Page 3 of 4

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 12:10pm
by gilesjuk
Si wrote:
gilesjuk wrote:
Si wrote:
I'd suggest that much of it is down to build rather than material, after all you can get just as big a difference in perceived* feel between two bikes built of the same material.


Both are singlespeeds, I moved the wheels over from my Ti to the Steel frame (the Ti frame is getting a Rohloff shortly).

Steel frame has steel rigid forks, Ti has carbon rigid forks. The only difference in the build is the forks, handlebars and cranks.

Much of the difference can be attributed to the weight difference. But I'm still of the opinion that flexy steel forks are better than carbon fibre forks.

The Ti frame is more flexible, I can flex it putting my foot on the pedal and pushing sideways.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 12:14pm
by gilesjuk
mankymitts wrote:
gilesjuk - do you have more info/sources of info on Ti frames cracking at the welds? I am now on my 3rd Ti frame, the other 2 having cracked at the weld around the bottom bracket. I am grateful for the lifetime warranty and service that the manufacturer provides but when I have made the warranty claims I am told that they have never heard of this happening. I was beiginning to think "Is it me?" until I saw your post.
MM


Examples:

(mentions it has been repaired)
http://www.bikeadventuresuk.com/forum/v ... 21ac4af511

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/forum/view ... 8de53be74e

Must be the reason for the "lifetime warranty". There will always be hardcore riders who can break anything though :D

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 12:39pm
by Si
gilesjuk wrote:
Both are singlespeeds, I moved the wheels over from my Ti to the Steel frame (the Ti frame is getting a Rohloff shortly).

Steel frame has steel rigid forks, Ti has carbon rigid forks. The only difference in the build is the forks, handlebars and cranks.

Much of the difference can be attributed to the weight difference. But I'm still of the opinion that flexy steel forks are better than carbon fibre forks.

The Ti frame is more flexible, I can flex it putting my foot on the pedal and pushing sideways.


Yes, but is that because it is Ti or because it's built of a specific gauge of tube? After all, you can do similar with some steel frames, and you can build a Ti frame that is extremely rigid if you go overboard with the tubing.

The only difference in the build is the forks, handlebars and cranks.

Do you know this for a fact? Are all the tubes of the same gauge and butting, all the angles the same, etc?

I'm not saying that material makes no difference, but it's very hard to test two "identical" frames because each material has it's own requirements during design and build, so you are never going to end up with two identical frames. It's not that one material is better than another in a specific area, rather than in making it better in a specific area some materials have fewer trade-offs elsewhere.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 2:59pm
by Gearoidmuar
Si wrote:You've no way of knowing that it was an identical impact - so the comparison is totally invalid.
Sorry, but your case has been well and truly laughed out of court and is beating a hasty retreat with tail between legs!


Now then. My friend and I were cycling side-by-side, as we had been for miles. This parked car which we have been passing takes off and then slews across the road so that we both strike it at right angles. The car was stopped when we hit it. We were travelling at 90 degrees to the car. In what way can the impacts have been significantly different. Did my friend cut in his afterburners? The reason that I didn't go over the car was that, my front wheel having whacked the car as hard as his did, my handlebar went through the windscreen with my hand on it. Having three knuckles broken and a torn finger tendon was sufficient of a retardant to stop me going over the car. I did finish up on the middle of the bonnet. He had no window to stop him.

Any reasonable person would construe this as being equal bangs. Of course, I'm not so brazen as to accuse you of being reasonable.. :wink: :D

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 3:04pm
by splott
what was initial question ?

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 3:50pm
by Si
Gearoidmuar wrote:
Si wrote:You've no way of knowing that it was an identical impact - so the comparison is totally invalid.
Sorry, but your case has been well and truly laughed out of court and is beating a hasty retreat with tail between legs!


Now then. My friend and I were cycling side-by-side, as we had been for miles. This parked car which we have been passing takes off and then slews across the road so that we both strike it at right angles. The car was stopped when we hit it. We were travelling at 90 degrees to the car. In what way can the impacts have been significantly different. Did my friend cut in his afterburners? The reason that I didn't go over the car was that, my front wheel having whacked the car as hard as his did, my handlebar went through the windscreen with my hand on it. Having three knuckles broken and a torn finger tendon was sufficient of a retardant to stop me going over the car. I did finish up on the middle of the bonnet. He had no window to stop him.

Any reasonable person would construe this as being equal bangs. Of course, I'm not so brazen as to accuse you of being reasonable.. :wink: :D


Sorry but it's pretty easy to see that it just doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny. You weighed different amounts, you hit different parts of the car, you probably hit it at different angles, we don't know what knocks the bikes had suffered in the past that might have already weakened them, you will have reacted differently during the impact, etc etc the list goes on. To be able to gain any meaningful insight about the properties of the materials from your anecdote you need to either be able to precisely replicate the incident under 'laboratory conditions', or you need to draw your data from a much larger population to show that there is a trend for weakness in one particular material. You can't do this so I'm afraid that anyone who decides whether or not to go for Ti based upon your story is doing themselves a disservice.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 11 May 2010, 5:09pm
by Chodak
I like titanium, so much I have two bikes made of it. But a quick search of the net shows there are issues with welding it and greater care is needed.

