Andrey

I have been thinking of replacing my steel long distance bike with a new bike. I have some requirements for my long distance bikes, like light weight, clearance for 32 mm tires and fender/rack eyelets. I have been drooling over a carbon Jamis Endura 3

https://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebik...thendura3.html

for a while, but recently I discovered a new Motobecane Century Team in titanium.

https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...yteam_x_ti.htm

Both have very similar components, geometry and room for wide tires and rack/fender eyelets. Motobecane is cheaper by a $1100.00($2100 vs $3200)
Any opinions would be appreciated.

Barrettscv 

I really like both of these bikes. More bikes should be built around long reach caliper brakes.

I've gone from steel to titanium to carbon fiber during the last 2 years. Carbon is stiffer, and I like the ride and handling. My titanium bike, a Lynskey built bike, had a plush ride, but was not as stiff.

I'm a big buy on a larger frame, so stiffness is an important issue for me. Can you test ride the Jamis?

I would consider the Ti bike. If you don't like it, you should be able to resell without taking a bath.

Rowan

Juat a question, the answer to which is not evident in your post: Why do you want to replace the steel bike?

Andrey

Steel bike is old, tired with 4130 main triangle with heavy seat and chain stays, plus the frame got dented and scratched when traveling to France for the PBP. It also has a worn out 9 speed components. Instead of changing the components and a lighter frame I might as well look at a new bike with new Shimano Ultegra.

pwdeegan

the best part about that steel bike is that you can dent it and still safely ride it. try that out with carbon.

steel bikes just go and go. the so-called weight penalty for the majority of riders is psychological at best. with identical components, a steel-frame bike might weigh a pound or two more. in some cases a good steel frame weighs as much as a poorly made Chinese Ti frame, but the steel will be better built. i write so-called weight penalty, because in your non-racing world of riding, there is no real penalty. e.g., if i go from a combined weight of me+bike 185# to 183#, it won't make any difference to me.

now if you like the ride of a certain bike, then kudos to you. but in terms of frame material, there is a lot of smoke and mirrors. even more so when you're looking at Chinese factory frames.

edit: i should point out that bikesdirect and jamis are, afaik, the latter type of frame.

StephenH

Among the local LD riders, there is a decided titanium preference, though I've never used either.

Homeyba

I have a dented steel bike (Peugeot) hanging out in the garage. If you think you're brave enough to take it for a ride you are more than welcome... Give me a break on the carbon bikes aren't durable enough for long distance stuff. If you don't hit your bike with a hammer it won't get dented. A good percentage of the bikes at most 1200ks are carbon and if you show up at an ultra-race like RAAM the vast majority of bikes are carbon. One nice thing about high end carbon bikes is that you don't need the crutch of balloon tires to get a good quality ride.

The vast majority of bicycles are made and the largest bicycle manufacturers are in China and Taiwan. Some of the best bicycle technology is in China and Taiwan. Is there some crap that comes out of there? You bet, but there is also a lot of high quality stuff coming out of there as well, just like everywhere else.

Rowan

There might be crap coming out of China, but I wouldn't tar Taiwain with the same brush. Be very careful there.

deegan makes a point about saving two pounds on the weight of the bike not making a difference. I beg to differ. Two pounds of difference over 30 kilometre might not anything at all, but over 1200 kilometres, there is a fair amount of energy required to putter it around the course.

I've ridden steel and carbon on randonnees. Frankly, I am not sure there is a signficant difference in terms of ride between the three bikes (two steel, one carbon, and the steel ones don't include the tandem).And my observations are skewed by the CF being a design older than five years, one steel frame being older than 10 years and the other steel frame being older than maybe 20 years. I have yet to ride my generic Taiwan-made titanium bike on a randonnee.

However, I definitely won't buy into the carbon durability issue, because I can't see there is any issue whatsoever for long-distance riding, based on my experience and observation of others.

Given similar frame dimensions, I think the ultimate issue in any bike selection comes down to comfort.

Homeyba

Bingo!!!!!

Rowan

Actually, re-reading my post, I should have been more specific in saying "fit" rather than comfort. But then, to me, comfort comes only after fit is right.

I suppose otherwise, I could have left the door open for people to suggest that comfort is down to frame material, but as I know through experience and observation, one CF/Ti/Al/Fe bike of a certain dimension and angles won't ride as comfortably as another made of similar or identical materials but with different dimensions and angles.

pwdeegan

but, if you're "dented" during the distance in an unsupported ride, chances are the steel bike will get you back. your carbon bike is just compromised---doesn't really dent (gouge, maybe; crack, certainly). seen it a couple of times. once on a light LD credit-card tourer in Russia. a long way to go only to have to end so early. this isn't really news; it's just basic material science. carbon is fine for many applications. the point is, each material has its pros and cons.

Yes, and Rowan is also right here: sorry to not further separate between Taiwan and mainland China; as a China-hand "China" 中国 in any mandarin conversation denotes the mainland 99% of the time; one almost always exclusive refers to Taiwan as 台湾 and not 中国. Incidentally I've been to factories in both countries in numerous industries. "Best bicycle technology" in mainland? Not so much. Fabrication plants built by foreign direct investors with SOEs, yes (e.g., Foxcon). Cutting edge R&D on bicycles? No---that happens elsewhere and then is produced in the mainland (and often copied and superficially reproduced, cf. 山寨). Overall, at present QA out of China is not as good as other Asian countries (JP, TW, KR, etc.).

Rowan also makes another good point: for some people 2# at 1200km makes a difference. I'm not one of those for whom it matters much. If you are, there are plenty of gram-shaving opportunities. But i'm of the persuasion to argue that time spent in better training will make more of a difference than shaving 2# for most riders.

