[Closed] Aluminium road bike comeback...?

Yup. Allez and Kinesis also, RCUK did a wee article recently.

I don't think hydroforming changes where material is though, it takes a tube and re-shapes it only, so that affects stiffness (significantly?) but not strength I think.

I have an aluminium Tricross, it rides well and has destroyed the prejudice against aluminium that I acquired in the 1990s from a couple of very stiff mountain bikes.

I don't think hydroforming changes where material is though, it takes a tube and re-shapes it only, so that affects stiffness (significantly?) but not strength I think.

I did wonder about that. If you have a thickness of tube could you stretch and squeeze it in such a way that you'd have a thicker wall in some places than in others? Someone will probably be along to explain it all soon 🙂

Giant do seem to have taken it to another level with the Propel. This one piece head tube and top tube for example...

[img] [/img]

Also saw a CAAD10 turn up at a local event last night, lovely alu bike that. The Allez Smartweld would make a great race bike too.

You really don't need to spend 16 grand a year to get nice race bikes like [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-supposedly-incredible-cost-of-racing-ridiculous-article-content ]this knob[/url] 😉

Hydroforming can do some really clever things - it really comes down to cost as to how clever you can be and whether carbon then becomes easier/cheaper to achieve it.

For example you can hydroform from plain gauge tubes or from tubes that are already variably butted. The latter costs a lot more, is more complex and is (I believe) less consistent but can give better strength:weight since you can put material where you want it.

I did wonder about that. If you have a thickness of tube could you stretch and squeeze it in such a way that you'd have a thicker wall in some places than in others? Someone will probably be along to explain it all soon

Tubes are placed into forming moulds and then forced outwards by hydraulic fluid. So if you *could* apply enough pressure to change the thickness of the walls, it would be even on all sides.

That Propel front end is very impressive.

I did wonder about that. If you have a thickness of tube could you stretch and squeeze it in such a way that you'd have a thicker wall in some places than in others?

[img] ?1430469767[/img]

There's also a section on 'why alu?' on this page: http://masoncycles.cc/thinking/the-tubing

is that rack mounts on that beauty above? 🙂

What's with the cables on that Giant!? Vertically into the top-tube?

back2basics - Member

is that rack mounts on that beauty above?

the-muffin-man - Member
What's with the cables on that Giant!? Vertically into the top-tube?

#aeroiseverything

That Mason stuff looks interesting, they've certainly invested in lots of marketing BS!

Weirdly was discussing that Mason at work this morning - their pricing is a bit odd. There's an Ultegra mechanical/hydro brake one for £2700, but the Di2 version which is essentially identical otherwise (different bar/stem) is £3700, which is significantly more than the sum of the parts.

Great looking bike though - particularly that colour scheme.

That is odd. Same wheels? That Mason's not really my sort of thing, rather nice all the same and seems to be getting a lot of media attention.

So why would you go Ally rather than Carbon? I assume price wise its similar?

njee20 - Member
Weirdly was discussing that Mason at work this morning - their pricing is a bit odd. There's an Ultegra mechanical/hydro brake one for £2700, but the Di2 version which is essentially identical otherwise (different bar/stem) is £3700, which is significantly more than the sum of the parts.

Flagship model has flagship price? Or the OE prices don't align with the AM prices for small companies.

Why assume carbon is better?

Does mrblobby work for cytech?

I was discussing this with them on their FB page earlier today and it seems a bit of a co-incidence.

I am under the impression that a high-end steel frame can rival an ally one for weight and stiffness, but I think it's more expensive to make such a beast.

Because it's typically lighter/stiffer/more compliant ( 😉 ) and the pros ride it. 🙂

Why assume carbon is better?

We are told it is the lightest and stiffest material. ?

I only have ally bikes, always have done. Does that mean I am trendy now 8)

I am under the impression that a high-end steel frame can rival an ally one for weight and stiffness, but I think it's more expensive to make such a beast.

