3.25 vs. 6/4 Titanium

[Aspen]

I am looking at two identical frames with the exception that one is 3.25 and the other is 6/4 titanium. The 6/4 is supposed to be a little lighter but how about stiffness and general ride quality? Would there be much of a difference? This is about a size 51 frame.

[dvs cycles]

6/4 is harder than 3/2.5 from what I remember. Tubes could be thinner so ride would depend on what the builder was trying to acheive.
Perhaps just name the bikes you want to compare and someone will have specific info?

[TAW]

A lot would depend on what type of bike you're looking at, so I can only comment on the bike that I have, which is a 6/4 Ti Colnago. It's not the stiffest bike I've ever ridden, but it's plenty stiff for my power output, and it does have a really good feel to it. I think it's fairly comfortable as well.

Hope this helps.

[David Kirk]

6-4 is stronger than 3-2.5 but it is not in any way stiffer. If using 6-4 one can have thinner walls and still have a bike that's plenty strong but because the walls are thinner it won't be as stiff as 3-2.5.

IMO the sole reason to make bikes from 6-4 as opposed to 3-2.5 is marketing. "6" is a bigger number than "3" so it must be better. "This one goes to 6!".

Dave

[avalonracing]

I know that Merlin was making their Works frame in 6/4 but they went to 3/2.5 only because it was better with twisting forces.

[dnades]

I was under the impression that 6/4 titanium tubing is a seamed tube hence their use in shaped tubing and the 3/2.5 tubing is a drawn tube. The 6/4 tubing is supposed to be stiffer and have some characteristics that are helpful to racers. I think Tom Kellog at spectrum cycles has an article on the differences between the two titaniums. I have two bikes with the 3/2.5 tubing (a merlin extralight and a serotta concours) both rides are very comfortable with the merlin being more flexible(smaller diameter tubes) than the concours. My research led me to go with the 3/2.5 tubing rather than the 6/4. I did not ride a 6/4 frame though.

[barry1021]

6-4 is stronger than 3-2.5 but it is not in any way stiffer. If using 6-4 one can have thinner walls and still have a bike that's plenty strong but because the walls are thinner it won't be as stiff as 3-2.5.

IMO the sole reason to make bikes from 6-4 as opposed to 3-2.5 is marketing. "6" is a bigger number than "3" so it must be better. "This one goes to 6!".

Dave

"Yeah, but mine goes to 11".

[malcolm]

Tom Kellog does have an article on his site discussing this. I think the take away was at the time it didn't make much sense to use the 6. Look on spectrum cycles website.

[Michael Maddox]

6/4 is full of awesome and win. That is why I only ride 6/4 Titanium. It fuels the inner barbarian, pumps my quads, and allows me to drop the hammer on biznatches who ride 3/2.5.

:D

[TAW]

6/4 is full of awesome and win. That is why I only ride 6/4 Titanium. It fuels the inner barbarian, pumps my quads, and allows me to drop the hammer on biznatches who ride 3/2.5.

:D

Man! I must have a 3/2.5 that's been REBADGED as a 6/4! :crap:

[cadence90]

...in this order:

3/2.5 Ti = Campa
6/4 Ti = Shimano
953 SS = SRAM Red
CP Ti = Tektro

:)

[Michael Maddox]

...in this order:

3/2.5 Ti = Campa
6/4 Ti = Shimano
953 SS = SRAM Red
CP Ti = Tektro

:)

And I thought my reply made no sense...

...although I admit I understand how Campy's now below Shimano, I don't get why you suddenly love Tektro so much.

[djg]

According to Reynolds (http://www.reynoldstechnology.biz/compproperties.html) 6/4 is stronger than 3/2.5 and __marginally stiffer__. I don't know that the latter property makes any real world difference. I have a 7 year-old Colnago CT-1 with a 6/4 main triangle and a CF rear (the old C40 rear triangle) and it's a really good bike, IMO, but it's not super stiff, at least not by the seat of the pants test -- likely because the relevant tube diameters are not especially large. I guess that as Dave Kirk (one of the actual experts here, unlike yours truly and most others) points out, keeping the diameter constant and removing material -- reducing wall thickness -- can also be a factor. For testing purposes -- supposing one did that sort of thing -- I don't know what sort of force you'd apply or how, but for riding, how-does-it-feel purposes, my 3/2.5 HSG frame feels stiffer. Bigger pipes. I think this I think that this is just one of those areas where the design trumps the materials difference. Because of the strength, you could build a somewhat lighter frame from 6/4; because 3/2.5 is plenty strong, you can build a fairly light frame that's more than strong enough. I guess this is just one of those areas where I'd trust the builder -- have a discussion about what you want out of the frame and, if it's a matter of choosing, ask the builder why one or the other might be preferred. If I were shopping for another Ti bike, which I'm not, I'd shop for the builder or the particular frame, and not the alloy.

