difference between steel, alu, carbon and titanium?

ianbar

so after hearing someone getting a titanium bike and being quite specific about it i had started to wonder what the real differences between the materials are? is having a carbon really all that? and is titanium really the best?

DubaiNeil

worms - check
can - check
can opener - check

There are fantastic bikes out there made of each of the materials you have listed (on indeed a mix of them) - what matters most is what fits YOU and what works for YOU and YOUR riding style.

Steel would be seen as "old skool" - but frame builders are still using this material for high end bespoke frame builds

Ti - see below

Aluminium - "lighter" than steel [pound for pound ] - some really great frames available but can be "harsh"

Carbon Fibre - the current "fad" (or "preference" if you prefer...) - can be very light & very stiff. Can also be built very cheaply (in large quantities) so a very good choice from a manufacturing P&L perspective.

FWIW I ride titanium as a "best" bike and aluminium as a single speed. The Ti bike (in my personal experience) is "smoother" than an aluminium or carbon bike and seems to hide road surface irregularities more effectively. This appears to make it "better" than the other main choices for longer (perhaps slower) rides, rather than a shorter (perhaps faster) "blasts" (be that "blast" a group ride, race, TT etc)

Ti is unlikely to ever be completely mainstream though (even if it was the "best" frame material), as the manufacturing/frame assembly process is more difficult to mechanise/automate/"production line" to the same degree as carbon fibre in particular.

My Ti bike does have carbon forks & seat post though!

Neil

(p.s. the primary advantage is the Ti doesn't melt when wet or shatter in sunlight...)

thefd

DubaiNeil wrote:

(p.s. the primary advantage is the Ti doesn't melt when wet or shatter in sunlight...)

Excuse my ignorance but what melts in the wet or shatters in sunlight?

pdstsp

Carbon does - everyone knows that

night_porter

No it doesn't, this is just a joke and anyone who geniunely doesn't know is being teased.

As with all of the frame materials suggested there are multiple grades of each material that will affect the weight, durability, "feel" and the purchase price.

Cheap BSO (bike shaped objects) sold by supermarket chains are usually junk steel that weighs far too much but can be produced very cheaply. Whereas high grade steel can make a frame come alive, soak up road noise, be very light, cost a small fortune, etc.

The same goes for Aluminium but with less variance in price this is similar for carbon and indeed Ti.

To be honest when buying a car would you ignore one you really liked the look of just because it had steel bumpers instead of plastic ones? Buying a bike which is right for your type of riding and that fits you correctly is much more important than buying one just because it is made of a certain material.

Having said that I like to look at bikes that have thin tube profiles like steel and Ti can have because I think big bulky tubes look awful. But once I am riding them it makes no difference because I cannot see the tubes (except the top tube).

giant_man

Dear oh dear, this is a huge subject, and who on earth told you Ti was the best material?

Ringo 68

At the end of the day you can get amazing bikes in all the mentioned materials. Some to Al bikes are lighter than carbon etc etc.
For what it is worth, if I was going to get another bike (and if I want to keep my balls in one piece there is no chance of that) it would be a Ti, simply because they look so good.

napoleond

I've owned bikes of all the above materials.
They're all as good in their own way, I was most disappointed with Titanium though, very over-rated, touted as a 'wonder material'. I preferred riding my alu-carbon colnago Arte to my Litespeed Siena. Not least because I much preferred the geometry.
Geometry and fit are the most important factors, the frame material can find tune that but unless the fit is right the ride isn't.

pdstsp

That's so true. I have a completely different experience in that I love my Ti bike - but it's the only one I had a proper fitting for. My winter bike is alu and I have ridden it as best bike for 3 years and winter bike for the last 6 and I am always surprised how much I like it when I get back on it - though I have had to play around with the position quite a bit. I had a cheap carbon which I liked but which had bits fall off it so I lost faith in it (it was the widgets which hold the rear brake cable and rear gear cable to the frame - brake cable detached the day after descending the Ventoux so glad it held for that!!).

IMO best to try a few bikes in different materials and find what you like best. Obviously do this on a dry day coz of the carbon melting thing

BobScarle

The fact of the matter is carbon is best! I know this because I have a carbon bike. I also have a steel bike which means that steel is second best!

