Ti bikes from back in the day -- just how bad?

[CunegoFan]

Originally Posted by velofinds

Just needs to be lowered, I would think.

I am guessing there are about two millimeters inserted there.

[Polyglot]

Originally Posted by Brian Smith

The Miyata linked, if it is the same model as the one I had in a stand years ago, and it does appear to be, used the same 1.1mm plain gauge 9/8" tube for each location in the main "triangle." Very flexy. I wouldn't recommend that ride over even a steel bike with the same very compromised dimensions.

There is a big difference between "back in the day" 10 years ago and "back in the day" of this Miyata. Serotta was the first to bring titanium tubing into a form with dimensions that really worked well, and they did it essentially from their start.

Brian,

You seem to be blissfully unaware of the many wonderful Titanium bikes that preceded the Serotta bikes. As but one example, I offer you my 1989 Passoni that featured whatever diameter tubing that they deemed necessary for teh individual client (they were all custom-built), as they made their own tubing and did not need to stick to what their supplier provided. The fact that they were able to make their own also allowed them to make titanium forks, titanium seatposts and one piece titanium bars and stems. Even if now 27 years old, there isn't much difference to today's titanium frames. The chainstays are massive when compared to most titanium frames of its day. I have showed my bike to a number of builders who use titanium and they are always shocked to see what Passoni was able to do back then. Many things are simply so prohibitively expensive that nobody can justify doing them anymore.

[paredown]

Originally Posted by merlinmurph

I think one of the issues is that they hadn't quite figured the alloy part out, yet. I'm pretty sure (someone call me on this) that the early bikes like the Teladyne Titan were 100% ti which was kinda noodly.

I found this on velobase.com:
http://velobase.com/ViewBrand.aspx?B...e-6113cf2cd556



The manufacturer was a southern California based aerospace firm named "Teledyne'. Teledyne was based in Gardena, CA, where they specialized in working with exotic metals like titanium which required special processes to fabricate frames. It is a little known rumor that the bike division was formed as a way of obtaining titanium during the cold war years of the early 1970s. Russia is where all the titanium was at and they were not about to send military grade titanium to the USA for them to make weapons with, but bicycles was another story. The US got the titanium and the bicycle part of the company promptly died but managed to win several races. Multiple national cycling champion Ron Skarin won a Red Zinger stage and the Tour of Sommerville twice on a Teledyne Titan and Pete Penseyers won the Race Across America (RAAM) on one. The history of the Teledyne would not be complete without mentioning Barry Harvey (a British cycling champion, who emigrated to Canada), who was the first to introduce his titanium frame technology to the cycling community at the US Grand Prix in 1972. Soon after this he worked out a deal with a California aerospace company to go into the bike frame manufacturing business. The Teledyne Titans were actually made from commercially pure titanium which is not as strong as the current 3/2.5 (aluminum/vanadium) alloy blend. The commercially pure metal was easier to work with than the harder alloys. In 1975, Teledyne was producing frames for the North Hollywood Wheelman team.

Someone showed up at a race with one of these BITD (I think 1973 or '74) and it was the coolest thing that anyone had ever seen. I did not get a chance to ride it, but the rumors of it being noodly were rampant.

I'm trying to remember if it was Barry himself who was there with it...

[fignon's barber]

Back in the late 1980's and early 90's there was no internet. We didn't know bikes were whippy or stiff. We just rode them.

[milkbaby]

Is it just me or does the way the seatstays meet the seat and top tubes make the front triangle look like it's drooping down at the seatpost clamp?

[Hindmost]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

Back in the late 1980's and early 90's there was no internet. We didn't know bikes were whippy or stiff. We just rode them.

Remember standing next to a bike, leaning the bike slightly while holding the saddle and handle bar, and then pressing on the head of the crank arm with the ball of one foot? One would do this once or twice and then nod knowingly.

[cnighbor1]

Here are some photos. Cracks in fork biggest problem
still a neat frame

[Black Dog]

Originally Posted by Hindmost

Remember standing next to a bike, leaning the bike slightly while holding the saddle and handle bar, and then pressing on the head of the crank arm with the ball of one foot? One would do this once or twice and then nod knowingly.

So true, except the flex we were inducing was in the wheels not the frame.

[bikingshearer]

The first Ti bike I recall hearing about was the Speedwell out of Great Britain. Luis Ocana used one for climbing in the 1973 TdF, which he won in dominating fashion. (Merckx was not there that year.) It had then-standard tube diameters, and the word on the street was that it was quite noodly. I have no idea if that was true or not. I also have no idea whether it was pure Ti or an alloy.

The Teledyne Titan was the first frame of any material I can recall that went the larger diameter route, which was ahead of its time. Among those sponsored to race on them was John Howard, who could (and probably still can) crank out serious watts. My recollection is that the word was that the increased tube diameters made a significant difference in de-noodling the frames. One problem, however, was that shift lever, front derailleurs, and bottom bracket cable guides at the time were all bolt-on - the braze-on stuff was still unusual - and there were no bolt-on components available to fir the oversized tubing, That is why they created narrower diameter spots on the frames to accommodate the then-available components. I remember hearing that doing that caused problems with the frames, although I am not 100% certain my memory is correct and I certainly do not recall any details.

