Duragrouch

I'm not gonna take the time to read all the posts.

All materials have pluses and minuses.

Aluminum: Because of the lower density, you can have a very large diameter down and top tube, without the wall thickness being very dent-prone. Torsional rigidity increase as a 4th power (IIRC) of the diameter so this makes for a very torsionally rigid frame, great for people that hammer the pedals (racers) and touring bikes with heavy loads so the frame doesn't feel like a wet noodle. However aluminum fatigues (cracks) when highly stressed for long periods in reversing loads. So it has to be built rigid enough to resist that, so it rides more poorly. I bought an '89 Cannondale criterium frame with a 2" down tube, looked very racy in '89, but over time I put larger tires on it for a better ride. In retrospect, a less racy frame would have been better for me.

Steel: Good ride, but less rigid for the same weight. Steel can actually have higher strength to weight ratio than aluminum, but rigidity is not a function of strength, but rather elastic stiffness (young's modulus), which stays constant even as strength increases within a family of materials (i.e., high strength steel, it's still steel). You can get higher rigidity by going larger diameter, but to keep it light, then the wall thickness gets so thin it becomes easy to dent, and even not, subject to local buckling (wrinkling), you look at an old B-52 with thin skins and you'll see the same effect in the fuselage fore and aft of the wings.

Titanium: Very good fatigue strength, so can be designed to flex like steel, but has lower density so can exploit some of the same design advantages of aluminum but without the drawbacks. Expensive, welding takes special equipment. I currently favor titanium if I can find one cheap used.

Carbon fiber composite (carbon fibers in a plastic matrix): Can change the fiber direction in parts of the frame to tailor strength and stiffness. This should produce the most optimum ride and stiffness and lightest weight. And even prices of carbon frames have come way down. BUT, carbon frames are fragile and difficult-to-impossible to repair, and fail "catastrophically", i.e., breaks in two, rather than "plastic" deformation like most metals (ironic term) which is inherently safer in a crash. There are some respected bike shops that recommend against carbon anything for consumer bikes that are not raced.

montanasoftware

My first decent bike was Reynolds 531 double butted steel. Then in 1985, I switched to a Cannondale racing frame. I was so excited when I saw the ads in Bicycling Magazine that I had to have one. I noticed the difference immediately ... much stiffer and much lighter. But after a long ride, like 70-100 miles, my legs felt terrible ... like they had the crap beaten out of them. On steel, the same ride would make my legs feel pleasantly worked out. I figured I would just have to improve my spin, so that it wouldn't affect me .. but it didn't work. I struggled with that bike for years.

I finally realized it was actually inefficient to go after lightness and stiffness at all costs. The human-bike combination is an amazing machine, but I think a lot of people put too much emphasis on the "bike" end of the equation, and ignore the "human" effects of bike decisions.

I've never ridden a full carbon fiber or titanium frame, so I can't compare them. But a high-end steel frame is much better for me than a high-end aluminum frame. I think a lot of people have never ridden a high-end steel frame, so they don't really have a point of reference to compare to.

It does NOT make me feel good to bad-talk aluminum. I really wanted it to be an improvement and I would love to have the cost and weight advantages of aluminum without the poor ride. I've never stopped hoping they can get it worked out to give the same riding experience as steel. Over the years, I've ridden many other aluminum frames (friends' bikes), but always with the same results. The lessons I learned on Aluminum were tough lessons that could only be learned from actual riding experience.

Now. my race-geometry frame is Reynolds 853 with a carbon fork, and I just got a MTB/Bikepacking REEB frame of True Temper OX Platinum, which is an air hardening steel similar to Reynolds 853.

I honestly think it would be ideal if people could ride several different frame materials high miles for a month each before deciding.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Darth Lefty 

Cannondale themselves didn’t seem to get the memo about compliance until the late 90s. Prior to that it was all about lighter, stiffer. During the 2000’s they made a lot of changes to the back triangle. The frames really did properly evolve, with tweaks every year or two.

caloso

The last two bikes I built up were both aluminum. My TT bike and my son's CX bike. Al is great. CF is great. Steel is great. Ti is great. It's all great.

Leinster

I like the ride on my Criterium series. Maybe 30 years of fatigue have made it more compliant? When I had it set up geared, it went up and down hills beautifully. Now I have it single speed with 25c tires as a commuter, and it's an ideal around-town bike.

