Oh I take my share... Nobody is immune here.

I had a lot of fun one afternoon playing with a mix of aluminum powder and rust ignited by strips of magnesium. Man that stuff BURNS!

Thermite is cool stuff.

fify

Interesting link on the corrosion issues.

http://www.paketabikes.com/index.cfm?page=corrosion

I see what you did there.

I recall these interesting I-beam magnesium frames being sold in the 80's:
http://bikehugger.com/images/blog/kirk_precision.jpg

The magazine article described the maker (Kirk?) driving his car over the frame, then reinstalling the wheels and riding it away, completely true & unbent, allegedly.

Actually, I was making fun of his misuse of the word "brunt".

I think we all agree that this scenario should be the overriding criteria for bicycle frame material selection.

Oy, my reply was to if it could burn, not if you should make frames out of it.

Just to add some more stupidity to this thread.

Here is what I imagine a Mg cyclist would look like:
http://www.maniacworld.com/flaming-bicycle-rider.jpg

:lol:

I've said it before hereabouts, my Litech Mg frame possesses the best combination of ride characteristics of any of my bikes. It is as stiff and light as my CF bikes; Colnago C40, Velo Vie Vitesse 100 and Look 386. It rides as smoothly and forgivingly as my Steel Torelli Express and Ciocc COM 12.5 and tops the ride quality of my Tommaso Super Legerra Ti. It's also nearly as stiff as my stiffest frame, BMC Race Master (mix of CF and Al). I only wish more builders offered more Mg frames. Other than Segal, I am unaware of other builders currently offering Mg frames. When it's going to be a long ride at a fast pace with ample climbing, I'll take Mg.

Interesting. If you had to decide between your favorite carbon bike and the Litech to do 95% of your riding, which one would you choose? Why?

Was your Litech made in Russia?

At what point was this up for debate?

I had a look at the Segal website. They look like reasonably nice bikes, but for making such a big deal about weight, they're nothing special. They claim 1175g for a frame (what size?). That's maybe 150g heavier than a top-notch AL frame and 150g lighter than a top-notch steel frame. It's about 300 grams heavier than a very good carbon frame.

There are many different ways to measure a bike's value, and weight is relatively low down on the list for me. If it rides nice, then that is much, much more important. I've never ridden a mag frame, so I can't comment on that. However, for all of you that comment on how light a mag frame is, I think you might need a little reality check. Like I said initially, the specific stiffness and specific strength of most bike materials are frustratingly similar. Carbon being the outlier. There just aren't big gains to be found on the scales when it comes to bike construction.

Yes, the Kirk frame -- die cast as a single unit. IIRC, it tended to fail because of voids in the casting.
http://www.kirk-bicycles.co.uk/Kirk.htm

If I HAD to choose (which I don't have to do), I'd go with the Litech because of its better comfort over the long haul. Also, on a metal frame, I worry less about the consequences of crashing. A metal fame may bend but it's not going to shatter like CF. Yes, it's a Russian Litech. I bought the frame well-used from a cat in Salt Lake City. The frame was branded by a local SLC shop as "Salt Cycles".

You getting extra brownie points amongst your pals for making that statement, jimbo?

Is the 41 the only place you find dumb people, jimbo?

You ever come across dumb people personally, in real life, jimbo?

Was I debating? You and halfspeed should have a discussion. It could go more pages than a pCad thread.

;-)

I was just enjoying the irony of this comment, given your name!

I hoped there were more folks like you with both magnesium and carbon frames.

My guess is if extruding and welding were easier, you'd see a lot more Mg frames. With more frames and more competition, Mg might very well compete with carbon.

What I don't get is the Segal Mg frame is heavier than some aluminum frames. For example the Spooky Skeletor is 1 kg, my Podio is 1.2 kg (56cm), and the Segal frame is listed at 1.18 kg (54cm). So there really isn't too much weight savings with the frames that I found, definitely no where near the weight of carbon. Granted, there is supposedly better vibration damping, but if that was your only concern then just get carbon, because the costs should be comparable because of the processing costs associated with manufacturing Mg.

I do remember that from an old chemistry set. Very explosive!

Wow! What he said exactly.

Kinda funny that the Zinn dogs carbon fiber for its potential to catastrophically fail, and belittles its ride quality as no better than magnesium, then on the Fassa magnesium framed bike page, it's pictured with a carbon fork.

http://zinncycles.com/Zinn/?page_id=127

Alpha Q is one of the very few mfgrs that offer forks with really long steerers,
which Zinn needs for the long headtubes on his tall frames.

Unless thats where you keep that book.

Paketa's Magnesium tandem +/- 20 LBS.

No.