![]() |
Before aluminum was the dominant frame material and steel was still king, failures of steel frames was common, especially very light frames.
There were some growing pains when the industry moved to aluminum, but after those problems were sorted out the overall failure rate per bicycle sold was lower than in the steel era. Titanium frames, again especially very light ones, had a fairly high failure rate. I have seen about half as many broken Litespeeds as I have seen intact ones. Early carbon frames often` failed where the carbon was bonded to aluminum lugs and fittings. Other failures are usually due to bad maintenance (overtightening clamps for instance) or due to 'misadventure' that may have been the end of a frame made from any material. I did not vote because there are pros and cons to each and personal preference is as important as any 'data' people are throwing around.... except for racing - it does seem that carbon is the best material for bikes intended for racing. |
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 22708066)
The shape of the bar is irrelevant -- the fact is that aluminum can corrode, and there are many examples of aluminum bars corroding to support that.
The shape of the bars may be irrelevant but the bar tape and wrapping is relevant because it traps and holds in all that salty sweat against the tubing and ruins it. Never happened to me yet. Not a speck of corrosion on any of my aluminum bars... This is a non-issue on a frame. |
Originally Posted by wolfchild
(Post 22708120)
The shape of the bars may be irrelevant but the bar tape and wrapping is relevant because it traps and holds in all that salty sweat against the tubing and ruins it. Never happened to me yet. Not a speck of corrosion on any of my aluminum bars... This is a non-issue on a frame.
|
I'd say the OP has succeeded.
|
Originally Posted by Koyote
(Post 22707972)
I was trying to say that AL breaks more easily, but I obviously don't know the engineering terms. Thanks for the clarification.
|
Originally Posted by indyfabz
(Post 22708144)
I'd say the OP has succeeded.
|
Thanks to everyone that responded. I can see now that a carbon bike is probably in my future and not aluminum. I've already eyed some nice carbon endurance bikes and will proceed in that direction. I'm sticking to the 105 mechanical group set though because of familiarity and my well stocked parts bin. Time to go for a ride, Smokey
|
Apologizes for my belated reply. Steel because I have always ridden high grade steel road and mtb bikes with an exception of one which is a 1992 merida albon a mix between4130 Crmo seat and stays glued into a 6061front triangle and a 4130crmo fork. Steel is comfy, lively, durable and easy to repair. As they say "Steel is real". I always favored one tube manufacturer over others which is Reynolds. 3 of my 7 bikes are made of Reynolds tubes. I have one Dedacciai DR Zero high grade steel italian made MTB. The next MTB will be in steel again and very probably a Reynolds 853 frame.
|
Originally Posted by ClydeClydeson
(Post 22708092)
Before aluminum was the dominant frame material and steel was still king, failures of steel frames was common, especially very light frames.
There were some growing pains when the industry moved to aluminum, but after those problems were sorted out the overall failure rate per bicycle sold was lower than in the steel era. Titanium frames, again especially very light ones, had a fairly high failure rate. I have seen about half as many broken Litespeeds as I have seen intact ones. Early carbon frames often` failed where the carbon was bonded to aluminum lugs and fittings. Other failures are usually due to bad maintenance (overtightening clamps for instance) or due to 'misadventure' that may have been the end of a frame made from any material. I did not vote because there are pros and cons to each and personal preference is as important as any 'data' people are throwing around.... except for racing - it does seem that carbon is the best material for bikes intended for racing. |
Many people posting here have already seen this report of the results of fatigue tests of a number of high-end road bike frames as performed for the German Tour magazine back in 1997, but for those who haven't, here it is. (Short version: two aluminum frames and one carbon frame survived the testing. All of the steel and titanium frames failed. The testers concluded that the failures had less to do with the frame material and more to do with the design of each frame and with how careful the builder was during the building process.)
For those who might object that the steel and titanium alloys used for building frames have improved since 1997---that's true, but aluminum and carbon technology has improved too, of course. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/...tigue_test.htm |
There is no best material. Too many other variables. This is a good read:
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-materials.html In a nutshell: Did you know that:
The reality is that you can make a good bike frame out of any of these metals, with any desired riding qualities, by selecting appropriate tubing diameters, wall thicknesses and frame geometry. |
Originally Posted by SpedFast
(Post 22708171)
Thanks to everyone that responded. I can see now that a carbon bike is probably in my future and not aluminum. I've already eyed some nice carbon endurance bikes and will proceed in that direction. I'm sticking to the 105 mechanical group set though because of familiarity and my well stocked parts bin. Time to go for a ride, Smokey
|
Originally Posted by Lombard
(Post 22708567)
The reality is that you can make a good bike frame out of any of these metals, with any desired riding qualities, by selecting appropriate tubing diameters, wall thicknesses and frame geometry. So you just have to pick some priorities when choosing a suitable frame for your needs and budget. |
Originally Posted by Trakhak
(Post 22708541)
Many people posting here have already seen this report of the results of fatigue tests of a number of high-end road bike frames as performed for the German Tour magazine back in 1997, but for those who haven't, here it is. (Short version: two aluminum frames and one carbon frame survived the testing. All of the steel and titanium frames failed. The testers concluded that the failures had less to do with the frame material and more to do with the design of each frame and with how careful the builder was during the building process.)
