# I'm looking for a new frame but I'm picky



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

hi, I currently own a 19.5 litespeed pisgah I like it except it just doesn't give me enough standover height. I tested a 19" gary fisher ferrous and really liked it aside from the eccentric bb. Now, I'm looking to either have a ti or steel frame made. I am looking into xacd frames, they're cheap and allow you to do full custom so I'd make a really nice bike. on the other hand I'd prefer to keep my money in N.A. (Canada even better) If I did have a custom bike made here it would probably have to be steel just for cost purposes. I'd like the frame to be sub 4 lbs if possible, anyone have any advice or thoughts?

Thanks


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*You get what you pay for*

XACD has zero customer service, and zero warranty coverage. Results I've seen from people here on MTBR are all over the map, from "It broke in a week and they won't return my emails" to "I've had it for years and it's great". YMMV. My personal experience (from many years before I built frames, in the late 90s) was that all three titanium forks that I bought from them broke within a season. But that's just me. If you're "picky", I tend to think XACD is a pretty bad idea.

Talk to the guys at True North or Klondike bikes. Keep your money local if you can, and if you have to save up and go out to eat out a little less for a few months to afford the frame you want, so be it. If there are other Canadian builders folks can think of, please post 'em.

It's worth mentioning that there are lots of non-EBB singlespeed frames built by production companies out there too. If you liked the Fisher, shop around a little. There's probably something that will fit most of your requirements.

-Walt



timms said:


> hi, I currently own a 19.5 litespeed pisgah I like it except it just doesn't give me enough standover height. I tested a 19" gary fisher ferrous and really liked it aside from the eccentric bb. Now, I'm looking to either have a ti or steel frame made. I am looking into xacd frames, they're cheap and allow you to do full custom so I'd make a really nice bike. on the other hand I'd prefer to keep my money in N.A. (Canada even better) If I did have a custom bike made here it would probably have to be steel just for cost purposes. I'd like the frame to be sub 4 lbs if possible, anyone have any advice or thoughts?
> 
> Thanks


----------



## jmoote (Aug 31, 2007)

+1 for True North

Hugh can take care of you and you'll be very pleased I'm sure. I'm ordering a frame this month...


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

thanks for your responses guys, I'm still on the fence in regards to xacd. I'll be starting school in february and money will definitely be an issue, I found this and it seems quite promising http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=200188057958&Category=98083&_trksid=p3907.m29
I understand that outsourcing to china hurts our economy and stops work for local builders but the product seems very good and the prices are simply incomparable.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Whoa.*

Did you *read* that ad? "We are professional bike dealer,we never sell fake item"?!? On the plus side, if there's a problem, "we will try to solve it friendly."

Ask them about the warranty. And ask for references to previous customers, or ask around on the 29er board and see if the seller is legit and worth dealing with. The ad is not exactly confidence inspiring.

Here's a good test: ask them to tell you what the steering trail will be with a common (ie, Reba or something) suspension fork, and how that will affect the handling of the bike. Let us know what they say. The MTBR frameforum BS detector squad stands ready to verify that this fellow knows something about bikes.

Better yet, sell some extraneous crap or scrimp a little and get something from a local builder that you can be proud to ride.

-Walt



timms said:


> thanks for your responses guys, I'm still on the fence in regards to xacd. I'll be starting school in february and money will definitely be an issue, I found this and it seems quite promising http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=200188057958&Category=98083&_trksid=p3907.m29
> I understand that outsourcing to china hurts our economy and stops work for local builders but the product seems very good and the prices are simply incomparable.


----------



## jmoote (Aug 31, 2007)

Hugh builds light steel frames very comparable to Ti in weight and strength. Sub 4lbs might be a lot to ask for a 19" frame... but only the frame builder knows whether they can make the frame strong enough at that weight. It wouldn't hurt to find out what you can get in a steel ride, which will certainly be quite affordable.

For your "picky" preferences, nothing beats a custom frame. Keeping it local, and dealing with great folks is optional, but highly recommended :thumbsup:


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Until you mentioned money was a limiting factor I was going to add Dekerf to the list of Canadian frame builders.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

I'm not a Canada expert, so I can't tell you about the north country other than they make beer and I drink beer so we are all good.

BUT:

You get what you pay for. If you want a local builder to fit you and build a light bike that works where you ride and doesn't break STOP BARGAIN SHOPPING NOW. Just pay up and love your new bike.

You get what you pay for.

Also, only crazy people shop by weight.