[WadePatton]

My wedding band was made from 10/2/2 IIRC. Very stiff and strong, uber light, and fairly easy to polish. :D

Free to good home! (size 10.5) :crap:

[mtb_frk]

I am looking at getting my first Ti frame here in the near future. I am looking to go for a custom mtb, because I apparently have a long torso. There are a lot of frames out there made by smaller independent builders that cost quite a bit less than some of the bigger companies. They use the same material, what should I look for in comparing them?

[cadence90]

And I thought my reply made no sense...

...although I admit I understand how Campy's now below Shimano, I don't get why you suddenly love Tektro so much.
Well, I'm a real frugal guy: I like my best "bang for the buck/to failure" ratio. :) :rolleyes:

And Campa is of course #1, for sensibility if for nothing else. :p

[cadence90]

I am looking at getting my first Ti frame here in the near future. I am looking to go for a custom mtb, because I apparently have a long torso. There are a lot of frames out there made by smaller independent builders that cost quite a bit less than some of the bigger companies. They use the same material, what should I look for in comparing them?What you should be looking for is:

1) A reputable Ti builder (not some guy who has put together 5 frames total in his career).

2) Fitting experience: a bit more forgiving in mtb sizing than in road frames, but nonetheless always important.

3) 3/2.5 Ti is fine, I think better than 6/4 (which is +/- 2x the price, and not worth that, especially on an mtb frame).
NO "CP" (Commercially Pure) Ti. :no:

4) A builder that listens to and understands you (and vice versa), communicates well, has a clear philosophy, and turns you on.

5) A builder who also knows component selection, and can make appropriate recommendations.

6) Your top US choices imho are (not necessarily in this order; they're all excellent builders): Moots; Kish Fabrication; Kent Ericksen (ex-Moots founder); Mike DeSalvo; IF; Seven Cycles; Carl Strong; Steve Potts; Serotta; Bill Holland (not sure if he does Ti mtb); (I don't know if Dave Kirk does Ti mtb)...then Merlin (they also do Tom Kellogg/Spectrum Ti work); Davidson; Titus; Litespeed. Airborne is presumably as good as Litespeed, from what I hear, cheaper, and under-rated.

Lynskey are the original Litespeed founders, now back on their own, worth a look from what I hear.

Dean also supposedly make good Ti frames, but I've read so many negative reviews of their customer service and very late delivery times that personally I wouldn't go there. Jeff Jones does ti, but I think he's...well, never mind. Again, personally, I would avoid Roark because of supposed quality-control issues (they started out as military Ti contractors, I think) and they are not AFAIK ti frame "specialists", although they may pretend to be.

Old (eBay or used only) Ibis (Sebastopol) mtb Ti frames are very good, but rare and $$$. I don't know if Castellano is still doing Ti.

I may have forgotten somebody good.

Here's a big list of world-wide Ti frame builders (http://users.skynet.be/lichtsnelheid/TITANIUM/links.htm).

There are are other Ti builders out there, but they are imho either not as experienced or they contract out their Ti work (it's a different expertise) to some of the above-listed builders.

Good luck!; it's a great ride! :)

[mtb_frk]

Thanks for the great info. :beer:

So far I have been looking at Titus, Serotta, Seven, Eriksen and a local builder Scott Quiring.

I am still trying to decide if I want to go the 29er route. I am pretty sure I want full suspension, but I am not fully decided on that yet either.

I was in for a fitting a few weeks ago at a titus/seven dealer. They were showing me different segments of tubes. The stock Seven Ti tube was quite a bit heavier than their higher end Ti found on the IMX. I assume though that they are both 3/25 Ti?

