Barrettscv 

There has been a healthy set of discussions concerning steel, carbon fiber and titanium as a frame building material. While each has its advocates, it sounds like a well made frame using any of those materials can be used and has been used for long distance riding.

It also seems like no-one ever mentions riding aluminum. Is it possible that no-one is using aluminum?

While searching for a bike frame, I recently came across an aluminum Ridley that has almost perfect geometry for my build and riding style. If the bike was steel, carbon fiber and titanium, I would get the bike without hesitation. Since I have never had an aluminum road bike, I’m hesitant. The few reviews I’ve read on the bike mention that it’s stiff, a good climber and stable. Can an aluminum bike offer enough compliance for a 200k, or do they all ride harshly?

The bike has a first class CF fork (I know, I have a Ridley fork on my CX bike) and I'll be building a comfort oriented wheelset for the bike.

Homeyba

I've used several Aluminum bikes on long distance rides. I've used a Cannondale Caad5 and a Specialized Allez Pro on RAAM and I've ridden a double century on a Colnago Dream. I'd have no qualms about using them on a 200k or even up to a double century. I think the Ridley would be fine, assuming of course that it fits you properly.

Barrettscv 

Hi,

Yes, the fit looks perfect on paper! As you know, Ridley is a 1st class bike builder. I should be able to put together a dream build for peanuts ;-).

Part of the plan is to use the money saved on the frame for strong & comfortable wheels and other componients.

Homeyba

Sounds like a great deal. Aluminum, like any material can be made stiff or compliant depending on what the designer is trying to do. There is a huge difference between the ride of the Cannondale, Specialized and especially the Colnago. Compliant wheels, of course, can make a big difference as well. Yes, Ridely makes great bikes. I don't see how you can go wrong with that deal. Let us know what you think after you get it built and do your first 200k on it.

justadude

I ride a 1980's Vitus 979 (bonded aluminum tube), and 2001 Giant OCR One (butted aluminum frame with carbon fork). I like both bikes for long rides. The Vitus is more fun, has a race feel to it. The Giant is smooth and rides good too.

Thasiet

Vitus 979 doesn't count that was before aluminum went oversized. That bike is famously far more compliant than steel.

I'm currently commuting on my new steed, a Specialized Tricross Elite which I built up with pretenses for doing LD, so consider this my lurker outing as well. Currently just commuting 17.4 miles a day on it but the plan is to do my first double century within a month...

And it's fantastically comfortable! Aluminum with full carbon fork, 44cm chainstays, carbon seatstays, carbon seatpost, 28mm Pasela skinwall tires, Zertz elastomers everywhere. Everything plays a small role, from the slightly S-curved seatstays to the wheelbase and so on. The carbon fork is unmistakeably superior to my steel bikes on chipseal. The fact that much of the frame is aluminum does not appear to be of great consequence. Now, a vintage cannondale with those funky fishhook dropouts making the apparent chainstays that much shorter, and running on 23mm tires with reinforced sidewalls; probably a different story altogether.

shorthanded

barrett-- man-- seriously, try a trek 2.3. i am not a fan of the look of it, but i've ridden bunches of them-- and for a 'race-ish' bike--- if you're not a fender user- is a FANTASTIC riding critter. i keep trying to convince our local trek rep to get me one with no decaling painted a solid color, and i told him i'd sing it's praises to the skies if they put a 70's decal set on it .

it's as comfortable a bike as i've ever hopped on-- particularly if you get an H3- which is more upright. put a good wheelset on that thing? pssh... if i had one i'd ride it, and i love my steel frame bikes.

horatio 

I compared my Secteur with several CF bikes before pulling the trigger, riding the same route and times over the course of a couple of weeks. To me it was a better ride than the Cannondale Synapse and a tie with the base Specialized Roubaix, not to mention significantly more affordable than either.

Aluminum has a bad rap for being harsh, but I think there are variables other than the frame that factor into the comfort of the ride - tires, air pressure in said tires, wheelset, fork, saddle, handlebar tape, etc. I ride a lot of chipseal backroads with no significant "buzz" issues. In fact, the Secteur rides chipseal better than my comfy old steel road bike. 'Course there's the "chipseal from hell" road nearby that even the CF bikes couldn't muzzle for me.

As always, ride several suitable bikes and pick the one that's the best fit. Then flip the stem and slap on some Soul wheels clad in GP4Ks! LOL

I plan to "upgrade" in due time with better (i.e. lighter) wheels and a set of NOS Ultegra 10 speed shifters I got on sale a couple of years ago.

For me, the limitation right now is not the bike, it's the engine! I may change my tune after completing some planned brevets, but for now I'm satisfied with my aluminum bike.

Bacciagalupe

Yeah, I have to reiterate my belief (which I did not always have) that frame material doesn't matter. It's all in how the bike is designed.

An excellent example these days, as Horatio mentioned, is the Roubaix vs the Secteur. On the 2011 models the two bikes use the same geometry, same wheels, same type of seatpost, same elastomer inserts, both have a CF fork. They even weigh almost the same amount. The ride difference between the two is very small; I would not be surprised if the ride is nearly identical if you drop the tire pressure by, say, 10 psi on the Secteur. Oh, and the Roubaix costs about $650 more.

By the way, some people do tend to blast through centuries at high speeds, and some of them likely use racing bikes (aluminum or otherwise). I suspect it's a lot easier to tolerate a harsh bike for 4 hours than for 8....