Lightest steel frame I've ridden was 1560gm (58cm) Sintesi Pegaso. The ride was closer to alu than most steel frames (it is oversized) but I didn't really like it - it's the skinny light steel frame ride I like.

IIRC Salsa made a 1300gm steel frame which I've tried to buy and failed (someone on here let me down). Alu frames can be around 1.1kg IIRC, not ridden one, though my (actual) 1450gm CAAD10 rode really well (not dissimilar to my Six!)

FunkyDunc - Member
We are told it is the lightest and stiffest material. ?

Don't...don't...don't believe the hype!

I guess the old advantages of carbon are the ability to make complex shapes and put the material exactly where it's needed. That's probably less of an advantage now.

I guess weight is still an advantage as the alu frames of the Emonda and Propel are heavier than the carbon equivalents.

People will still likely claim they prefer the "intrinsic ride characteristics" of one over the other!

Does mrblobby work for cytech?

No idea who they are!

So why would you go Ally rather than Carbon? I assume price wise its similar?

cheap carbon is not to everyones taste. would rather have a nice alloy frame than the chinese stuff planet-x and rubble churn out.
mainly on looks but often the ride is as good or better for the similar money. cheap carbon just looks dull and er ‘cheap’ nobody ever crowded round a dribble/dolan/planet-zzzz/cube etc for a closer look.

Interesting stuff.

Al. - those two frames, any ideas what the actual material used was [ie not just the brand] ?

CF for me, though if I wanted to race* 🙂

*errr, is there a rest stop?

Dedacciai EOM 16.5, the Salsa maybe something from True Temper? I'll google.

EDIT

http://salsacycles.com/bikes/archive/primero

3.1lb = 1.4kg, True Temper S3

No idea who they are!

!

Oh are they the workshop training guys?

Edit... Just checked out their facebook. Bit of a coincidence but it is a fairly current bit of bike news. I was going to post something about the new carbon Merida frame too which I see is also being discussed!

🙂

Friend of mine has recently built up a stealthy black Allez that's as light as anything and rides brilliantly.

Good frame materials never really go out of fashion!

Swedish Chef posted this racey Allez in another thread...

[img] [/img]

Bit of an explosion in a paint / decal factory but I do rather like it.

Just bought a Caad10 frames to race while my cracked Giant warranty gets sorted. It's really a thing of beauty and unbelievably light for alu.

CAAD10's just look right...

[img] [/img]

(Spem spacers and angle aside!)

I had Look aluminium frame back in the day around 1.4 kg with a full carbon fork sub 0.5kg. Awesome bike with brilliant handling, I could 2 wheel drift in the wet on 23 mm tyres. Also comfy for 100+ mile rides.

The only thing that was slightly dodgy was the 1" full carbon fork meant you could bend the handlebars down almost like a Flexstem. Still it did make the front of the bike comfy.

I'd love a Look or Time frame now.

That Cannondale looks pukka as well. Road bikes should have flat top tubes IMO, none of this compact cack as demonstrated by that Trek at the top of the thread.

cheap carbon is not to everyones taste. would rather have a nice alloy frame than the chinese stuff planet-x and rubble churn out.

(I've got a caad5 seems ok, nowt to compare it to tho.... except a milk race from back in the day)

don't allez/caad tend to be a few hundred quid more than the similarly specced planet x cheap carbon models? Do PX posher carbon models at a similar price not compare better ride wise with the nice ali frames?

no idea? possibly? I’m not likely to be in the market for carbon frame popped out of a mould with a mass market makers name decal placed on it.
well thought out alloy, custom oversize steel, tube to tube custom carbon in that order.
£650, £1500-£2000, £2500 respectively. size restricted generic £800 carbon isn’t on my radar.

Great to see more alu race bikes, not sure that Trek is quite alu £€$ though, removes the main advantage of aluminium if it's the same price as carbon.

mrblobby - Member

Swedish Chef posted this racey Allez in another thread...