[edited to remove strong language]


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Just to put my nose in where it doesn`t belong- it seems to me that custom frames really aren`t all that expensive. It`s just that there are such incredible bargains these days in some of the producton stuff. Really, take a look at some builders web sites. Look at the beautiful work that Sachs, Sascha White, Garro, and Mr Walt are putting out and then look at the pricing schedules. Really and truly, it`s beyond me how they can do it for those prices. When you think about the cost of the whole bike, an extra three hundred or so for the frame isn`t THAT much more. If you are serious about riding, I can`t see going any other way. For a hard tail, at least. For FS or somebody who only sees saddle time for a few hours per week, there are plenty of Giants, Treks, Specs, etc that make more sense. I say find yourself a local builder and at least have a talk with him.


----------



## WadePatton (May 10, 1999)

rodar y rodar said:


> . When you think about the cost of the whole bike, an extra three hundred or so for the frame isn`t THAT much more. If you are serious about riding, I can`t see going any other way. I say find yourself a local builder and at least have a talk with him.


ditto. custom is king.

And I'm curious as to why you'd want a new frame based on standover height?


----------



## 8shadow8 (Mar 18, 2007)

hi guys, thanks for your replies, I'm looking into hi-light. they have a pretty good rep on this site, I'm going to get them to build a frame based on the gary fisher genesis geometry. I'll definitely save more than a few hundred dollars.

If anyone can find a N.A. builder that can make me a full custom Ti frame for under $1000 or even $1200 I'll look into it.


----------



## jmoote (Aug 31, 2007)

8shadow8 said:


> If anyone can find a N.A. builder that can make me a full custom Ti frame for under $1000 or even $1200 I'll look into it.


There's close to that in material costs alone for a proper Ti frame. I'd be afraid to get on a Ti frame that cost that much. Steel at that price is reasonable, but Ti is going to cost much more for anything worth riding (other than non-custom like the new Vassago)


----------



## 8shadow8 (Mar 18, 2007)

material cost in the US, I hate to say it but american builders just can't compete.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*What are you buying?*

Keep in mind that a lot of what you're paying for with a builder who is (at least relatively) local to you (ie, in the same continent at least) is an assurance that you'll be happy with what you get. Customer service and a good warranty are worth a lot. I've screwed things up many times (we're all human), and every time I happily take the frame back, modify or rebuild as needed, and everyone is happy. In one or two rare cases I've even given refunds when it became clear that what the customer wanted and what I wanted to build would never match up.

I spend *hours* each day on the phone and email giving recommendations on everything from tires to NOS front derailleurs that I've hoarded specifically for 29ers. Customers stop by the shop for a beer when they're in Colorado, and I give them directions to some of my favorite rides and restaurants, and sometimes go ride and eat right along with them. They know that down the road, if they taco a wheel or break a chain, I'll be happy to sell them a replacement at a price they can't get anywhere else. They can email or call me with a question or concern almost any time they want and expect a reasonably timely reply.

I'm rambling. The point is that you're paying for a lot more than a hunk of metal when you buy a custom/handbuilt bike. That doesn't mean everyone needs one, but it also means you're comparing apples to oranges when all you care about are the price numbers. If you contact your random Engrish ebay seller a year after you buy your frame to get a warranty addressed, what do you think the response is going to be?

-Walt



8shadow8 said:


> material cost in the US, I hate to say it but american builders just can't compete.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

I'm going to start a thread in the general discussion to see what peoples experiences with hi-light have been.

I understand the benefits of a good local shop, but as a member or the internet age and as an individual who does most of my repairs. a repore with bike shops is not really important to me. plus I live in a very large city

the warranty is really my only concern with these guys, I've read very good things about them and as well as airbornes.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

If Peyto is currently building frames he's still the best bang for the buck as far as custom canadian frames go.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

8shadow8 said:


> I'm looking into hi-light. they have a pretty good rep on this site


Having a good rep on MTBR is pretty meaningless when it comes to real bikes for real riding. This is an internet site, not a trail. What are your local riders using for customs? Who do you know that really rides that you can talk to about your choices.


----------



## Paulie (Jan 23, 2006)

timms said:


> I'm going to start a thread in the general discussion to see what peoples experiences with hi-light have been.
> 
> I understand the benefits of a good local shop, but as a member or the internet age and as an individual who does most of my repairs. a repore with bike shops is not really important to me. plus I live in a very large city
> 
> the warranty is really my only concern with these guys, I've read very good things about them and as well as airbornes.


Good luck with the being "picky" part when you order a frame that is made in China from a website. BTW, you said you prefer to keep your money in NA . . . uhm, Walt makes frames in the USA that are extremely reasonable (right in your price range as a matter of fact), did you even check his website? Just look at the fork build really quick:
http://waltworks.blogspot.com/2007/12/friday-show-and-tell.html

If what you say is true, that the warranty is the most important thing to you, then you will not find a better warranty than what Walt describes in one of his responses to your questions. It sounds like what you really want is the best of everything, but are not willing to pay for it.

