Mixed material frames-variations and ride differences?

[tv_vt]

Mixed material frames are not new, but I'm curious if there are any actual published reviews or studies about how the various iterations of mixed material frames ride. Lots of variations out there: Lemond Spline (top half all carbon, bottom all metal-either ti, steel, or aluminum), Serotta (generally with TT and DT carbon, ST ti), and on to those like Clean's recent Firefly or a Seven 622 (DT, TT, and ST all carbon, with basically ti lugs joining them). Almost all of these versions have metal headtubes and bottom brackets. With Trek/Lemond, the seattube/TT lug is carbon; most other versions have metal lugs there. Pretty much all mixed material frames have carbon seatstays and metal chainstays.

So, basic question, is there a quantifiable difference in "performance," however you define it, between all these variations? Or even between one of these and a single material version? Does it just boil down to individual rider's opinion and preference? Or is the value/benefit in how it allows builders to customize a ride by using stiffer or flexier carbon fiber tubes?

[ultraman6970]

IME too stiff doesnt work for me. as for mixed materials I had 2 bikes with mixed material. De rosa planet and a BMC road racer.. both aluminum with carbon rear and the rides were awesome.

IMO has more to do with the geometry than with the material, then you have to factor the rider. Obviously some materials will do better in certain roads than others... for example all the kuota bikes can go uphill.

Is subjective aswell, but for me no matter what materials you mix, if the geometry is the wrong one the bike wont do what it should.

[simonov]

I have two bikes from the same manufacturer, one Ti and one Ti Carbon. Geo is pretty much the same. Same chainstays, dropouts, headtube and fork. The Ti Carbon one, as you might expect, is a little stiffer, a little more reactive out of the saddle and a little more "racey" feeling. It's a touch less comfortable after hours in the saddle.

[jamesdak]

Well, I find my spine Lemond to be pretty harsh and had to make some allowances for that. I've got a C.F/steel one. Had to put a more forgiving saddle on it and then fatter tires at lower pressure. The first few rides I thought I'd finally found a Lemond I didn't like because of how harsh it was on chipseal. Now it's tolerable and really shines as a climbing bike which is what I picked it up for.

[oliver1850]

Originally Posted by jamesdak

Well, I find my spine Lemond to be pretty harsh and had to make some allowances for that. I've got a C.F/steel one. Had to put a more forgiving saddle on it and then fatter tires at lower pressure. The first few rides I thought I'd finally found a Lemond I didn't like because of how harsh it was on chipseal. Now it's tolerable and really shines as a climbing bike which is what I picked it up for.

Interesting comments considering that you probably have more than one 853 LeMond. Do you have one of the OCLV frames? I have a Zurich and a Trek 5500 but couldn't tell you which is stiffer/harsher.

[Clean39T]

Originally Posted by tv_vt

Clean's recent Firefly

It's beautiful, and I love riding it. That's really all that matters.

That said, I think there is something special to it that comes from the unique blend of materials and their properties. It feels different than any straight titanium or straight carbon bike I've ridden - probably the closest would be the Davidson and Parlee frames I had. It has the snap at the BB of the Davidson and the muted ride over chunky pavement of the Parlee. And it descends better than either, maybe even better than the Marcelo. Put all that together, and it's the best skinny-tire road bike I've ridden. Others may feel differently. So it goes. I couldn't be happier with it.

[weisan]

It depends on what you are looking for.

I recently sold my Serotta Fierte.



I remembered the first time I took it on a group ride...




I tested it a couple of times by putting in some shearing accelerations and it responded like a race car in the Fast and Furious movie with the NOS activated. It just blasted off the block like a bat out of hell. It was exhilarating to say the least. In subsequent rides, the euphoria sort of die down and I found it to be harsher and stiffer compared to my Merlin Ti bike, and that's the main reason why I sold it. Also, aesthetically, I prefer a straight Ti or straight carbon, I don't like to mix things up.

[mcteague]

I have a 17 year old Seven Axiom (butted Ti) and a 6 year old Seven 622 SLX (butted Ti and carbon mix). The geo is not identical but pretty close. Both have the same saddles, pedals and bars. Groups are currently 11s Chorus on the Axiom and 12s Record on the 622. Each has alloy rims and the same tires. So, how do they differ?

The all Ti has is not as stiff as the carbon/ti mix but it seems to have more road feel over moderate pavement. The 622 mutes this a bit and feels smoother. However, when I hit potholes or breaks the the road surface, which I try to avoid, the all Ti bike causes less of a jolt than the stiffer bike. However, when I was talking to Seven about what I wanted, I mentioned a stiffer feel when out of the saddle and they delivered. So, it may be the material and may be just the tube gauge.

It is interesting that where I feel the most impact over bad roads is in my hands. And there, most Ti bikes are mixed material as they usually run carbon forks.

Tim

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by oliver1850

Interesting comments considering that you probably have more than one 853 LeMond. Do you have one of the OCLV frames? I have a Zurich and a Trek 5500 but couldn't tell you which is stiffer/harsher.

Yep, I've had three 853 frames and in my opinion all ride nicer on my rough roads than this spine bike. I'll say the same for the three Italian made steel Lemonds also, they ride nicer. One is Columbus TSX, one is Excell GLx and one is Columbus Cromor.