Ok, a bit flippant I know, but the point is the "best" material is purely subjective and will depend on a whole load of other factors. I had a bike fit when I bought my carbon bike so it is set up for me, it fits well and consequently rides well, for me. If you were to get on it you might hate it. And that's the point, what suits one may not suit another. The only way is to narrow down the choice by researching but ultimately it will come down to you doing test rides and you picking the "best" material for you.

tonyf34

Best aluminium framed bikes were made by Principia, the RS6 pro is better than a 'Dale Six Carbon...FACT! If you could get your hands on the SX limited edition then you'd have the perfect combination of lightness/stiffness, ride & as important for the poseur..looks
CF made with a quality weave is very very good stuff though, can be shaped readily to give fantastic aero advantages over all the other materials both in the frame & forks. They give a certain amount of dampening though the energy is stored/released somewhere so don't believe everything you read about comfort... CF is now relatively cheap to make compared to the other high end frame makers in Ally, Steel & Ti, the downside is that most CF bikes are absolute dogs to look at.
As others have said, go with what you feel comfy on, something you won't feel guilty about spending the money on once you've got it, ateotd what it is made of is irrelevant really, just make sure to ride the paint job off it and enjoy!

itsnotarace

The design is more important than the material a frame is made of

napoleond

tonyf34 wrote:

Best aluminium framed bikes were made by Principia, the RS6 pro is better than a 'Dale Six Carbon...FACT!

The REX is still made, I'd love one. Bit pricey for a coke can frame though.

tonyf34

NapoleonD wrote:

tonyf34 wrote:

Best aluminium framed bikes were made by Principia, the RS6 pro is better than a 'Dale Six Carbon...FACT!

The REX is still made, I'd love one. Bit pricey for a coke can frame though.

I have a 2002 Jet black Ellipse Project Rex e, gorgeous bike & belting ride and better still no creaks

napoleond

tonyf34 wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

tonyf34 wrote:

Best aluminium framed bikes were made by Principia, the RS6 pro is better than a 'Dale Six Carbon...FACT!

The REX is still made, I'd love one. Bit pricey for a coke can frame though.

I have a 2002 Jet black Ellipse Project Rex e, gorgeous bike & belting ride and better still no creaks

Pictures.

prawny

IME (limited) wheels and tyre make more difference to ride quality than frame material.

The main issue for me with frame material is fatigue resistance. If I was paying a fortune for a bike that I wanted to last forever I'd go stainless steel.

indysmith

Seriously, read this article - it's all you need to know.

http://www.ibiscycles.com/support/techn ... _cyclists/

ianbar

the person i had spoke too didn't say ti was definitely the best it was just what he liked, think he found it lasted longer and his other had not got a mark on it so a lot was to do with durability. my question was not so much about which is best as i knew this would cause i right ruckus! lol but what the characteristics of each material was?

indysmith

Obviously the below is a MASSIVE generalisation since most of the characteristics of a frame are borne of the combination of both the design and the material, but this should get you in the right ballpark...

Well designed carbon frames are often incredibly lightweight and aerodynamic but fragile in that if crashed, dinged or dented, the structural integrity is greatly compromised, and it will fail catastrophically. They can be super comfortable; vertically complaint and laterally stiff but may not last long: only for die-hard racers and minted people who took up cycling last week after giving up golf. (I jest)

Titanium frames are usually a similar weight to comparable aluminium frames. They do not rust or corrode (like steel or aluminium), and they have a lot of 'spring' in them (unlike carbon). A well designed Ti frame is supremely comfortable, strong, lightweight and should last a lifetime. Unfortunately a lot of titanium frames seems to fail due to weak "contaminated" welds. It's important to make sure the person building your frame really knows what they're doing and has the necessary equipment. Titanium is also incredibly expensive (despite being one of the most abundant metals on Earth): Good for long distance bikes and custom racers with a "classic" metal tube look.

Aluminium frames are usually lightweight and extremely stiff, but prone to denting and can provide a harsh ride if not combined with things like a carbon fork, thicker tyres, dampened seatpost etc. Good quality frames are available cheaply: a good choice for the novice/amateur road/sportive rider.

Steel frames are traditionally very heavy, since steel is far denser than all of the above materials. However, it is also much stiffer, much stronger, and has much greater elasticity. Modern steel frames can be made relatively lightweight and should outlast the owner (and their children). Many people believe the ride quality of steel to be superior (or at least more forgiving) than other common frame building materials. Steel rusts, but this can be prevented with proper treatments. Stainless steel is also available, but is very expensive. It is also very workable, and can be joined in a number of different ways for different aesthetics (commonly TIG welds, fillet brazing, lugs).
Good for any bike where strength, ride quality and longevity are paramount - and trump the need for light weight.

EDIT: Please everyone feel free to correct me; there's bound to be some enormous mistakes in there somewhere

Bordersroadie

My take on this comes from 30 years of riding a Reynolds 531 steel frame (if we're taking metal types it's actually steel/molybdenum alloy, isn't it?) then 6 months of riding a new aluminium frame.

