget their tinfoil helmets. For everyone else, carbon forks are a huge improvement.

Aluminum frames used to be extremely stiff and somewhat uncomfortable, but technology has brought a lot of improvements. A decent Al frame with a carbon fork and seat post is absolutely no problem to ride ... except on roads where any bike without suspension would be uncomfortable.

Carbon fiber frames have also been around for a couple decades, and despite some horror stories seem to be as safe as any other kind of frame. Maybe more prone to damage if treated harshly (as in crashed hard, dropped off a rack, etc.) but by and large, nothing wrong with carbon.

Some of Cannondale's bikes ride as well as anything made from any material (IMO) and even my bargain-basement aluminum Dawes with a carbon fork and post rides about as smoothly as my all steel Raleigh.

FullGas

have a Serotta Ti frame and carbon fork.

bike rides very nicely. not abusively stiff, not flexy, just feels good.

haven't been on a steel-framed bike since the late 70s, so hard to compare.

Sy Reene

Not a real comparison, but I like both my Steel Nashbar CX bike as well as my Merlin Cyrene. FWIW, chose the Cyrene over the Extralight at the time (back in 2003) precisely for the 'noodly' sentiments floating around about Ti frames built too light back then. No idea if it applied to the Extralight. The Nashbar CX bike is my comfort commuter bike -- great value with 105 shifting, though brakes could be better. Reason can't reallly compare is I have 33mm tires on this bike, vs. 25s on the Merlin. Both are quite smooth, but the Nashbar is a more comfy ride (due to tires and my Merlin's fairly stiff wheelset (Eurus)).

Steve B.

Well stated, should be a sticky

rekmeyata

Trek a US company? true, but most of the bikes are built in either China or Taiwan so in that respect it doesn't matter who you buy from anymore. I personally won't buy from Trek anymore because they sent 99% of their production to those other countries and left people without jobs; and they weren't the only companies that did that either of course.

I cannot get my Lynskey Peloton to rub on the small or even the large ring, but I'm not as strong as I use to be either so maybe you might be able to? I don't know, but it seems really stiff, in fact stiffer down there then any of my steel bikes are. I wish you could try a Lynskey and see what you think. Of course there is that problem with going too light could potentially cause an issue unless they traded away a bit of weight to beef up the bottom end. I remember guys that bought a Litespeed Ghisallo (sp?) an the Classic model that drove them nuts in the flex department but thats what they wanted...the lightest TI bike made and at the time those were it.

Funny you mentioned Soma because I've read from many people who owned Soma and some, not all, of them thought the bottom end was noodly on those bikes. Yet there are some really stiff steel bikes like Pegoretti Big Leg Emma and the Merckx MXL, or any of the stainless steel bikes.

StanSeven

Couple comments on your post. I got a Ti Seven and had it painted new. The paint was perfect and stayed that way the entire eight years I had the bike.

The other thing is soft bottom brackets was a common compliant on older Ti frames. It got corrected with new welding techniques.

JanMM

This is my first season riding titanium. I like it! The quite robust 4130 frame of the long wheelbase recumbent I bought in 2009 was replaced this past winter by an unused-but-older-than-my-bike ti frame. After moving parts from old to new frame, what was a 30 pound bike (not bad for a 'bent) now weighs about 25 pounds. Much easier to lift onto a roof rack! Climbs better, accelerates better and seems to tolerate non-smooth road surfaces better than when it was steel. (Wheelbase is 64 inches so it's never been bad on rough stuff.)

jamesdak 

Dang, well now it's confession time about something I've been thinking for a couple of months now.

First off, after many years on steel and CF bikes I really wanted to try a Ti bike and saved for awhile to build my dream bike. I'm driven by comfort on chipseal roads over long distances for the most part.

So, I finally decided on a Lynskey R265 and after many emails back and forth along with some chat time with Lynskey we worked out the build. About the only upgrade that deals with the handling/comfort was a upgrade to the CF fork. I got the bike in, did some rides, and liked it. Real cushy on the rear over the bumpy stuff but a tad rougher on the front than I expected.



