Carbon vs Titanium
mike ives
Posts: 319
A friend of mine has suggested that titanium framed bike have a better effort - power performance than similar carbon framed models. I remain unconvinced about this as far as I am aware, the vast majority of professional road racers use carbon and if it was the case why are they not using titanium.
Can anyone shed some light on this for me?
Can anyone shed some light on this for me?
0
Comments
-
How the frame is built and geometry is a bigger factor than material. But taking identical size/geometry I think carbon is more efficient due to the stiffness, and can be built into a lighter frame. Titanium give more flex though so can offer a more comfortable ride.Carlsberg don't make cycle clothing, but if they did it would probably still not be as good as Assos0
-
I think the pros use carbon as it offers a lot more in the way of customisation; they could in theory specify different lay-ups of the carbon, more layers at stress areas, less in unstressed areas for lightness etc. Titanium tube is, ultimately, tube. You can get different pre-formed sections, but you're basically just welding tubes together.
Of course I'm only offering my 2p-worth from design/manufacturing and teaching experience, I'd be interested to hear the views of anyone with relevant bike building knowledge?
From a day-to-day point of view I prefer Ti because of those 2 crucial carbon-fibre related words - 'catastrophic failure'.Litespeed Tuscany, Hope/Open Pro, Ultegra, pulling an Extrawheel trailer, often as not.
FCR 4 (I think?)
Twitter: @jimjmcdonnell0 -
jimmcdonnell wrote:I think the pros use carbon as it offers a lot more in the way of customisation; they could in theory specify different lay-ups of the carbon, more layers at stress areas, less in unstressed areas for lightness etc. Titanium tube is, ultimately, tube. You can get different pre-formed sections, but you're basically just welding tubes together.
Of course I'm only offering my 2p-worth from design/manufacturing and teaching experience, I'd be interested to hear the views of anyone with relevant bike building knowledge?
From a day-to-day point of view I prefer Ti because of those 2 crucial carbon-fibre related words - 'catastrophic failure'.
do you use carbon forks?'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
I think the pro's ride carbon frames,'cos they are supplied them.
If they were supplied with Reynolds 531,they'd ride them,& I dont think that average race speeds would suffer.
Us amateurs can pick whichever fad is going & indulge ourselves to our wallets content(s)!
The key to me is that the fit of the frame is the most important,then a factor of comfort/weight dependant on the useage planned for.
Then go buy the best damn wheels you can afford,as these will give you,buck for buck,more performance gains.
Think about it,a lot of people will shell out 2 grand on a frame,which may well not give you one jot of performance improvement over your previous frame,but if you were to shell out the same on a pair of Lightweight wheels (yep,the German ones), I'm sure you would feel a difference in performance.
PS Mick Ives....is that the Legendary Mick Ives,bike racer extrodinare?so many cols,so little time!0 -
mike ives wrote:A friend of mine has suggested that titanium framed bike have a better effort - power performance than similar carbon framed models. I remain unconvinced about this as far as I am aware, the vast majority of professional road racers use carbon and if it was the case why are they not using titanium.
Can anyone shed some light on this for me?
i'd say that it depends on the build of the bike. Both types of material can be built to respond in different ways. Someone like Serotta or Parlee will tailor the bike to the rider whereas a standard frame is made to suit 'everyone'M.Rushton0 -
I couldn't decide, I have two carbon road bikes (one is a TT) and the third(winter/trainer) is awaiting a new Litespeed Ti frame.
Both bases covered.0 -
'I am afraid not Nick.0
-
What I have always wanted to see in a bike is military grade titanium and magnesium weave instead of the carbon. Would be interesting to see how that or twintex holds up on a bike. :P
:P 0 -
They both, ultimately can built up to be more 'forgiving' or stiffer, racier frames. Depends on the design brief!
Alot of race bikes are carbon, so they are built stiffer. Alot of race bikes are Ti, so they are also built to be stiff. There are a few touring and auduax bikes made out of titainium, so they will be built with more engineered 'flex' in the seat stays, giving a more comfortable ride, and the perception that Ti bikes are more comfortable - you don't see (m)any carbon touring bikes do ya!? Yes, you do get carbon long distance race frames, like the bikes used in the Paris-Roubaix.
But, as I said before, you could probably engineer a stiff race frame out of swiss cheese, and a flexy frame out of glass, if you were that way inclined. I'd be looking at the intended use of the bike frame, rather than material it's constructed out of, to give you a clue to it's stiffness.Boo-yah mofo
Sick to the power of rad
Fix it 'till it's broke0 -
I think your mate iswrong. Look at team GB = how many Ti bikesdid they win with on the track ? And Ti is easier to build with and cheaper than molding carbon ?0
-
I think you're grasping at straws with carbon vs titanium in this "effort-power" thing
you talk about. You won't notice any "effort-power" difference in higher end bikes.
Where did your friend hear about this, so called, "effort-power" stuff? Some bicycle
advertisement? Sounds like something THEY would say.0 -
dennisn wrote:I think you're grasping at straws with carbon vs titanium in this "effort-power" thing
you talk about. You won't notice any "effort-power" difference in higher end bikes.
