metal and carbon combination for best riding frame

[Rebel_Biker]

I will start off by saying, that I have no idea if any of my ideas make any practical sense.

I like how Lemond, Tete de Course, and Cannondale, System Six, tried to combine metal and carbon. I am wondering if they did not take advantage of the properties of the materials.

Using comfort and stiffness as higher factors than light weight.

Rear Triangle - Ti or steel - isn't this where the yield of these materials helps improve comfort and ride quality?

Front triangle - Monocoque carbon - like the SystemSix

Metal - CS/SS/SP/BB Shell/ maybe 1/8 of the TT & DT

Carbon - HT/ 7/8 of TT & DT

I always wondered if you could also have a model that you do this and carbon lay over the BB & small part of the CS to stiffen up the BB. Would there be some issue of the metal flexing more than the carbon and causing cracks?

You could do unique things with the BB, like lay up a bb92, but have recessed english threaded BB.

Seven does a great job but I don't understand using carbon for SS/TT/ST. I think that is where I want metal as these are not areas where I want to stiffen the frame. Although, they probably do it for weight savings.

What do I know. I just like the ride of steel and stiffness of carbon. I also don't think the engineers/designers have been successful at laying up carbon to capture the ride qualities of ti/steel. My dream frame could be too conceptual and have no practical usefulness.

[wildboar]

Steel MX-Leader + Carbon sole shoe = good ride

;)

[KidWok]

If you have a compact metal frameset that allows you to run a longer seatpost, the cantilevering action of the seatpost would probably better define the vertical compliance of the frame than anything done in the seatstays. I do think steel is the best material for forks...the slender steel forks on my Gunnar, Davidson, and Merckx ride better than any CF fork I've owned.

I appreciate that you're thinking mostly of the technical nature of the materials and where they could be best applied. Personally, I couldn't possibly buy a bike purely on technical performance. My subjective aesthetic tastes (skinny steel tubes) would likely trump all.

In the mixed metal category, my favorite bike/builder is probably English Cycles. You've got the skinny steel seat stays, compact geo, and integrated carbon seat tube lending to vertical compliance, with modern steel throughout the rest of the frame. If it were my bike, I would probably prefer to use a standard steel seat tube. Maybe use the new Ergon CF-3 post if I wanted a bit more comfort. I would probably stick with a CF fork just for aesthetic reasons, but the fork would need to have clearance for 28's at a minimum. I would probably spec a 57mm reach brake front and back to give the bike more versatility.

Tai

[Mark McM]

Simple -

Metal for the part below the saddle, and carbon-based for the part above the saddle.

[dekindy]

Here is what Carl Strong thinks about multi-material bikes; from NAHBS 2008.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J20NmfEwDmY

[Mark McM]

But all kidding aside, the question is too simplistic. Materials aren't inherently stiff or light or strong. The final characteristics of a structure depends on the design - and material selection is just a part of the design. You can make a soft spring out of steel, or a stiff frame out of wood - it just depends on how you use the material.

[Charles M]

Nah...

(OP) is overly suggestive and overly general at once.

Carbon in general terms isn't "more stiff" and it's not "more flexible" than metal. It's both and neither depending on the material and layup.

You're better off trying to generalize impact resistance than flex given Carbon is Anisotropic and metal is isotropic. Carbon has greater ability to change character based on carbon type and layup schedule than metal does when you change wall thickness...

[mvrider]

As with so many things, it all comes down to execution. And has been noted many times before, the Ottrott, with its particular combination of Ti and C, is magical. I once test rode a Seven Elium Ti + C that was not.

[Ralph]

As a very general statement.....I think wheels, tires, and air pressure have more to do with ride and "feel" (whatever that means) than any frame material combination.

Also...a lot of times when people take a short ride on some bikie, that particular bike may not be the perfect fit, may not be set up perfect for the rider, may not have the wheels and tires and air pressure that rider might actually ride himself.....so the test experience may not mean that much.

[Rebel_Biker]

Nah...

(OP) is overly suggestive and overly general at once.

Carbon in general terms isn't "more stiff" and it's not "more flexible" than metal. It's both and neither depending on the material and layup.

You're better off trying to generalize impact resistance than flex given Carbon is isotropic and metal is isotropic. Carbon has greater ability to change character based on carbon type and layup schedule than metal does when you change wall thickness...

Agreed. I did not write it but I think the frame should also be sub 1000g. In order to have a super stiff HT in steel, it would weigh too much. The two things I like about the carbon frames I have ridden are how stiff the BB and Front end are. My favorite descending, sprinting, and climbing frame was the Dogma 65.1. However, that bike was a bit punishing on bad pavement and long hours in the saddle.

My favorite ride is definitely an IF SSR made with 953 SS. That bike excelled everywhere except sprinting and super fast descending. I have been lucky to own a lot of carbon bikes that try to design the carbon modulus and layup in a way to make a comfortable stiff bike. I just don't think anyone has nailed it. And I have never been on a carbon bike that emulates the spring and snap of steel.

[Rebel_Biker]

The other thing that I don't like about carbon is the press fit bb. I had a Madone with some miles and when I replaced the BB, I was able to press in the new bearings by hand. After some miles, a creak ensued. Another reason I really like a metal BB. Most carbon BBs today will be press fit, due to manufacturing efficiency, which I understand. But this seems to make the frame disposable at some point.

[Jason E]

#ottrottST


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FastforaSlowGuy]

My Seven 622 SLX rides great. But I'd guess that's 80% design and 20% materials.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sg8357]

For optimum ride you want carbon bike with ti chain stays, AL seat stays
and a bamboo top tube. Fork would be steel with a AL steerer held in
by a large roll pin. Note to Specialized, I have patent on this combo.

[Brainbike]

I am sure there's tons of threads on this subject, but I am weighing in having recently purchased an Ottrott from a fellow Forumite. The feeling I have when riding the Ottrott is totally different than my Cervelo. Not lighter, not as quick off the line, but just better. I post faster times on my climbs and come back in a calmer mood, no idea why. My Cervelo is amazing, but the Ottrott tracks better, and holds a firm line. I think Serotta wrote some pov vs. Seven especially given the Elium (sp?) which you can research as well. FWIW.

[uno-speedo]

Early nineties mix, this has a steel rear built by Roberts Cycles:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7535/15718273575_e2afea561f_b.jpg