My CAAD10 is phenomenal. It descends on rails.

icemilkcoffee 

I notice that the paint on the aluminum bikes seems to be much tougher. The paint on my steel frame Lemond seems to chip off if I look at it too hard.
Which is odd because in the car world, paint typically sticks to steel very well while chipping off of aluminum more easily.

bruce19

Jesus that would be panda-monium.

Outrider1

I love my Emonda ALR 5.

Doge

I'm not hearing folks diss alloy. Maybe the groups hang around just ride what they want.

My primary bike is an alloy/carbon Six/13 from 2002. Since then I've bought/used/built about 10 or so carbon bikes.
My son is mostly riding carbon fibre, road, alloy MTB. I started him on alloy in 2008 and he had 3 alloy road / TT bikes.
My wife went from steel to carbon to Ti - never alloy - except the tandem.
This tandem is alloy, prior 3 were steel.
I really think these new Mag bikes look interesting and may pick one up.

USA Pro road race 2018 was won on an alloy bike.

pdxscotty

That is one of the funnier lines I have read in a while. You definitely brought a smile to my face.

General Geoff

Your post is very confusing. All steels are alloy and almost all titanium and aluminum bikes are alloy as well.

Doge

Most know that. Common speak about bikes is "alloy" means aluminum.

General Geoff

oh, I've not heard it used in that context with that meaning before.

RiceAWay

That is a very good bike but it is about a kilogram or two lbs heavier than the carbon fiber model. This is not a debility unless you do a LOT of steep climbing. The bottom brackets in the ALR are much better than in the carbon fiber model.

CyFan4036

I prefer aluminum but I have also had bikes made of other materials and they're fine too. When I want to buy a bike I test ride the contenders and buy the one that feels best to me. Which material is better is subjective.

ClydeClydeson

I have seen and experienced more broken steel bikes than aluminum bikes. But those were all (or mostly) because of poor workmanship or abusive riding/crashing.

My current bike-crushes are aluminum. I was going to say aluminum or steel, but then I took a second look at the bikes I was thinking of and none are steel. This is because those bikes are the ones that come in a size that is likely to fit me and has the features I want - totally independent of frame material. If they were made in steel then I would be lusting after a steel bike, too.

Carbon still scares me as a very big rider who enjoys being careless with my equipment.
And I wonder how does the epoxy hold up to freeze-thaw cycles?

base2 

It shouldn't. Aircraft see temperature swings of 150 degrees Farenheit or more nearly every flight. It is, afterall 40 or 50 below zero at 35,000 feet & can easily 100+ everywhere from LAX or Phoenix to Cairo or Riyadh...And aircraft carry hundreds of lives at a time for decades of service life.

Composites make up significant portions of modern aircraft. Entire wings, fusalages, skin, underlying structure, secondary structure. The question: "What part is not composite?" is becoming increasingly relevant.

One of the many reasons for composites in aircraft is temperature stability. Expansion/contraction with temperature change is minimal at best & a very tiny fraction of aluminum. The result is a reduction of fatigue stress & related issues. Better service life in spite of manufacturing execution of design plans. As well as better manufacturing execution to higher standards.

(I worked in aircraft manufacturing for 13 years, much of it on composite structures.)

Outrider1

No question there. I live in Central Florida and ride the flats. With my bars, wheels, and saddle, I love the bike.

Outrider1

This. I would rather, and do own, a high end aluminum bike, than a low end carbon fiber. (Trek Emonda ALR 5 with full, as in full 105 groupo, and full, as in full cf fork.)

dtbwwygfalayc

One of the most favourite bikes I have to ride is an aluminum single speed, belt drive. I also have carbon, steel, stainless steel and bamboo bikes, each with their own specific qualities and ride. Can I tell the difference in the ride? Certainly. I love each bike for how they ride and what purpose they serve. For me to make a fair decision, I would like to compare two bikes with the EXACT same geometry and components, right down to the handlebar tape to make an accurate comparison..... for now, I love my aluminum bike!

Mv350

I just built up a Specialized Allez Sprint. I love it, very happy with the way it rides.

Pilot321

Seems like I've seen you and that Lynskey somewhere before!

pullings

Here it is......general definition of alloy in bike world since I can remember.
https://www.livestrong.com/article/3...oy-bike-frame/
https://www.specialized.com/us/en/alloy-technology

General Geoff

Small world, my friend

Madmonk1

Aluminum fine just make sure you have a quality carbon fork to negate the dead feeling.