Steel v. Titanium!

meagain

Now we know - all those steel is comfiest contentions are plain wrong.

Mark Appleton (Decathlon Review on Home page) says so: "Swapping an older steel-framed bike for a 21st century titanium and carbon number is a bit like switching from leaf sprung model T Ford to a hydro-pneumatically suspended Citroën luxo-barge. Suddenly you have entered a world of magic carpet, mile-munching comfort...."

McBain_v1

I have both steel and titanium frames - can't say I notice much of a comfort difference, but there is quite a weight difference (although I haven't got my Renolds 953 frame yet).

Nuggs

meagain wrote:

Now we know - all those steel is comfiest contentions are plain wrong.

Mark Appleton (Decathlon Review on Home page) says so: "Swapping an older steel-framed bike for a 21st century titanium and carbon number is a bit like switching from leaf sprung model T Ford to a hydro-pneumatically suspended Citroën luxo-barge. Suddenly you have entered a world of magic carpet, mile-munching comfort...."

IMO, the views of any man who heralds Citroën as a paragon of luxury must be taken with a pinch of salt...

Brixtonbiker

I think you will find he is talking about ride quality and Hydro-pneumatic suspension used in Citroen, Rolls Royce and mercedes cars still provides the best ride quality avaliable.

idaviesmoore

I used to have a Van Nicholls titanium frame. Had it for 3 months but it kept making me feel sick!!?? Switched to carbon and everything was hunky dory again. Never felt right about 'em since.

mrushton

I'm fortunate to own carbon and carbon/titanium and steel bikes. each has it's own personality. i went with my partner to Sunday Cycles intending to get her an audax/winter type bike. She did get one but I took along my steel Corrado (m-guards) as I considered replacing it. I got on the bike and within 5 mins decided I was keeping it. All it required was a new stem/bars as my position has changed slightly. But the actual feel of the bike over the road was excellent. Would I rather ride the steel instead of the carbon Serotta - no but neither would I bin it. A good steel bike is excellent and while not as 'sexy' as some exotic bike, they do the job well. By 'good' I'll say Serotta CDA or Colnago Master or Vanillat the top end with custom following on subject to material used.

portuguese mike

meagain wrote:

Now we know - all those steel is comfiest contentions are plain wrong.

Mark Appleton (Decathlon Review on Home page) says so: "Swapping an older steel-framed bike for a 21st century titanium and carbon number is a bit like switching from leaf sprung model T Ford to a hydro-pneumatically suspended Citroën luxo-barge. Suddenly you have entered a world of magic carpet, mile-munching comfort...."

Well he's not exactly making a fair comparison then is he. how about comparing a 21st century steel bike (True temper S3 or Reynolds 953 tubing for example) with a modern Ti bike?

When i chose my frame (Waterford R33) i rode it back to back against a Moots Vamoots Ti bike and although that was a fantstic bike and was beautfuly finished it simply didn't ride as well the Waterford. Having just finished the etape on it i can vouch for its all day comfort.

I'm not suggesting that Ti bikes don't ride well or that a steel bike will always ride better (there may well be a more comfortable ti frame out there i haven't tried) but i just think that the reviewer is making unfair comparsions.

PS i also had a colnago master x light and that rode like a dream too.

giant_man

Mike did you have the Master X Light you can buy now or was yours a 90s bike?

portuguese mike

giant mancp wrote:

Mike did you have the Master X Light you can buy now or was yours a 90s bike?

It was a nineties bike with a full on lurid red/green/yellow paint job and polished power forks it even had campag delta brakes, i loved that bike. it's still in the family though as my brother has it now.

simon johnson

What about 'modern' steel?

I ride a titanium bike but have recently found myself drooling over Enigma's steel Elite model.

The Elite is Columbus Niobium, does anybody have experience of this type, and, if so, can you compare it to other steel and/or titanium?

Not sure what the weight is (not listed).

aracer

It's all a load of rubbish, as the only things affecting ride comfort are the pressure in your tyres, your saddle and seatpost and the geometry. The material a double diamond frame is made from has an undetectable effect since even the flexiest ti frame has only a tiny fraction of the vertical compliance of your tyres.

portuguese mike

aracer wrote:

It's all a load of rubbish, as the only things affecting ride comfort are the pressure in your tyres, your saddle and seatpost and the geometry. The material a double diamond frame is made from has an undetectable effect since even the flexiest ti frame has only a tiny fraction of the vertical compliance of your tyres.