Barrettscv 

A well made aluminum road-race bike would complement my other bikes and fills a need I have for a faster group ride bike. I’ll keep a steel Cyclocross-sport/touring bike as my primary long distance bike. I would usethe Ridley road-race bike primarily for local fitness riding. Most of these rides will be less than 75 miles and less than four hours.

I’ll also have a compliant wheel-set & tire combination for the bike. PSIMET is building a Shimano/Velocity A23 wheel-set with 23mm wide rims that increase air volume compared to 19mm wide rims. I’ll also use 700x25 tires at sub 100 psi air pressures without any loss of performance compaired to smaller tires on 19mm wide rims. I'll have the air volume of a 700x28 or 30 without the bulk.

I’ll try the bike on hilly 200k events where the stiffer frame will be an asset. For other Midwest events, I’ll have the Cyclocross-sport/touring bike that I know is super comfortable.

Ridley is a superlative bike builder and they make beefy bikes that should perform well under a Clydesdale like me. The investment will be small and the bike should sell without much of a loss if I decide it's not ideal

Andrey

I love the ride of aluminum . I am at 200 lbs currently and always loved super stiff bikes.

I have a dedicated steel cross/touring long distance bike, but I always loved the ride of my Cannondale Caad3 and then CAAD8 for fast rides. I have not tried it over 120 miles, but I suspect it will be fine for longer distances also only much faster that the steel rig I have. To me the ride quality depends more on rims and quality of tires(tpi) than the frame material.

melonyogloo

I have a carbon bike and a Specialized Tricross. With same wheelset and tires (record 32h, open pro, 28mm Conti 4 Season), I can barely notice difference in ride quality. I can feel the carbon bike is being lighter than the Tricross but both ride about the same. My Litespeed Arenberg, on the other hand, ride pretty soft on matter what wheel is on.

In the winter, with the above wheelset, I have no discomfort riding more than 70 miles.

slide23

I ride aluminum. A big, husky chunk of it, actually.


Basically, it's a re-badged hardtail mountain bike with a narsty aluminum fork. I ditched a Kona Sutra in favor of this frame. Over 400K of soul-abrading chipseal, I was no more worn out than the other people with whom I was riding. They were on custom and semi-custom steel, larger tires, some CF. I ride without gloves and that saddle has zero padding.

As Andrey, Barretts and others mention, tire selection has a lot more to effect. The modulus of tires, even highly inflated narrow tires, exceeds that of any frame material by many orders of magnitude. I think that cockpit setup gets a very close second to tire selection for overall ride comfort. Just my opinion and experience from dialing in this bike (and others).

groovestew

I've ridden a couple of brevets (200 and 300 km) on an aluminum cross bike with a carbon fork and 32mm tires @80psi. Nothing about the bike made me wish I was riding something else.

On the other hand, I once rode 185 km on a steel road bike with 23mm tires @100psi. I felt pretty beat up by the end.

I suspect the difference in tires was what contributed most to the difference in comfort.

robbleebob

Just to be 'that guy', I have done a number of 200k+ rides with high-psi 23 tires on my aluminum/CF forked Specialized Allez and I have never felt beat-up. I'll let you know after my first 400k in few weeks... maybe that'll be different.

Homeyba

I use 23mm (sometimes 25's on my tandem) tires on all my bikes in all my ultra distance races...

slide23

Yeah, but you're a RAAM rider and I (along with probably most of us) are mere humans.

Jose Mandez

I know that my aluminum Trek 1100 tends to be very unforgiving on bumpy roads, but I'm not sure if this is due to the aluminum or to the "racing" type geometry of the bike. According to Sheldon Brown on his website article about frame materials, the geometry of the bike and tire width/pressure has more to do with the quality of the ride than the material of which the frame is composed.

Homeyba

Thanks for the complement but I'm just as human as anyone else here. I'm a firm believer that most of us can do it. The only difference is that I've done it!

Barrettscv 

Frame compliance & flex can be a complex issue.

After reading further, the size of the frame and the size of the cyclist are critical issues.

Small frame sizes tend to be stiff, and larger frame sizes tend to flex. This correlation is more significant than material type or other factors.

Lighter cyclist on smaller frame sizes often have the stiffest frames, and bigger cyclist on the largest size frames often have issues with excessive frame flex.

I'm starting to think that smaller riders on smaller frames should buy a frame known to be compliant and that that a bigger rider will get acceptable ride quality from stiffer frames, if the frame is one of the larger sizes.

maillotpois

I did a 600k (as well as 10 or so rides over 200 miles) on an aluminum (scandium) eddy Merckx team sc race frame. I don't think the 600k was any more painful than it would have been on a bike of a different material. That bike, sadly, was stolen last year, so I am doing this years brevet series on my old (an harsher riding) Colnago ovalmaster ti frame. I expect the 600k to be comparably painful to the aluminum bike.

Sarah

Bacciagalupe

I may be wrong, but: I believe that with modern aluminum frames from experienced manufactures, that is no longer an issue.

Frame builders are well aware of the basic facts of geometry and engineering, and know that smaller frames are stiffer. As a result, they manipulate the tubing and tube shapes to get a fairly consistent ride characteristic regardless of size.

Stiffness is also more critical at certain specific spots, most importantly the bottom bracket and the chainstays, and that's easier to manipulate than, say, an entire front triangle. So, all they have to do is stiffen those spots, and the increased flex of the larger sizes is mitigated.