Here's an extract from one article:

the most widely used grade of titanium alloy, ASTM Grade 5 (Ti-6Al-4V), has a yield strength of 120,000 psi and a density of 282 lb/ft3. In comparison, ASTM A36 steel has a yield strength of 36,000 psi and a density of 487 lb/ft3, while 6061-T6 aluminum has a yield strength of 39,900 psi and density of 169 lb/ft3.

In short, titanium is about 45 percent lighter than steel, 60 percent heavier than aluminum and more than three times stronger than either of them. While expensive initially, titanium lowers life cycle costs because of its long service life and reduced (or non-existent) maintenance and repair costs. For example, the Navy replaced copper-nickel with titanium for seawater piping systems on its LDP-17 San Antonio Class of ships because it expects titanium to last the entire 40 to 50 year life of the ship.

In addition to military applications, other common uses for this light, strong and corrosion-resistant metal include those for aerospace, marine, chemical plants, process plants, power generation, oil and gas extraction, medical and sports.

Shielding Gas Is Critical

Titanium falls into a family of metals called reactive metals, which means that they have a strong affinity for oxygen. At room temperature, titanium reacts with oxygen to form titanium dioxide. This passive, impervious coating resists further interaction with the surrounding atmosphere, and it gives titanium its famous corrosion resistance. The oxide layer must be removed prior to welding because it melts at a much higher temperature than the base metal and because the oxide could enter the molten weld pool, create discontinuities and reduce weld integrity.

When heated, titanium becomes highly reactive and readily combines with oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen and carbon to form oxides (titanium’s famous colors actually come from varying thickness of the oxide layer). Interstitial absorption of these oxides embrittles the weldment and may render the part useless. For these reasons, all parts of the heat-affected zone (HAZ) must be shielded from the atmosphere until the temperature drops below 800°F (note: experts disagree on the exact temperature, with recommendations ranging from 500°F to 1000°F. Use 800°F as a reasonable median unless procedures, standards or codes indicate otherwise).

One of the most common mistakes when welding titanium is not verifying the many variables that contribute to good shielding gas coverage prior to striking the first arc. Make it a practice to always weld on a test piece before beginning each “real” welding session. To ensure that gas purity meets your requirements, AWS recommends using analytical equipment to measure shielding gas purity prior to welding. Gas purity varies by application. Typical specifications require that the shielding gas (typically argon) be not less than 99.995 percent purity with not more than 5 to 20 ppm free oxygen and have a dew point better than –50 to –76°F.[/color]

Now I may be a simple soul, but for a bike frame shop to ensure 99.995% purity and atmospheric shielding below 800 degrees farenheit or risk embrittlement of the weld does sound like it's asking a fair bit! - you're not going to do that in the shed in your garden! :wink: Which is why I'm happy to have a lifetime warranty on my frames from a reputable builder and bike shop - thank you very much indeed and goodnight. :D

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 12 May 2010, 8:13am
by gilesjuk
Thing is titanium is often alloyed, so it all depends on how reputable the builder is. I have a Lynskey which is made in the USA, they've been doing Ti for ages. They set up Litespeed before selling it.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 12 May 2010, 8:16am
by gilesjuk
Si wrote: I'm not saying that material makes no difference, but it's very hard to test two "identical" frames because each material has it's own requirements during design and build, so you are never going to end up with two identical frames. It's not that one material is better than another in a specific area, rather than in making it better in a specific area some materials have fewer trade-offs elsewhere.


Isn't that the point? the material allows the build to vary.

Aluminium frames could be built flexy and smooth riding, but would snap after a short while. Therefore they are built really stiff and harsh to ensure no flex.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 12 May 2010, 12:24pm
by asterix
Si wrote:
Gearoidmuar wrote:
Si wrote:You've no way of knowing that it was an identical impact - so the comparison is totally invalid.
Sorry, but your case has been well and truly laughed out of court and is beating a hasty retreat with tail between legs!


Now then. My friend and I were cycling side-by-side, as we had been for miles. This parked car which we have been passing takes off and then slews across the road so that we both strike it at right angles. The car was stopped when we hit it. We were travelling at 90 degrees to the car. In what way can the impacts have been significantly different. Did my friend cut in his afterburners? The reason that I didn't go over the car was that, my front wheel having whacked the car as hard as his did, my handlebar went through the windscreen with my hand on it. Having three knuckles broken and a torn finger tendon was sufficient of a retardant to stop me going over the car. I did finish up on the middle of the bonnet. He had no window to stop him.

