Titanium - why?

omri

I have to admit I never really gave a lot of thought to titanium frames. Just recently came across the Baum bicycle in another thread. So I guess I have to ask whats all the fuss about?

I came to cycling without the "classic" background - so Im not big fan of steel road frames etc.. Its carbon ftw all the way but them Baums are nice looking...

Idleater

If you have to ask...

Jawgap

Comfort although some people think there's no difference (or little difference).

I certainly find my Sabbath to be a lot more comfortable on longer distances than my carbon or alu bike.

lennymc

A nice steel bike is lovely to ride. They feel nicer and more comfortable than carbon. I have a nice colnago super that I really must build up...

Never ridden titanium.

Lumen

Light, nice tube profiles for a traditional looking bike, doesn't need paint so wears very well, feels good to the touch.

Also, it's TITANIUM. It's what our future robot overlords will be made of.

Jawgap

........and write songs about it.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fz4MzJTeL0c

tunney

Better resistance than carbon to armour piercing shells

Beasty

Lumen wrote: »

Also, it's TITANIUM. It's what one of our current robot overlords is made of.

FYP

happytramp

Once upon a time Aluminium was seen as an exotic material. Then it was carbon, now it's Titanium. Carbon is pretty much the bog standard frame building material these days hence the desire for something more exotic. I suspect in 5 years we'll all be cycling woodello bikes

tunney

happytramp wrote: »

Once upon a time Aluminium was seen as an exotic material. Then it was carbon, now it's Titanium. Carbon is pretty much the bog standard frame building material these days hence the desire for something more exotic. I suspect in 5 years we'll all be cycling woodello bikes

You are new to cycling aren't you? Titanium was en vogue 20 years ago, never took off mainstream but never went away. Ti was the exotic material before carbon, and even before alu was established. I remember there was a mountain bike where the rear suspension was achieved by flexible TI joins......

Ti was also more established as a frame building material before Alu. In the days when high end bikes were Reynolds 501 tubing Ti was knocking.

Showing my age (and your ignorance )

tunney

tunney wrote: »

You are new to cycling aren't you? Titanium was en vogue 20 years ago, never took off mainstream but never went away. Ti was the exotic material before carbon, and even before alu was established. I remember there was a mountain bike where the rear suspension was achieved by flexible TI joins......

Ti was also more established as a frame building material before Alu. In the days when high end bikes were Reynolds 501 tubing Ti was knocking.

Showing my age (and your ignorance )

Damn it what was the name of that mountain bike? would have been 1994.

Bristolscale7

Isn't titanium completely absent from the pro-peloton these days (I could be wrong)? Gone are the days of Virenque winning the KoM on a Lightspeed Vortex.

omri

Is it as durable as say steel frame ? Any dent would damage carbon frame what about titanium ?

Idleater

happytramp wrote: »

Once upon a time Aluminium was seen as an exotic material.

There's a great article / interview with Gary Klein in the April / current Rouleur magazine.
He was originally competing with steel and lost. Back to the drawing board, new exotic paint colours, doubled the price and was suddenly competing with titanium and winning.

bikermartin

tunney wrote: »

You are new to cycling aren't you? Titanium was en vogue 20 years ago, never took off mainstream but never went away. Ti was the exotic material before carbon, and even before alu was established. I remember there was a mountain bike where the rear suspension was achieved by flexible TI joins......

Ti was also more established as a frame building material before Alu. In the days when high end bikes were Reynolds 501 tubing Ti was knocking.

Showing my age (and your ignorance )

Was it not Reynolds 531c and then Reynolds 753 after that. I hated the constant fear of the bike rusting as they did in those days. Much prefer the little maintence on my aluminium frame nowdays.... never had a carbon bike as I think I wouldent do it any justice :eek:

Bristolscale7

I can't speak for bike frames, but in terms of submarines the Soviet titanium hulled ones are deemed to be inferior to American steel submarines. The titanium hulled boats could dive deeper than steel boats but were not as durable to concussion/impact. How this translates into bike frames is another question.

p.s. My first racing bike was a Bottechia with Columbus SL steel tubes....a work of art.

