[Closed] Titanium ,still not a bike for life?

Mine hasn't broken since the last of these threads, I always count that a small victory.

[quote=Northwind ]Mine hasn't [s]broken[/s] been ridden since the last of these threads
FTFY

Ti Bontrager cracked seat tube
Kona Hei Hei stolen from car
Litespeed Road bike cracked seat stays

Bike for life?

Steel is better?
Kona Unit cracked top tube in front of seat tube.

All bikes break it how long they last depends on material quality, good design, and the weight

to misquote Keith Bontrager Light,Cheap strong pick one.

scotroutes - Member

FTFY

Why you bounder! It does several miles a week.

I get the feeling there's 2 main reasons ti frames don't last like people expect them to do. 1 is that everyone wants a light one so they tend to get built to a target. The other is that Lynskey don't know what they're doing but can sell their frames for a fortune anyway so aren't that bothered.

[i]I don't actually think Titanium is the "Best" material for a bike frame to be made from,[/i]
I don't think anyone is claiming Ti is [i]The Best[/i] but it certainly has unique and worthy properties. As light as Aluminium, as strong as steel. Yes, you get frames in steel or aluminium too, but you get both qualities in Ti.

[i]it's not terrible but there are lighter materials and more durable/stronger materials available at lower cost, boring but rational... [/i]
Which materials are you thinking of, specifically?

[i]A Titanium frame is really a "Heart over Head" choice IMO, if you can be honest with yourself about that, drop the "Frame for life" justification and you still find you just really want one still, then just get it... scratch the itch if you can afford to. [/i]

It really wasn't a heart over head decision, quite the reverse actually. I didn't want the corrosion issues of Ali or steel, nor do I want the weight or harshness issues of steel or aluminium. So in my case, it was quite a practical conclusion to buy Ti, esp when you throw in a custom fit.

As for the so called cliche being a frame for life, etc. I think those posting such comments are missing a fundamental point. Having a comfortable frame, free from potentially terminal corrosion, to take you along the road for decades, until you become utterly famliiar with the entire experience of riding, [b]your[/b] bike. Is why a long lasting frame will provide you with a different level of ownership experience.
I've got an Ali frame, over 10 years old, structurally, it appears to be sound, but the bike has now been retired. I've just purchased a steel frame, which I look forward to using.

Nowt wrong with Ti:
[img] [/img]

Nowt wrong with Ti:

Great Plane - Not still flying though so not a "plane for life"

In service 1966 to 1999. If I got 33 years out a Ti frame I'd be happy and those I have would outlive my ability to ride them 😀

Interesting I was just thinking this as I rode my 2002 Airborne Lancaster to the local shops. Tends to get as used as a general runabout and tourer now, but it has outlived every other bike I have owned - I usually change bikes every year or two but the Airborne just soldiers on. It is still the lightest mountain bike I have and looks in pretty good nick.

I am genuinely impressed with the Titus Fireline I have, I have another Ti frame which has several issues that I have never experienced before & I just put it down to the material, I have also owned other Ti frames, none of which matched my expectations of my favourite frame which was an ally old skool round tube Stiffee. So what I'm getting at? (and I'm not in anyway saying that the Titus is good/the best) is that you can have good/bad bikes in any material, it's how you interpret them that counts.

Cheers.

I think my Cotic Soul is probably fairly close to a bike for life, especially now my full-sus has taken on uplifted, gnarr and enduro racing duties so it isn't being ragged so hard in the summer. I'm sure it'll crack at some point but it'll weld back fine, it's steel! And it has the kind of geometry that lends itself well to all sorts of uses - maybe it'll be a 700c skinny tired faux CX commuter one day? Right now it's being great as a big tyred 140mm hardtail.

I'm selling a Van Nicholas road bike to be replaced by a Genesis Equilibrium (the low end one).

It rides better IMO.

My ti frame is 1lb lighter than the Soul it replaced, just as compliant, if not more so...and has none of the disc brake dig into the chainstay either.

After a 5-6 hour side I don't feel beaten up like I have done with alu frames after 2-3 hours (where I can't hardly walk the next day).

Yes it's expensive but a good investment for the heart, head and arse!

Saved for ages to get a Stanton ti and the craftsmanship is simply stunning...and a lot cheaper than a Kona or Cove ti too.

I still don't believe this compliancy stuff having ridden plenty of steel bikes.

Someone mentioned on another thread that it was like having 15mm of rear travel, if that was the case, your frame would be flexing/deflecting in the vertical by 15mm. LOL.

Compared to alu IMO, steel and ti is much better (not 15mm travel better..that's just bollocks).

I thought my Soul was awesome, but was slightly too steep and a bit too long...but Jesus did the rear chainstay take a beating with the disc because of the flex.

This ti frame is lighter, slacker and feels just as good as the Soul...but with no chainstay damage. Running the same wheels, tyre model and pressures too.

http://www.englishcycles.com/design-philosophy/

What are the options for a Ti road frame with a chain stay rear disc mount? I was considering the Lynskey cross frame. I'm looking for a reliable workhorse commuter (previously owned an Airborne Carpe Diem which did daily commuting duty for 9 years until it developed a terminal crack).