There was a pretty s**** looking Bowman in that same thread, IIRC 😀

don't allez/caad tend to be a few hundred quid more than the similarly specced planet x cheap carbon models?

Yup.
Because they're probably better.
I was recently handed some actual comparative test info (as in lab tests, strength, stiffness, etc) comparing a Spesh Smartweld alloy frame to a PX and Boardman carbon frame. I can't remember the actual numbers but the Spesh frame was stiffer laterally (something like 46% stiffer then the PX if I recall correctly) yet more compliant vertically than both of them, and within not very much of the weight, in fact it might have been lighter than one of them......Cant remember for sure. It sort of backed up what I already suspected that a good alloy frame is better then a cheap carbon one.

theflatboy, yes, and it had a curious choice of seatpost if I remember correctly 😉

PP, I can well believe that. With frames like the Aithein, CAAD10, Allez and Bowman about for not much more money than cheap carbon, I know which I'd rather have.

That is odd. Same wheels?

Yep! It's not the flagship one either, there's a Dura Ace Di2 one which is £5000, and can't be full Dura Ace because it's got Shimano Hydro discs, so must still have the R785 STIs. That still has the same (£350 wheels), but does have nicer bar and stem. Bit weird. The frames are available for £895, just doesn't all add up.

I swear some of this "Cheap carbon vs expensive alu" shit is just snobbery and elitism.

Yes, a brand new 2015 caad10 is a little lighter than a 2005 Scott Carbon road frame. But a modern say.. Cube Agree, or Canyon? In what way is it better - lighter? Stiffer? More impact resistant? On what basis is your argument made?

That Propel is impressive. And I've just ordered an SL2 to replace the Advanced (RIP). But... the alloy TCR SLR never sold well at £1200, the CAAD10 is pretty much the last pro-spec alloy frame standing, and harder still, an ADVANCED level Propel or TCR can now be had (with alloy steerer tube) for the same price as the previous all alloy TCR.

Giant have effectively removed the "Composite" line and started the "advanced" line at the same price. So whilst the picture is enticing, and those were £1350 wheels when I bought them for my Defy SL, I suspect that the propel will be targeting CAAD8 buyers and the like in the £500-£1000 price range. It probably won't come with those wheels either. But what a first-time race bike 😯 . Or spare...

I always feel a bit hard done to if they hide away an alloy steerer inside the frame. You can always upgrade components but its harder to upgrade a fork in the same design to get a carbon steerer at a later date.

Carbon is definitely a bit smoother over the bumps but I race aluminium cos it feels a bit sharper. And the thought of scrapping a carbon frame in the crashes I see at virtually every race keeps me away from buying one for now....

When is that alloy Propel due out?

I always feel a bit hard done to if they hide away an alloy steerer inside the frame

I agree. I upgraded my alloy TCR with alloy steerer to a fully carbon Ritchey fork and the improvement was impressive.

Buy you can't argue with the value Giant are delivering by splitting the range and adding an alloy option (note the standard not aero brakes to save money). Would make a fine winter race bike. I'm blown away. Says up for 2016, but it might not cone to the uk, of course.

Yes, a brand new 2015 caad10 is a little lighter than a 2005 Scott Carbon road frame. But a modern say.. Cube Agree, or Canyon? In what way is it better - lighter? Stiffer? More impact resistant? On what basis is your argument made?

I've a Caad4 from 2004/5, having demo'd a few of the carbon bikes that make up the top places of most grouptests you're kidding yourself if you think things are really moving on so far/fast. The best were better [mostly a bit stiffer, noticeably under hard braking] but if you rode them blindfold you'd struggle to say the CAAD4 was worse, especialy if you considder it was an £800 bike with tiagra when i bought it, not some £5k+ superbike.

Looking forward to seeing what they do with the new Trinity now, I could well be tempted.