El Vino

I have one and to be honest it's single biggest advantage is no paint to chip or scratch, it is 3 years old and stored in a shed with 5 other bikes (not all mine) which are constantly been taken in and out and all have various scratches on them but the Ti bike is pristine.

I guess you could also achieve the same result with stainless steel or anodized Al but there seems to be a bigger choice of Ti bikes.

happytramp

tunney wrote: »

Ti was also more established as a frame building material before Alu. In the days when high end bikes were Reynolds 501 tubing Ti was knocking.

Showing my age (and your ignorance )

Possibly showing my ignorance again but I'm not sure that Reynolds 501 CroMoly steel tubing was ever considered high end. The 501 set was designed for entry level bikes.... (the smiley makes it okay)

granda

i love my Ti bike bought it as a frame from enigma and built it up myself and it does everything i ask it, it doesnt rust in the winter and no paint to chip, still looks the same 2 years later as it did when i got it, its super comfy over rough stuff and stiff enough to race and big plus is the lifetime warranty. as for carbon i cant comment as i've never ridden one and its stiffer and comfier than steel(which is my winter bike). while no lightweight at 7.7kg in race trim its certainly not heavy. The only downside it the price but i can live with that as i've a frame for life now.

Brian?

happytramp wrote: »

Possibly showing my ignorance again but I'm not sure that Reynolds 501 CroMoly steel tubing was ever considered high end. The 501 set was designed for entry level bikes.... (the smiley makes it okay)

You're right 501 was entry level when I was a lad. 531 was high end.

c50

People buy titanium bikes to show they have money... any rejections?

I sure as hell never felt the need to keep the one i had (cant remember name-small italian company). it had no compliance when compared to master olympic i ride daily and i wouldnt say on par with carbon frames in general.it was the highest grade, 6al 4v possibly..

Plus google any ti frame with the word crack afterwards and your guaranteed results and with those results with companies such as litespeed follow results of terrible customer support. My buddies litespeed cracked at headtube. Given the fact it was 4 years old but sat in a shed with probably 2000km total use, litespeed told him there was nothing they could do that it was 'general wear and tear'


Also for anyone thats racing its pointless. one bad crash and right there youve quite literally shattered a frame into numerous bits- like glass

BailMeOut

Do any Ti bikes have Ti forks? I did some research on them a while back and they all seemed to have carbon forks.

Lumen

c50 wrote: »

People buy titanium bikes to show they have money... any rejections?

I sure as hell never felt the need to keep the one i had (cant remember name-small italian company). it had no compliance when compared to master olympic i ride daily and i wouldnt say on par with carbon frames in general.it was the highest grade, 6al 4v possibly..

Plus google any ti frame with the word crack afterwards and your guaranteed results and with those results with companies such as litespeed follow results of terrible customer support. My buddies litespeed cracked at headtube. Given the fact it was 4 years old but sat in a shed with probably 2000km total use, litespeed told him there was nothing they could do that it was 'general wear and tear'

Also for anyone thats racing its pointless. one bad crash and right there youve quite literally shattered a frame into numerous bits- like glass

There's a whole lot of spuriousness there.

Ti frames aren't necessarily expensive. Planet X were doing some Lynskey ones a while back for less than a grand. You may as well say that carbon frames are bought by people "to show they have money" because a Cipollini carbon frame costs 4k.

Ti just has a different failure mode. I've crashed mine and it didn't shatter. I've crashed carbon frames, one broke and the others were fine. Too little data.

I have seen/heard of busted Litespeeds, both Ti and Al. The Al one was cracked at the BB. So I think that was manufacturer problem, either poor materials/fabrication quality control or flying too close to sensible limits of weight shaving.

