Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 51 total)
  • The great Steel Vs Ti debate re-opened… Your thoughts please…
  • mboy
    Free Member

    Sooooooooo… A few rides in on my new frame, I’m starting to wonder if there really is much difference. We’re talking like for like here, as of course comparing something like a Lynskey 29er with a Cotic BFe would be pointless, whereas comparing a Soul with a Soda would (or in my case a Genesis Altitude Ti with an 853 steel version of the same) would be much more relevant.

    I went from this…

    To this…

    So aside from the single ring (which is an experiment anyway), virtually identical builds on both. Certainly all the key areas (wheels, forks etc) the same, and though not the same in the pics, tyres as well (at the same pressures in case any pedant asks).

    The point I’m trying to make here is that other than a bit less weight, I’ve not noticed any real difference yet between the two. Maybe that’s cos the Steel frame was so good (in my opinion at least), maybe the Ti frame isn’t as good as it could be perhaps? I’m not complaining, I loved the Steel frame, the Ti feels like more of the same with a chunk less weight, but I thought it might also ride differently. In a way I’m pleased it doesn’t, though I’m also pleased I didn’t buy it brand new for full RRP as the £600 saving of the Steel frame would have saved more weight elsewhere on a bike I’m sure!

    Anybody else got any thoughts? I’ve ridden quite a few Ti frames over the years, but only ever found one I liked very much before this one, a 2003(ish) Cove Hummer. Most Ti frames I’ve tried have been a bit too soft, and felt like the front and the back weren’t pointing in the same direction very often. But I’ve also ridden Steel frames I didn’t get on with (Cotic BFe, way too firm IMO amongst many others), so its not really all that clear cut.

    druidh
    Free Member

    What debate?

    If you can afford it, buy Ti. If you can’t, buy steel.

    cinnamon_girl
    Full Member

    If I’m doing a long ride, I would rather be on the Ti than the steel. Did actually do a comparison last year – Ti had 100mm travel and steel had 120mm, Ti had Ti seat post and steel had Thomson. Everything else, ie wheels, brakes, tyres, chainset, saddle, was identical. Same 35 mile route in same conditions.

    Definitely felt less beat up on the Ti. Weight difference was around 2.5 lbs.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

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

    Anybody else got any thoughts?

    The material your frame is made from really doesn’t make that much difference.

    angryratio
    Free Member

    Geometry is the biggest influence i would have thought.
    followed by other variables like tyre pressures, and also the level of competancy of the pilot.

    mboy
    Free Member

    CG, that’s an interesting point, I’ve not been out on a long ride yet really on the Ti, I think just under 20 miles has been the longest on it yet.

    Weight difference between the 2 frames in my case was about 1.25lb, significant? Possibly, but probably not as significant as 1.25lb off the wheels (though mine are already reasonably light).

    The material your frame is made from really doesn’t make that much difference.

    Is kinda where my thoughts are starting to go too… Having recently bought a road bike, a Giant Defy, which is an alloy frame but is also remarkably forgiving to ride. I’ve ridden many abusive hardtails over the years, owning quite a few, and in each case put the stiff ride down to it being made of ally. But then my Cotic BFe felt no different!

    I think a lot of the “Ti ride qualities” that people talk of generally only come in very expensive high end lightweight XC frames, where very thin walled Ti is used and though its still strong enough, the frames become very flexy as a result. Personally this doesn’t appeal at all to me, having ridden frames like that. As it is I’m happy with my new frame, just like my old frame but lighter, and no paint to scratch/chip off. But again, I’m also happy I bought it 2nd hand and saved a packet…

    druidh
    Free Member

    My cheapest Ti frame is the flexiest.

    mboy
    Free Member

    Geometry is the biggest influence i would have thought.

    Agreed, which has been knocked out of the equation here as both frames have identical geometry in my case.

    followed by other variables like tyre pressures, and also the level of competancy of the pilot.

    Was riding with the same tyres, at the same pressures initially, noticed no differences there. Ignore the competency of the pilot too, as I’m equally as crap whatever bike I ride! 😉

    flow
    Free Member

    The material your frame is made from really doesn’t make that much difference.

