Carbon / ti bikes

[LegendRider]

It appears that most manufacturers of ti bikes have added ti/carbon frames to their arsenal. They seem to be saying carbon is superior is certain applications. Yes, marketing and consumer demand play a role, but ask an Ottrott rider if their bike is the best they've ever ridden - normally they say yes. So, the question is, is there any design reason for using ti in these frames at all? Or, is it strictly convenience for the manufacturer? You'll notice that traditional carbon manufacturers are NOT adding ti to their bikes.

For example, why does the Ottrott have a ti head tube, seattube and chainstays? Sure, ti might withstand chain suck better, but isn't it the case that Serotta isn't ready - for whatever reason - to build an all carbon frame? Nearly ever manufacturer that has the ability to build with any material they want has a carbon bike in the top spot (C-50, Madone, etc.).

Why use ti at all in mixed material frames? I see no advantage.

[chrisroph]

Good questions, but have you ridden any carbon frames? Do you like them? I have a carbon frame, and it is a very nice bike. I use it as my primary racing bike. It is stiff, pretty light and comfortable. However, I also have a ti bike and love its riding qualities. It is very comfortable, compliant and has a certain spring or liveliness that is lacking in the carbon bike. The carbon bike is a great racing tool but the ti bike interacts with the road in a more lively way. This makes it a more pleasurable bike to ride and train on. However, when you are racing, who cares what the bike feels like? That is not something that usually comes to mind in a race. In addition, it is generally thought that a ti bike is more durable than a carbon bike and will withstand crashes and getting thrown around better. As to the new ti/carbon hybrids, I have not ridden one so I have no opinion as to how they feel. I am sure they ride very well. However, the expense puts me off. In addition, they generally weigh more than ti only bikes. Finally, they likely lose out to an all ti bike in the durability department. So, at this point I am not interested in one. For racing, I'll take the 281. For training or just riding, I'll take ti or one of my steel beauties. So, I for one think that ti is real. However, I also realize the benefits of carbon bikes. They can be made very light, strong, stiff, and compliant. But, there certainly is a place for ti.

[Len J]

I think that, for a custom manufacturer like Serotta & Seven, using TI wherever there are angles (HT, BB etc) allows for ease of customization, within existing capabilities. To create custom carbon lugs at different angles, HT dimensions etc. would probably be cost prohibitive.

Just my .02

Len

[drd]

LegendRider, I essentially agree with you. Seems that manufacturers still use Ti for convenience. As far as I know, most lugged carbon bikes use OEM carbon tubes. That includes parlee, calfee, serotta, seven, IF, etc. So Seven, Serotta, IF, etc. essentially have little-no carbon expertise, other than gluing a carbon tube into a ti tube.

One possible reason for using Ti with carbon is to more easily adjust geometry and make custom bikes. Or I should say, "more easily" if you already have the expertise and equipment to weld Ti. If you use Ti for the lugs and carbon for the tubes, it's may be easier/cheaper than whatever process calfee/parlee/colnago do to make custom geometry carbon lugs.

[93legendti]

I am not sure if there still are strict requirements necessary for ideal welding of ti, but if there are, using ti might not be all that "convenient". I think durability, ride quality and customization of head and seat tube angles are probably the reasons for use of ti with carbon.

[Serotta_James]

Len is completely correct. In a mixed material format we can acheive true custom geometry. The 'custom' carbon bikes on the market can only really acheive about 30% of the customization that we can hit with our TIG production. This is a major reason why we don't build an all-carbon bike. When there is sufficient technology to allow us to hit a level of customization even close to what we currently can, then we will consider it.

Ti also has pretty great riding characteristics. Mixing it with carbon in the right way can really accentuate each materials' benefits.
This sounds like marketing, and it is... it also happens to be true in this case.

[LegendRider]

Ti also has pretty great riding characteristics. Mixing it with carbon in the right way can really accentuate each materials' benefits.
This sounds like marketing, and it is... it also happens to be true in this case.

Can you give us some specifics? Why does Serotta choose to put ti at the head tube, seat tube and chainstays? Conversly, what benefit is there, in your opinion, to putting carbon in the down tube, top tube and seat stays. Lemond Bikes has a different theory given they use ti for the "spine" (basically the lower half) and carbon for the top.

Also, what customization can you do that Parlee, Crumpton or Calfee can't with carbon?

Thanks for any insight - I'm genuinely curious. I'm not attacking Serotta.

