JPW# Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 I have a question for all those who ride hardtail titanium frames. How much softer of a ride are they compared to your "cheapy allu frames?
JPW# Posted January 9, 2009 Author Posted January 9, 2009 I'm sure there must be hubbers riding Ti frames
Johan Bornman Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 Go to the CNA and buy yourself three stiff 300mm rulers. Dril a hole at each end of each ruler and assemble the rulers into a triangle. Now put a bolt through each end of the triangle and tighten it so that you have a stiff triangle. Now try and flex this triangle in its plane. I know the rulers are flexible laterally, but keep it in plane and try and flex them.Now repeat with titanium, steel, carbon and aluminium rulers. Report back to us which one flexes the most and where the flex comes from. You would have noticed that it is impossible to get any flex out of the triangle. Your bike's rear end is a triangle in two planes. Imagine how still that is, no matter what the material. In sloped top-tube bicycles all the perceivable flex comes out of the long seatpost. To spare you the experiment which I know you won't do, let me put it in words: there is bugger-all flex in any MTB rear triangle no matter what the material. The only time you'll feel something different in a Ti MTB is when the tubes crack. I believe that is quite perceivable. Buy an aluminium bike and be done with all the BS.
DeltaOscar Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 Go to the CNA and buy yourself three stiff 300mm rulers. Dril a hole at each end of each ruler and assemble the rulers into a triangle. Now put a bolt through each end of the triangle and tighten it so that you have a stiff triangle. Now try and flex this triangle in its plane. I know the rulers are flexible laterally' date=' but keep it in plane and try and flex them.Now repeat with titanium, steel, carbon and aluminium rulers. Report back to us which one flexes the most and where the flex comes from. You would have noticed that it is impossible to get any flex out of the triangle. Your bike's rear end is a triangle in two planes. Imagine how still that is, no matter what the material. In sloped top-tube bicycles all the perceivable flex comes out of the long seatpost. To spare you the experiment which I know you won't do, let me put it in words: there is bugger-all flex in any MTB rear triangle no matter what the material. The only time you'll feel something different in a Ti MTB is when the tubes crack. I believe that is quite perceivable. Buy an aluminium bike and be done with all the BS. [/quote'] How about stays which have a degree of flex engineered into them: profiling/butting, or differing lay up for composites? How about how different materials absorb different frequencies in different ways?
Jules Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 Hence integrated seat posts? Even integrated, there would still be some flex if the seat post is long enough. I agree with JB, I reckon it's a load of nonsense. I'd love to conduct a blindfolded test one day. I reckon half a bar's difference in the tyre pressure would make a 100 times more difference than frame material.
Johan Bornman Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 Hence integrated seat posts? NOt quite. An integrated seatpost will also flex. It is the fact that you have a long unsupported post with a huge weight on top. The integration is neither here or there wrt flex. A way to reduce flex is to make the diameter bigger or obviously, the seatpost smaller.
Johan Bornman Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 How about stays which have a degree of flex engineered into them: profiling/butting' date=' or differing lay up for composites? How about how different materials absorb different frequencies in different ways?[/quote'] No matter what the stays are made of or whether the crystals lie exactly east, if they are made of a rigid material and configured in a triangle without pivots at each corner and tubes that can slide over each other, then it is for all intends and purposes rigid. Frequencies? This is not meta-physics. Frequencies have nothing to do with it.
DeltaOscar Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 How about stays which have a degree of flex engineered into them: profiling/butting' date=' or differing lay up for composites? How about how different materials absorb different frequencies in different ways?[/quote'] No matter what the stays are made of or whether the crystals lie exactly east, if they are made of a rigid material and configured in a triangle without pivots at each corner and tubes that can slide over each other, then it is for all intends and purposes rigid. Frequencies? This is not meta-physics. Frequencies have nothing to do with it. No it's not metaphysics (one word). We're intepreting his question differently - he asked about 'softer' you're thinking Flex, I'm thinking overall ride feel. My full carbon mtb definately felt 'softer' or 'deader' than my aluminium ones. And he was asking about "Titanium Ride Feel".If you can't answer an honest question without being condescending, don't bother.
Johan Bornman Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 No it's not metaphysics (one word). We're intepreting his question differently - he asked about 'softer' you're thinking Flex' date=' I'm thinking overall ride feel. My full carbon mtb definately felt 'softer' or 'deader' than my aluminium ones. And he was asking about "Titanium Ride Feel".If you can't answer an honest question without being condescending, don't bother. [/quote'] Netiquette lets us overlook the odd typo or spelling error but doesn't allow us to omit capitals, punctuation or inner-circle abbreviations no-one understands. Since you so dilligently point out my mistake, I dearly hope all your posts are clean. You may embarrass yourself soon. I stand by my interpretation of softer. Softer, as is used in softer suspension, or softer pillows mean one thing and one thing only. It has nothing to do with vibrations. I think my answer was honest and to the point. If you don't like me or my posts, twitlist me and be done with it. Have a nice day.
vanniri Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 Cycling mags talk about the effect of different materials on ride quality.Framebuilders talk about ride quality built into the frame. Me, I am just a person who rides bikes. Having experienced steel, aluminium, titanium and recently carbon. For some reason they all felt different, but apart from the material variances all the bikes were different brands also. The difference most noted by me was the sound from the vibration of the frame when or a tar road and tyres are inflated hard, or the pitch of creaking noices. I bought my first carbon frame only recently and was very suprise on the ride, all aspects: speed, handling, feel, etc. I like racing and are obviously baised towards speed. If I have to list the material in preference I would say: 1) Carbon2) Alu3) Ti4) Steel
1kTT Posted January 9, 2009 Posted January 9, 2009 Generally I agree with JohanB but at times, not. ?Despite what his rulers tied together might suggest, I have real world experince.About a year ago I swithed from a ali hardtail (Yeti) to a Ti (Erikson). ?Almost all other components were the same, particulary wheels and tyres.The ride difference between the two in worlds apart. ?The Ali is super stiff and transmits every single bump in the road to your body. ?The Ti is very plush in absorbing trail vibration and small bumps yet still feels very very lively. ?It way well crack in time but is the miracle element when it comes to mtb frames.There is no way I would have done epic on the Yeti hardtail but it was a pleasure (90% of the time) on the Ti.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now