I don't have one of the OCLV frames yet but I do want to try one. I did have OCLV Madone's 4.5 and a 5.9 but sold them due to harsh rides on chipseal.

I've got a Lemond Aeroaluminum frame that I'm still sorting out too. Haven't had any real rides on it yet to pass judgement.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by tv_vt

Mixed material frames are not new, but I'm curious if there are any actual published reviews or studies about how the various iterations of mixed material frames ride. Lots of variations out there: Lemond Spline (top half all carbon, bottom all metal-either ti, steel, or aluminum), Serotta (generally with TT and DT carbon, ST ti), and on to those like Clean's recent Firefly or a Seven 622 (DT, TT, and ST all carbon, with basically ti lugs joining them). Almost all of these versions have metal headtubes and bottom brackets. With Trek/Lemond, the seattube/TT lug is carbon; most other versions have metal lugs there. Pretty much all mixed material frames have carbon seatstays and metal chainstays.

So, basic question, is there a quantifiable difference in "performance," however you define it, between all these variations? Or even between one of these and a single material version? Does it just boil down to individual rider's opinion and preference? Or is the value/benefit in how it allows builders to customize a ride by using stiffer or flexier carbon fiber tubes?

Not really possible, quantifiable', as 'ride' is subjective. yes..individual ride and preferences'.

Doubt anybody has put these on some wort of stress machine and measured amount of flex per ft-lb, type thing.

What's 'stiff' to one person is 'vague' to another, same frame/bike.
Went to interbike when carbon back ends were the latest and greatest 'thing'.
One maker-"makes the ride stiffer, brighter", another maker-"makes the ride more comfy, like 'suspension"...

Personally blended bikes, particularly titanium with carbon 'plugs' or even tubes is marketing 101..Seven did it, so lots did it(serotta) but I never nderstood taking a really nice riding frame made of titanium, and then gluing carbon plus/tubes into it. It didn't help the ride and for some makers, really reduced it's longevity and crashworthiness.

[sailorboy]

Aren't all of these comparisons essentially meaningless unless you build the two bikes completely identical, all the way down to the wheels, tires, tubes, psi etc etc? I can convince myself of anything if I put my mind to it when it comes to something like 'road feel'

[paredown]

My simple-minded take is that for a lot of us, it is a question of degree, since many (me included) are riding either steel or titanium bikes with CF forks. So adding carbon fiber rear stays doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.

My only experience was with my Colnago CT-1--so it was exactly that combination--CF fork and stays. I really liked the ride--as I said to someone who asked me about it while riding, it was 'plush' and also muted.

Compared to the Tecnos that I sold (also with CF fork) with similar geo, there was not a lot of difference since much of what we feel is set by geometry, not materials--although it did feel more 'smooth'/muted/plush. I was sorry I had to sell it. (I transferred over the group and wheels--but couldn't really ride them back to back...)

I would like to try one of the Lemonds and/or one of the Seven/Serotta with carbon tubes/titanium bits just for fun.

[happycampyer]

Originally Posted by sailorboy

Aren't all of these comparisons essentially meaningless unless you build the two bikes completely identical, all the way down to the wheels, tires, tubes, psi etc etc? I can convince myself of anything if I put my mind to it when it comes to something like 'road feel'

^ This is really it in a nutshell. In speaking with people who actually build or built these frames (Tyler and Kevin from Firefly, Scott Hock and Brian Smith from Serotta), all things being as equal as they can be, the carbon/ti frame will be a little lighter and torsionally stiffer than an all-ti frame. From what I am told, Serotta did conduct torsion tests, and concluded that replacing the seat tube with carbon had less effect than replacing the top and down tubes.

This makes sense since a carbon tube with equivalent stiffness as titanium is lighter. So if you’re having a bike built, you can have a builder like Firefly, Seven, etc. design the frame to have the characteristics you want. 622s are incredibly light. Some Ottrotts were really light, too—I have one that is sub-15 lbs fully built.

But once the frame is built, how a carbon/ti frame rides compared to a ti frame is going to be very subjective. As a general rule though, for frames of similar stiffness, the carbon-ti frame will be a little lighter.

To paredown, since we live near each other and ride the same size bike, we should get together and do a comparison ride one of these days.

[berserk87]

Originally Posted by sailorboy

Aren't all of these comparisons essentially meaningless unless you build the two bikes completely identical, all the way down to the wheels, tires, tubes, psi etc etc? I can convince myself of anything if I put my mind to it when it comes to something like 'road feel'

That is very concise and well-said.

I had a Klein that was aluminum with a carbon rear triangle. It seemed a bit more compliant, marginally perhaps, than the Cannondale CAAD 4 I had been riding before I got it. I say "perhaps" because of the above. The frames were differently built and shaped. It was impossible for me to isolate what caused the perceived greater compliance (less harsh on my bum). It could have been the carbon rear stay, but who knows?

On a side note, the frame failed at the junction of the carbon stay and the seat tube. I really liked the frame, but the corrosion at that junction did nothing to further my fondness for mixed materials. I just don't see the point other than aesthetics.

[CDollarsign]

I had a lemond alpe d'huez with the carbon spline. It rode really nice - and I think the concept is sound from an engineering standpoint to integrate the two materials.