Face it, for good quality backed by reputation, you've got to anny-up and stop flushing all of the sound advice you asked for down the pipes. :ciappa:

Paulie


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Paulie said:


> Good luck with the being "picky" part when you order a frame that is made in China from a website. BTW, you said you prefer to keep your money in NA . . . uhm, Walt makes frames in the USA that are extremely reasonable (right in your price range as a matter of fact), did you even check his website? Just look at the fork build really quick:
> http://waltworks.blogspot.com/2007/12/friday-show-and-tell.html
> 
> If what you say is true, that the warranty is the most important thing to you, then you will not find a better warranty than what Walt describes in one of his responses to your questions. It sounds like what you really want is the best of everything, but are not willing to pay for it.
> ...


If Walt can make me a sub 4 lb Titanium frame for reasonably close to $600, than I'm all for it.


----------



## jmoote (Aug 31, 2007)

You've got a frame that you're happy with aside from the geometry. Now you want to buy an inferior frame that may or may not solve this problem, and your main criteria are weight and price. Ti bikes are not for people with a tight budget in mind - it just doesn't make sense. Ti is nice, but expensive.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Agreed.*

Cheap ti is cheap ti. No way around it. Same with steel, or aluminum, or whatever. For my money, I would *never* buy a custom ti frame from anyone but a master builder like Carl Strong or James Bleakley (or one of many others). Great people you can feel proud to support who are absolute masters of what they do. You pay more, yes, but you don't have to have that niggling feeling at the back of your mind, wondering if you *really* got a bike that fits and rides right, or wondering if they'll stand behind their product if something goes wrong.

Honestly, returning to the original post, standover is a pretty minor complaint. When was the last time you straddled your toptube with your feet on the ground while riding? Personally, I've *never* managed to rack myself on the toptube, and I've crashed plenty, trust me. If you are halfway competent at mounting and dismounting, standover is pretty irrelevant. I'd just suck it up and keep riding the bike you have, and save your money for another year to get something sweet from True North or another builder.

-Walt



jmoote said:


> You've got a frame that you're happy with aside from the geometry. Now you want to buy an inferior frame that may or may not solve this problem, and your main criteria are weight and price. Ti bikes are not for people with a tight budget in mind - it just doesn't make sense. Ti is nice, but expensive.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

I have a number or reasons why I want to sell my current frame:
1. Standover , I feel that it is a detriment in that I'm worried to tackle harder stuff.
2.my frame is suspension corrected to 80 mm. I want a frame that is corrected to 100mm if they're copy the 19" genesis geometry frame I sent them I'll have a frame that will last a while.
3 my frame has rim brake mounts and a disk brake adaptor, they bother me, it's my prerogative.
4I want a slighly slacker geometry and I feel that the stand over issue will be exaggerated, I'm tired of messing around with stems and handle bars.

I'm buying the Hi-Light 
1 I've heard good things about their company directly.
2 I've done welding in machine shop in high school.
TIG welding is a master skill, based on what I've read in regards to airborne and hi-Light I feel that their and skill is at lest adequate for what I'm looking for.
3. I don't feel that "high end" frames are not considerably better.
when building the frame it basically comes down to :
metal quality
butting 
cutting 
welding
I think these Chinese builders have enough experience doing what they do.


----------



## ~martini~ (Dec 20, 2003)

Why are you insisting on Ti? Is it for the mythical ride qualities or wieght? Or rust 'prevention'? Those are all arguments/goals that can easily be met by a competent steel builder. For about the same price if you look hard enough. AND they'll come with some form of warranty. 

Trying to warranty a frame with your Chinese builder will be no easy task. It will certainly be a patience tester. Just ask all those guys who have dealt with the XACD forks! If you insist on doing the ChiTi thing, at least go through Gene Spicer. He's got the relationship with the Chinese, and offers good CS from all reports. 

Don't look at these responses as prodding you with a Bock poker. We really ARE trying to give you better options than a ChiTi frame. If you're so internet savvy, use those skills to find a US based builder willing to do up a steel bike with the properties you're after. And FWIW, there IS a US ti builder out there, offering introductory prices in the range you're looking for. Its been posted on this site before. Use your wizardry to find it. East coast based is all I'll say.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

This is a different company than xacd, these guys have a good rep with airborne in my opinion and these guys seem at lease a little more legit, they sell on ebay at least.

would you mind pointing me in the direction of this U.S builder who charges very little for his work, I find it hard to believe that he could even come close considering the material cost differences.