    Ride an aluminium road bike next to a carbon road bike and you will find there is a hell of a difference.

    The same goes for aluminium and steel hardtails.

    Can’t comment on titanium though, never had the pleasure of riding one.

    epicyclo
    Full Member

    What I like about Ti is your bike stays looking good.

    It’s a bit gutting when your brand new bike looks like a 100yr old wreck after one muddy 24hr.

    TiRed
    Full Member

    Other things being equal…

    1. Geometry = handling
    2. Tube size = stiffness
    3. Material = weight

    Your experiment has looked at factor 3. controlling for 1. and 2. Hence a pretty fair test. Most people’s Ti experience don’t control for 1. or 2. (e.g. going from say an Aluminium frame with large tubes and 72 degree head angle to a Ti frame with smaller tubes and 69 degree head angle)

    My Ti road bike rides very smoothly and seems less rigid that a similar Al or CF frame (ridden a few), I suspect this is down to 2. principally. I am sure that a high end steel bike with the same geometry and tube diameters would ride the same (and be half a kilo heavier).

    chiefgrooveguru
    Full Member

    Material | Ti3Al2.5V | 853steel | 6061Al
    Density | 4480kg/m3 | 7780kg/m3 | 2700kg/m3
    Stiffness | 107GPa | 207GPa | 69GPa
    Strength | 900MPa | 1400MPa | 325MPa

    So Ti is 42% lighter than 853 but only 36% weaker. However it’s 48% less stiff. If you keep the geometry and tube profiles the same (ignoring the addition of joint reinforcements because Ti doesn’t strengthen with welding) but increase the wall thicknesses for equal strength then the resulting frame will weigh 11% less and be 20% less stiff.

    It seems that generally Ti bikes use larger diameter tubes (as these can be built with sufficiently thick walls to survive impacts without excessive weight) to increase the stiffness in key areas and reduce the weight further. Also many 853 bikes aren’t 853 throughout. Aluminium alloy frames have to be overbuilt when new because as they age they weaken with use, however light that use is, hence the high stiffness (and this stiffness reduces the weakening through fatigue cycles), whilst steel and titanium frames only suffer fatigue from loads which cause high stress (beyond their fatigue). Despite that it’s interesting to see how the most common aluminium alloy compares to these fancier materials: If you built a bike to just last one race you’d get the best performance from an al alloy frame!

    freeridenick
    Free Member

    Having built up a Kobe and ridden it alot over the last month I would say compared to my PA it is alot stiffer over the back end. I am not sure if this is part down to the ground being so hard at the moment or just geometry/short top tube or the Kobe being thick old TI tubes? I can certainly feel my back today after 3 out of 4 days riding over the weekend.

    takisawa2
    Full Member

    You’ve two quite different looking saddles on those bikes also, but intresting observation. If I had the cash I’d be worried that for the extra £600 I’d not notice much difference. I felt the same about the Cotic Soul & Inbred I had. The Soul was a pound lighter & just felt very flexy. (in my opinion) not worth the £300 over the Inbred.

    richmars
    Full Member

    Emperor’s New Clothes?

    rOcKeTdOg
    Full Member

    that step is a health and safety nightmare

    TheSouthernYeti
    Free Member

    I’m guessing that not only have you not ridden far enough to notice the difference… but you also haven’t ridden hard… or fast… enough.

    😛

    xiphon
    Free Member

    aracer – Member
    Anybody else got any thoughts?

    The material your frame is made from really doesn’t make that much difference.

