dgasmd

In all the years riding, I've never really owned an all aluminum frame. I've had steel, all carbon, and carbon with aluminum. Not for any particular reason, but simply because it just did not happen. All I know about aluminum frames is that they are a bit of a rougher ride, but that is about it.

Can you educate me a little on their inherent properties, benefits, down sides, etc.? Can you name 5-7 top aluminum frames and tell me what makes the "top ones"? I don't need a chemical and mechanical disertation, just some educated opinions.

EffSizzle

Cannondale CAAD9...

Duke of Kent

That's all that needs to be said. And all you need to know.

PhilThee

CAAD9 Nude

monk

I think aluminum frames are "under-rated." Sure, they ride a bit rougher but frankly being able to feel the road a bit isn't all bad. If I had the $ I'd probably go carbon, but for now I'm happy with my Fuji Roubaix SL frame.

Garfield Cat

Cervelo Team Soloist. Some of the Tour de France stages are ridden by the CSC team use the Team Soloist.

wfrogge

Not in many years....

An as a Team Soloist owner I can attest the frame is too verticaly stiff while having too much flex horizontally.


That and I wouldnt base a purchase on the fact that a pro races on a product.

Jay Andriot

I've got an alu Colnago Dream with carbon flash fork. It's very well mannered, does transmit more road feel than either the steel or carbon frames I ridden, but I like that. I picked mine up used for a very good price. I've run across a number of Colnago riders who like the Dream better than any other bike, I think I know why.

If you don't like the way a bike rides you might call it rough, if you do like it we call it responsive.

I just got finished replacing the Chorus components on my Dream with Record ones. Still waiting for the rear derailluer, then I'll be done.

Jay

BHBiker

Cervelo Soloist Team (SLT)

As a new owner of one...I can really say this bike is a keeper! It just maintains speed and cuts the wind better than even some full carbon buids out there.

I have a Tarmac Expert and they both have different qualities with the Cervelo SLT....

I suggest that if you are in the market for an all aluminum frameset then check out the Soloist Team...its hard to explain but surely you would undertsnad what I am saying after a test ride. Just check it out before buying anything.

Not that it matters but Matt Goss (CSC) used it at the 2007 Philadelphia International Championship and placed a strong second behind Haedo (on a carbon soloist). Now that is a competitive field if you look at the line ups. However when I chose this its not because its a proven winner for the pros but my test ride itself that impressed me.

dgasmd

does anyone in bf ever read the question??? No offense to anyone, but the question was not tell me how much YOU like your aluminum bike!

Jay Andriot

This is a road forum. We are not engineers, we ride bikes. So with all due respect it is all about what you like. To me it's not about the material, it's about the builder and what they can do with the material. I don't ride an aluminum bike because it's alu I ride it because of what Colnago did with the aluminum. That's true for all the building materials. There are great bikes in all materials, you just have to find one that matches your riding style. If you looking for the technical properties of aluminum you're in the wrong forum.


Jay

ElJamoquio

Uh, speak for yourself...

+1. You can make an aluminum bike an a compliant, long distance tourer, and you can make steel into the stiffest, harshest bike you've ever ridden. There are limitations, most notably, tube thicknesses required for welding/dent resistance, etcetera, but... you get the idea.

Geometry is king, material properties are secondary. If you need any demonstration of this fact, go look up how much stiffer steel is when compared to aluminum.

dgasmd

OK. This is a good start. So what type of geometry or angles make an aluminum frame stiffer, harsher, softer, less/more compliant?

Jay:

Don't take this personal. I do appreciate that people take the time to reply. However, just because one doesn't read, understand, or appropriately address/answer to the question ASKED doesn't mean it is in the wrong place or can't be answered.

Fox Farm

Before I stopped riding my Cannondale Crit 3.0, the one with the huge down tube, I was convinced that this was a great bike because it was light and not all that expensive. I would still say that about it. The weight to dollars factor make aluminum a good deal. Better aluminum manufacturers have found ways to make the frame not feel so stiff or harsh. I think that for shorter rides, 30 - 50 miles, or for crit racing, you can't go wrong with one, particularly with the carbon stays and fork. But when you start to see aluminum frames costing well into the $1200 range and up, I begin to figure that you could go with carbon or Ti.

You never said what your body size and mass is, and how you want to use this bike/frame.

ElJamoquio

Given the same "frame geometry" i.e., seat tube length, top tube length...

Diameter of tubes is a huge factor. To over simplify, the stiffness of a tube in torsion is proportional to the diameter to the fourth power. Witness the stiffness of Cannondale frames 10-20 years ago.

Wall thickness also influences, although to a lesser extent than diameter.


Changing the "frame geometry" in aluminum has similar effects to changing them in any other material. For a more compliant ride, make the wheelbase longer, screw around with the seat stays (to make them compliant... witness Pinarello, Cervelo R3).