----------



## ~martini~ (Dec 20, 2003)

1] well, that is something that's kinda nice. Personally, I like lower slung frames. Like Konas.
2]/4] Throwing a 100mm fork on your 80mm frame will slack it out. It'll raise the front end/TT though...Gensis ain't all its cracked up to be BTW.
3]I hear ya. I cut mine off a custom I had done a few years back. I sent it back for another repair issue, and he noted that the studs were hacked off. I found it comforting that he remembered the build.

1} Possible heresay.
2} welding and machine shop in HS is a different skill set than working with the precise tolerances nessessitated by frame building. I know. I used to work in a machine shop. Close enough went a long ways there. 
3} Correct on your assumptions, exept for the part about High end quality. There has been a huge quality discrenpency between my custom made bikes and my 'regular' bikes.

I may have missed this, but are we talking 29", 650b or 26" wheels on this?


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*What??*

Why not just buy a 19" genesis geometry frame? What's the logic of getting a "custom" copy of an existing production frame? And why would genesis geometry last any longer than anything else? If they build it well, it'll last. If not, it won't. The geometry doesn't have much to do with it.

When I contacted XACD about my broken forks, way back in the day, the response I got via email read "we can no replace because we cannot sure you are proper use". Nice. I sent a few more emails off into the ether and eventually gave up. A $300 lesson in how not to throw good money after bad.

Enjoy the bike, regardless. I hope it works out well for you. Someday when you're a little wealthier and done with school, give a real custom builder a call and get your dream bike.

-Walt



timms said:


> if they're copy the 19" genesis geometry frame I sent them I'll have a frame that will last a while.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

you also need to take all this "suspension corrected" stuff with a huge grain of salt. it means NOTHING.

The last bike I had before building frames for myself was a ZION 660. yeah, super cheap, selling now for $179. It wasn't the lightest frame in the world, but it was about the best bike that i had ridden until riding my own (and i've owned a lot of very fancy bikes). It's also totally indestructable. I even had a 120mm fork on it although they said made for 80 or 100. It sucked at 100 and came together at 120.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

It sounds to me like he made up his mind to buy this Hi-lite titanium already, and no amount of logic from us will convince him otherwise.


----------



## Francis Buxton (Apr 2, 2004)

One question I have is the hangup on the sub-4lb thing. Just about any builder could build you a sub-4lb frame. I bet Walt COULD build you a sub-4lb 19" steel frame. I would also bet he WON'T. A solid, fast, durable 19" steel frame (that will last you a long time) should probably come in between 4 and 4.25 lbs. My frame weighed 4.49 lbs with some beefier tubing suited for a 195 lb fatass riding aggressively.

Just beware that you may get your lightweight frame, but it may be a noodle.

I know you insist on being "right" in this conversation, despite what many are saying, so I'm not going to tell you otherwise. Instead, I'll mimic others and simply state again that often you get what you pay for.


----------



## WadePatton (May 10, 1999)

If I were buying a ti mountain bike tomorrow, I'd be contacting Matt Chester or Jim Kish and discussing fitment and application. Fit and handling and durability would be my primary concerns. Jim has an "SL" option for a 500 upcharge. You gets what you pay for.

Pick up your bike and stand on the scales. Record that number. Subtract 2 #, now calculate the % difference in the bike+rider and the light bike+rider weights--and tell us what the percentage is and how it's going to make your trail time faster and more fun.

No one has ever beat me in a race because their bike was lighter. Usually had something to do with being a stronger rider.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

well, as it happens someone listed a 2002 airbornelucky strike 19" frame on craigslist and I'm currently dealing with him, I hope to get a look at it soon. If the geometry and welds are nice, do you guys approve?


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

no.


----------



## WadePatton (May 10, 1999)

well how much does it weigh?:incazzato: :madman: :eekster: :nono: :nonod: :smallviolin:


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

well, the deal has fallen through it was sold. my search will continue.....


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

You could get a bike made out of papier-mâché.

Super duper light and you can customized it each day. I really doubt that you need a real bike, so you should go for it.

I heard that the papier-mâché bikes are really popular on MTBR these days! You could join the cool crowd! Just make sure it's a 694b'er.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Wow..... you have too much time on your hands.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

What are Curtlo's prices like these days?


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

hey, I looked into curtlo when I originally wanted a frame, I'm not a fan of the fillet brazing.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Greeeeaaaat..... well yer living up to the picky part for sure now. Because the nicest frames are fillet brazed IMHO.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Can't we all just get along.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Ok guys, can you explain to me how a Chi-Ti frame is physically inferior to an American made frame, if the downtube is over sized and everything is welded properly.