Any reasonable person would construe this as being equal bangs. Of course, I'm not so brazen as to accuse you of being reasonable.. :wink: :D


Sorry but it's pretty easy to see that it just doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny. You weighed different amounts, you hit different parts of the car, you probably hit it at different angles, we don't know what knocks the bikes had suffered in the past that might have already weakened them, you will have reacted differently during the impact, etc etc the list goes on. To be able to gain any meaningful insight about the properties of the materials from your anecdote you need to either be able to precisely replicate the incident under 'laboratory conditions', or you need to draw your data from a much larger population to show that there is a trend for weakness in one particular material. You can't do this so I'm afraid that anyone who decides whether or not to go for Ti based upon your story is doing themselves a disservice.



Clearly the experiment needs to be repeated but with the riders and their bikes in swapped positions.

Other than that, it is obvious that the answer to the OP is 'neither'. If you want comfort and longevity you can't beat steel, after all, how many aluminium, Ti or CF springs do you see? What material is immune from fatigue when used within its stress levels?

Of course if you are easily seduced by marketing hype and/or wish to look like a TdF rider then you have to get something less suitable (and expensive) but if you are an independent spirit of discernment and common sense, you will choose a steel framed machine.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 12 May 2010, 1:23pm
by gilesjuk
asterix wrote: how many aluminium, Ti or CF springs do you see?


There's loads of Ti springs around:

eg. http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=15605

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 13 May 2010, 7:46am
by Gearoidmuar
Sorry but it's pretty easy to see that it just doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny.

Oh yes it does.


You weighed different amounts

Yes. As it happens I'm a stone and a half heavier than my friend but are you suggesting that I was behind the back wheel, therefore propelling my bike into the car??? If the weight made any difference, which I'm sure it didn't, my bike would've fared worse.

you hit different parts of the car

Different parts of the same side. This was an unusual car. It didn't have a large angle in the middle of the side. All of the side was in the same plane.

you probably hit it at different angles

Definitely didn't.

we don't know what knocks the bikes had suffered in the past that might have already weakened them

I do. Neither of us had ever crashed the bikes before.

you will have reacted differently during the impact

You mean that I was affected by gravity and my friend wasn't? He of course is a superbeing from the planet Plonk.

, etc etc the list goes on. To be able to gain any meaningful insight about the properties of the materials from your anecdote you need to either be able to precisely replicate the incident under 'laboratory conditions', or you need to draw your data from a much larger population to show that there is a trend for weakness in one particular material.

I never said that Titanium was weaker. It's just a whoor to weld.

Clearly the experiment needs to be repeated but with the riders and their bikes in swapped positions.

And then you'd find more objections in your 'mind'. You just don't like the answer do you??

Of course if you are easily seduced by marketing hype and/or wish to look like a TdF rider then you have to get something less suitable (and expensive) but if you are an independent spirit of discernment and common sense, you will choose a steel framed machine.


What's that got to do with anything? I've one carbon fibre bike, three aluminium and three steel at the moment. I've had more steel bikes than you've had hot dinners. :shock: :D

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 13 May 2010, 10:14am
by Si
Gearoidmuar wrote:snip snip snip


It's simple: to compare the strength of two frames you need to conduct the exact same test on both and show that the results are repeatable....this is basic empirical scientific method. Your anecdote does neither: it's just a bucket load of unmeasured variables, it is not a reliable comparison...it' pretty meaningless. I'm afraid that your argument is starting to sound a bit like one of these people who state that they fell off while wearing a helmet so the helmet must have saved their life :wink:

For example, when you both contacted the car can you say that both of you were in exactly the same position on the bike, with your weight distribution the same, the same rigidity/laxness in your arms, legs, body, etc? No, you can't. But exactly how the weight is distributed will help to determine how the force is transferred through the frame, and the stiffness of your muscles will determine how much of that weight is cushioned rather than transmitted through the frame. Try this experiment: climb up onto your desk, jump off, on landing bend your knees to absorb the force - now do the same thing but instead of bending your knees keep them locked straight when you land....feel the difference? In your anecdote there are a whole host of different variables acting and more force than found with the jump off the desk.

Now if you and your buddy were to ride into the car lots and lots of times then the size of the test population might start to balance out all of these variables eventually, and we might glean some useful information upon which frame is stronger. But your one-off, uncontrolled test tells us virtually nothing.

So, again, I would advise anyone wondering about relative strengths of these frame materials to ignore the anecdote - these is much better, scientifically derived, data out there to base your purchase on.

Oh, BTW, could you be a little more careful in using quotes so that I don't have to keep correct your messages: you seem to be missing out the [/ on the closing quotes so every one's comments are running into each others - cheers.

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 13 May 2010, 1:37pm
by MartinC
Arguing that it's sensible to assume that the forces both cycles were subjected to in the accident seems flawed. The outcome for the two riders was totally different - so the logical conclusion is that they were subjected to to a widely different set of forces and therefore the bikes were too. Or is the poster suggesting that he's constructed of different material to his companion?

Re: Carbon fibre v Titanium

Posted: 13 May 2010, 7:51pm
by Gearoidmuar
I'm not talking, and have not talked about the strength of the frame materials. I know that the Titanium is every bit as strong as Aluminium. It's the WELD which causes the problem. The Weld gave.
Now I've cracked about a dozen frames in my time cycling and it's never been the weld. Not once.