Changing the head tube angle... if you take two bikes with the same wheelbase, and different head tube angles, one will definitely 'handle' quicker than the other, but I'd be surprised if had a non-placebo demonstrable effect on the frame compliance. Of course, the fork would be in a position to be much more compliant. A similar effect could be seen on seat tube angle/seat posts, but I don't believe that most seat posts have demonstrable deflection under normal loads.

ElJamoquio

OP - have you ever ridden a lighter aluminum frame with a light CF fork? It really isn't a bad ride.

dgasmd

NO. I have never ridden an aluminum frame at all. That is partlly why I was asking. More out of curiosity really. Someone sent me a link to the cannondale site and I was looking at all the different bikes they had. It is nearly impossible to tell the reall difference between the different CAAD numbers, the Six13 and those, etc. It got me thinking. It is very hard for me to really get anything out of a "test ride" because it takes me a good 200-300 miles before I am done with all the twicking and finally feel comfortable on a new bike. I dount any store will let me take a bike home for 300 miles for me to tell them I did not like it.

A friend of mine has also being wondering as he loves the look of the Cinelli Aliante and was considering getting one too. HEnce me asking for top 5 aluminum frames and such.

Duke of Kent

Ok, I gave you the top aluminum frame on the market.

A little research, just into the name would give you:

CAAD9 = Cannondale Advanced Aluminum Design, ninth iteration/generation.

Cannondale makes stiff, light, yet somewhat forgiving aluminum frames. They do this by taking the time and spending the money to do lots of finite element analysis with various tube shapes, aluminum grades and thicknesses. Generally speaking, this results in a reasonable weight (1200g for my 50cm frame) and very good torsional stiffness, particularly at the bottom bracket.

They're stiffer than all but a few carbon frames, but try as Cannondale might, they still transmit a bit of road noise. Some people, like me, like this, as knowing your road surface can help you make quick decisions. If you like the "dead" carbon feel that some carbon bikes offer, aluminum might not be your cup of tea.

Duke of Kent

They make 4 race frames. CAAD9, Six13, Super6 and System6.

They make 2 "comfort" frames. Synapse and Synapse SL.

Pretty simple...

Garfield Cat

BHBiker, is the Team Soloist the same as the other soloists, with the difference being the material? are the tube size and shapes pretty close?

terry b

Here's mine - I have 4 aluminum bike - Colnago Dream, Fondriest Top Level, Pegoretti Fina Estampa and Casati Dardo.

The Top Level is one of the best riding bikes I own. It does everything well.

The Dream and the Dardo are close seconds. Interestingly, the Dardo uses the same tubeset as the Top Level (Deda U107) and rides very similarly. It has CF stays which I think make no difference. The Dream uses Columbus Airplane and gives a good ride.

The Pegoretti trails the other three. It's pretty heavy, and I don't feel it takes sharp bumps particularly well. It uses the SC61.10 tubeset.

I have an Orbea Starship hanging from the rafters in my shop. I found it uninspiring.

In terms of road noise some of these are noiser than some of my steel frames and some of them aren't.

Some of them tend to be stiffer than my steel bikes, but not all.

The Fondriest is preferable to a couple of my carbon bikes but not all of them.

None of them are terribly different than my titanium bikes.

That's about all I know about aluminum bikes. Some are great, some are not. Some are not better than the best steel/titanium/CF bikes. Some are close to equal to the best steel/titanium/CF bikes, at least among the ones I own.

The solution is easy - you decide you want to try an aluminum bike and you go buy one and ride it for 1000 miles. You start that effort by buying as close to the top of one of the major brands as you can. I doubt you'll be disappointed if you follow that process.

BHBiker

The Team Soloist shares the geometry of the Carbon Soloist as well as the aero downtube and seat tube. However, the carbon soloist and the carbon soloist SL has vast improvement in bottom bracket stiffness, curved/aero seat stays and reinforced chainstays due to the ability of carbon to be shaped to a desired shape easier than aluminum could possibly be...also they are heaps lighter than the Soloist team (17+lbs).

cat0020

IMO, aluminum frames are disposable frames. All frame material have a fatigue life, aluminum seems to have the shorter fatigue life than most.

Aluminum is less dense so lighter weight is possible with same amount of material.

Aluminum is less flexible so stiffer frame is possible with less material.

Aluminum frames are cheaper to manufacture, material cost less, fabrication process is less expensive.

Aluminum frames are to be replaced more often (before it fatigues), especially if the rider is heavier.

Aluminum frames are most likely to have large diameter tubing that are prone to dents, and once dented (or bent), it could not be repaired.

Aluminum frames usually have lots of welding material at the weld joints, to over strengthen the junctions.

Aluminum frame usually heavy paint to mask the possible cracks due to usage over long perior of time, especially tough paint like powdercoating paint that do not scratch or peel as easily.

ElJamoquio

Remind me when I'm supposed to throw away my frame, again?


All frames will eventually fatigue, I agree.


Wrong, aluminum is much more compliant than steel.


Steel is cheaper than aluminum, and steel is easier to weld than aluminum.


Huh?

BHBiker

never mess with an engineer!