I wouldn't race mine either, FWIW, but only because the geometry isn't ideal for it and I like it too much to trash it.

granda

c50 wrote: »

People buy titanium bikes to show they have money... any rejections?

sorry but i have to reject that comment as i definitly dont have loads of money just wanted something different and was willing to pay that price at the time

dave2pvd

Litespeed sponsor pro teams in the US. They raced Ti for years - afterall, that's what Litespeed gave them.

Years and years of pressure from the riders finally convinced Litespeed to make a CF frame. It was a flop. Litespeed declared that CF was an inferior material and that they'd never touch it again. Cue more pressure from the riders. 5 years later and Litespeed's highest performance race bikes are CF. Although they'll still sell you a T1 frame for massive money. However the pros all ride the C1R.

For high performance, nothing touches high-end CF.

fixie fox

happytramp wrote: »

Once upon a time Aluminium was seen as an exotic material. Then it was carbon, now it's Titanium. Carbon is pretty much the bog standard frame building material these days hence the desire for something more exotic. I suspect in 5 years we'll all be cycling woodello bikes

First it was steel (alloy), then titanium, aluminium, carbon. (not strictly linear of course). A nice classic-style Titanium frame will always hold it's good looks. Carbon style changes a lot - frames become dated-looking pretty quick. But that's part of marketing with everything. That's what I like best about my Sabbath (apart from comfort etc) - it will look good forever, it won't rust and it won't splinter.

brownian

I've had two Ti bikes in 10 years. One that I rode for 8 years, including multiple week-long col-fests. Always found it comfy, good rattle absorption. Never thought about the frame from one end of the year to the next. The decals eventually got a bit shabby, but the frame itself was perfect, year in year out. Sure, I crashed it (once quite nastily), but no damage. Bent the derailleur hanger once - bent it back.

Eventually replaced it with another Ti bike (Van Nic Yukon). Replaced it because I couldn't get to to love canti brakes (it was a cross frame), and wanted road brakes. Got em on the new bike, two years ago. New bike, like the old one, is smooth, medium-light, and perfect for general sportif, long tours and all that. I'm certain that in ten years the frame will be as good as ever, tho the ultegra stuff may be tired (that said, the ultegra on the first ti bike is still going strong, or was when I finally sold it on, a couple of months ago.

THAT ALL SAID, I got a carbon bike a few months ago (cannondale evo 6), and have to say that it's faster, more responsive, just as comfortable over long rides, and plain more fun. Right now, I can't see the Ti bike coming out of the shed, except for loaded touring.

FWIW, that's my 2 c.

c50

ok possibly not a richman thing all the time but i do believe a big percentage of people riding them is an 'i have money and want to differentiate myself from everyone else because i can'
The reason i made the comment is the fact that for what you pay it really doesnt make sense to buy, spend 3000$ on a vortex frame to find they wont warranty on a common weld failure spot along the headtube- just doesnt seem right

letape

Brian? wrote: »

You're right 501 was entry level when I was a lad. 531 was high end.

I wouldn't have called 501 entry level. It was an entry race bike! Pretty crap and heavy though like Colombus Cromor or Columbus Aelle.

I put my old Raleigh 501 (record road ace - 1990/1991 or so) in a skip about 4 years ago. I didn't appreciate that it still had some value and was still in pretty good condition!

I do regret selling my Litespeed Vortex titanium frame in 2009 though. It was a beautifully made frame and very comfortable on poor roads, with feel not dissimilar to a high end steel frame and of course much lighter.

ryan0380

If you liked Baum have a look at firefly, beautifully crafted ti bikes.
Ti bikes got a bad name in racing circles for being 'springy' and for that reason became more popular as a kind of do it all touring bike due to them reducing road buzz and being more comfy.
A lot of ti frame manufactures are starting to put this right by making much more responsive ti race frames, won't ever have to same kick as a super stiff carbon bike but won't be found wanting either. Check out kent eriksen and moots vamoots rsl, eriksen makes custom ti frames and can supposedly build them as stiff as you like. Racing ti would appeal to me, I would love to get a super stiff kent eriksen ti race frame.

