Witterings

Is there and easy guide as to which of the above are better for what conditions and what their different characteristics and advantages / disadvantages are of one against the other?

I keep seeing posts saying I'd never move away from my steel or now I have I'd not go back again and whilst I thought Carbon would always be the Mecca because of the weight advantage again I'm seeing some comments saying not for X, Y or Z.

I'm mainly thinking about a gravel bike as a possible next purchase but I'd be interested in comments where one material may be considered better for road or mtb's as well.

Koyote

https://www.bikeradar.com/us/mtb/gea...terials-49814/

I haven’t read it, but it was the first hit on a Google search. Have you searched the Internet? You will find plenty of information.

Kontact 

There is a ton of (conflicting) information out there. It really just comes down to cost, weight and ride characteristics. If you are riding a bike with large, low pressure tires the ride characteristics become mostly unimportant.

Realistically, you can make a nice bike out of any of the common materials. They will just all have compromises in cost vs weight vs ride.

Witterings

I tried to look at that but as I have adblocker running it won't let me and I'm sick of playing the 30 second video to gain 30 minutes of site access that it doesn't remember the next you go in that you've only used 2 minutes of the 30 minutes allocated ..... just bugs me.

I've heard that carbon isn't great on rougher surfaces ... is there any truth in that I would have thought it would be more shock absorbing than the others.

mcgeggy

Carbon is considered to be the most shock absorbing material. That's why many metallic frames even come with carbon forks - to reduce the vibrations. Not to say that steel or aluminum is terrible though.

HerrKaLeun

If you can lift the bike relatively easily, it is light enough. Unless you are a serious racer, the bike is not what is holding you back.

Steel may last longer if it doesn't rust, but with the development in frame geometry and components, is a bicycle that lasts 25 vs. "only" 23 years really better? It is the heaviest.

Carbon is lighter, but seems more fragile and expensive.

Al is in between, somewhat a compromise (like everything in technology).

Ti is pretty good in all departments, except cost.

Darn it, the old "cheap, light, strong - pick two" still is true!

pvillemasher

There is no consensus. Do an internet search, read all of the conflicting opinions until your eyes glaze over, and come to your own conclusion.
Or just read the following posts in this thread which will in all likelihood become a microcosm of an internet search.

RobotGuy

I’m a big fan of titanium and (quality) steel, but it’s totally subjective. I’d say that the more you ride the more you’ll build your own opinion on things. If you’re looking for a bike, I’d go with something used - great value to be had in 10 year old quality steel (853/OX Platinum come to mind) or some higher quality aluminum frames.

Carbon is a very nice ride, top end carbon is the lightest, best power transfer and best vibration damping plus maybe the best ride out there. until you dump it on a rock.

Quality steel is a good value, lively and absorbs vibrations wonderfully. If you pair it with a carbon fork, you’ll pay a pound penalty over most mainstream carbon frames.

Titanium (which I love) is fools gold if you’re looking for a ‘deal’. Best characteristics of steel, a shade lighter and much more cafe ride bragging rights.

If you go aluminum, don’t cheap out on the frame - cheap aluminum frames range from stiff as I-beams to soft and muddy. Aluminum’s characteristics don’t allow it to be flexible and lively like the others, but high end frames are very nice.


I put the over/under at 2.5 days till this thread gets locked.

Metieval

all depends on how it is made!!

Cannondale can make an aluminum bike that will rival the comfort of most steel bikes. Rival Carbon too for that matter.

And then if you want to compare apples to apples. A guy sells his Niner RTL steel for a Niner RLT RDO, and then claims the RDO is the most comfortable bike he has ever ridden. what? Carbon more comfortable that steel? say it isn't so....

While each material has its advantages/disadvantages, once the material has been manipulated into a bike those advantages can be destroyed!

there are bikes of each material that are awesome, there are bikes of each material that flat out sucks.

choose your manufacture and bike wisely.

Witterings

My query re the carbon was about it's fragility which seems to have been answered, I'm guessing though if Spcialized are offering it as a gravel bike option it can't be that fragile it'll self destruct going over a few stones.

Also as mentioned there doesn't seem to be a specific consensus so I think I#ll just find the bike / spec I like within my budget and go with that.

Cheers for everyone's input ... much appreciated

Cyclist0108

I'd like to see a comprehensive comparison regarding the properties of an aluminum frame vs. an aluminium frame.

dcwldct

Check out this article (from an ali fan)
https://medium.com/@alexroseinnes/al...s-1ecc4dfcc3dd It is admittedly biased, but proves the point that aluminum can be competitive even in racing (on relatively flat courses anyway).

It really all comes down to preference. Just some general observations though:
-Aluminum and carbon are by far the most common on any training ride or group ride I've ever done.
-I am a cost-sensitive rider so I ride an aluminum frame with a carbon fork. Not only is aluminum cheaper, but it's harder to break. I do my own wrenching and it's nice not having to be ultra-precise with every torque on the frame to avoid cracking.
-Titanium makes me salivate and I really want to try one, but I doubt I'd ever buy one as my primary road bike.
-Steel is sturdy and has great feel, but is obviously heavier. I had a steel fixie in college that I loved, but you don't really see steel in many new bikes in the roadie segment.

RobotGuy

Another note about carbon and gravel... the mud and dirt from the tire can abrade the seat and chainstays pretty bad if there isn’t sufficient tire clearance.

I sometimes push the tire size a bit on my older steel and titanium frames (27mm tires in winter with maybe 1-2 mm clearance). When wet and muddy, the grinding sound of the muddy tire on the brake bridge is terrible - no way carbon stays survive that.

indyfabz

And...They'reoff!

AlmostTrick

Steel will last longer than aluminum, and especially carbon, if that matters to you.

A stone chip can easily lead to a crack in carbon. If you go this route, inspect your bike often... and be prepared to replace.

ColonelSanders

That is an interesting point I hadn't considered about having to be more careful on tyre clearance with a carbon frame.

Cyclist0108

vs. Al

indyfabz

This thread has the potential to be the greatest of all time.

fixedweasel

Holy smokes..........this is a can. But, I would say that in an instance where you were touring across the world, then steel would be the smartest bet. It can be repaired by any welder easily and you could be on your way. Aluminum is the harshest only in the fact that you will not see many aluminum forks. Your ti(y)res and PSI will make the most difference as far as comfort or ability to absorb "shock". I've ridden and raced carbon, steel, aluminum and have trained on multiple Ti and they were all excellent.

Witterings

Absolutely zero chance .... it's one of mine ... they normally crash and burn fairly soon in

SouthFLpix

I prefer steel and titanium bikes because they seem to last forever, and also because you can buy or retrofit them with S&S couplers for travel. Of the two, titanium is lighter, and more corrosion resistant, but of course also more expensive. Steel is more affordable, but heavier and we all know that it can rust.

I view carbon frames as being for people that like to compete and race. They are lighter, more aero, and can also be comfortable, but I don't think they will last as long as a quality steel or titanium frame. I am sure if you take care of a carbon frame it can last 10 years, but I wouldn't trust it on a expedition type tour.

Aluminum frames are fine, but I don't think think they are as durable as steel or titanium, nor are they as good for racing as carbon.

Kedosto

What, no love for bamboo?!


-Kedosto

RobotGuy

Too risky.

Hiro11

I like steel and Ti, but I'm 44 years old, a cheapskate and I don't race.

indyfabz

Cardboard is the next big thing in bike frames. Mark my words.