Ti v. Carbon

[Dromen]

Searched Forum, found nothing....

Always looking for ways to improve road vibration on my all Ti gravel bike. ALL = frame/seat post/stem. Run 42mm tubeless tires at 40ish psi on Belgium+ 32 spoke disc wheels when off pavement. Fork is Enve CX. Bars are currently Easton EA70 AX. Will any CF pieces reduce road noise however slight considering the above set up?

FYI - also spend considerable miles with 35c smooth tubed road tires(50psi) on pavement rides.

Begs question kicking around in my head for years. Does Ti have similar vibration damping characteristics as CF?

[cribbit]

Titanium > carbon

End of story

[PaMtbRider]

I don't think changing any of your components to carbon is going to help reduce any vibrations. Thicker or gel padded bar tape might help.

I asked Dave Kirk about carbon vs aluminum stems when he was building my JKS. His reply was:

Stems are pretty darn simple items but it’s amazing how bad a few of them are. There are very few things I can say for certain in this life and one of them is that stems do not affect ride quality at all. They are just too small and stiff to do anything but hold the bars rigidly and that’s that.

On the topic of handlebars his thoughts were:

some will say that one bar gives a smoother ride than another and I can say I’ve never experienced this. I think I am pretty fussy when it comes to ride quality but that said I can’t feel a difference in bar material. Suffice it to say if there is a difference that it is very, very small.

I hope Dave doesn't mind me sharing his comments here. I've tried many different setups over the years and have to agree with what he said.

[AngryScientist]

first and foremost, i think it bike fit and rider position on the bike, with respect to weight distribution and comfortable overall position. After that, wheels and tires easily are the biggest variable to tune the feel of any bike on any surface. i would try some more supple tires at lower pressure before anything else.

i have heard some positive comments about the seatposts that use some sort of microsuspension like the specialized "cobble gobbler" that also may increase comfort, but that would probably be less impact than lowering rear tire pressure a few psi.

[prototoast]

I'd lower tire pressure by 5 psi before I messed with any of the components.

[htwoopup]

Any material has worse or better damping than the other based on engineering.

Simply, a well designed/engineered/built carbon item (like a frame) will hands down be better than a poorly done titanium one.

And vice versa.

But you already have the frame. Components like a well done carbon bar will dampen vs alloy. It will be more compliant and thus absorb more.

On seatposts, different materials IF THEY ARE BETTER ENGINEERED/ BUILT will be better than a run of the mill alloy post.

Stems are more of a teeny difference so I wouldn’t worry about stems.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[David Tollefson]

I've really been enjoying the Kinekt seatpost. Tailor made for gravel, perfect for chip-sealed roads as well.

[Mark McM]

In a Velonews Technical FAQ article a few years ago, a reader wrote in to ask if carbon handlebars would be more comfortable. Editor Leonard Zinn posed that question to several manufacturers of carbon handlebars. Half of them said, yes, carbon handlebars will be more comfortable. The other half said no, carbon handlebars are stiffer, so they will be less comfortable, and recommended aluminum handlebars instead.

Cervelo posted this article on Ride Quality, with charts to show the relative contribution of different components to vertical compliance. For front wheel bump shocks, the tire provided the largest portion of compliance (about 1/3), with the fork and handlebar providing about 1/6th each, followed by the tape at about 1/10th. The wheel and the stem contributed the least, the frame also provided very little. In the rear, the tire provided nearly 1/2 of the compliance, with saddle, seatpost and shorts providing most of the other half. Just like in the front, the wheel and the frame provided very little compliance. It should be kept in mind that Cervelo's test was for road bikes, and at the time the largest tire that would fit in most Cervelo frames was 25mm. If Cervelo were to run the test again with 42mm tires, no doubt the tire compliance would totally swamp all the other compliances. Also keep in mind that the tire is better at damping vibration and conforming to small ground irregularities.

[2metalhips]

How much do you weigh? 42c tubeless at 40 psi seems high to me. I run low 30's, 38c, latex tubes.

[rnhood]

The carbon / Ti debate is one of those that will likely never end. My advice is to test ride a carbon gravel bike, such as the Specialized Diverge or perhaps the Trek Checkpoint SL5 or 6, and you will then know if carbon provides a better ride and comfort that what you have. If you want to keep your existing bike, then as mentioned above, fit and air pressure can definitely make a difference.

[KonaSS]

Yes, that tire pressure seems high for 42s. Obviously weight and terrain dependent, but would experiment down closer to 30.

https://gravelcyclist.com/bicycle-te...ve-composites/

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by htwoopup

Any material has worse or better damping than the other based on engineering.

Simply, a well designed/engineered/built carbon item (like a frame) will hands down be better than a poorly done titanium one.

And vice versa.

But you already have the frame. Components like a well done carbon bar will dampen vs alloy. It will be more compliant and thus absorb more.

On seatposts, different materials IF THEY ARE BETTER ENGINEERED/ BUILT will be better than a run of the mill alloy post.

Stems are more of a teeny difference so I wouldn’t worry about stems.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I like this answer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dromen]

180 necked + loaded bike/rider = 205 to 210#. Add is semi-rough terrain w/ river crossings(mysteries below the surface).

Originally Posted by 2metalhips

How much do you weigh? 42c tubeless at 40 psi seems high to me. I run low 30's, 38c, latex tubes.

[CAAD]

Originally Posted by rnhood

The carbon / Ti debate is one of those that will likely never end. My advice is to test ride a carbon gravel bike, such as the Specialized Diverge or perhaps the Trek Checkpoint SL5 or 6, and you will then know if carbon provides a better ride and comfort that what you have. If you want to keep your existing bike, then as mentioned above, fit and air pressure can definitely make a difference.

I can say for a fact that the Checkpoint SL5 is a pretty darn comfortable bike. I have many miles on mine. BUT the Checkpoint is equipped with the isospeed decoupler. This dramatically reduced chatter and big hits. How smooth is smooth enough? When I mount up 40c GR1 tires at 50psi on the Checkpoint it feels so so smooth and muted on hardpack dirt/gravel. I'm also running the Bontrager XXX carbon integrated bar stem combo, it's flexy to begin with so I feel it's a great bar when the going gets rough.

I had a Crockett before for gravel and the Syntace HiFlex Full Carbon P6 Seatpost was a great post and definitely recommend it.

Stem, no major noticeable difference. I'm running an Ax lightness full carbon on one bike. Extralight on another. They feel the same. Both 100mm length with Easton E100 bars. Save your money and stay alloy.

I'm a big fan of Easton bars. But their carbon bars are pretty stiff. I'm not sure how the EC70 AX would be compared to the EA. Try thicker bar tape?

[Dromen]

THANKS FOR all info. I get all the "tricks" for reducing vibration like tape options, gel padding, tire psi.... i was really just looking for info on diff from Ti to CF with my TI gravel bike as an example. Think i got my answer. Thanks for the info/responses.

Steve