ROK ON

I bought a Van Nicholas Ventus recently. It's an entry level Van Nic road bike and was purchased to replace a Van Nic Mistral.
It feels heavier than my fully built up. Mistral but that maybe due to having an Ultegra group, whereas I had Red/Force mix on the Mistral.
Got out on her today for four hours around Kildare and Wicklow.
Once I threw my leg over the bar there was no faffing around- the bike was comfy from the get go. Mix of back roads with poor surface and smooth main roads.

The one thing that I will say is that it is an upright frame relative to my other bikes - I have dropped the stem, but I may actually have to slam it - which would be a first for me. Despite that I was as comfortable on the bike as I have been for a long time.
Corners reasonably well despite the 'uprightedness' - but I have to say that I didn't feel confident of throwing it into a corner. The bike felt considerably stiffer than my last Van Nic or my carbon fibre Dolan Hercules (a sponge of a bike). I may race a bit on it next year but probably won't race in the Corkagh Park circuit with it.

Now a lot of this May not be down to the bike - but I used a set of bars that were from another bike. I took off the wheels that I got with the frame and put on a trusty set of Ksyrium elites with Vittoria Open Pave tyres (25mm).
The only new point of contact was a Specialized Toupe saddle. Having never had saddle issues I am having a lot of problems recently. I am unsure why. So I bought a Toupe on the basis of recommendations. One ride is too soon to tell, but I didn't have an issue on it and my ass feels fine.

All in all I purchased the bike as a commuter/trainer/long spins (Audax type).
My initial impression after one data point is that it should work well for its intended purpose.

Idleater

Interestingly I too have recently got a ti bike. I have built up a S&S machine coupled Enigma basically with SRAM red. Back from two weeks pottering about France and the bike was unquestionably comfortable. Like ROK ON, mine is a bit shorter and comfort oriented than my carbon race bike, but it is very similar to my steel frame soma and weighs in between the two (7kg - 8kg - 9.5kg). It feels the kgs lighter than the steel and is much more responsive climbing and accelerating, but it doesn't feel the kgs heavier than the carbon but doesn't have the race bike agility.

Ole Rodrigo

I plan on getting a Van Nicholas Yukon after xmas. Nothing can dissuade me from its awesomeness.

ROK ON

Idleater wrote: »

Interestingly I too have recently got a ti bike. I have built up a S&S machine coupled Enigma basically with SRAM red. Back from two weeks pottering about France and the bike was unquestionably comfortable. Like ROK ON, mine is a bit shorter and comfort oriented than my carbon race bike, but it is very similar to my steel frame soma and weighs in between the two (7kg - 8kg - 9.5kg). It feels the kgs lighter than the steel and is much more responsive climbing and accelerating, but it doesn't feel the kgs heavier than the carbon but doesn't have the race bike agility.

Yep would have said similar- bike was heavier to lift than my Kuota and VanNic. Mistral - but it certainly didn't feel heavy going up some drags today. I might try Sally Gap tmrw and see how it feels.
In terms of stiffness, I would have to admit that I certainly do not have a decent power output, but I am a heavy bugger. On the last Van Nic and on my Dolan I get a lot to rear triangle flex when climbing out of the saddle -'softies it's so noticeable you get wheel rub. I did not get that today - but again only one datapoint.

Ror - I thought long and hard about the Yukon given the superior tyre clearance. In the end I tossed a coin.

ford2600

ror_74 wrote: »

I plan on getting a Van Nicholas Yukon after xmas. Nothing can dissuade me from its awesomeness.

Have been looking there also myself. Be sure to post up if you purchase; seems like an ideal 40th present come May!

Ole Rodrigo

ROK ON wrote: »

Ror - I thought long and hard about the Yukon given the superior tyre clearance. In the end I tossed a coin.

Yeah, not an easy decision. The Ventus does look lovely.

