Originally Posted by
pstock
I meant (and should have been clearer) Ti in the pre-carbon era.
I have bought and sold a LOT (some 200) of high end pre-carbon road bikes and in my experience a recreational rider will pay a hefty premium (over siimilar quality steel) for Ti. If I could do my bike dealing adventure all over again (which I won't), I have concluded that the easiest sales were A) anything Colnago and B) virtually anything Ti. I am not saying these buyers were rational. It always annoyed me that without a well known brand name, a frame was virtually unsaleable. so a hand crafted steel Reynolds 753 frame by a regional artisan builder in NE France for instance, is worth almost nothing in North America.
agreed though that the draw of Titanium it might be more based on sex appeal, show and exclusivity. LIke wearing a Rolex instead of a Timex.
Not gonna deny it, there's some truth there. My rationale for getting a new bike was to get something that wouldn't rust in the rain - note, I said "rationale," not "rational."
Lots of things don't rust. But even after riding a bunch of different carbon, there was only one thing that I wanted and was willing to pay for, sight unseen - Titanium. The carbon Scott, Specialized, Colnago, nor Bianchis (plural) did it for me. The Moots was the only bike that made me actually want her - but my budget's closer to shrimp than to lobster. I was still able to scratch that titanium itch with my new Lynskey (with etched graphics, of course). I'm certain the Colnago CR-S is faster. The Scott Addict or the Canyon Endurace would have been better values. But I wanted titanium, and unless there's prize money at the end of the day, isn't that what matters?