For those who might object that the steel and titanium alloys used for building frames have improved since 1997---that's true, but aluminum and carbon technology has improved too, of course. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/...tigue_test.htm |
Originally Posted by georges1
(Post 22708587)
Interesting but that test in question didn't include high end steel framed bikes with tubes such as the Columbus Nemo , the Columbus Genius, the Dedacciai Dr Zero 18 mcd v6ht and even the Reynolds 853 and 631. I doubt that aluminium frames will outlast them. Back in the days all Cannondale frame were made in the USA,that is not the case anymore. Where as for carbon, good luck for repairing a broken frame. For instance the Columbus Genius won a number of victories in the road bike racing and mtb racing races and championships from early 90's to mid late 90's beating aluminium and carbon made bikes. In 1991, the Genius tubing, made of Nivacrom steel, was an unprecedented success. For the first time in the history of cycling, the concept of"Differential Shape Butting" appeared, which only Columbus technology, now the master of the know-how connected with the strain of a frame could design. In 1994, to celebrate 110 years of Bianchi, Columbus strengthened the friendship that born between the fathers of the two companies, making MEGATUBE solely for the Treviglio company, the first oversize tube for high-performance, strong and lightframes. Megatube has become a must and is now one of the strong pointsof the Milanese company, with more than 14 different shapes. In 1995, the Columbus adventure also began in the mountain bike sector with the OR tubing for Cinelli and the custom series for Tom Ritchey (the first fork blades with a variable thickness). With the CYBER tube set (1994), specifically for mtb use, with subsequent forms, and then with Genius mtb, Columbus began accumulating World Championship mtb victories: from Brentjens with American Eagle to Acquaroli with Bianchi, to the Sunn Team and their multi-medallists Vouilloz, Martinez and Chausson. The competitive sector is obviously not the least: from Coppi and Bartoli who were the first to use the Columbus tubes, passing through Merckx, Gimondi, Hinault, Lemond, Argentin, Fondriest, Chiappucci, Roche, Rominger, Pantani, Chioccioli, Armstrong, Rijs, Bartoli and Olano to Tonkov, Brochard, Zuelle and Virenque.
|
Originally Posted by PeteHski
(Post 22708621)
It's now 2022 and all the pros are exclusively racing carbon frames, road and mtb. Armstrong also rides carbon frames today - has some link up with Ventum.
|
Originally Posted by Lombard
(Post 22708630)
The pros ride what they do because their sponsors, the bike companies, supply their bikes. It's a promotion of sorts. Because the sheeple will follow what the pros do with the hopes they will ride like the pros.
|
Originally Posted by Lombard
(Post 22708630)
The pros ride what they do because their sponsors, the bike companies, supply their bikes. It's a promotion of sorts. Because the sheeple will follow what the pros do with the hopes they will ride like the pros.
Paraphrasing Rooster Cogburn in True Grit: If I ever meet an American male who doesn't claim to be a one-of-a-kind nonconformist, I'll shake his hand and give him a five-cent Daniel Webster cigar. |
Originally Posted by SpedFast
(Post 22708168)
Yep, I am definitely looking harder at Carbon. I initially had strength concerns, but I just need to wrap my head around it. My concerns don't appear to be based in fact. Smokey
|
Originally Posted by Trakhak
(Post 22708757)
Whenever I see someone use the word "sheeple" non-ironically, it drives home how good a job advertising agencies have done at convincing every American male that he's an individualistic freethinker who can express his superiority to the masses through his purchase choices. Those guys are probably the same 92% of driving-age American males who believe that they're above average in driving skills.
Paraphrasing Rooster Cogburn in True Grit: If I ever meet an American male who doesn't claim to be a one-of-a-kind nonconformist, I'll shake his hand and give him a five-cent Daniel Webster cigar. It just irks me that so many people think something is great for them because the pros ride it. The pros have achieved a fitness and skill level that few of us mere mortals will ever achieve. And no, sorry, I don't smoke. |
Originally Posted by SpedFast
(Post 22708168)
Yep, I am definitely looking harder at Carbon. I initially had strength concerns, but I just need to wrap my head around it. My concerns don't appear to be based in fact. Smokey
Otto |
Originally Posted by Atlas Shrugged
(Post 22708898)
So you took us till the mid 90’s, almost 30 years ago. You have not explained how steel overcomes it’s massive strength to weight disadvantage to carbon nor the ability to modify the layup throughout the bike. A 1,500 gram carbon bike will be more durable than any equivalent weight steel bike. A Specialized Aethos S-Works comes in at 585grams try that with any other material. But I did enjoy all the fancy branding for what is essentially heat treated steel. But my favorite was the “Differential Shape Butting”.
|
Can you repair a carbon bike frame if crashed ? Not as far as I know.
Of course, you can repair carbon if you crash it. I've ridden and raced on all your listed material chooses and enjoyed them all. At present the bikes left in my stable are made from the following materials. 4 road bikes = all carbon 4 trail bikes = all aluminum 1 bike in progress of being built = steel |
Originally Posted by ZIPP2001
(Post 22708958)
Can you repair a carbon bike frame if crashed ? Not as far as I know.
Of course, you can repair carbon if you crash it. |
Originally Posted by ZIPP2001
(Post 22708958)
Can you repair a carbon bike frame if crashed ? Not as far as I know.
Of course, you can repair carbon if you crash it. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:49 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.