rpenmanparker 

See, that's what I'm talkin' about!

Ferrous Bueller

Agreed. I stripped my bike of all materials used in the aerospace industry, and ended up with one 100% lighter.

spectastic

what other ways are there?
corrosion? you worry about that when talking about moving parts, not frames. Besides, paint jobs cover that pretty well nowadays.
I'm pretty sure fatigue resistance isn't really applicable to bicycles.

to me, these are nonfactors. The best frame is one that's durable, light and relatively inexpensive. That's carbon fiber. Titanium might be more durable, but unless you're Wolverine, planning to take the bike with your to the next century, don't even worry about it.

Ti is fool's gold, completely unnecessary in the practical sense. But I keep forgetting we're in the road cycling forum, where people pour their money into these kinds of things.

Ooompa Loompa

If science has taught us nothing else, it has at least taught us that if you drope the hamer and dial it up to 400 watts carbon will assplode.

dissident

come back here to the forums after the winter off to see the important issues still take center stage here. Good to see.

StanSeven

You need to let the GM Corvette engineers know. The new 2014 Vet has a CF hood. I'm not sure how watts match up with horsepower but the Vet has 450 horses so I assume the hood will assplode when you drop the hammer on it too. Just don't follow one too close.

Ferrous Bueller

The people who developed the Corvette are engineers? I thought it was a group of 12 year old boys.

rpenmanparker 

You don't think frame corrosion is important. As bike repainters why most frames come in to be redone. I know several folks who had Al frames replaced under warranty because of sweat corrosion and latent cracking. Your position on this is nonsense.

Your opinions about the lack of need for Ti bikes are fine. It is only natural to have folks on both sides of the question. But your contention that fatigue is not an issue in bicycle construction and operation is patently false. Aluminum has much shorter fatigue life than steel and has always been questioned as a appropriate frame material because of this. One of the most if not THE most common motion of frame members is repetitive flexing which is a primary cause of fatigue failure. Certain Al alloys, tube thicknesses, construction methods and such have enabled Al to take an important role as a frame material, but that doesn't mean Al's fatigue risk in bicycles isn't significantly higher than steel's and titanium's. As an example, Al saddle rails were short lived during the '80s due to fatigue failures after only a few months of riding.

Titanium bikes are a joy to own and ride for whatever reasons, necessity likely being the least. Not for you? Okay. But why the need to say silly things about it. And since when is carbon fiber inexpensive relative to Ti as far as frames are concerned. Prices for the latest embodiments of the two materials are quite comparable.

I have steel, carbon fiber, Ti and used to also ride Al. They have all been good rides and cost competitive considering their attributes. What is the point of saying one has no place in bike frames?

Robert

Nerull

I've been working with the local sailing club to repower a 40 year old sailboat, but I forgot to tell them composite materials don't last. Oops.

There is no particular reason a composite frame can't outlive you.

As to titanium not being subject to fatigue failure, I've seen enough snapped Ti to not be so sure of that. Titanium, like steel, is not damaged by stress levels below it's fatigue limit, but how much engineering work goes into making sure it isn't being pushed over that limit?

Seattle Forrest

Most of the titanium bikes I've seen on the road have carbon forks.

TrojanHorse

Mine has an Al fork. it's like the worst of both worlds and may explain why I prefer my carbon bike now.

I laaaaaaaugh whenever the "steel is real" crowd get really cracking. Where's the spot on a bike that you would least want a catastrophic failure? The fork... and that's usually made of CF. It's comedy.

rpenmanparker 

Never said carbon composites weren't long lived. That would be silly.

Never said titanium didn't fatigue. Did you think I had. I said it was nearly as resistant to fatigue as steel. In some cases it is higher. Steel fatigues too, just not very rapidly in bicycle usage.

There is really no argument here. That is what I am arguing!

Robert

rpenmanparker 

Sure, because more than one kind of material is valuable in bike construction. That is my whole point.

spectastic

I'm not going to argue with you anymore. to each his own.

Seattle Forrest

It's a pretty self-evident point, though. So much that it probably doesn't need to be made, it's like saying "air is a valuable thing to have around because it's good to breathe."

I've never seen a bike with carbon fiber tires, for example, or titanium cable housing or steel brake pads. Hell, I've never even seen carbon chainrings, for obvious reasons.

But we're discussing this in the context of a chicken little thread where the sky is falling because somebody on the internet said a carbon fiber frame won't last 300 years. And in that context, it's worth pointing out that people have no qualms about buying a used steel bike with a used CF fork, and then riding down hills on it. It's like this guy who was talking about how the end of the world is next week, but still took the time to tend a garden; if carbon fiber wasn't a reliable and sensible material to make bike frames out of, people wouldn't do that, and people especially wouldn't use it to make forks.

pdedes

Now you have.

clausen

It has the strength to mass, but does every frame built have the mass to support the strength. Light weight frames are fragile regardless of material. I know my light weight steel would not survive a crash that some carbon can. I've also seen CF crack from a bike falling over.

clausen

You don't understand how business works. People will manufacture anything you want if your willing to buy it. Supply and demand. And look up carbon fork recall, I can think of a few major brands that have had them.

rebel1916

I find that CF bikes tend to asplode very easily, where I have never heard of a Ti asplosion incident.

Nakedbabytoes

Yes. The forth or fifth owner of your bike will appreciate the lifespan, but at a much cheaper cost.
I rode a 12 year old CF wheelset all last summer....and LIVED!!!!

clausen

It's not the age that kills a frame, it's the abuse.

rpenmanparker 

The idea of bikes frames surviving crashes, which is very dear to many on the 41 is just ridiculous. Bike frames are made to ride down the road, not survive crashes. Sometimes they will, sometimes they won't, but it has nothing to do with the way they were built of from what material. We all hope our frames will survive the next inevitable crash. That is just human nature, but there is nothing we can do to guarantee it. My advice is buy the bike you want to ride, not the one you think you are safe to crash.

Robert

Nerull

Titanium spindles have a reputation for suddenly snapping in half. Any of these will ruin your day.

rebel1916

Lies! Gypsy lies! Everyone knows that Ti is forever, steel is real and CF asplodes.

Bah Humbug

Why does it always have to be one material for everyone in these? Can't we all just ride whatever we want?