Buying one was never an option for me as I was about 16 or 17 when the Titan came out and it was all I could do to buy a Bob Jackson frame and outfit it in the most eclectic combinations of components you can imagine.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by bikingshearer

The first Ti bike I recall hearing about was the Speedwell out of Great Britain. Luis Ocana used one for climbing in the 1973 TdF, which he won in dominating fashion. (Merckx was not there that year.) It had then-standard tube diameters, and the word on the street was that it was quite noodly. I have no idea if that was true or not. I also have no idea whether it was pure Ti or an alloy.

The Teledyne Titan was the first frame of any material I can recall that went the larger diameter route, which was ahead of its time. Among those sponsored to race on them was John Howard, who could (and probably still can) crank out serious watts. My recollection is that the word was that the increased tube diameters made a significant difference in de-noodling the frames. One problem, however, was that shift lever, front derailleurs, and bottom bracket cable guides at the time were all bolt-on - the braze-on stuff was still unusual - and there were no bolt-on components available to fir the oversized tubing, That is why they created narrower diameter spots on the frames to accommodate the then-available components. I remember hearing that doing that caused problems with the frames, although I am not 100% certain my memory is correct and I certainly do not recall any details.

Buying one was never an option for me as I was about 16 or 17 when the Titan came out and it was all I could do to buy a Bob Jackson frame and outfit it in the most eclectic combinations of components you can imagine.

You remember correctly. A lot of them broke at the shifter 'waist'.

[martl]

I've no personal experience on them, but i heard several Teledyne owners say they ride them with extreme care due to lack of stiffness and trust, mainly in the fork.
1990s Merlins or Litespeeds will be comparable to contemporary SLX bikes. Nothing to be frightened of, but not up to par with what the market offers nowadays.

[trout]

Here is mine. I will be selling it soon.

2004 litespeed firenze

[IMG]Litespeed Firenze by billd203, on Flickr[/IMG]

[Brian Smith]

Originally Posted by Polyglot

Brian,

You seem to be blissfully unaware of the many wonderful Titanium bikes that preceded the Serotta bikes. As but one example, I offer you my 1989 Passoni that featured whatever diameter tubing that they deemed necessary for teh individual client (they were all custom-built), as they made their own tubing and did not need to stick to what their supplier provided. The fact that they were able to make their own also allowed them to make titanium forks, titanium seatposts and one piece titanium bars and stems. Even if now 27 years old, there isn't much difference to today's titanium frames. The chainstays are massive when compared to most titanium frames of its day. I have showed my bike to a number of builders who use titanium and they are always shocked to see what Passoni was able to do back then. Many things are simply so prohibitively expensive that nobody can justify doing them anymore.

Polyglot - We may disagree here, but maybe we're miscommunicating as well. Disagreement, I easily tolerate or enjoy, but the same isn't true for miscommunication. I certainly didn't try to characterize myself as being unaware of Passoni. I'd describe any gaps of knowledge in my bicycle history as opportunities and not, as you guessed, blissful. I'm aware of Passoni, even if I wasn't aware of them 27 years ago, and I still maintain my earlier statement. Passoni themselves present their current product as evolved. If you don't see evidence of difference between recent titanium product in the market and that of Passoni 27 years ago, you may not be looking closely enough. We may disagree about whether the differences are material, if in fact the main differentiator for you is simply that - the material, as in the alloyed metal of the frame. Some people cheer for their favorite marques of bicycles, and that's great, and I don't mean to disparage Passoni, however I wouldn't liken any titanium frame of that era to that of recent times. Titanium frames became good well after they became commercialized, and not vice-versa. Such is the way new material generally finds new applications, not only in bicycles.

Beyond discussions of titanium bicycle frames, however, I see it as more likely that we disagree about the bicycle market more than we might be miscommunicating about it. Your statement that things are so prohibitively expensive that nobody can justify doing them anymore can't seem to be reconciled with the state of the market. Titanium is more available to, and more workable by the sports equipment industry than ever before. Disregarding materials, the bicycle enjoys a more plentiful high-end buying public than at most times of the past 27 years. If better product can be offered at a premium price to that which is slightly inferior, it's often worth pursuing. After the limits of high end construction are reached, buyers still exist who spend additionally for further aesthetic customization of even these machines. Perhaps you could show how a particular process cost or material cost of titanium has caused a product's extinction as an example, or perhaps you're proffering a version of history that is counter to the market and counter to my experience.

[RFC]

Originally Posted by martl

I've no personal experience on them, but i heard several Teledyne owners say they ride them with extreme care due to lack of stiffness and trust, mainly in the fork.
1990s Merlins or Litespeeds will be comparable to contemporary SLX bikes. Nothing to be frightened of, but not up to par with what the market offers nowadays.

I have a Ti Bike Jones and have owned and ridden many.

I agree with the statement above. The 90's straight tube Ti bikes do ride like high end steel, for example, my 1994 Catalyst.

My 98 Litespeed Ulitmate, however, is the second stiffest bike I have ridden. The stiffest was my 87 Cannondale SR Crit Series with the massive stays. I need to pick up another one of those.

My 91 Litespeed Tachyon with the ovalized tubes is plenty stiff, but with an entirely different feel because of the unique geometry.

[zap]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

Back in the late 1980's and early 90's there was no internet. We didn't know bikes were whippy or stiff. We just rode them.

Raced Cannondale's and had a Trek carbon back then.........difference was noticeable.

Purchased an early 90's Litespeed.......that was a mistake. It just sucked and damn near killed me when the chain stay cracked while doing hill intervals.