Whilst i agree with you in terms of the amount of flex there is is in a given frame is very samll and tyres saddle and geometry are far more important, i do think that there is an appreciable difference in the way that different frame materials transmit vibration or 'road buzz' through to the rider which i believe has an effect on how fatiguing a bike may be over long rides.

satanas

aracer wrote:

It's all a load of rubbish, as the only things affecting ride comfort are the pressure in your tyres, your saddle and seatpost and the geometry. The material a double diamond frame is made from has an undetectable effect since even the flexiest ti frame has only a tiny fraction of the vertical compliance of your tyres.

The above is rubbish IMHO! Some frames have a lot more compliance (or flex) than others. Try riding an old bonded alu Vitus or Alan (especially the Alan Tourist) and then get on an older Cannondale with the 1 1 /4" steerer tube and tell me they're the same. All are alu as well. If there's anyone who cannot tell the difference within 50m - billiard tables not included - I'll be very surprised.

And yes, I agree that tyres and tyre pressure make a difference and are easy to change, but honestly...

Further anecdotal evidence: I have ridden Bianchi frames with identical geometry, contact points, wheels and tyre pressure. The difference between the Via Nirone (alu) and 928 (carbon) is not even slightly subtle - the 928 is both vastly more comfortable and more "lively" (for want of a better word). This does *NOT* mean that it flexed excessively.

I can believe that some people are insensitive to differences in frame "feel" but to say that as you cannot detect it it does not exist is not sensible. The same thing happens with crank lengths - some people really don't notice 5mm or more difference in crank length. Others do.

Personally, I get very suspicious about any vehement, blanket generalisations.

tenor

Materials? Well, as much depends upon the individual riders perception and preference for ride characteristics.
Robert Millar summarised this quite well in his test of the original Airborne Zeppelin (Ti). He complimented the bikes stability, comfort and ability to dampen road vibrations, but his overiding impression was that despite these virtues the ride lacked the essential dynamic character of a good road bike and that the bike was ultimately unrewarding to ride. His impression of the (modern) steel Pegoretti Marcello was quite the opposite as he found the ride lively and inspiring.
I also have sympathy for Aracer's view. In a recent C+ test PV concluded that the inclusion of Flax in the frame construction brought a perceptible (placebo?) improvement, but that changing the wheels from deep section rims to low profile handbuilts brought a dramatic improvement in comfort and handling.
Conclusion?
Draw your own, but I'd be quite happy with the Pegoretti dressed with Chorus and Neutrons or handbuilts thank you very much, Santa...

giant_man

[quote="aracer"]It's all a load of rubbish, as the only things affecting ride comfort are the pressure in your tyres, your saddle and seatpost and the geometry. The material a double diamond frame is made from has an undetectable effect since even the flexiest ti frame has only a tiny fraction of the vertical compliance of your tyres.[/quote]
Of course there's a bloody difference man for gods sake!

mrushton

aracer wrote:

It's all a load of rubbish, as the only things affecting ride comfort are the pressure in your tyres, your saddle and seatpost and the geometry. The material a double diamond frame is made from has an undetectable effect since even the flexiest ti frame has only a tiny fraction of the vertical compliance of your tyres.

The Elite is Columbus Niobium, does anybody have experience of this type, and, if so, can you compare it to other steel and/or titanium?

If you can't feel the difference in different frame materials then you either have little experience of frame materials or it just doesn't bother you. i had a Pinarello Paris in Aluminium that just wore you down on rides over 60 miles due to it's stiffness, but it begged you to go fast. My carbon Serotta is smooth, v.comfortable and like the Pinarello thrives on fast riding. I don't consider myself capable of finding out where it's limits end. my Ti/Carbon is like a 'magic carpet' in that whilst not as responsive as the carbon, it 'floats' over poor surfaces.

re; the Niobium. It's a v.high quality steel, very comfortable. i think it tends to be used for more expensive steel bikes like Serottas and vanillas