[PanTerra]

Why does Serotta choose to put ti at the head tube, seat tube and chainstays? Conversly, what benefit is there, in your opinion, to putting carbon in the down tube, top tube and seat stays. Lemond Bikes has a different theory given they use ti for the "spine" (basically the lower half) and carbon for the top.



When Ben came to our LBS open house last year I asked him this question. He said that he would have an issue with the seat tube being carbon, in that if carbon, he would be leary of its integrity, having to clamp the front deraileur onto it - would much rather have it clamping on Ti. Plus, he said there is virtually no noticible difference in the ride with a carbon seat tube as opposed to Ti. If the Ti comes up high enough on the seat tube to secure the FD clamp, with the rest being Carbon up to the top tube, there would be no real weight savings, well at least not enough to matter.

[spatz]

No complaints about my Victoire... the lively yet vibration dampened feel of Ti with the lateral stiffness and weight reducing properties of 110 OCLV carbon, Ah yes! :beer:

spatz :)

[CNY rider]

Last summer I decided to take the plunge into premium road bikes.

After much searching, the list was narrowed to two: A Legend Ti and a Lemond ti/carbon. I got the Legend last August and absolutely love it.

Even after getting the Legend, I was still lusting after either a LeMond or an Ottrott. I took my fit measurements from my Legend and discovered that I would fit a 53 cm LeMond very nicely.

Fast forward to two weeks ago: I discovered a site on the web named EBay (perhaps some of you have heard of it).

:D

Anyway there appeared a 53 cm Tete de Course frame/fork , and as they say, the rest is history.

I had it built up at Blue Sky, and just brought it home :banana: Unfortunately I live on top of a hill that basically catches snow all winter and funnels it down the roads all spring, so they're muddy rutted disasters right now and we haven't made the maiden voyage yet.

I am totally excited to see how it rides compared to the Legend.

I will do a photo shoot soon and post some pix.

[Steve800]

ti carbon mix = heavy frame. Seems to be a weight penalty for mixing the materials. We all know that the Ottrott is not a gravity friendly frame, while some all ti and alll carbon frames can be very light.

[dave thompson]

Is weight the important factor though? You make it sound like the Ottrott is a porker, which it is definitely not. I think that Ti/Carbon bikes are made to have certain qualities, and gossamer weight wouldn't allow those qualities to be manifested. 1000 gram frames are not necessarily noted for their longevity, durability or having a nice ride. You pays your money and makes your choice. For me, a pound or so of frame weight is very far down my priority scale.

[CNote]

No complaints about my Victoire... the lively yet vibration dampened feel of Ti with the lateral stiffness and weight reducing properties of 110 OCLV carbon

Wait...I thought it was the vibration-damped feel of carbon fiber???? :confused: Then again, I guess I don't buy into that material resonance thing that a lot of people talk about.

[CNote]

Steve, I don't know what's going on in that avatar of yours, but it's freakin' me out, man.

[John H.]

I have seen Ottrott ST frames as light as 1100 grams painted with all hardware. How can you say that is not light? Component spec has more of an impact on total bike weight.

[93legendti]

My Ottrott, with clincher wheels and mostly D/A 9 speed, weighs 16.6 lbs...hard to get that low with a "heavy" frame, even if all the lightest parts are on it.

[Steve800]

My Ottrott, with clincher wheels and mostly D/A 9 speed, weighs 16.6 lbs...hard to get that low with a "heavy" frame, even if all the lightest parts are on it.

Good point

[Tony Edwards]

IMO it's stupid to call an Ottrott "heavy" just because it isn't the lightest frame available.

I will probably never own an Ottrott (and certainly not a new one) for financial reasons, but it does strike me as an intelligent design. IMO it makes sense to use ti, as opposed to CF, for the chainstays and seat tube, for ride-related reasons. It seems to me in this respect the Ottrott is a superior design to the even-more-expensive Independent Fabrication version, which seems to me to incorporate so little ti that one might as well buy a stock CF bike, as long as it fit.

[Jeff N.]

Steve, I don't know what's going on in that avatar of yours, but it's freakin' me out, man.Me too! What the hell is it? TELL IT TO STOP!!!!! Jeff N.

[BarryG]

Me too! What the hell is it? TELL IT TO STOP!!!!! Jeff N.
If you're using Internet Explorer, go to Tools, Internet Options, Advanced, Multimedia and uncheck "play animations" and fatty will stop dancing for you.