I want Titanium but don't have much to spend, I have a nice frame that I might just keep. If I find an airborne that fits what could possibly be wrong with it?


----------



## mmerll (Nov 24, 2005)

pvd said:


> You could get a bike made out of papier-mâché.
> 
> Super duper light and you can customized it each day. I really doubt that you need a real bike, so you should go for it.
> 
> I heard that the papier-mâché bikes are really popular on MTBR these days! You could join the cool crowd! Just make sure it's a 694b'er.


Or we all could listen to all the b.s. hot air coming out of your butt that you portray as knowledge. Shut up, go home PVD.


----------



## jmoote (Aug 31, 2007)

Bad design comes to mind. For example, if you went to True North, you have Hugh who has a degree in mechanical engineering designing and welding your frame. Buying Chi-Ti, who knows where the design came from... throw some oversize tubing here, make it look like a bike and there you go.

Not to mention the lack of customer support behind those frames should something go wrong.

Why do you want Ti, but don't want to pay the going price for Ti? Your budget says steel, and it rides just as nicely.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Here`s a link you might be interrested in, timms. Another opinion about Ti.
http://www.anvilbikes.com/?news_ID=13&catID=3
It might change your midn about Ti, or might not. Ti doesn`t really do anything me personally, but I understand- I have a lot of stuff that I wanted just because it`s what I had my heart set on. If it were different it might actually serve me better but I wouldn`t be as happy with it.

If Airborne is the only frame you can afford that fits your "specs", you don`t have much choice, do you? My vote is get one now, then you can do it differently next time around it it doesn`t work out for you. Maybe it will work out fine and you`ll live happily ever after.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

timms said:


> Ok guys, can you explain to me how a Chi-Ti frame is physically inferior to an American made frame, if the downtube is over sized and everything is welded properly.


Theoretically, it shouldn't be. The difference lies in the "ifs" and what your recourse will be if they don't fall in your favor. I have worked with hundreds of Chinese made Ti frames and have yet to find a manufacturing defect. But they were all purchased with the help of an agent with well established industry contacts. I would not go this route on my own to buy a personal bike.



timms said:


> I want Titanium but don't have much to spend, I have a nice frame that I might just keep. If I find an airborne that fits what could possibly be wrong with it?


It could crack and you would be SOL because that company is history.

Check eBay for TiSport/TST frames. They are ~$1000 new and can be found on eBay for much less from time to time. I got mine a few years ago for $300. They are at least made in the US by a company that still exists.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

timms said:


> Ok guys, can you explain to me how a Chi-Ti frame is physically inferior to an American made frame, if the downtube is over sized and everything is welded properly.


The problem isn't the chinese made, though with that country's habit of substituting materials to save money (lead paint in children's toys, inferior grade metals, etc) you could pay for what's claimed to be US Grade 5 Ti 5Al/2.5V and get grade 1 commercially pure titanium instead (which is a LOT weaker, but still titanium so it'll fool you until it fails while riding). Not to mention that you want to order from XACD. A company with a well known track record of failing to deliver products actually to custom ordered specifications, especially well known and reported here on mtbr as many users have tried going the custom route with them. Forks which were ordered disc only and suspension corrected that are delivered with rim brake mounts and not-suspension corrected, frames which have the wrong geometry than ordered, etc. But hey, why should our opinions matter... go waste your money. Just don't come and cry to the forums when something goes wrong.



> I want Titanium but don't have much to spend, I have a nice frame that I might just keep. If I find an airborne that fits what could possibly be wrong with it?


Titanium doesn't last forever. Get that notion out of your head right now. And its not cheap to repair. To get a crack fixed on my Alpinestars Ti frame is likely going to run me $200.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

for the sake of everyone's sanity on this post, I've decided to keep the litespeed. Thanks for all your replies, I will go custom one day, but when I have more money to spare.

Thanks again.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

rodar y rodar said:


> Here`s a link you might be interrested in, timms. Another opinion about Ti.
> http://www.anvilbikes.com/?news_ID=13&catID=3
> It might change your midn about Ti, or might not. Ti doesn`t really do anything me personally, but I understand- I have a lot of stuff that I wanted just because it`s what I had my heart set on. If it were different it might actually serve me better but I wouldn`t be as happy with it.


I didn't understand his concept other than he likes steel as he comes across as a "purest". Nothing wrong, and if anything admirable, but to say there isn't a difference on what a Ti frame can do vs. steel, I have to disagree. Ti does have a different feel, and I can say that because I've had multiple bikes made out of every material out there.

