• This topic has 20 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by P-Jay.
Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • Frame material today… does it matter?
  • Kryton57
    Full Member

    Several high end bikes I’ve been looking at coming in Alu and Carbon guises.

    Most notabley the new Hei Hei and Anther 29er’s have 2 models a similar price points, but with changes of component spec which may just balance a weight difference.

    Its forced me to consider the question that, given that 2 bikes might weight the same, and most group sets/suspension are all as reliable as each other, does it matter what the frame material is any more?

    weeksy
    Full Member

    Only if you’re at extreme levels of whatever you’re doing.

    E.g I wouldn’t race world level enduros on a carbon bike/wheel. I wouldn’t race elite roads on a Steel.

    If you’re using it for racing and the difference between winning / 3rd is 5 seconds over an hour, i may go carbon… but other than that, nope.

    The actual frame weight is a small difference, usually 0.5-1kg, does that matter on a 10kg build ? Hmmmm i’m not convinced.

    Yak
    Full Member

    I would imagine that on a full suss, as long as they are all stiff enough, it doesn’t really matter and that overall weight and spec would trump the material. On a hardtail it would matter more I reckon.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    Nobeerinthefridge
    Free Member

    Two responses, and not one of them going on about recycling of frames. Tsk. :mrgreen:

    Yak
    Full Member

    Damn, well alu uses huge amounts of energy, carbon harder to recycle……..

    But at my usual price point i am buying 2nd-hand, so er, I am recycling already… right? 😀

    mboy
    Free Member

    does it matter what the frame material is any more?

    Yes

    or No…

    Completely depends on the individual I guess!

    We are certainly in an age where we’re overwhelmed with choice, bicycle manufacturers have pretty much perfected “comfy” aluminium frames these days, they can and do make all sorts of variations on compliance with carbon, and you can buy steel that’s stiffer and harsher than the other materials if you so desire!

    IMO it matters more on a road bike, where you’ve got a much more direct connection with the ground than you have on an MTB, yet strangely steel is the only material I lust after when it comes to MTB’s (and I’ve owned Ti bikes, not generally a fan)… Go Figure!

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    I’ve seen more innovative designs with carbon that will not translate to Alu. So there are some bikes that will never be made of Alu I think. Get the one you like the ride of

    TiRed
    Full Member

    Two bikes of the same weight but different materials will have chosen different compromises.

    So for road, you may have alloy plus Dura Ace or carbon plus Ultegra. There really will not be a huge difference. In fact the alloy frame may be stiffer than the carbon – tests don’t tend to want to show them together, but I recall Giant did once. The shifting at that level will be the same.

    The same is going to hold for off road, but there may be a bigger difference in component performance. Wheels are heavier too, so more options for differentials.

    As I always say:
    Handling = geometry
    Stiffness = tube diameter
    Weight = material (plus components)

    Personally my recommendation is buy the best geometry you can at a weight you are happy with. I like carbon, but I also like steel and alloy. I’m less enamoured with Ti than I used to be, but largely because I think steel has come a long way, and you can save weight elsewhere.

    shermer75
    Free Member

    Scandium/bamboo hybrid FTW

    oikeith
    Full Member

    Depends what you want to do with the bike I think, yes I’d love more carbon to make my 14kg enduro bike lighter, but its not worth the risk of it breaking and I dont race so dont need to shave seconds of an EWS course. Feels quite nice earning my descents by grinding up the hills too.

    Actually really tempted for the winter to buy an all carbon sub 10kg XC bike, luckily the bank account says no!

    MrSmith
    Free Member

    I wouldn’t race elite roads on a Steel

    watched many a win at my local E/1/2/3 crit series on steel bikes, a few wins for ‘cheap’ aluminium too as well as carbon. not seen a Ti win but there have been a few up at the sharp end.

    Rubber_Buccaneer
    Full Member

    My next hardtail will be Ti just because it is cheaper than the alternatives. Not having any paint to damage is just a bonus

    steve_b77
    Free Member

    To be fair on an XC FS I don’t think frame material will make a huge amount of difference other than in weight. I’d imagine that to achieve the same level of frame stiffness the alloy would be heavier, but there are the apparent damping abilities of carbon that you’ll loose – however noticeable they are.