Cue, the steel. Around the same time I picked up a used Giordana Antares locally and was amazed at how well it rode over our bad roads. Very fast, yet pretty comfortable. I especially loved how compliant the front end was over the rough stuff.



I loved it so much that I hunted down a NOS frame of a much "better" model and bought it. Built it up with a Campagnolo 11 speed setup and wow so nice. Even better than the other Giordana in my opinion. Both of these ride nicer on the front than the Lynskey for sure with the same type tires setup and pressures.



Then I found an old Greg LeMond built by the same italian gods that built the Giordana bikes. So home it came only to find a pretty harsh ride, WTH??
But with some bigger rubber at lower pressure, leather saddle, and cushy handlebar setups I've now got this harsh steel bike setup as my most comfortable.



So good in fact that I'm seriously thinking of selling the Ti bike. It's a great bike and if it could really run the same 28c tires as the steel bike it maybe more comfortable but it can't. And to be honest the Giordana XL Super running the exact same tires, pressures, and even the same saddle is more comfortable too. I've done centuries on them all and the Ti comes in 3rd best now. Now all this rambling aside. I don't really see this as a steel vs. Ti thing. I see it as one frame is able to fit tires that give me better overall comfort,

I'll even muddy the waters even more. I recently got an old Bob Jackson built with Reynolds 531. I've only put a little over 100 miles on it but it feels the most comfortable of all my rides so far even with the smaller 700 x 25c tires. So much so that it just doesn't feel fast despite the speeds it runs saying otherwise. Why does it feel slow and cushy yet go so fast? Heck if I know.



Finally coming off the high from today's century and feeling tired. I suspect I'll read this tomorrow and just see a bunch of jibberish, LOL!

American Euchre

Placebo effect.

Spoakland

I just got a Ti frame from Bikes Direct. Love it so far. I had forgotten how light it was until I recently road my Trek hybrid.

Sy Reene

I'm going to suggest that some of the differences you're attributing to the frame material, are due instead to the wheels you're using. Am I correct in seeing the low spoke count (ie. stiff rims) front wheels being the same used for the Lynskey and the Lemond ti bikes. Your comfy steel bikes likewise with much higher spoke-count wheelsets?

Shimagnolo

My bike collection:
(1) steel frame & fork
(1) aluminum frame & fork
(1) titanium frame & CF fork
(1) CF frame & fork

And what makes the noticeable difference between them when riding:
- Total weight
- Tire choice
- Tire pressure

jamesdak 

Hmm, maybe I confused things a bit. The Lemond is steel.

Yes and no to the wheels. I've tried various wheels across the various bikes. The Lynskey is now sporting a set of Novemeber Ti wheels in a 24/28 configuration and has had some 32 spoke Mavic wheels on it.

The Lemond has sported a different 32 spoke setup. I recently put some very low spoke Shamal Ultras on the XL Super and haven't noticed a decrease in comfort from the 32 hole Mavic Open Pros it had.

But I totally agree that it's not frame material. Maybe the geometry and other factors but for sure the biggest is the tires and pressures. Here the wheels can some into effect if the wider rims allow more air volume and lower pressures.

If I do sell the Lynskey the Vision Team 30s will go back on it and the wider and much lighter November wheels will go on the LeMond. In fact I'm thinking of making that change anyway since I seem to be choosing the old Lemond over the Lynskey anyway.

Of course if you really want comfort then this steel bike of mine delivers in spades! Steel frame, wide high spoke rims, low pressure tires, sprung saddle, etc.

American Euchre

There's no difference. Steel is not a magic material. Neither is titanium.

Jarrett2

I'm a big steel fan. Have owned and ridden several. Love 'em.

I was hoping titanium might be steel+, but alas, it was not for me. It didn't have the same resonance on rough roads that I've come to love with steel. Titanium just felt like noodly aluminum to me the times I've ridden it.

I'm interested in trying 953 sometime though. Might be steel+.