The bike I ride the most is my ridged STEEL SS. I love the way it feels, and wouldn't trade it for the world. However, I have a Ti road bike (steel before that), and I now want to have a Ti frame to replace my SS. The steel has a "lively, snappy" feel, but Ti has a similar feel, but is lighter and more supple. Sure you can do things to a steel frame to make it "closer to a Ti frame, but then you can do those same things to a Ti frame and make it that much better.

Bottom line: neither is better than the other, BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*With all due respect..*

I'm pretty certain I (or anyone else) could be put on 2 identical bikes, one ti and one steel, painted so that the material wasn't visually obvious, and not be able to tell which one was which. No offense, but you're feeling what you expect to feel. Do a real blind test and I'd bet dollars to donuts you wouldn't be able to pick out the ti bike vs. the steel on any consistent basis. I know I've never noticed any difference, and I've ridden lots and lots of both.

Don's point wasn't that there aren't advantages to ti - there certainly are. His point is that if you have $3k to spend, a $1000 steel frame and $2k worth of parts is a lot more bike for the money than a $2k ti frame and $1000 worth of parts. Sure, the ti frame might be 1/3 pound lighter, but I think we can all think of ways to save 1/3 pound (or, hell more like 2 or 3 pounds) on parts with an extra $1000 to spend.

And hell, you don't even have to spend the parts money - get your steel bike for $2k instead of a $3k ti one, then take the extra $1000 and take a riding vacation, or time off work to train more, or hire a coach. Or pay some entry fees and do more racing. You'll end up riding WAY faster regardless, 1/3# extra bike weight or not. Would you rather be that really fast guy on a decent bike, or not so fast guy on a super blinged out ride? I know which I'd choose...

If you have unlimited money to spend on one bike (say, for our purposes, >$4000 or so) then ti starts to make lots of sense. Otherwise, steel and aluminum (depending on what you want the bike to do) are the value/$ winners.

-Walt



Treybiker said:


> I didn't understand his concept other than he likes steel as he comes across as a "purest". Nothing wrong, and if anything admirable, but to say there isn't a difference on what a Ti frame can do vs. steel, I have to disagree. Ti does have a different feel, and I can say that because I've had multiple bikes made out of every material out there.
> 
> The bike I ride the most is my ridged STEEL SS. I love the way it feels, and wouldn't trade it for the world. However, I have a Ti road bike (steel before that), and I now want to have a Ti frame to replace my SS. The steel has a "lively, snappy" feel, but Ti has a similar feel, but is lighter and more supple. Sure you can do things to a steel frame to make it "closer to a Ti frame, but then you can do those same things to a Ti frame and make it that much better.
> 
> Bottom line: neither is better than the other, BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

Ok, I'm not going to try and argue with Walt. But whether I can tell the difference, or I "think" I can tell the difference I guess is up to me.

I guess my viewpoint comes from being a fan of how tube is shaped. I have a steel Serotta (circa 1991), SS made out of Columbus Max OR tubing where as all the tubes (including chainstays) are ovalized in the areas to increase stiffness where needed. I wanted a frame stiffer than a common steel but didn't want it to ride like an aluminum frame, and the ti frames back then were like noodles when considering my 6'1" 175 lb (back then) frame. Well, I guess I'm cheering for Ti is because my road bike I bought in the mid 90's is a Ti Eddy Merckx (litespeed), that had the same thing done with the tubing where it was ovalized in the right places. I had been on a Steel Paramount OS (handbuilt with oversized steel tubing), and I couldnt believe how much better the Merckx rode and was just as stiff when sprinting or climbing out of the saddle. 

Anyway, just my experience.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Darn right!*

Yeah, 'cause I'm prefect and I know everything. Riiiight.

Bike tubing (and geometry, at least for mountain bikes) has changed a lot since the bikes you mentioned. I guess I could maybe buy feeling a difference between steel and ti on road bikes, but on mountain bikes with 2.3" cushy tires, I don't think I can. But subjective or not, it's the perception that counts. So we can both be "right". Yay!

-Walt



Treybiker said:


> Ok, I'm not going to try and argue with Walt. Bu


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

I agree with Walt.

A bike built with steel, TI, or aluminum will feel the same, be approximately equal in weight, absorb shock, and be as stiff without regard to material PROVIDED that each material used is built to it's engineering limits.

Some materials will require far more effort than another to approch this limit. Others will be far easier.

I'm a big fan of aluminum and I'm working on building with it soon. Why? It's easy to make light and strong while being very cheap and easy to work with.

TI sucks ass.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

pvd said:


> I
> TI sucks ass.


Watch out PVD. I'll start whining like a baby and scream on every board for you to be banned. :eekster: (whats with that guy).

Not to keep bugging everybody, but I'm interested in what you guys are saying.