Yes, a brand new 2015 caad10 is a little lighter than a 2005 Scott Carbon road frame. But a modern say.. Cube Agree, or Canyon? In what way is it better - lighter? Stiffer? More impact resistant? On what basis is your argument made?

I would definitely not put Canyon or Cube in the "cheap carbon" bracket!

Loving this thread so far.

Agree that the horizontal top tube on the CAAD makes all the difference aesthetically.

What was max tyre clearance on the Bowman? Was it 25?

Liking the look of their Pilgrim as well.

Re Bowman, not so much the Pilgrim but definitely looking at the Crays Foot for a CX race bike.

I have one eye on the new Mason alu bike. If it rides like they review, looks better value than similar Ti frames.

I swear some of this "Cheap carbon vs expensive alu" shit is just snobbery and elitism.

You could have just read the thread, 2 or 3 posts up there's a post explaining exactly why.

Yes, a brand new 2015 caad10 is a little lighter than a 2005 Scott Carbon road frame. But a modern say.. Cube Agree, or Canyon? In what way is it better - lighter? Stiffer? More impact resistant? On what basis is your argument made?

Why you comparing it to a Scott 😕 Hardly bottom end are they? Again, if only you'd have just read the thread instead of getting a bit ranty.

Is there a price on the alu Propel yet? It makes a lot more sense as a frame only (if the price is right) IMO, aim it at the weekend crit racers who already have expensive wheels and other bits of groupset already.

Swedish - Bowman Palace has clearance for 28, I've got 25s in mine and there's definitely space for larger (though still with the annoying problem I mentioned in the other thread of the wheel not fitting past the chainstay bridge with the tyre inflated 😡 😆 )

Yup.
Because they're probably better.

Like I said I have no vested interest, just seems disingenuous to compare 2 differently priced items* and then say the more expensive one is better.

I swear some of this "Cheap carbon vs expensive alu" shit is just snobbery and elitism.

*if that's what is happening, it's not clear so far.

Thanks, not quite sure of the logic why it doesn't fit when inflated but interesting to know that I could fit 27mm Vittoria Pavé's.

I would definitely not put Canyon or Cube in the "cheap carbon" bracket!

Why you comparing it to a Scott Hardly bottom end are they? Again, if only you'd have just read the thread instead of getting a bit ranty

A Cannondale SuperSix EVO 105 is the same price as a Cannondale CAAD10 105. Which is about the same price as a Cube Agree GTC SL.

A few weeks ago there were Scott CR1 Framesets going for sub 500. Ribble's R872 is just over 400 quid.

Yes, Planet X's cheapest road frame isn't as stiff as a CAAD10. Whoop-de-do. Big news. But you didn't turn down a PX for a CAAD10, you turned down a SuperSix.

Sorry, I still think a good chunk of it is elitism.

You can throw the "But I don't want to crash carbon" argument out also - it's an argument that's been time-and-again proven to be codswallop. Carbon is strong.

. But you didn't turn down a PX for a CAAD10, you turned down a SuperSix.

Having ridden both I'd take a CAAD10 over a SuperSix any day, nothing to do with reverse snobbery, but all to do with performance.

A Cannondale SuperSix EVO 105 is the same price as a Cannondale CAAD10 105. Which is about the same price as a Cube Agree GTC SL.

If anything it's pleb-ist, everyones saying the cheap options better.

And in a lot of cases it's people " turning down" much more expensive carbon bikes, nothing to do with strength in a crash, everything to do with wanting the best frame they can get their mitts on and still afford a replacement if/when needed.

'laterally stiff yet vertically compliant'. does the wheelbase effectively grow?
so what happens when you're out of the saddle, pushing pedals and pulling on bars?
i've never really seen how this was advantageous? surely it just means that you're pi55ing away effort?