I was fully expecting to find the jump from lightweight 531 tourer (relaxed geometry, 25c tyres, long fork rake) to Sportive aluminium frame (relatively tighter geometry, straightish forks, 23c tyres) a difficult one. I expected that the poorer surfaced roads round here would give me real problems and that on long rides the fatigue that I would suffer as a result of the ultra rigid aluminium frame coupled with an alloy seatpost would be unbearable.

These expectations were based solely on forum chit chat, here and elsewhere.

And what did I find?

To my utter amazement, that the new alu frame bike was extremely close to being as comfortable as my old faithful 531 bike. None of the harsh ride and vibrations transmitted through the rigid frame that I was expecting. On very rough roads the old bike has an edge (such as corrugated, pitted frost-weathered tarmac that rattles out your fillings) but by a very narrow margin.

For interest the alu bike is a very ordinary Cube Streamer (£1250 price point) and each bike has the upgrade benefit of good quality handbuilt wheels which I am sure helps. In the case of the Cube, 32 spoke, not the ridiculous radially spoked low-spoke-count wheels that came with the bike.

wishitwasallflat

Steel = old fashioned and heavy, rusts at any humiditity above arid (only useful for Giro D'Mars).

Aluminium = light and quite modern but watch out your missus doesn't roll up your bike, wrap a chicken in it and put it in the oven.

Carbon = dissolves on contact with any substance known to man, exists in a stable form only for short periods in bike shops, adverts and in the imaginations of magazine editors i.e. it's a myth

Titanium - was modern but is now old and spacemen and aliens from the 1950s are very likeley to break into your house and steal it as they use it for their crafts.

Bamboo = prone to being eaten by panda's

Wood = prone to being eaten by worms

Solution = forget all the above and buy the bike that fits you best and excites your soul!

petemadoc

indysmith wrote:

Well designed carbon frames are often incredibly lightweight and aerodynamic but fragile in that if crashed, dinged or dented, the structural integrity is greatly compromised, and it will fail catastrophically. They can be super comfortable; vertically complaint and laterally stiff but may not last long: only for die-hard racers and minted people who took up cycling last week after giving up golf. (I jest)

This is so true, yesterday "I was just riding along" and a small stone flew up and "dinged" my frame. Then maybe 20 metres down the road the downtube shattered! :shock: The bike broke in two and I was left crying in the middle of the road.

:roll:

Seriously, carbon is no way as fragile as some people make out.

indysmith

You clearly haven't been a bicycle mechanic as long as I have. I have seen about 20 times as many failed carbon frames as I have any other material. I'm not saying a situation like the one you have described above is a realistic one, but for real life every day use, carbon is not in any way, shape, or form a durable material.

tonyf34

NapoleonD wrote:

tonyf34 wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

tonyf34 wrote:

Best aluminium framed bikes were made by Principia, the RS6 pro is better than a 'Dale Six Carbon...FACT!

The REX is still made, I'd love one. Bit pricey for a coke can frame though.

I have a 2002 Jet black Ellipse Project Rex e, gorgeous bike & belting ride and better still no creaks

Pictures.

Pictured with old stock Mavic Heliums, Brooks Pro, FRM CU2 & DA7700 group but now with the older all black SSC's(non SL), alien carbon seatpost & Arione saddle, for a non compact 58cm it's a respectable 7.8kg Even with a fat old pudding like me she is a rocket

P_Tucker

wishitwasallflat wrote:

Steel = old fashioned and heavy, rusts at any humiditity above arid (only useful for Giro D'Mars).

Aluminium = light and quite modern but watch out your missus doesn't roll up your bike, wrap a chicken in it and put it in the oven.

Carbon = dissolves on contact with any substance known to man, exists in a stable form only for short periods in bike shops, adverts and in the imaginations of magazine editors i.e. it's a myth

Titanium - was modern but is now old and spacemen and aliens from the 1950s are very likeley to break into your house and steal it as they use it for their crafts.

Bamboo = prone to being eaten by panda's

Wood = prone to being eaten by worms

Solution = forget all the above and buy the bike that fits you best and excites your soul!

napoleond

tonyf34 wrote:

Pictured with old stock Mavic Heliums, Brooks Pro, FRM CU2 & DA7700 group but now with the older all black SSC's(non SL), alien carbon seatpost & Arione saddle, for a non compact 58cm it's a respectable 7.8kg Even with a fat old pudding like me she is a rocket

Nice