View Poll Results: Frame Material Preference
Carbon Fiber
40
31.25%
Aluminum
10
7.81%
Steel
61
47.66%
Titanium
17
13.28%
Voters: 128. You may not vote on this poll
Frame Material Preference Poll
12-30-22, 07:04 PM
#201
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,657
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1245 Post(s)
Liked 1,321 Times
in
673 Posts
This is just my experience, yours may differ.
I've only ever ridden 3 TI bikes in my 40 plus years of riding a bike, one of those belonged to a friend of mine, a low price Motobecane he got from Bikes Direct, so I rode it a bunch of times to figure if TI was a worthwhile investment; the other I rode once was a Serotta, can't recall the model, but in the meantime I was test riding a lot of CF bikes.
I had a scandium bike but hated the harsh ride, coming off of steel bikes it was more than noticable the ride was harsh then any of my steel bikes.
When I first rode the TI, yes it/they had a CF fork of course, but the ride quality was indeed better than my steel bikes, by a little but noticeable, but very noticeable over a CF bike. The odd thing about the CF bikes I test rode was that over smooth roads they did ride very smoothly, more so than any bike I have ever been on except for the TI bikes, then they were about the same. But where I live we get a freeze and thaw cycle that tears up roads, and on harsh roads the TI bikes were more comfortable than the CF, the CF would bang across rough roads, the TI bikes did not transmit the banging near as much as the CF. I tried to buy the Motobecane due to the price but they were out of stock over a year and half, in the meantime Lynskey had a closeout sale on the Peloton model so I bought it without ever test riding it, and love the ride on my first ride with it; the Peloton is not a racing geometry bike, closer to the old school sport geometry, so that also makes it comfortable, the Motobecane was more of a racing geometry.
TI bikes with 25c tires ride a lot like steel touring bikes that I had/have with 32 or 38c tires that are loaded, in terms of comfort riding on the road. But I find the TI bike very responsive, not quite as much as a CF bike, more like a steel bike, but you give up a tad of responsiveness to gain a tad more comfort. Of course my comparisons are limited, I haven't rode a bunch of different TI bikes so I can't say if a Moots or whatever brand is better or worse.
Here are my thoughts, if you're going to be racing then buy either an aluminum racing bike if your on a tight budget, or a CF bike if money is no object; but if you're not racing and you want more comfort instead than I say TI or steel bikes, but if weight is a concern then the TI bike weighs about as much as CF and lightweight aluminum bikes weigh, if you want both comfort and lightweightness.
I'm not going to respond to what I've said because some people get pretty intense over this sort of stuff, why I don't know, so to keep any bad vibes from happening I will bow out of all conversations over this stuff, take it or leave it. I will answer questions, but I will not respond to negative comments bashing anything that I said, it's all just my opinion based on my personal experiences and nothing more.
I've only ever ridden 3 TI bikes in my 40 plus years of riding a bike, one of those belonged to a friend of mine, a low price Motobecane he got from Bikes Direct, so I rode it a bunch of times to figure if TI was a worthwhile investment; the other I rode once was a Serotta, can't recall the model, but in the meantime I was test riding a lot of CF bikes.
I had a scandium bike but hated the harsh ride, coming off of steel bikes it was more than noticable the ride was harsh then any of my steel bikes.
When I first rode the TI, yes it/they had a CF fork of course, but the ride quality was indeed better than my steel bikes, by a little but noticeable, but very noticeable over a CF bike. The odd thing about the CF bikes I test rode was that over smooth roads they did ride very smoothly, more so than any bike I have ever been on except for the TI bikes, then they were about the same. But where I live we get a freeze and thaw cycle that tears up roads, and on harsh roads the TI bikes were more comfortable than the CF, the CF would bang across rough roads, the TI bikes did not transmit the banging near as much as the CF. I tried to buy the Motobecane due to the price but they were out of stock over a year and half, in the meantime Lynskey had a closeout sale on the Peloton model so I bought it without ever test riding it, and love the ride on my first ride with it; the Peloton is not a racing geometry bike, closer to the old school sport geometry, so that also makes it comfortable, the Motobecane was more of a racing geometry.
TI bikes with 25c tires ride a lot like steel touring bikes that I had/have with 32 or 38c tires that are loaded, in terms of comfort riding on the road. But I find the TI bike very responsive, not quite as much as a CF bike, more like a steel bike, but you give up a tad of responsiveness to gain a tad more comfort. Of course my comparisons are limited, I haven't rode a bunch of different TI bikes so I can't say if a Moots or whatever brand is better or worse.
Here are my thoughts, if you're going to be racing then buy either an aluminum racing bike if your on a tight budget, or a CF bike if money is no object; but if you're not racing and you want more comfort instead than I say TI or steel bikes, but if weight is a concern then the TI bike weighs about as much as CF and lightweight aluminum bikes weigh, if you want both comfort and lightweightness.
I'm not going to respond to what I've said because some people get pretty intense over this sort of stuff, why I don't know, so to keep any bad vibes from happening I will bow out of all conversations over this stuff, take it or leave it. I will answer questions, but I will not respond to negative comments bashing anything that I said, it's all just my opinion based on my personal experiences and nothing more.