Where did your friend hear about this, so called, "effort-power" stuff? Some bicycle
advertisement? Sounds like something THEY would say.
It was his friend that said it, not the OP...0 -
I'm gonna just come out and say it.
Most carbon bikes are carbon because its fashionable. :? I bet they move on to the next material 10 years down the line.0 -
downfader wrote:I'm gonna just come out and say it.
Most carbon bikes are carbon because its fashionable. :? I bet they move on to the next material 10 years down the line.
Incorrect.
The height of fashion at the moment is 'retro' steel...
Of course 'they' will move to another material if a better one comes along.0 -
Carlsberg don't make cycle clothing, but if they did it would probably still not be as good as Assos0
-
NapoleonD wrote:downfader wrote:I'm gonna just come out and say it.
Most carbon bikes are carbon because its fashionable. :? I bet they move on to the next material 10 years down the line.
Incorrect.
The height of fashion at the moment is 'retro' steel...
Of course 'they' will move to another material if a better one comes along.
Actually you're right. With the brass lugs or summit. Quality looking bikes though 0 -
NapoleonD wrote:downfader wrote:I'm gonna just come out and say it.
Most carbon bikes are carbon because its fashionable. :? I bet they move on to the next material 10 years down the line.
Incorrect.
The height of fashion at the moment is 'retro' steel...
Of course 'they' will move to another material if a better one comes along.
I sort of disagree that "they" will move on to a "better" material. I'm thinking that "better or not" they will move on to a NEW material which they will call better.
0 -
dennis, you are incredibly cynical about these things!0
-
NapoleonD wrote:dennis, you are incredibly cynical about these things!
Yes I am, and thanks for noticing. I've just passed my 60th birthday and am taking a class in how to be a mean old geezer. It's all part of the training.
And if YOU think I'm cynical, well, I have pretty much driven my wife insane in the past 30 years. Once again, all part of the plan. :twisted:0 -
Heh heh, sure you're not the teacher? 0
-
Well personally I think carbon is better as you can get it light and stiff, whereas trying to get a light stiff titanium bike is darn hard (impossible?). In fact I'm tempted to stick my neck out and say titanium is the worst bike material out of the 4 main ones.
Steel for a solid reliable bike.
Aluminium for a stiff, light racer on a budget.
Carbon for ultimate racer in terms of lightness and stiffness.
Titanium well just an expensive alternative to steel really, oh but you don't need to paint it wow :roll:0 -
Hmmm eh have you ever ridden a Ti bike?0
-
Yeah why?0
-
because you seem to be as ignorant of the ride quality as you are of the material.....
Ride quality means nothing when applied to materials, remember Raleigh MT4 frames they were titanium and were dreadfull, equally Raleigh Special Products built some darn expensive but good titanium frames.
Feel free to discuss which bit of my previous post you don't agree with? Maybe you think titanium needs paint, or that aluminium isn't good for making an affordable light stiff race bike?0 -
eh wrote:because you seem to be as ignorant of the ride quality as you are of the material.....
Ride quality means nothing when applied to materials, remember Raleigh MT4 frames they were titanium and were dreadfull, equally Raleigh Special Products built some darn expensive but good titanium frames.
Feel free to discuss which bit of my previous post you don't agree with? Maybe you think titanium needs paint, or that aluminium isn't good for making an affordable light stiff race bike?
saying that 'titanium is just an expensive alternative to steel' is a bit like saying that carbon fibre is just an expensive alternative to fibreglass, or that beer is just an expensive alternative to water - there is a bit more to it than that.0 -
Thanks to everyone for commenting.
Clearly a simple comparison doesn't work as there are several factors involved. From the discussion I am inclined to believe that for the same stiffness a carbon frame could be built lighter and as pointed out, a more detailed specification could be applied to the build of a carbon frame than that of Ti. As an example, the wrap on a carbon frame can be specified to be laid thicker/thinner in certain places or applied in different weave directions where required. This isn't not necessarily be applicable to Ti?
I am not sure if I have got this exactly right though as I suggest from the discussion that professionals road racers require bikes which are light, stiff and custom built. Surely this must be more relevant to carbon?
However, thanks again.0 -
Not too sure about pro's bikes HAVING to be custom built (size wise)
Armstrong used a stock size treck for his 7 TDF wins,which was actually a bit large for him on the seat post length (might have used a 58cm,from memory),& he used the slightly large frame,as it gave him the correct top tube length,as i seem to recal.
People harp on about needing custom sizing,but the reality is with different stem sizes,varying seatpost laybacks,etc, the VAST majority of us really have no need for custom,& that includes the post.
I think we get dragged in by the marketing :roll:so many cols,so little time!0 -
Titanium is more durable than carbon, less knocks and scratches. I weighed up both materials when spending 3k on my bike. The best imho was a carbon fork with ti frame. My front wheel has a carbon hub and my seatpost is carbon. I wouldn't say one material is better than the other, it is a simple personal preference.
I think my bike rocks but I still get misty eyed when I see a beautiful carbon De Rosa, Colnago, Parlee or other full carbon bike.
A mixture of excellent materials is surely the best we can get both carbon and titanium are excellent, light, strong and aesthetically pleasing.0