My ti full sus has five inches of travel in the frame, no pivots and is an awesome xc animal - Ibis BowTi.

When I first bought a ti hard tail I came from a steel hard tail and if I am honest, they rode similar but the ti was lighter and way more responsive, it just sort of felt more alive yet remained quick and rigid when you had to sprint. Whats not to like.

[i]What are the options for a Ti road frame with a chain stay rear disc mount?[/i]

I think Enigma do something like that. Having dealt personally with Mark Reilly, I'd be happy to buy from Enigma.

[img] ?v=1409175003[/img]
Etape Disc.

Tom_W1987 - Member

Someone mentioned on another thread that it was like having 15mm of rear travel, if that was the case, your frame would be flexing/deflecting in the vertical by 15mm. LOL.

I suppose it [i]could[/i] be, on a particular frame. On mine it's nothing like that, more like the difference in 10psi in a fat rear tyre. (I swapped the alu version of my frame for a ti one) Which is still a lot, and well worthwhile. TBH I wish mine was a bit softer, like my Soda was.

I've got three Ti bikes, A Cove Hummer, a Kinesis Sync and a Kinesis Tripster ATR.

I don't try to justify it, I just like the way they feel!

[i]I don't try to justify it[/i]

Married?

Still rolling on this obsolete old thing.
[URL= http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/g341/kiwijohn42/784501fb.jp g" target="_blank">http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/g341/kiwijohn42/784501fb.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
DBR Axis TT built by Sandvik.
19 years old this year. Rebuilt 7 years ago when you could still get a good fork with V brake mounts & decent wheels. 10kg all up & still the fastest bike I own.

I used the 'rust/shelf life'...and you got an amazing engagement ring argument to justify my frame. She still didn't pay for it mind you 🙁

Yeah I'm married Solo, unlike some on here I don't need to hide my bike purchases though 8)

Cheers, just realised I mistyped my original message; it's a seat stay disk mount frame I'm after.

Hmmm, Thing is the A12/SR71 had a slightly different set of performance requirements to a Bicycle frame...

Titanium was chosen primarily because an aluminium airframe and leading edges would have melted at high mach and Steel would have carried a ~30% weight penalty, I don't think Lockheed were all that concerned about trail buzz TBH...

Like I said I don't see it as the "Best" choice of material, but it's not the worst, it's certainly adequate if cost isn't a concern...

I just don't buy the "bike for life" claims, But I'm not the one spending the money, if you think you'll still be riding it in 30-40 odd years then good for you...

from a structural/manufacturing perspective I'd say Ti has long been superseded by Composites in all sorts of areas, but that doesn't carry the Cachet or exclusivity does it...

[i]hummerlicious - Member
Yeah I'm married Solo, unlike some on here I don't need to hide my bike purchases though.[/i]
Good for you, and I'm sure those who do have to "negotiate" for bikes and parts, are just as happily married.
🙂

[i]Hmmm, Thing is the A12/SR71 had a slightly different set of performance requirements to a Bicycle frame... [/i]
You obviously haven't seen me ride a bike. Although since shattering all the windows in my town on one occassion, I've decided to stop cycling at Mach 3.
😉

[i]Like I said I don't see it as the "Best" choice of material[/i]
And I don't think anyone has claimed that, AFAIK, which we established on page 2.

[i]I just don't buy the "bike for life" claims, But I'm not the one spending the money, if you think you'll still be riding it in 30-40 odd years then good for you... [/i]
Again, while I see your point, I've tried to point out that it's more that just how long a piece of metal lasts. It's about how you go along, with your bike, how you get use to it, the experiences you have while riding it and the longer your bike lasts, the better all that gets. If you're aware of it. There a loads of folk who love their old bike, because it's been their long term ride. This doesn't exclude other frame material though, so long as they last.

[i]from a structural/manufacturing perspective I'd say Ti has long been superseded by Composites in all sorts of areas, but that doesn't carry the Cachet or exclusivity does it...[/i]
Ok, well that's a kind of half answer to my question. Reason I asked was, just like lockhead, when one measures weight, performance and cost. They usual score two. As with the SR71, it was light and durable, but cost was a bitch.
So it goes with bikes. Light weight usually excludes low cost and may not be a guarantee of durability. Likewise, Carbon is strong but also very expensive and not necessarily durable. But you can include Ti there too if you wish as I agree that it does fall over on cost. But hey-ho, you pays your money.
🙂

I still don't believe this compliancy stuff having ridden plenty of steel bikes

Ti tubing is about the same diameter as steel. Rigidity is determined by tube diameter and weight by material. So the only difference between a steel and Ti frame is the weight. Everything else is geometry. I still like Ti frames, especially the finish, but my carbon road bike trounces the Ti one it replaced on every count except shininess 😉 .

If I upgraded my Genesis IO to Ti, I do not expect to feel any difference in handling, only weight. Now the Ibis Bow Ti - that was special (until I rode one).