[malcolm]

I would check out DeSalvo as well. His bikes look quite nice and his turnaround times weren't bad a year or so ago. I think he does some the the building of the S. White speedvagens so he must be good. Prices are not bad either. He'll do steel or Ti.

[Peter B]

-snip- I don't know if Castellano is still doing Ti.

John has resurrected his old Silk ti softail and Steve Potts is doing the ti fabrication. They'll build it as a 29er too. Very nice frames!

[Ahneida Ride]

Before the final decision ...

Take a Legend Ti for a test ride.

[mtb_frk]

I wish I could ride a serotta. I only know one person that has a older serotta mtb. Way too small for me. But maybe riding a road bike wouldnt be a bad idea. Or then it again it might be a really bad idea. I may be buying two bikes...

[WadePatton]

Cadence90 pegged it. All the builders I would consider are on that list. I met Steve Potts at NAHBS 4.0 and he's a great guy. Personal interaction with the builder is what turns me on. The Lynsky's are in my neck of the woods and I rode one of their Litespeeds back in the day. It was a great bike (and the one I miss the most), BUT I'm not into the trendy stuff they're doing now--non-round tubing that is.

[Michael Maddox]

I'll add something serious to the discussion, I suppose.

I'm interested in a Moots Cinco (5" travel, full suspension), and have been advised against the purchase of a Ti mountain bike. My trusted friend (an LBS owner) says the flexibility of a full-suspension MTB is somewhat greater due to some design tradeoffs, making a 5" travel bike more of a 6" travel bike. He recommends an aluminum frame (something like a Turner 5-spot) instead.

An extra inch of travel seems a bit exaggerated. I love Ti bikes (I own a Moots Compact SL and a Gary V Titanio), but am inexperienced with the material in the MTB world. Still, the longevity of the frames is attractive. I don't find either of my Ti bikes particularly flexible, but then I measure flex against a Vitus 979 gold standard.

How real is this supposed flexibility in Ti MTBs?

[PacNW2Ford]

Note that the Moots Cinco uses an aluminum rear triangle for stiffness.

[mtb_frk]

too bad serotta doesnt make a full suspension mtb. Then it would be a really easy decision for me. :banana:

[rockdude]

I have a Cinco, it was built with oversized Ti tubing and it has no flex. I would bet that if regular tubing Cinco has little to no flex.

I'll add something serious to the discussion, I suppose.

I'm interested in a Moots Cinco (5" travel, full suspension), and have been advised against the purchase of a Ti mountain bike. My trusted friend (an LBS owner) says the flexibility of a full-suspension MTB is somewhat greater due to some design tradeoffs, making a 5" travel bike more of a 6" travel bike. He recommends an aluminum frame (something like a Turner 5-spot) instead.

An extra inch of travel seems a bit exaggerated. I love Ti bikes (I own a Moots Compact SL and a Gary V Titanio), but am inexperienced with the material in the MTB world. Still, the longevity of the frames is attractive. I don't find either of my Ti bikes particularly flexible, but then I measure flex against a Vitus 979 gold standard.

How real is this supposed flexibility in Ti MTBs?

[dookie]

How real is this supposed flexibility in Ti MTBs?

no different than in road applications, really. as has been said a bunch already, it's not the material, it's the design & application.

dunno if your question is specific to full-sus bikes (with which i have zero experience), but my ti kona king kahuna hardtail (ovalized & gusseted OS ti) is *way* stiffer than my paramount mtb (lugged OS tange prestige).

[bnewt07]

Thanks for the great info. :beer:

So far I have been looking at Titus, Serotta, Seven, Eriksen and a local builder Scott Quiring.

I am still trying to decide if I want to go the 29er route. I am pretty sure I want full suspension, but I am not fully decided on that yet either.

I was in for a fitting a few weeks ago at a titus/seven dealer. They were showing me different segments of tubes. The stock Seven Ti tube was quite a bit heavier than their higher end Ti found on the IMX. I assume though that they are both 3/25 Ti?

I'd consider a Ti MTB for a whippy hardtail but not for a full susser. Most respected Ti builders who produce such a thing tend to use a carbon rear end because the flexier nature of Ti is not ideal for the strains of suspension. Such a bike is not likely to be placing low weight as a top priority and stiffness is more crucial to handling so the usual advantages of Ti are less significant. Sure you design a super-stiff Ti MTB susser bike if you like but that is going to feel more or less like an aluminium bike, weigh about the same and cost three times as much. Durability is good of course but modern alu/carbon MTB's are pretty tough beasts.

