I didn't say it couldn't be made into a perfectly serviceable frame, I said that was it main advantage over other materials. Half the strength of steel, twice as heavy as aluminum.

I like the color in that photo, but I would leave one or two of the tubes unpainted just to give it that nice contrast.

Since the OP asked about experiences with Ti, please share your experiences that led to this conclusion.

I've never heard this stat before. Would you please back it up with a reference?

Please read my posts about Seven, Litespeed, Merlin, Lemond, etc.

I don't think you mean "heavy". I think you mean dense. Which is kind of ironic under the circumstances. ;)

The question is what does a finished frame weigh that is strong and stiff enough in the right places. Titanium provides that combination quite similarly to aluminum. Being in the middle between steel and aluminum (approximately), it probably can't get to the same low frame weights that aluminum can without running afoul of the "too thin" tube issue and the tendency to dent. It also isn't a great candidate for making very complex tubes by hydroforming like aluminum is. No it isn't perfect. But it is a wonderful bike frame material. As I said, my Merlin Works CR only weighs 1,207 g in size M, about 1 lb more than the bulk of lightweight CF or 1.5 lb more than the lightest of the lightest. Rides great. Looks great. What is not to like?

Depending on what you prioritize. To reduce that much weight on a bike between 16-18 lbs will cost you a lot of money. As I said before, I am not willing to take that weight penalty AND having a relatively flexy frame vis-a-vis good carbon frame. YMMV

Yeah. I think my Seven frame is about 3 pounds, about the same as the CAAD5 I used to have and about a pound less than most of the steel frames I have had.
It's also quite stiff, similar to the CAAD5 but not as brutal on rough roads. Still, beats me up pretty good and I wouldn't want anything stiffer. I have ridden a Moots and it felt like a spring compared to the Seven.

Fair enough assuming your classification of the Ti frame as flexy is based on personal experience. As it turns out, both my Ti and CF bikes weigh the same and cost just about the same, 13.5 lb without pedals, cages or computer stuff for about $3,500. Home built of course from variously sourced parts. I would like to lighten the CF bike with a 700 g frame, but that's just beyond what I want to spend right now. Thing is I love both the CF and the Ti. Just lucky I guess.

yea, I dig it! Same feelings about my Ti and CF bikes. Not really much more than an pound or a bit more in weight difference yet both have distinctively different ride characteristics. I would not call the Ti a spring or noodle at all, nor would I call the CF a piece of wood.

The comment a few posts back about the cost of the DeRosa at $15 grand: Sure, build any bike with Super Record EPS and see what it costs! Build a Colnago C-60 with SR EPS and you are in the same cost bracket.

close thread





Soooo...what do we chat about now?

If you buy a brand new frame from them ($3000) made from round carbon fiber tubes (not monocoque) which precludes taking full advantage of the material.

Starting with an existing titanium frame you just pay for couplers and labor, keeping your great fit.

I have been riding my Tuscany for nearly 15 years (gift on my 50th birthday). It's still a fun ride and I can vouch for its longevity, but I can't compare with cf since I've never even sampled a cf bike.
Based on my informal on-the - street survey, it seems many ti bike riders buy them to match their greying hair - maybe older riders appreciate different things.

I think it is $700 to get a quote to have a frame built. ;)

ti can be stiff as a board where it counts. My Salsa is a rocket when you get on it, not noodly whatsoever,and no, it doesn't have to look boring:

http://salsacycles.com/files/bikes/W...v_1440x960.jpg

Should be easy enough to ask the CF owners how their bike has held up over the past 15 years.

Most good CF bikes weren't made that long ago. Sort of like asking people how their Apple phones held up over the last 15 years.

True. So the jury's still out I guess. OTOH the iphone has a shelf life of 2-3 years and has planned obsolescence which I think most are aware of.

Mine is a 2004. Getting close. Takes a licking, keeps on ticking.

Dang that is spicy. Ay ay ay ay ay ay!

This is a proper use of ti. Very nice indeed. How much does it weight in this guise?

Greatest advantage? It isnt crabon fiber.

Interesting...steel is the most flexible of the three metals from which bike frames are made...with titanium and aluminum getting more rigid.

Carbon eliminates the vibration you typically find in metal bikes, especially aluminum.

Titanium will last a long time, but like carbon, steel and aluminum, there are major variations in tube grade quality.

It's like talking to a customer about carbon bikes....they immediately believe carbon is "lighter" but a CAAD10 aluminum frame is lighter than almost all the entry level carbon frames.

Point, there are some wonderful ride qualities to titanium, but it is not all created equal, as all the other materials from which frames are made.

I know several people who are still riding Trek 5200's. Late 90's version. But the ride quality on the newer frames is much better. Tube shaping, seat and chain stay design...all contribute to improved rideability.

About 10 years ago, IMO, was when the ride quality improved. If you look at the old 5200 and 5500 Trek's, round tubes with tuning fork seat stays. That has all changed. Cannondale's improved chain stay design. Shaped tubing not only improved the ride but shaved weight.

Kitted out the way I have it at the moment including multiple lights, pedals, tubeless tires, 6800, crabon bars, cages, stem & post... 20.5# Frame/Fork weight is 3.7#.

Not a lightweight, but neither am I, 200# @5'10"...:roflmao2:

It is a shame we can't all get together in person and exchange bikes to show folks what we are talking about. I wonder how a round-robin like that would affect perceptions. Maybe, maybe not, eh?

Well it is fun to let a customer test out a few different frames. Like an entry aluminum, versus higher quality shaped aluminum. There is a distinct difference.

If you can get your hands on a late 90's to early 2000's carbon frame versus even the entry stuff today. It's day and night.

But this is the "41" in the bike think tank...;)

I can assure you that at least half these '41' personalities would not show up in person, because they are not the personalities they project online.

Always remember, on the internet you can be who and what you want to be ... who would know otherwise? :thumb:





But I digress.