    Exactly my opinion too. If they’ve just spent £lots on a new Ti frame, of course it’s going to ride differently – so they can justify buying it 😉

    Dickyboy
    Full Member

    Recently bought a secondhand Genesis Ti frame myself but not got round to building it up yet as it will mean splitting my Prince Albert. All depends where your priorities lie – weight loss & corrosion resistance were high on the list for me – only downside for me will be expense of any damage, so probably mean I take less risks with the bike (I am an XC jeycore rider anyway) & definitely won’t be taking the Ti for any pub excursions 🙄

    DezB
    Free Member

    Can’t see myself ever owning a Ti frame. Always thought it was the ultimate hardtail if I had the money to burn.
    But I ain’t, so my steel Cove will do me just fine.
    Nice to know there isn’t much difference really 🙂

    charliedontsurf
    Full Member

    If you have the money then why not go Ti – but if you work out the cost per gram saved, you would never tell the wife.

    853 Steel and Ti are kinda similar in ride characteristics, not the same… But similar. and both way nicer than alloy.

    But you need good steel and good Ti. It’s alarming how many Ti frames are cracking up at the moment. Cheap/ strong/light choose any two, bearing in mind that a £1,000 ti frame is cheap and light.

    Cheifgrooveguru… Cheers that was very interesting. Everyday is a school day.

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    Seems to me the Genesis designers stuffed up – they should have designed each frame to take advantage of its material.

    Munqe-chick
    Free Member

    (Mr MC posting)

    writing as someone who’s user name on a different MTB site is Ti Fetish and used to have a litespeed with every possible part made of Ti (and was a research metallurgist many years ago) I reckon

    1) any characteristic of the metal property is outweighed or negated by frame design and tube spec (which could be consciously exploited by frame designers).

    2) Ti frames have a higher failure rate than any other material, due to weld contamination giving lie to the “frame for life” tag.

    Its always seemed like the “right” material for a mountain bike, hard (so impact resistant), fatigue resistant and elastic (so potential for building a frame with some shock absorption/flex/spring and not having it snap), corrosion resistant (so easy to care for and doesnt need painting) but even the most experienced builders (Lynskey who used to be Litespeed were aero Ti fabricators before they started building bikes and theyve built bikes for ages) still suffer too many failures.

    I’ve got a Dialled Alpine and I’d love a Ti Alpine (or Brodie Holeshot) though, but only if I had confidence in the warranty.

    chief said “If you built a bike to just last one race you’d get the best performance from an al alloy frame! “

    didnt kona and a few others do this with “scandium” (actually aluminium with scandium as the alloying element) XC race frames, which weighed nothing, cost a packet and had a 1yr warranty?!

    BadlyWiredDog
    Full Member

    I’ve ridden both a Blue Pig and a Ragley Ti, which have identical geometry, though both are optimised in design for their frame materials – the Ti has that Lynskey thing of a very braced BB area for example, both have the three-finger brace gubbins.

    Anyway, the difference in weight between the frames is pretty much 2lb. I’d say that the ride feel of the frames in terms of compliance and suppleness etc is broadly similar, so on the face of it, you’re paying an awful lot to save 2lb in weight and have a pretty ti finish.

    The difference is that if you build both frames up with the lightest fit for purpose kit you can afford, the Ti will weigh 2lb less and it’s 2lb that to lose elsewhere, you’d effectively have to compromise on strength or performance or spend mega-bucks. It’s the difference between a 28lb build and a 26lb one. That’s actually a big chunk of weight for a certain type of rider, someone who values acceleration on climbs and on undulating stuff, who wants a light, spangly, but still capable bike. If you’re someone who only rides for the downs, you won’t care, and why should you.

    I found the Pig kind of sluggish and uninterested on the sort of undulating singletrack I’d be sprinting out of the saddle on a lighter bike and capable but very ‘steady’ on the climbs. A Lynskey Ti built quite similarly was just exponentially more lively and explosive feeling on the same terrain.

    I’m not saying it’s worth the extra dosh, but arguably to some riders it is, ah, yes, you could get an Mmmbop that’ll build to the same weight, but as a generalisation, it’ll ride a lot stiffer. What you’re paying for is a frame that has alloy or near carbon weight, but steel-type suppleness.

