Multi-Purpose Dream Machine....Steel or Ti?

Muzak

Hi

Please can you help with some advice? I am looking to purchase a bike that will have the following uses:

1) Club rides
2) Occasional competitive events eg Etape & other sportives
3) Audax
4) Commuting

Having done a bit of research I've decided to go for either a titanium or steel frame and push the boat out to get something really nice for a change. Looking to go with either...

A) For titanium I was thinking of a US builder like Moots - a Vamoots or Compact. There are lots of top notch titanium bikes out there but I like the finish of the Moots.

For steel I was thinking of something using lightweight tubing - either Reynolds 953 or light Columbus tubing like Spirit/Life.

I want a bike that lasts for years and gives both good performance and a good feel. Given my 4 intended uses of the bike above, do you have advice or an opinion on whether the two options A) and are good in your view and maybe even which is best?

Many Thanks in Advance

AF

meagain

Difficult to be scientific or even objective at this sort of "which is better" level, but having had 4 or 5 Ti frames of varying types (none at the very top end) and lots of steel (but not the newest specs like 953), I vote titanium.

OTOH I remain of the view that design/geometry/fit (for you and for purpose) is on balance more important than material per se!

giant_man

You have such a huge choice when it comes to decent ti builders, check this list ..........

http://users.skynet.be/lichtsnelheid/TITANIUM/links.htm

Some you may be aware of but not all of them surely. Anyway you can soon sort out what you want and ascertain exactly the kind of quality you need. Good luck.

Muzak

giant mancp wrote:

You have such a huge choice when it comes to decent ti builders, check this list ..........

http://users.skynet.be/lichtsnelheid/TITANIUM/links.htm

Some you may be aware of but not all of them surely. Anyway you can soon sort out what you want and ascertain exactly the kind of quality you need. Good luck.

Many thanks for the list. I take it you would prefer Ti then! Why so?

giant_man

No. I would have one of both actually. All depends on your budget really. There are some really nice ti builders in that list, be sure to check out Serotta and Roark both lovely. Steel wise Waterford are very nice as are Independent Fabrication. Pegoretti also.

gundersen

Well I have had 2 titanium frames (including Litespeed) and loads of steel frames - and all I have now are 3 steel frames.

Because I prefer them.

And I agree totally with what was said earlier: THE DESIGN IS THE IMPORTANT THING - NOT THE MATERIAL

Thats why I own Italian frames. I find American frames under par.

Muzak

meagain wrote:

Difficult to be scientific or even objective at this sort of "which is better" level, but having had 4 or 5 Ti frames of varying types (none at the very top end) and lots of steel (but not the newest specs like 953), I vote titanium.

OTOH I remain of the view that design/geometry/fit (for you and for purpose) is on balance more important than material per se!

Thanks. Will definitely get a full fit done again and work on the design with someone in the know. Nonetheless, can I ask why you prefer ti? :?:

Muzak

gundersen wrote:

Well I have had 2 titanium frames (including Litespeed) and loads of steel frames - and all I have now are 3 steel frames.

Because I prefer them.

And I agree totally with what was said earlier: THE DESIGN IS THE IMPORTANT THING - NOT THE MATERIAL

Thats why I own Italian frames. I find American frames under par.

Thanks. I prefer Italian steel but the US Ti like Moots on appearance alone. Moots is also half-price if bought in the US :shock:

Why for you prefer steel then - can you pin it down? Why get rid of the Litespeed?

gundersen

A steel Tommasini rides better than a Litespeed - so why pay more if it is not neccesary.
It is a question of design.

Ok , maybe a Moots looks good, but is that what its all about? Isn't it the ride as first priority and looks as nr. 2.

meagain

"can I ask why you prefer ti?"

Ah! This is of course where the "design" elememt might colour my judgement. My most "comfortable" and "best" bike (also entirely subjective) might have been so whatever MATERIAL the frame was made of. It happened to be Ti!

More objectively, I love the finish, plain or polished, and the fact that it doesn't chip/scratch like paint (and I know can paint Ti but I really don't see why).

giant_man

[quote="meagain"]Difficult to be scientific or even objective at this sort of "which is better" level, but having had 4 or 5 Ti frames of varying types (none at the very top end) and lots of steel (but not the newest specs like 953), I vote titanium.

