Two kinds of tubes too many?

[Climb01742]

lots of folks are building frames these days with mixes of tubing materials: ti and carbon, steel and carbon, alu and carbon. ok, it's possible. but is it a good idea? setting aside fork material, does multiple frame materials improve or muddle a frame's ride? all steel, all ti, all carbon and all alu frames have a purity of both design and tubing characteristics. i'm not smart enough to answer this question. so i'll ask the collective you. my own experience is, my frames that are all one thing have clearer personalities, clearer ride characteristics. is a multiple-material frame a step forward, or an interesting detour?

[Bill Bove]

Niether a step forward nor a detour but an alternative route.

Serotta started the whole deal by using different shape tubes to get them to do what he wanted them to do, useing different materials is no different.

[Matt Barkley]

With different materials you can market something just that: different - as well as new.

So I would have to say as long as we live in this accelerated marketplace where we need to replace what we own to keep this economy moving (and us working all the time) we will be seeing these different combos for a while at least.

Climb: I completely agree with you about the characteristics of these combo bikes vs. the pure steel or Alu. Carbon tend to muddle things - albeit in a "good" way if that is the desired affect.

I think what differentiates bikes from a lot of other machines is there relative simplicity and the closeness and therefor "close feel" to the human body.

Whereas with a Formula One car or other machine, mixes of the high-tech materials can yeild great gains.... But these are much more complicated machines than bicycles - and "feel" while still subjective between drivers and riders alike is performance based with cars (more easily quantified) than "feel" on a simpler machine with a very small engine capable of a few HP.

[djg]

It seems to me that a frame's "ride"--which is no particular quantity that any of us has a clue about how to identify--is a property of many things, including, very significantly, the frame's environment (I'd count things like wheels here, but I'd also count the rider as a very major component). I don't really think that there's anything in particular to muck up when you add a second material to a class of frames (and to extend the model, I note that my all steel CSi seems pretty happy to interact with non-steel rims and tires, among other things).

I happen to love my Colnago CT1--I think it's a great frame and I much prefer it to the all-Ti frame I sold a while back as well as some others I've ridden. Now I don't think it's great just because it's a materials hybrid. It seems to me that lots of builders and manufacturers are throwing parts and materials together willy-nilly and I don't believe that the instruction "add some carbon here" is any sort of sure fire way to improve a bike. Nobody is going to remove the stays on my CT1 and replace them with a CF plug-in--not on my watch. That CSi is something particular that works for me as is and I'm not looking to change it. I just happen to think that the CT1 is also a particular bike--hybrid materials and all--that works, and if it has mucked up some "pure-ti-ness" expressed through the other ti bikes with which I'm familiar, then either those bikes didn't express that quality well or I just didn't appreciate it after all (or there's no such thing). YMMV.

[Dude]

I think what we are seeing is the specialization of the tubes. Each tube has a specific function in the bike. The top tube is lateral stability etc. and as technology advances, we can tailor the material/shape of the tube to do its specific task better. Serotta first started doing this (and continues to do it) with colorado concept tubing. Matching the material characteristics with its use in the frame is something that good builders still do (carbon in front triangle, carbon in the rear, colorado concept tubing, Ti DKS rears (you can't make DKS out of alum.), etc.)

Also, as the technology advances, we (hopefully) will see other materials come into play and/or better use of materials. they are doing that that now.

I don't see it as a bad thing, in theory, it will make a bike that much more enjoyable, durable, stronger, more compliant, safer, but also a bike that is more marketable - new gizmos and carbon here/there. Fortunately, people who ride bikes daily and follow new product like we do will be able to cut through some of the mumbo jumbo.

[Matt Barkley]

Although I have never ridden my own Richard Sach's (because I do not have one, or am yet on the waiting list) - he knows what he is doing.

Dario Pegoretti knows what he is doing.

Ben Serotta knows what he is doing.

These three guys are doing the same thing as well as 3 different things.

I think they are all tring to design and build or have built for them - good bikes.

Richard Sachs does not really "market" his frames. The other two guys do....

Different materials on the frameset is what we are talking about. Yes point taken djg, tires, wheels, etc materials... But my point will have to be stated more clearly: Climb mentioned the difference between materials being combined on a frame and the frame being just one material. I know as well as you there is a difference. I believe the "feel" difference especially with carbon is fairly evident (subjective, I know) But we brought into debate the issue of whether these new combo material bikes are better like Dude is saying about different tubes doing different things a la Colorado Concept.

Well back to the beginning here. Some builder using just steel make bikes do a lot of thing really, really well. They (good steel bikes) climb well, sprint well, corner and descend well, absorb shock well, and really handle overall very stable and yet can be aggresively ridden with total control.

If Ben can come up with the Ottrot which does all these things better than the CSI and that can be shown true - then maybe I have no case. I just don't really feel like these new combo bikes are that much, if at all better than what came before them. Sure, I ride a combo bike myself ALu/Carb at the momnet and I love it. But my all steel bikes were great, if not better. Ben Serotta, Richard Sach, and Dario Pegoretti know more about this stuff which I obviously know little about. I read all the technical stuff, and see the marketing, and try to understand what a "nice weld" looks like or is - or why a tube is shaped a certain way or how carbon is woven for these certain properties. But it all comes back to the fact (subjective as it may be) that I know what I like in a ride when I am riding it. I cannot design bikes - but I sure can tell what I like underneath me screaming down a hill!! - Matt

Hey I am all for progress, really!

[Climb01742]

dario is one reason i thought of the issue of mixing materials. there are two things you can't ask dario to build you: a sloping TT or a carbon rear. but yet his frames are very "modern" and innovative. when building his BLE, adding carbon tubing to stiffen it certainly would have been an option. but he chose a different path. who knows why? just dario being different? believing there was a better way? believeing that one material per frame has some advantage? i sure don't know. but looking at dario's frames, you gotta believe there is some logic, some philosophy there. of course on the other side, ugo, ernesto and ben blend materials. viva la difference, or whatever it is the frenchies say. :beer:

[SPOKE]

good thing i'm not a total purist. i used to be but have found that the blending of frame materials is a good thing. i'm not going to claim that "pure" is better than "blended/hybrid". what i know to be true is the personalities are quite different. fortunately, each of us gets to determine what "best" means to us.

[Too Tall]

Look, I'll be the first guy in line 10 years from now when I can custom order a thermoplastic frame that costs less than the components and rides like steel...and arrives at my door to spec. in 2 weeks. Meanwhile, my pigs go to flying school and it's begininning to look like a waste of money.

Is there a reason American craftsmanship is highly prized in Europe? Maybe something to do with that rare blend of free thinking and solid science? Japanese prize a man's philosophy and in a similar way American's want to share their life's passion(s) with others...and we seek folks WITH passion to fulfill our own need for harmony (on a bike). !CLUE! The list is long and praise the stars I ride a few: Clark Kent, CoMotion, Serotta, FatChance. Not a bummer in that bunch.

Wooo, gotta go do something manly. CYah.

[Kevin]

I can't tell you why it rides so well. But my Ottrott ST is phenominal. If the ride is the result of mixing materials, then I am all in favor of the mix. With that said, I just ordered an all-steel CSi, so I guess I like both the mix and the pure.

Kevin