Rigidity is determined by tube diameter

Ti tubing is about the same diameter as steel.

It's not though, is it - it's slightly oversized usually in comparison to steel. Which given the cube property of stiffness...

And don't forget that stiffness isn't the only consideration. How about strength/elasticity?

What happens if a material is inherently stronger for a given weight?

You could, I'm sure, make a carbon bike that exactly duplicated the ride and feel of my ti bike. Good chance it'd be lighter too, and it could probably be more durable. But... Titanium's just really nice, isn't it? It looks like a bike, not a bar of soap... it shines up nicely (brush it then oil it, mmmmmmmm).

Why would anyone want a bike for life? So many things change as the years go by. I still have my steel frame from my first mountain bike (1991). No way would I build it up into a bike for any kind of meaningful riding.

What's "meaningful"? My '93 steel Marin is in daily use for commuting - I reckon that if you want a bike for long-term ownership, adaptability is the key.

A Brooks saddle then, maybe? 🙂

Ti rails of course.

save us from 'meaningful riding' though ffs 😕

Since no-one else has mentioned it, I think, there's a piece in a recent - current? - What Mountain Bike about the future of frame-building materials and one point was that metal and titanium in particular, is ideal for use with 3D printing processes, so it may just be less moribund than some would have you believe.

Also interesting was the idea that with 3D printing you could create slightly complex shapes, like head tubes, without introducing potential weaknesses like welds and with more control over profiles, shape, thicknesses etc, so you could, at last create a real 'bike for life'…

I actually made up that last bit, but I thought it was interesting that new manufacturing technologies could potentially also change the way we use existing materials. And of course 3D-printed ti will be dirt cheap, like paper, which is also printed...

save us from 'meaningful riding' though ffs

Agreed. I would stick with the existential stuff rather than resort to meaningful trails with their artificial nuances and poorly constructed semantic berms… 😉

kcr - Member
What are the options for a Ti road frame with a SEAT stay rear disc mount? I was considering the Lynskey cross frame. I'm looking for a reliable workhorse commuter (previously owned an Airborne Carpe Diem which did daily commuting duty for 9 years until it developed a terminal crack).

I think Enigma do something like that. Having dealt personally with Mark Reilly, I'd be happy to buy from Enigma.

Except he doesn't work for them anymore.

[url= http://www.nervebikes.com/about/ ]http://www.nervebikes.com/about/[/url]

[i]Except he doesn't work for them anymore.[/i]
Corrected, thanks! However I'd still hope Enigma are ok to deal with.
😉

Any bike looked after is a bike for 'life'. Oddly mid priced ones will probably last longer than high end ones, as they probably have bit more metal in them, plus as they are mass produced will have had more testing done on them, than a single guy in a garage could ever do.

If you are talking old planes still flying pre to post the SR-71 then have a look at the B-52, C-130, Nimrod/Comet.

Since no-one else has mentioned it, I think, there's a piece in a recent - current? - What Mountain Bike about the future of frame-building materials and one point was that metal and titanium in particular, is ideal for use with 3D printing processes, so it may just be less moribund than some would have you believe.

Also interesting was the idea that with 3D printing you could create slightly complex shapes, like head tubes, without introducing potential weaknesses like welds and with more control over profiles, shape, thicknesses etc, so you could, at last create a real 'bike for life'…

I actually made up that last bit, but I thought it was interesting that new manufacturing technologies could potentially also change the way we use existing materials. And of course 3D-printed ti will be dirt cheap, like paper, which is also printed...

Yawn!

Derived from the Research grant funded, fluff turned out by Empire/Renishaw? There's more interesting stuff being done bonding Steel and Ti lugs directly to Composite tubes....

That empire Bike, Prohibitively expensive especially when what you get a porous structure with no grain alignment, welded tubes are structurally superior, and prettier... otherwise great stuff...

Realistically Rapityping technology in bike frame manufacture is most cost effective if you are producing plastic (ABS) inserts / "consumable Jigs" to laminate composites and create "Custom geometry"...

So the only difference between a steel and Ti frame is the weight

Realistically Rapityping technology in bike frame manufacture is most cost effective if you are producing plastic (ABS) inserts / "consumable Jigs" to laminate composites and create "Custom geometry"...

And in English for us non-geeks?

Nimrod should have been phased out years ago.

Derived from the Research grant funded, fluff turned out by Empire/Renishaw? There's more interesting stuff being done bonding Steel and Ti lugs directly to Composite tubes....

I used to do that clever stuff figuring out how not to get ti and carbon to seperate when folks think you just scratch it up and glue it this was in the days flexures were Ti and not carbon ,even figuring out how to make bladders cores and things to get pressure in hard to reach places inside monocoques ,no one really gives a shit how its done more that it doesnt end up in two bits

3d printing great for headbadges

in fact is still think (read its been done before) more and more now that I could build a steel frame as light as a carbon one but the true cleverness if you could get folks on side and some way to accepting it, is that you can have a different material in a different place to do different jobs ,thats a composite ,but then your costs go up no one wants an F1 car to do the family shopping in