OTOH I remain of the view that design/geometry/fit (for you and for purpose) is on balance more important than material per se![/quote]
The design and how the frame's geometry fits you might be important of course, but if you had identical geometries built into two frames, one in steel and one in ti, they would feel different. For sure.

Blonde

To the OP: I love my Serotta steelie - but I wouldn't like to ride it in winter or for commuting. I ride a cheaper steel framed fixed at the moment for the commute, but I am hoping to get a Ti winter/audax frame which I can use for commuting as well. If you only have one bike to do all that, I would go for Ti if you can afford it. It doesn't corrode. A steel commuter will need a lot of TLC if you ride it in winter and in all weathers. Not saying it can't be done though - I have ridden steel to commute (and do audax - on the same bike, day in, day out) for several years, but it wont last forever and it does need a wipe down after every wet/salty ride to ensure it lasts as long as possible. I suppose the main advantage of Ti for commuting is you can ride it and forget about it - to some extent at least. You still have to clean the chain etc of course, though!

meagain

"but if you had identical geometries built into two frames, one in steel and one in ti, they would feel different. For sure."

That's the bit about which I am not convinced! Surely it would be determined by the precise spec of each material? Gas pipe steel would not feel like top-end Ti. Nor would cheapest plain gauge Ti equal say 853? I'm sort of using "design" to mean more than asemblage of the tubes, rather incorporating themanipulation of the tubing itself.

But then I'm not a materials scientist, so purely opinion only!

gundersen

I would like to stick my neck out and say:

If you built 4 frames - 1 from each of the following materials steel, titanium, aluminium and carbon fiber to exactly the same design then they would also ride the same. The only difference would be in weight.

Thats why I say design is the most important factor.
And Italians can design motorbikes, cars and bicycles.

alan_sherman

No - if you built 4 frames exactly the same (i..e tube thickness) then they wouldn't feel the same at all. An Aluminium alloy frame made to steel tube thicknesses would break in no time. The materials all have different elastic modulii (how much they stretch under load) so would feel different, primarily noticable in terms of flex.

Good design would optimise the geometry for handling combined with tube thicknesses, butting (lay up layers) and profiling for stiffness and strength.

redddraggon

alan sherman wrote:

No - if you built 4 frames exactly the same (i..e tube thickness) then they wouldn't feel the same at all. An Aluminium alloy frame made to steel tube thicknesses would break in no time. The materials all have different elastic modulii (how much they stretch under load) so would feel different, primarily noticable in terms of flex.

Good design would optimise the geometry for handling combined with tube thicknesses, butting (lay up layers) and profiling for stiffness and strength.

Spoken like a true materials Scientist!

mrushton

gundersen wrote:

I would like to stick my neck out and say:

If you built 4 frames - 1 from each of the following materials steel, titanium, aluminium and carbon fiber to exactly the same design then they would also ride the same. The only difference would be in weight.

Thats why I say design is the most important factor.
And Italians can design motorbikes, cars and bicycles.

No they wouldn't. would your steel or ti frame be lugged or tig welded? Would the carbon be lugged or monocoque. What alloy for your Alu bike? Pinarello made the Prince in one material and the Prince SL in ahigher grade/military spec alloy

gundersen

I said design.

Not tube thickness or what type of lugs and so on.

mrushton

gundersen wrote:

I said design.

Not tube thickness or what type of lugs and so on.

Actually you said building the frames to the same design. A design is not the same as a build imo

richardjallen

There's a guy at work who insists that any bike made with tubes is inferior and a proper reliable bike is made from solid bars of metal welded together. It seems to me that a bike made from solid bars would be so heavy it would not be strong enough to support its own weight.

giant_man

richardjallen wrote:

There's a guy at work who insists that any bike made with tubes is inferior and a proper reliable bike is made from solid bars of metal welded together. It seems to me that a bike made from solid bars would be so heavy it would not be strong enough to support its own weight.

tyskie

gundersen wrote:

I said design.

Not tube thickness or what type of lugs and so on.

I think it was quite clear what you were saying. Strikes me that some people were just trying to be smart. :roll:

By the way, which italian steel frames would you go for? When my femur finally heals back to one piece again, I really fancy splashing out on a Colnago Master X-Light or a Tommasini Tecno.