To my understanding:

laterally stiff = the frame not moving left to right under pedaling, therefore no wasted power as everything is going via the drivetrain to propel you forward

vertically compliant = the fame giving to absorb road vibrations, (think Trek Domane Isopeed as the extreme example)

what stops the bits that flex to make the frame comfy from flexing when you're trying to propel the thing along?

Lockout

In plastic frames its the layup/weave direction of the actual carbon, as well as the amount used.

In steel/ali frames I assume it to be the wall thickness.

LOL at bigdug

you push down on the pedals when you want it to go. how does the frame know that it's not supposed to absorb the effort?

Having ridden both I'd take a CAAD10 over a SuperSix any day, nothing to do with reverse snobbery, but all to do with [s]performance[/s] preference.

Having ridden both I took a SuperSix. If I was a racer I'd have taken the CAAD10 for crashes.

Having ridden both I'd take a CAAD10 over a SuperSix any day, nothing to do with reverse snobbery, but all to do with performance.

I've also ridden both - and I've no idea what you're talking about. Let's not split hairs - the CAAD10 was great. But the SuperSix was marginally lighter more responsive AND more comfortable. And it was the same price (cheaper when I was looking). A quick google read shows the argument mostly comes down to preference, with most people who say they have had them choosing the supersix in the end.

You do spanner your own argument there, how is aluminium elitist when it's cheaper than all but the cheapest carbon, and as most people who've ridden both are saying, the aluminium frames are their favourite of the choices.

If anything it's pleb-ist, everyones saying the cheap options better.

And in a lot of cases it's people " turning down" much more expensive carbon bikes, nothing to do with strength in a crash, everything to do with wanting the best frame they can get their mitts on and still afford a replacement if/when needed.

You seem to be confused. If a CAAD10 is the same price as a SuperSix and an Agree GTC SL, how is it cheaper than all but the cheapest carbon?

SuperSix's have been proven to be just about the stiffest carbon frames around. They are quality carbon, not cheap carbon.

People aren't saying the cheap option's better. They're saying "Look at me, I'm special because I don't have another run of the mill good quality carbon frame, instead I paid exactly the same for a heavier, weaker, harsher riding frame".

Re: vertical compliance and latteral stiffness:

When you mash on the pedals you apply tension to the chain which is about 3x the pedaling force, so ignore the effect of your weight on the pedals. The chain is offset 50mm or so to the right so tends to twist the rear triangle that way, so its made stiff to resist this. Its also about 75mm above the BB so puts strain on the chainstays upwards, but then theyre braced by the seatstays which are about 50cm up so have a much greater leverage over chainstays vertical movement than the chain. But an impact from the road is acting directly onto the seatstays so does have enough force to noticeably deflect them.

In addition to this the front triangle is flexing. A large downtube holds the BB and headtube in alignment by resisting twist but can do little to avoid bending, so a skinny top tube takes that impact from the seatstaya and bends as well, further adding to the feeling of vertical compliance some frames have. Ultimately what you want is a really stiff headtube, downtube and chainstays, and skinny seatstays and toptube. The seatube adds to comfort (but not vertical flex) by deflecting due to the leverage of the seatpost.

People aren't saying the cheap option's better. They're saying "Look at me, I'm special because I don't have another run of the mill good quality carbon frame, instead I paid exactly the same for a heavier, weaker, harsher riding frame".

Its cheaper and people are arguing they still prefer it. And the supersix evo this year isnt the same as laat years, its not the hi-mod balis-tec £2000+ sub 900g frame, its still the bog standard carbon supersix.

you push down on the pedals when you want it to go. how does the frame know that it's not supposed to absorb the effort?

Merckx and Hinault did ok on skinny steel tubes. Ever see that old video of Hinault launching up the lower ramps of Alpe d'Huez in the big ring? I'd probably call those frames whippy but I couldn't blame them for 'loss of power' : )

I think we need a bit of give and flex over the bumps to be able to put out power effectively. Frames don't give vertically at the back unless they're un-triangulated. Front 'triangles' aren't always triangles and a vertical load or front end force can create some vertical flex, only a few mm. Watch a frame on a CEN / ISO test and you'll see a lot more though.
Front triangle twist is probably most of the flex we feel when riding, imo.