    With the Giant and it’s comparatively small rear triangle, I’d assume a carbon rear would be stiffer, but then you’ve got to factor in the effect the multiple bearings etc have on overall lateral stiffness anyway.

    It comes down to if the raised component spec counteracts the weight gain for the alloy frame.

    Personally I have a carbon XC FS 29er and a carbon XC HT 29er, having had both varieties (not the same brand) of bike in alloy previously. The XC HT in carbon is just as stiff feeling as my last XC HT – a Kinesis FF29 – but it is a damn site more comfortable, and lighter with a very similar build.

    The Carbon XC FS is nicer to ride than my previous XC FS – Giant Anthem X1 29er – it’s also a fair chunk lighter.

    Make of that what you will, but for XC duties I’d go carbon frame everytime as the less it weighs the better starting point it is for a build.

    Kryton57
    Full Member

    The Carbon XC FS is nicer to ride than my previous XC FS – Giant Anthem X1 29er – it’s also a fair chunk lighter.

    Have a look at the two new Anthems at £3499.

    I reckon the frame + build on both is equal on weight. That considered would it be alloy or carbon?

    molgrips
    Free Member

    watched many a win at my local E/1/2/3 crit series on steel bikes

    Means nothing – a fast rider might be fast enough to win, but we’ll never know if they’d have been slightly faster on a carbon bike.

    However, this is nothing to do with speed, it’s all about perceived riding pleasure. So the ‘only if you are a pro’ argument is rubbish. If we wanted to get somewhere quickly we’d use a motorbike.

    ac282
    Full Member

    Of those 2 I would go alloy. I’ve had better luck with fox than rockshox.

    cookeaa
    Full Member

    does it matter what the frame material is any more?

    Did it ever really?

    Despite being pretty “Material agnostic” I seem to have owned more Steel framed MTBs than anything else over the years, however for my most recent build I wanted light and cheap and so opted for a used Aluminium frame, with all the compromises that doubtless brings…

    For me if cost didn’t come into the equation composite would be my preference for both on and off road use, however I know not everybody likes the black stuff, and even if they do worries about the cost of replacing damaged frames or parts can still deter them…

    But like I said, has the material ever really mattered? people have ridden and reaced Steel/Al/Ti/CF in pretty much every niche and not died to death from it…

    I suppose if you want to benchmark things you need to try and compare different bike over the same terrain/route/application as much as possible; My most frequently Ridden ride would have to be my commute and TBH I’m not really that much quicker on the Carbon ego waggon than the SS Steel tank, so as ever the rider is the main limiting factor…

    philjunior
    Free Member

    Apart from weight, no.

    If 2 bikes were different materials with differing builds to make them the same weight overall and they were the same price, I would assume the heavier frame had better parts on it, so then it comes down to the question of whether there’s any benefit to the better parts in terms of function.

    And then are you going to change much out now or in the future? The lighter frame would have more potential to get lighter, and conversely the heavier frame would have the potential to get heavier if you replace parts with stuff of equal quality on both bikes (e.g. cassettes, chainrings, tyres etc.).

    Edit, of course how much that weight matters is debateable, as with how much any “improved function” matters. But as we aren’t riding about on £80 Apollos, I would assume there is some sort of sweet spot between function, weight and cost somewhere from £1000 to £10000 that most people find themselves at.

    wicki
    Free Member

    totally of topic but the 80 quid apollo just caused a memory

    80 quid Apollo was my first mtb 45 lbs wow ….the second was a giant NRS about 25lbs ish god was I a shocked bunny when I trod on those pedals for the first time lol.

    maxtorque
    Full Member

    I think the freedom of uni-drectional carbon in terms of attitude dependent strength brings genuine advantages to complex FS bikes made of carbon, especially in critical locations where pivots or shocks etc connect. And all the evidence so far points to modern CF frames being just as robust as ally ones.

    P-Jay
    Free Member

    Not to me, I’ve listed after a carbon frame for a long, long time, but it’s pushed the price of bikes so high I’d feel I was robbing my kids of a holiday.

    The upside seems to be for the first time in years you can buy a well specced, alu bike for 2500, the same amount I paid for my Enduro Expert in 2006.

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)

The topic ‘Frame material today… does it matter?’ is closed to new replies.