If titanium is so great why are there no Ti bikes in the pro peleton?

northcliff66

The question is all in the title.

I am going to buy a custom geometry frameset. Don't ask. Separate thread.

My query is material based only.

napoleond

1. It isn't so great
2. CF is much easier to make stiff, light and aero
3. And do 2. Much cheaper.
4. Marketing

bondurant

Well, I think it's great. Subjectively.

But 2,3 and 4 are correct.

slowmart

Ti is a difficult material to work while carbon offers scaled manufacturing, reduced failures thereby negating ongoing warranty claims and the development and usage of carbon is still ongoing.

That said as a pure object of aesthetic beauty a ti frame is a visual feast which means you can disappear into your garage with your favourite tipple and admire the lines and welding.

I've not done that with a carbon frame yet but I'll let you know what happens when I buy my next bike, which will probably be carbon as functionally and for longevity it's hard to beat.

tommytranquillo

There isn't a Ti builder with the multi-million £ budget to fund a World Tour team.

dodgy

Like comparing a screwdriver with a hammer and asking which is best.

I have a carbon 'dry' bike and a Ti winter bike, I'm on my 2nd Ti bike, I love the material. I love it due to the ease of keeping it looking good, it stands up to abuse in bad weather/commuting, but it's no race machine. Ti tends to 'wind up' IME, you don't get that urgency when stamping on the pedals that you do on even a modest carbon bike.

It would make a poor choice for a top flight race machine imo. But I'll probably always have one.

ugo.santalucia

Titanium construction is not scalable. The welding requires specific expertise and it's time consuming. None of the large brands would want to go that route. Besides, you are limited to the shapes of tubings on offer on the market, which is a big limitation, when compared to the infinite number of shapes you can achieve with CAD/in mould manufacturing

DeVlaeminck

There used to be titanium bikes in the pro peloton - I used to race a ex pro's Litespeed Ultimate - a bike good enough to win a TdF green jersey on. A lot is down to the design of course but my impressions of that bike were that it was smooth, handled well, not as light as a modern top flight carbon frame and you could get a bit of chainrub sprinting up a powerclimb out of the saddle which I am guessing was due to a bit of flex.

It was a nice bike to ride, as above easy to keep looking good, probably cost a fortune brand new though. I remember Litespeed's attempts to keep up with the move to super light frames being considered a bit too flexy - this was 15 years or so ago so no reflection on their modern stuff.

mfin

I owned one of the Ti bikes with a racey reputation and reviews. Got rid of it because it simply was noticeably slower than any carbon bike I've had. If racing at pro level, no way I'd want to be riding one based on my experience. It was a lovely mile-muncher though, but no more comfortable than carbon bikes I've had either.

keezx

Bikes are not slow, riders are.

inseine

Keezx wrote:

Bikes are not slow, riders are.

All bikes are slow, without the rider

Matthewfalle

inseine wrote:

Keezx wrote:

Bikes are not slow, riders are.

All bikes are slow, without the rider

All riders are slow without their bikes.

MikeBrew

Who said it was great?

What did they say it was great at ?

Why would this unspecified greatness mean anything in the context of a Pro Peloton ?

If the question is "all in the title", then the "title" needs to make some sort of sense. I could say that Reynolds tubing is great, that doesn't imply that it should find it's way back into a pro peloton. Not every great frame material, has to be race orientated. That's a very narrow view of cycling indeed.

inseine

Matthewfalle wrote:

inseine wrote:

Keezx wrote:

Bikes are not slow, riders are.

All bikes are slow, without the rider

All riders are slow without their bikes.

I'd still beat a bike........ 8)

cmcdonnell

Titanium done well is a great material but as others have said it is expensive and not usually as light as CF although it can be in smaller sizes. It is a comfortable ride and plenty stiff enough for most and to me looks lovely. It's also more unusual. I have 2 Ti bikes, a 9 yo Litespeed Ghisallo that still looks like new, not the stiffest but plenty stiff enough for me at 9 st in a small. Never had chain run or any other issues; have done 150 mile sportives, 70 mph descents and raced 2nd Cat with it. Bought another Litespeed this year, a T1 which is much much stiffer than the Ghisallo. Much more of a modern race bike but much heavier than the Ghisallo at 1200g compared to 700g but still built to a 7kg bike. I know some people had issues with the Ghisallo when it came out and I bought the last and stiffest version. The issues were the aero fork which I asked Litespeed to replace with a different model and also it was never going to me suitable for a larger rider. Ti is never going to be mainstream anymore but I do really enjoy riding it.

keezx

No, it's not.

964cup

Weight. My Enigma Excel frame is about 1200g, and that's with lighter, harder to work 6Al4V Ti. My R5Ca is 670g. Carbon is also easier to tune for stiffness and compliance, easier to mass produce, and easier (for marketing reasons if nothing else) to make into interesting 'aero' shapes. So using carbon you can come in at the 6.8kg limit without using unobtanium parts, or hit 7-and-a-bit with aero tube shapes and deep-section wheels.

hypster

cyd190468 wrote:

Keezx wrote:

No, it's not.

Yes it is. If you use a motor with no permanent magnets then all you can detect is the presence of metal by either metal detector or x-ray, both of which would be very difficult with a metal frame.

I'm guessing something less technial like tapping the tubes or the extra 1.5 kg of motor and batteries might be more of a giveaway!

Anonymous

Keezx wrote:

Bikes are not slow, riders are.

So all bikes are the same then?

I think you will find that some bikes are slower/faster than others, some riders are slower/faster than others, and an individual rider is slower/faster on any given day compared to another.

Bikes are bikes, riders are riders. Its a team effort

ddraver

MikeBrew wrote:

Why would this unspecified greatness mean anything in the context of a Pro Peloton ?

That

Becasue Not everyone needs to ride the same bike as a pro rider. Deep in out hearts most of us know that actually a well made, more upright frame with a bit of flex for comfort would suit us far better than Cav's/Froome's/Bertie's super long low and rock solid race bike but very few of us will admit it - We ll buy one and call it a gravel bike instead...