    And that’s it I think. I’m not trying to justify it, like I said, I think it’s important to some riders and not to others, depends on how you’re wired. I suspect there’s also a sort of investment trap effect where if you’ve spent big on a ti frame, you’re more inclined to spend a little more on lighter, more expensive bits elsewhere, so in the real world, the difference in weight is more pronounced again…

    So you might have Pikes on a Pig, but put Revs on a Ti and save another lb in weight, fit lighter cranks etc. The overall difference between the Pig and the Ti version I’ve ridden was actually more like 4lb, which is really noticeable on some terrain, but even with identical componentry, there’s still 2lb in it… To be fair the Pig is a heavy-ish steel frame while the Ti is par for the course with titanium, say 5.5lb versus 3.5lb.

    Would I buy a Ti? Hmmm…

    BadlyWiredDog
    Full Member

    Do people still ride stuff without springy bits at the back, is this some sort of Northern poverty issue?

    Do southern trolls still insist on six inches of rear travel to ride over their non-existent rocks? Is this some sort of ****, effete Southern rider competence issue?

    woodsman
    Free Member

    Ti doesn’t do it for me, although I could make an exception for a >95 hei hei. Apart from the crack factor there is just something vulgar and apsirational about it in my opinion. Sorry – not meaning to offend any owners with my comments. 🙂

    BadlyWiredDog
    Full Member

    Ti doesn’t do it for me, although I could make an exception for a >95 hei hei. Apart from the crack factor there is just something vulgar and apsirational about it in my opinion. Sorry – not meaning to offend any owners with my comments.

    Says someone who just recommended Swobo clothing on another thread… 😉

    TiRed
    Full Member

    Seems to me the Genesis designers stuffed up – they should have designed each frame to take advantage of its material

    Perhaps, but I suspect that a) they are settled on the geometry and b) Ti tube sizes were fixed by the tube/frame supplier – and there aren’t many over-sized Ti tubes (some odd profile ones mind!). Hence they are left with a Ti version of an already excellent 853 frame for a different “price point” in the market.

    As I said, all else being equal, switching to Ti saves weight (and paint scratches), but there is no magic involved as attested by chiefgrooveguru’s numbers.

    DezB
    Free Member

    Do southern trolls still insist on six inches of rear travel to ride over their non-existent rocks? Is this some sort of ****, effete Southern rider competence issue?

    I do that too!

    DezB
    Free Member

    woodsman rides rubbish bikes in great clothes. What’s wrong with that? 😉

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    My point is alot of nice frames flex a bit – that’s what is nice about them.

    chiefgrooveguru
    Full Member

    BWD, how do you think a Ragley Ti with a full water bottle in a cage would compare to a Blue Pig without?

    mboy
    Free Member

    You’ve two quite different looking saddles on those bikes also, but intresting observation.

    Both are equally firm, and similarly shaped I can assure you.

    Emperor’s New Clothes?

    Not for me anyway, I’m trying to find where it feels better than the Steel version, and to be honest it doesn’t really. Just a bit lighter! Maybe I’ll notice it more in time or on longer rides?

    I’m guessing that not only have you not ridden far enough to notice the difference… but you also haven’t ridden hard… or fast… enough.

    A hardtail is a hardtail. I have ridden plenty quick enough already to get into trouble on it, I can assure you! Though an 8″ travel full suspension bike would probably not have reached its limits, maybe I should ride on of them instead? 😉

    there is just something vulgar and apsirational about it in my opinion.

    Ironically I used to think like that too, and many a time I have gone on a ride and there’s someone there who’s just spent £2k or so on a new Ti HT frame, and is spouting about the benefits of it after the first mile. For the record, this Ti frame cost me less than the new RRP of the Steel version of the same. I’m the last person to be vulgar about my bikes, I’m well known for being a bit of a tight-arse when it comes to buying bike stuff, and 90% of the time I buy 2nd hand.

    Seems to me the Genesis designers stuffed up – they should have designed each frame to take advantage of its material

    Perhaps, but I suspect that a) they are settled on the geometry and b) Ti tube sizes were fixed by the tube/frame supplier – and there aren’t many over-sized Ti tubes (some odd profile ones mind!). Hence they are left with a Ti version of an already excellent 853 frame for a different “price point” in the market.