American Euchre

It should be obvious to anyone that frame material makes a very tiny difference in ride quality, if any at all.

Sure, some fat 300 lb. masher who likes to jump on the pedals might feel a difference in rigidity, but for most people, it won't make a difference.

Tire width, and psi make the biggest difference. As do contact points such as saddle and handlebar tape.

Y'all are pissin' money into the wind hoping for something that's not really there.

idiotekniQues

meh. i worked at an LBS one season about 4 years ago. on the road/hybrid side we carried cannondale, trek & jamis. i rode every hybrid and road bike there - the hybrids mostly from $500-1000 besides a couple of bad boy 1's. riding the coda hybrids there was a clear difference in road feel vs those other aluminum hybrids. i'm sure not all steel is created the same and ditto with aluminum - but at those price points there was an easily noticeable difference.

American Euchre

I'm not saying you didn't "feel" a difference. I'm just saying it's not due to the frame material.

It could be frame geometry, it could be a lot of things. Most likely it was due to the following:

1. tire width
2. tire pressure
3. handlebar grips or tape
4. saddle

Whatever "magic" Jamis struck it clearly doesn't resonate with consumers, most of whom have never heard of Jamis and very few of whom seek out the brand in particular.

It's just a bike, bro. Rigid frames ride like rigid frames.

Mulberry20

The frame material is the least important part of putting together a great bike. I will never understand why people spend so much money on a frame and put Shimano 105 on it. I would much rather put Chorus or Record on a Gunnar or Road Logic frame and get better wheels than what most people seem to be doing these days.

rekmeyata

I know a couple of guys that have worked at my LBS for at least the last 13 years since I've lived here and they've tried all sorts of bikes, and they can feel the difference between bikes too, which is why the one mechanic has a titanium bike, even the store owner has several really nice and expensive vintage steel bikes and he knows there's a difference between frame materials.

Sure someone like the average rider who may only ride a few bikes in their lifetime may not be able tell a lot of difference, but someone who has ridden many surely can.

rekmeyata

I see it differently than you do, frame and fork is the most important part of the entire bike, you can't just upgrade a frame whenever you want, but you can buy a really nice frame stick 105 (or whatever) on it and then later upgrade as the components fail. This is how it's been done actually for many years by people who know bikes, they buy the best frame their money can afford and not worry about the components till later when they have more money to put into the bike. For me getting a comfortable long lasting titanium frame was much more important than the 105 components I put mostly on it because there isn't a whole lot of difference between 105 and Dura Ace anyways, just as there isn't a whole lot of difference between Record and Athena. When I bought my Lynskey it was suppose to come with all 105 and a cheap FSA headset and a Lynskey branded fork which I had no clue who made that fork, so I upgraded a few parts including the rear derailleur to Ultegra, the headset to Cane Creek 110, and the fork to Enve 2.0 which was the most expensive upgrade because like the frame I feel the fork is the second most important part on the bike. Later when a part fails I can decide if I want to upgrade to something better or just get the same as it was before.

idiotekniQues

mind you i went into riding all these bikes wanting a cannondale bad boy 1. an aluminum bike. i lusted after it. for weeks and weeks after working there. simply test riding different bikes and discovering an easily noticeable difference between the steel i rode and the aluminum i rode turned me around a full 180. mind you these were at price points of a certain type.

tire width - minimal difference. we are talking cannondale quicks, trek fx's and jamis codas - 30-32c was the biggest difference in tire width. negligible.

tire pressure - considering i was one of the employees charged with pumping up the tires of these bikes every few days, they were consistently pumped up to the same psi. we probably did the hybrids at 90 or so. road bikes higher. so not much difference between bikes.

grips and saddles - different amongst every manufacturer but similar in quality at similar price points. i do find it amusing that you can admit that a difference in grip substance and construction and saddle substance and construction can make a difference in road feel but no no no. not the actual frame and fork - probably the single biggest factor in a bicycles construction, followed by the wheels. i find that silly.