Ole Rodrigo

ford2600 wrote: »

Have been looking there also myself. Be sure to post up if you purchase; seems like an ideal 40th present come May!

I will indeed. Funnily enough, was supposed to get a light tourer for my 40th as well, last June, and was gonna pull the trigger on a Spa Cycles Audax, but I thought I may as well hold out a bit longer for the Yukon - been oogling it for years.

Chiparus

What about magnesium framed bikes?

Idleater

Chiparus wrote: »

What about magnesium framed bikes?

Kirk revolution. Class looking bike in its day.

Fian

Idleater wrote: »

Kirk revolution. Class looking bike in its day.

They actually built bikes out of magnesium? I just googled and it seems they did.

I presume it is a magnesium alloy of some kind, since magnesium burns intensely and is soft enough to bend with your fingers.

But mostly because it burns intensely enough to damage eyesight if you look at it directly. IIRC it willven burn underwater - once lit. Would add a whole new level of excitement to long descents with overheating rims.

Mec-a-nic

tunney wrote: »

Damn it what was the name of that mountain bike? would have been 1994.

Would it be the ibis Bow Ti ? I've ridden one (once) and it was very nice - entire top tube and rear triangle are the rear suspension.

My daily commuter is a 20 year old touring bike, so my next road bike will be titanium as I don't trust CF frames to last that long (and I'm not in competition).

Hi Ho

c50 wrote: »

People buy titanium bikes to show they have money...

I'm not one of those 'people'.

Hi Ho

c50 wrote: »

Also for anyone thats racing its pointless. one bad crash and right there youve quite literally shattered a frame into numerous bits- like glass

Titanium??

tomasrojo

BailMeOut wrote: »

Do any Ti bikes have Ti forks? I did some research on them a while back and they all seemed to have carbon forks.

The lightest Bromptons do. The fork, rear triangle and sometimes the seat post are titanium. The main bit is steel.

Perhaps not what you had in mind!

diomed

c50 wrote: »

People buy titanium bikes to show they have money... any rejections?

My frame cost £650 seven years ago. It still looks new.
If there is a difference between the feel on the road of carbon, aluminium, steel, titanium it isn't major. I have (or had) all frames.
My steel frame is the roughest to ride, but I think that is because of the steel forks and heavy hub gears. Carbon frames probably feel better because the bike is lighter.

If you have a pension and a titanium frame you are sorted for life.
Fwiw the bike that gets all the upgrades is the titanium bike.

Lumen

diomed wrote: »

If you have a pension and a titanium frame you are sorted for life.

The government will shortly be announcing a scheme whereby it will shave 0.15% off your titanium frame every year until you die.

Weight weenies rejoice!

Hi Ho

You really can't compare any materials on a stand-alone basic. It depends on what kind of titanium, steel, carbon, etc, how they are built, and what they are for. I have steel, aluminium, carbon and titanium bikes. All for different uses. Among other things, titanium doesn't rust and doesn't need paint. I f u get the right titanium., geometry and size right for whatever type of cycling you intend to do, then you should have a frame for life unless you are unlucky.

c_brennan

Hey Brownian, I was researching the VN Yukon and saw you have one and mentioned you don't ride it much anymore, any interest in selling?

4068ac1elhodqr

Nano-porous low-density metal foams seem to be the next big thing, may even be suitable for hydrogen release if power assisted.

brownian

c_brennan wrote: »

Hey Brownian, I was researching the VN Yukon and saw you have one and mentioned you don't ride it much anymore, any interest in selling?

Sorry - that'd be a no. I have it set up for touring - carriers F&R, big hefty 36-spoke wheels. So it only gets ridden on bike tours (one a year, most years), but it's staying home.

Thanks all the same!

Lumen

Malani Shy Cellar wrote: »

Nano-porous low-density metal foams seem to be the next big thing

Yes, the damping properties of steel tube/alu foam combinations are particularly interesting (PDF, PDF), although corrosion may be a problem.