    As I said, all else being equal, switching to Ti saves weight (and paint scratches), but there is no magic involved as attested by chiefgrooveguru’s numbers.

    What he said… I don’t think they’ve stuffed up at all, it rides great, exactly like the steel version but a fair bit lighter. Not easy to justify of course if you’re buying new at RRP, but then as with any Ti frame, if you had to justify it, you’d not buy it in the first place I’m sure!

    My point is alot of nice frames flex a bit – that’s what is nice about them.

    Ever ridden a really flexy Ti frame? It’s horrid! A bit of give in the right direction of course helps a lot, but too much flex, particularly laterally, makes for a nasty bike to ride!

    Cheifgrooveguru… Cheers that was very interesting. Everyday is a school day.

    Indeed, many thanks. I broadly knew most of that information without knowing the figures, but it is nice to know the exact figures behind it too.

    jameso
    Full Member

    “The point I’m trying to make here is that other than a bit less weight, I’ve not noticed any real difference yet between the two”

    Shall i chip in as i designed them? ) (although i don’t work there now so this is an FYI not a sales pitch!)

    They were meant to feel similar, just the ti was a lot lighter and perhaps a bit softer overall. a bit.

    Anyway – the Ti version used a larger TT and a pretty large DT compared to some frames. I don’t like noodly / too-whippy frames, i like spring under pressure, ie in a hard corner or leant over on rough ground, but not so much of the wobble a flexy frame can have with a short stem, slack-ish angles and wide bars.

    The 853 version was relatively stiff for a steel bike but flexier than alu or carbon in general. the Ti was meant to feel similar in the mainframe, so it went through a few rounds of prototype to get the frame tube dims feeling right. Ti has less stiffness than steel, so the diameter needs to be bigger to make it feel similar. But it can still be lighter, by almost a pound and a half in this case i think. I’d say it was a bit more flexible overall than the 853, but it’s subtle – compared to riding an older merlin or similar that can feel really whippy.

    If you didn’t want lighter / more £ but you wanted more flex, a slimmer tubed steel bike will be a better bet.

    “Seems to me the Genesis designers stuffed up – they should have designed each frame to take advantage of its material
    – Perhaps, but I suspect that a) they are settled on the geometry and b) Ti tube sizes were fixed by the tube/frame supplier”

    Not really, the ti version is lighter and doesn’t give up much stiffness – that IS taking advantage of the material, it’s just not doing it in the same way that most people do. Tubing sizes are only fixed by a supplier if you buy off the peg.. there’s a good range of sizes to choose from if you go to the right factory.

    jameso
    Full Member

    “I think a lot of the “Ti ride qualities” that people talk of ..”

    .. are simply due to flex combined with low weight. sorry, but it’s true, there is no ‘magic’ : ) steel can do similar things at a higher weight.

    woodsman
    Free Member

    BWD + Dez – because I’m worth it! 😉

    It’s like all these things, taste is subjective, but I for one are more than happy with the steel.

    A good natured thread despite my outspoken comments. Cheers all and happy riding.

    Elfinsafety
    Free Member

    that step is a health and safety nightmare

    It’s bin keeping me awake at night. 🙁

    BadlyWiredDog
    Full Member

    A good natured thread despite my outspoken comments trolling. Cheers all and happy riding.

    Fixed it for ya 😉

    tk46hal
    Free Member

    I’ve had the lot, Titanium, Steel, Aluminium and now Scandium! From the lot, I prefer the Scandium! As light as Titanium, if not lighter, as strong as Titanium, as flexible, but as a big plus, less expensive than the Titanium! 😉

    chiefgrooveguru
    Full Member

    Initial investigation suggests that the addition of scandium to an aluminium alloy slightly increases strength but more importantly significantly increases (triples!) the number of fatigue cycles to failure, so you don’t need to ‘overbuild’ as much as with other aluminium alloys.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 51 total)

The topic ‘The great Steel Vs Ti debate re-opened… Your thoughts please…’ is closed to new replies.

New deal added to Members Discounts