Anyway, I see you're points. I'm not an engineer, or a frame builder, but I still think that if you take 2 frames that have the same everything including tube diameter and shape with the proper thicknesses, but one is steel and the other is Ti, the steel frame to be stiffer but also harsher. Therefore, wouldn't they differ in what "engineering limit" you could build them to? (I don't know, I'm asking). Also can steel tubing be "worked" as much as Ti and is it more affected by how it reacts to heat (during the welding) than Ti?

But none the less, the most important thing is fit and handeling. The frame material isn't going to make a brake a rider, but to each his own.

Ti RAWKS ASS!!!


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Titanium is superior to steel in every way except price. That I why I like it.

feeling confident on a bike makes you faster,,,, it's a fact.


----------



## dr.wierd (Aug 10, 2007)

What if you have a customer that is a weight weenie? Would differing frame materials make a difference in feel since theoretically there is less mass to soak up vibration, or would the tires, no matter what be the overriding factor to dampen vibrations?



Walt said:


> Yeah, 'cause I'm prefect and I know everything. Riiiight.
> 
> Bike tubing (and geometry, at least for mountain bikes) has changed a lot since the bikes you mentioned. I guess I could maybe buy feeling a difference between steel and ti on road bikes, but on mountain bikes with 2.3" cushy tires, I don't think I can. But subjective or not, it's the perception that counts. So we can both be "right". Yay!
> 
> -Walt


----------



## ~martini~ (Dec 20, 2003)

timms said:


> Titanium is superior to steel in every way except price. That I why I like it.
> 
> feeling confident on a bike makes you faster,,,, it's a fact.


yyyeaaahhh..:madman:


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

timms said:


> Titanium is superior to steel in every way except price. That I why I like it.
> 
> feeling confident on a bike makes you faster,,,, it's a fact.


Except for stiffness, strength, and durability also.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

aluminum is stiffer that Ti, but with fatter tubing that becomes mute. Ti has the highest yield strength of of all the bike materials, steel can be as strong. I live in Ontario and Rock sold is used a number of months out of the year so I'll have to deal with corrosion for both aluminum and steel. what's more durable than Ti?


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

timms said:


> aluminum is stiffer that Ti, but with fatter tubing that becomes mute. Ti has the highest yield strength of of all the bike materials, steel can be as strong. I live in Ontario and Rock sold is used a number of months out of the year so I'll have to deal with corrosion for both aluminum and steel. what's more durable than Ti?


You live in ontario, where the school system just hasn't been that good for a long time it seems.

Ok first off, Aluminium (you'd think you'd know the correct spelling at least if you live in canada) is NOT stiffer than Ti, and its only because of the larger diameter tubing that the bikes ride stiffly when made out of it. Ti doesn't have the highest yeild strength of all the bike materials that will always be steel's domain. You obviously know very little about actual material properties other than the summary stuff you typically read off the back of a package of cracker jacks. As to rock salt corrosion, its not that much of an issue if you do even a mediocure amount of maintenance on keeping the bike clean after rides in the winter here. A LOT of ocean going vessels which are exposed to salt water 24/7 use aluminium extensively in their construction and you don't see them corroding away in just a few years.


----------



## 8shadow8 (Mar 18, 2007)

you're a jerk.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*For those who are interested*

Some good background reading on the various materials under discussion here (with additional references if you're really into it):
http://www.anvilbikes.com/?news_ID=16&catID=3

-Walt


----------



## 8shadow8 (Mar 18, 2007)

DeeEight, first of all, here in Canada we spell it Aluminum. Aluminium is British!

read for your self, and find a better use of your time instead of upping your ego by pointing out other peoples mistakes....so childish,

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
a·lu·mi·num /əˈlumənəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uh-loo-muh-nuhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun
1.	Chemistry. a silver-white metallic element, light in weight, ductile, malleable, and not readily corroded or tarnished, occurring combined in nature in igneous rock, shale, clay, and most soil: used in alloys and for lightweight utensils, castings, airplane parts, etc. Abbreviation: alum.; Symbol: Al; atomic weight: 26.98; atomic number: 13; specific gravity: 2.70 at 20°C.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

If TI is so good, how come the fastest guys only ride AL or Carbon?

I could really care less if a frame or a wheelset last forever. I ride a frame or wheels for a few years mostly. By then, standards have changed, fits are different, and handling goals are differnt. I would take cost and weight over life expectancy any day of the week.

To that end, If one of my wheels (that i build and ride) lasts more than a year, I get pissed. Why? Because that means that it's way overbuilt and way too heavy. I want to replace a rim within 12 months. I want lighter, wider rims, but they are all over designed.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

8shadow8 said:


> you're a jerk.