And this is clearly why manufacturers provide us consumers with so much choice.

To me the Super Six was tepid to ride providing no response apart from excessive vibrations. The front fork suffered from massive chatter too, but I'm pretty certain that was set up and not the bikes design at fault. Whilst the CAAD was pretty much the opposite, involving and full of positive feedback.

You pays your money you takes your choice.

continuity - Member

People aren't saying the cheap option's better. They're saying "Look at me, I'm special because I don't have another run of the mill good quality carbon frame, instead I paid exactly the same for a heavier, weaker, harsher riding frame".

Aren't people just expressing a personal choice? You seem to be getting more worked up about it than anyone else here... 😕

I'm building up a Caad 10 tomorrow and a cheap carbon frame.

Should be interesting to compare.

Carbon on road bikes is strong to ride but not in a crash - having seen it go snap I a shunt in a poxy 25 minute local crit. Lightweight alu is probably no stronger though.

Carbon does mute the bumps though. Alu feels sharper but a bit note rattley over the bumps.

Carbon on road bikes is strong to ride but not in a crash - having seen it go snap in a shunt in a poxy 25 minute local crit. Lightweight alu is probably no stronger though.

Carbon does mute the bumps though. Alu feels sharper but a bit note rattley over the bumps.

I recently switched components from an alu Defy to a Caad10 frame. Really pleased with the results.

I thought about cheap carbon, but knowing a bit about composite construction I know cheap carbon is a lot of glue (plastic) with some carbon holding it together, unlike expensive carbon which is about lot's of carbon with the minimum amount of glue holding it together.

Based on this I bought a built for purpose race frame and it works great. Very snappy response when you need to jump onto an attack. Stiff and reliable through super fast turns, and a high BB that allows you to peddle through tight corners.
Everyone is so obsessed with comfort and weight, they forget things like peddling through corners. A top end race alu frame has evolved for the purpose, a cheap carbon frame has been made to appeal to the masses and made fast, without a history behind it.

That's my opinion anyway.

History is it then? That's why I only shop at Harvey nicks darling, to avoid these bloody nouveaux riche types!

Jest aside.

Yes this years ultegra supersix is 10-15% more expensive than the caad. No that is not the only good quality carbon frame that can be had for less money than a bowman palace or a caad10.

If it's money that's the issue, I mean which rides better, a palace with aksiums or a r872 with rs81 c24's?

I mean, yes, I am enjoying playing devils advocate in a silly argument, and yes I agree that some top end aluminium frames can ride better, be stiffer and lighter than some shit cheap carbon frames, but in a like for like comparison I think you guys have to admit that you're not choosing the Alu frame for rational reasons.

A lot of bikes are chosen for non rational reasons. Why choose steel????

There is a difference in ride between alloy and carbon (cheap or not), and why do people have to prefer the ride feel of carbon??

They don't.

mtbtomo - Member
A lot of bikes are chosen for non rational reasons. Why choose steel????
There is a difference in ride between alloy and carbon (cheap or not), and why do people have to prefer the ride feel of carbon??
They don't.
POSTED 7 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

That's totally fine - I agree - i wasn't arguing that you shouldn't ride aluminium, just that it's wrong to tell people 'it's lighter faster and stronger in a equal price comparison'.

I mean, plenty of people out there enjoy paying to be chained up and abused by a lady in black leather - but it isn't for me.

That said - I have a steel adventures touring bike because steel is easy to weld if something breaks in the arse end of nowhere.

So are we all agreed then? Expensive aluminium is different to cheap carbon and some may prefer it? Especially if they expect to crash.

We should certainly be able to agree that it's very fashionable anyway.