Barrettscv 

Umm... Do you use a carbon fiber bike? Have you ever?

The Octopus 

The idea that carbon is somehow an inappropriate material for bicycle frames and components is kept alive by personal anecdotes, internet legend, and personal injury lawyers. It has no basis in science.

I think being honest about this issue would recognize that the force to "dent" a steel frame has to come from somewhere. Whether your frame is dented or broken in two, what happens to the rider? The force necessary to bend your typical steel or even cro-mo fork is usually less than the force required to break your carbon one. The problem isn't a bent or broken fork. It's the fact that the stick you picked up or the battery pack that swung down into the front wheel and jammed against the trailing edge of the fork blade caused the front wheel to stop suddenly, and this sent you over the handlebars and into the pavement, landing usually on your face or your head. Who cares if your bicycle is "broken" or "dented?" You have a much bigger problem on your hands.

Most things that would cause enough force to dent or bend a steel frame or to break a carbon one on a ride are going to cause the rider to DNF regardless of what happened to the bicycle.

Pick a material you like. Buy as much quality as you can afford. Make sure it fits you and your riding style and that you're comfortable on it. Properly maintain it. Your frame, no matter what it's made of, should last a lifetime.

thebulls

What I worry about with carbon is that a blow that does not cause immediate failure (.e.g, heavy tool dropped by careless mechanic causes unseen damage; or bike falls over, hits sharp piece of steel sticking out of the ground; etc.) will eventually cause a catastrophic failure. With steel, if the sharp piece of steel did not cause a dent that is serious enough to make the bike unsafe/unrideable, then the bike will not become unsafe/unrideable over time.

Nick

pwdeegan

yes and yes.

Barrettscv 

Pictures or it's not true.

pwdeegan

Calm down big boy.

zoolpsu

I have Motobecane Century Team Ti (a gift from my wife earlier this year) and would recommend it to others. For me, it was everything I expected-- good value, but I did replace the stock seat, tires, and pedals right out of the box.

Homeyba

I think you are way over playing the "frail" carbon bike thing. I've been riding and racing ultra distances for almost 20 years and I can count on one hand the number of people I've seen have their bikes break catastrophically. Doesn't matter what the material is they all break in the right situations but it happens very rarely. When it does happen it's usually a result of a crash and the person wasn't going any farther than the bike afterward. If you are talking about "touring" you are in the wrong forum.


If you spend much time in China they don't differentiate between China and Taiwan. Taiwan is just the rogue province. Yes the engineering is often in other countries but, the manufacturing technology is in China and Taiwan. With proper oversight, QA is perfectly adequate out of China and on par with what is coming out of Taiwan (ask Giant). That is exactly why so many US and European manufacturers have moved their production there. I've been working with Asian, Chinese and Taiwanese suppliers in particular, in my real life job for many years. I'd say you are trivializing their expertise.

electrik

Titanium and steel is easier to dent, you dent it in the wrong place and it's game over. You can crash a CF a lot harder than those metals before it dents, but when it "dents" it is game over. CF will never fatigue either, so the lifespan of the bicycle is not limited by that.

For those worried about a mechanic "Dropping" a tool..

Rowan

Do a search on Bob Dopolina's posts in the Road Forum on the subject of the variable quality of bicycle components to gain an understanding of the differences in the industry between China and Taiwan.

pwdeegan

I would agree. I never argued that carbon frames are frail; you inferred that. They're fine bikes for the purpose. Are there still smoke and mirrors regarding so-called frame materials? yes. does that also apply to steel? it can. I realize you're an apologist for carbon, and that's nice. One of my points above (re: smoke and mirrors) is that marketing hype is ridiculous. Rowan summed it best with: fit.

Choose your battles, I say. You're mistaken, yes. They do refer to Taiwan is "Taiwan, that renegade province." But in the official 中国大陆 news and in academic papers (e.g., CAJ) Taiwan is never called "China." That would be confusing, to say the least. You'd probably know this if you spoke the language, which I suspect you do not. (Correct me if I'm mistaken about this.)

Your keyword of "proper oversight" sums it up. This is, of course, true in any national context—good QA *can* happen anywhere. The problem in China (i.e., the mainland, i.e., not Taiwan) is that there are still glaring problems with QA oversight, and good oversight often doesn't happen. If you've lived there or spent significant amount of time there, you'd know this. As to why foreign manufacturers have moved to China: QA is not among the top five reasons; labor, plant, and environmental costs are all more major factors.

Now things are always improving (remember Japan of the 1970s?), but I am not trivializing it. I follow and study it for a living. In my real life job, as you call it.

Barrettscv 

The quality of manufacturing in mainland China is diverse. If you have traveled to China, as many here have, you will have found many low quality operations. You would have also found many high quality producers. China is a big country with many grades of product and production.

I also am directly involved with China and Chinese manufacturing, my specialty is high value mechanical equipment for heavy industry. It too is my "real life" job. I'm also a published author on the topic of composites.

I continue find you statements to be very limited. They certainly have nothing to do with the original question provided by the OP.

electrik

There are lots of good product from China, the problem is they also make a lot of lower quality product so reputation is in the ****ter.

I bet if you spend time in taiwain they differentiate themselves from China. Probably why Chinese gov't get so upset when american armed Taiwanese to the teeth. Sure chinese like to call taiwan an SAR, but that is like asking Israel who owns the west bank. Obviously the answer varies!

Man are we off topic.

Homeyba

We could sit here and argue this till the cows come home but I'm not going to change your mind and you're certainly not going to change mine and yes we are way off topic.