[Kane]

6) Your top US choices imho are (not necessarily in this order; they're all excellent builders): Moots; Kish Fabrication; Kent Ericksen (ex-Moots founder); Mike DeSalvo; IF; Seven Cycles; Carl Strong; Steve Potts; Serotta; Bill Holland (not sure if he does Ti mtb); (I don't know if Dave Kirk does Ti mtb)...then Merlin (they also do Tom Kellogg/Spectrum Ti work); Davidson; Titus; Litespeed. Airborne is presumably as good as Litespeed, from what I hear, cheaper, and under-rated. Lynskey are the original Litespeed founders, now back on their own, worth a look from what I hear.

Butt, my opinion is that all these bikes in a Ti/hardtail format are a waste of money. Riding a hardtail mtn bike is like riding a model T. Ti or steel may be fine if you live nebraska, but if you live somewhere with ups and downs + bumps you need full suspension for maximum enjoyment.

None of those listed makes a worthy full suspension Ti bike. Seven an Moots cost a bucket but they are far from the cutting edge. IF was going to get in the game with a DW link design, but that got real quiet of late. Potts may have invented mtn biking, but what have you done for me lately?

Titus is the only company on the list that could or would make a contemporary design mtn. bike. But, you should look hard at their Al bikes to see if you could get a good fit unless you want a custom antique to give to your grand kids because a Ti mtn bike is going to be around for a long time and whatever design you pick, parts (shocks, linkages etc.) will be impossible to buy for it in ten years.

Try a Ibis Mojo if your begging to spend a lot of $$.

Cheers,

Kane

[bnewt07]

Butt, my opinion is that all these bikes in a Ti/hardtail format are a waste of money. Riding a hardtail mtn bike is like riding a model T. Ti or steel may be fine if you live nebraska, but if you live somewhere with ups and downs + bumps you need full suspension for maximum enjoyment.



I guess that may be a discussion for an MTB forum but as somebody who rides both HT and FS MTBs ins some very lumpy country I can assure you a great deal of fun can be had on an HT MTB. There are times when FS actually takes away the fun, (and the skill to a certain extent). Sure this may not be true for a real downhiller but HT's still have a big role for XC riding.

Otherwise I agree with you about Ti FS MTB's.

[michael white]

yeah, I think there are certain trails that are better for each frame style. A strictly offroad bike for really bumpy courses would probably be a fs.

A hardtail is for me, a more versatile frame, one which works well in commuter mode or even in long distance loaded touring, and ON the trail, I love the flickable handling . . . not surprisingly, I've always owned hardtails.

[rockdude]

There is a place for Ht and FS and I enjoy riding both. My FS bikes are Titus mojolite, Yetia ASR-SL, Turner O2, Ellsworth Thuth & Moots Cinco. If I had to pick one, it would be the Moots Ti. I have paired down my Ht's to one older Litespeed obed Ti. Its light, fast, a little flexy, but soaks up the bumps. I also ride a Ti road bike. Most materials can be made stiff or flexy but I perfere Ti because of the durablity, weight, look and I feel Ti is more comfortable.

Butt, my opinion is that all these bikes in a Ti/hardtail format are a waste of money. Riding a hardtail mtn bike is like riding a model T. Ti or steel may be fine if you live nebraska, but if you live somewhere with ups and downs + bumps you need full suspension for maximum enjoyment.

None of those listed makes a worthy full suspension Ti bike. Seven an Moots cost a bucket but they are far from the cutting edge. IF was going to get in the game with a DW link design, but that got real quiet of late. Potts may have invented mtn biking, but what have you done for me lately?

Titus is the only company on the list that could or would make a contemporary design mtn. bike. But, you should look hard at their Al bikes to see if you could get a good fit unless you want a custom antique to give to your grand kids because a Ti mtn bike is going to be around for a long time and whatever design you pick, parts (shocks, linkages etc.) will be impossible to buy for it in ten years.

Try a Ibis Mojo if your begging to spend a lot of $$.

Cheers,

Kane