Muzak

Blonde wrote:

To the OP: I love my Serotta steelie - but I wouldn't like to ride it in winter or for commuting. I ride a cheaper steel framed fixed at the moment for the commute, but I am hoping to get a Ti winter/audax frame which I can use for commuting as well. If you only have one bike to do all that, I would go for Ti if you can afford it. It doesn't corrode. A steel commuter will need a lot of TLC if you ride it in winter and in all weathers. Not saying it can't be done though - I have ridden steel to commute (and do audax - on the same bike, day in, day out) for several years, but it wont last forever and it does need a wipe down after every wet/salty ride to ensure it lasts as long as possible. I suppose the main advantage of Ti for commuting is you can ride it and forget about it - to some extent at least. You still have to clean the chain etc of course, though!

Thanks Blonde - that sounds like practical advice. I already have a FS MTB and a Ribble winter bike so will need to lose the Ribble to make space for the new bike in my flat. So, in short, the new bike does need to be multi-purpose. Plus, as much as I love bikes, I am a bit slack about cleaning them. Just want to ride really I would want to use the new bike for sportives as well - although I enter these for fun more than for any realistic chance of a high-placing. Will be doing some audax too. Steel appeals and is a material I am familiar with but I do have a concern around it's maintenance and apart from ti was considering 953 due to my perception of it being both light and rust-free.

portuguese mike

If you live down south get yourself down to Rock n Road in Southampton. they're dealers for Moots and Waterford. they provide a full bike fit session (takes 4 hours) and let you properly test ride the bikes for as long as you want.

i test rode both last summer and plumped for the waterford and i love it (the moots was pretty good too, mind).

giant_man

tyskie wrote:

gundersen wrote:

I said design.

Not tube thickness or what type of lugs and so on.

I think it was quite clear what you were saying. Strikes me that some people were just trying to be smart. :roll:

By the way, which italian steel frames would you go for? When my femur finally heals back to one piece again, I really fancy splashing out on a Colnago Master X-Light or a Tommasini Tecno.

I am in that place right now, the X-Light or the Techno/Sintesi, it is a hard choice. Nice traditional steel lugged frames.

portuguese mike

tyskie wrote:

gundersen wrote:

I said design.

Not tube thickness or what type of lugs and so on.

I think it was quite clear what you were saying. Strikes me that some people were just trying to be smart. :roll:

By the way, which italian steel frames would you go for? When my femur finally heals back to one piece again, I really fancy splashing out on a Colnago Master X-Light or a Tommasini Tecno.

i used to have on of those in the 90's (my brother has it now) and i loved it but it is a lot heavier than my Waterford frame

Muzak

giant mancp wrote:

tyskie wrote:

gundersen wrote:

I said design.

Not tube thickness or what type of lugs and so on.

I think it was quite clear what you were saying. Strikes me that some people were just trying to be smart. :roll:

By the way, which italian steel frames would you go for? When my femur finally heals back to one piece again, I really fancy splashing out on a Colnago Master X-Light or a Tommasini Tecno.

I am in that place right now, the X-Light or the Techno/Sintesi, it is a hard choice. Nice traditional steel lugged frames.

If you have steel and ti at present what will a Tecno add that you don't already have if you don't mind me asking?

gundersen

TYSKIE

Have 2 Tommasini Tecno's at the moment. One of them is a Tecnolight.
Guess that they weigh about 1.6 and 1.3 kg. Use carbon forks on both.

If I was to buy a new bike today then I guess that I would also look at Colnago X-light, DeRosa Neo Primato or a Tommasini Fire.

giant_man

I am leaning towards the Colnago X-Light but the weight of 1650g puts me off a little. I don't know at this stage the built up weight of course. A light steel frame lugged or not seems to be a rare thing. I don't know what the likes of Waterford or Pegoretti are like.

tyskie

Have been looking at the Neo Primato - very nice. The Fire isn't quite as traditional looking as the Tecno but I guess it has modern performance enhancers as part of the design. Out of all of them I prefer the X-Light. Great reviews, has the name and looks amazing, especially in the classic retro paint job. Shame it's a few hundred quid more than the others (but I guess the 'name' costs extra).

gundersen

My Tommasini Tecnolight complete is a heavy 8.2 kg