9 months and 15 posts... either you're a total newb or someone's alternate account afraid to risk calling me a jerk and being held accountable for it.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

8shadow8 said:


> DeeEight, first of all, here in Canada we spell it Aluminum. Aluminium is British!


Aluminium is actually the official standard for how its spelled internationally. Only americans and lazy canadians adopted aluminium as the spelling.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> You live in ontario, where the school system just hasn't been that good for a long time it seems.
> 
> Ok first off, Aluminium (you'd think you'd know the correct spelling at least if you live in canada) is NOT stiffer than Ti, and its only because of the larger diameter tubing that the bikes ride stiffly when made out of it. Ti doesn't have the highest yeild strength of all the bike materials that will always be steel's domain. You obviously know very little about actual material properties other than the summary stuff you typically read off the back of a package of cracker jacks. As to rock salt corrosion, its not that much of an issue if you do even a mediocure amount of maintenance on keeping the bike clean after rides in the winter here. A LOT of ocean going vessels which are exposed to salt water 24/7 use aluminium extensively in their construction and you don't see them corroding away in just a few years.


Real mature response. I hope you don't kiss your mom with that mouth.

I used to live off the gulf coast, and worked in shops there for 12 years. I saw saltwater do horrible things to steel and aluminum. Now the exterior surface is some what protected by paint or its anodized, (as I'm positive a ship's hull is somehow protected so the actual aluminum isn't affected), but the inner seat tube and anything bolted to the frames would suffer some nasty oxidation. Sure if you take the time to douche your bike regularly you can decrease these issues, but you'll NEVER have the same issues with Titanium. All you gotta do is use a little anti-seize here and there.

None the less, when you take the 3 materials and use them in an identical application **PROPERLY*, (bike frame), the Aluminum frame WILL be stiffer, the Ti will have more flex, and Steel will be somewhere in between.

*Properly means that the Aluminum tubing, by current standards is made with larger diameter tubing therefore it will be stiffer when used in all bicycle frames made today. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing whether its more flexible or stiffer when you have samples of Steel, Aluminum and Titanium that are of identical dimensions. For the 3 materials to achieve a similar goal, they have to be produced differently of which will cause benefits and drawbacks of EACH material.

And Dee, I know some people feel strongly about things, and you're opinion, factual inputs, and corrections are welcome, but please don't bounce in this conversation and start bashing. Besides, they may not have Cracker Jacks in Canada. Nuts and popcorn may be a little over the top.

Oh, and I wouldn't mine seeing a pic of that Alpinestars frame. Used to dream about having one of those.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Not exactly right*

Vitus and other early aluminum builders used smaller diameter tubes and produced frames that were quite a bit flexier than the steel frames of the time (late 70s or so, I think). They held up ok, but the walls had to be pretty thick to make them durable enough, so aluminum eventually moved to massively oversized tubes, as this is the form in which the weight of a reasonably durable frame is lowest (they'd go bigger diameter and thinner walls if they could, but dents and crumpling would be a HUGE problem). Hence the stiffer ride. The material itself is, as D8 says, less stiff than steel or ti. So you can certainly "properly" build an aluminum frame with lots of flex if you want to, just as you can make a wicked stiff (or noodly) bike from ti or steel or carbon. The tubing diameter is MUCH more important than the mechanical properties of the materials, they're all quite close for our purposes.

For an acceptably durable (meaning it'll last 5 years of hard riding) mountain bike frame, all of these materials are within about 20% of each other in terms of end frame weight. 20%! Wow! That's a lot! But that means about 2% of total bike weight (assuming a 25 pound bike) and only 0.25% of bike+rider (assuming a 175# fully dressed rider with a water bottle and some tools). A quarter of a percent is *nothing*, which is part of why I've never understood people who will sacrifice fit or durability for ultra-lightweight parts. Be a weightweenie if you want, or be a cheapskate, but don't be both.

-Walt



Treybiker said:


> None the less, when you take the 3 materials and use them in an identical application **PROPERLY*, (bike frame), the Aluminum frame WILL be stiffer, the Ti will have more flex, and Steel will be somewhere in between.
> 
> *Properly means that the Aluminum tubing, by current standards is made with larger diameter tubing therefore it will be stiffer when used in all bicycle frames made today. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing whether its more flexible or stiffer when you have samples of Steel, Aluminum and Titanium that are of identical dimensions. For the 3 materials to achieve a similar goal, they have to be produced differently of which will cause benefits and drawbacks of EACH material.


----------



## WadePatton (May 10, 1999)

Walt said:


> ... A quarter of a percent is *nothing*, which is part of why I've never understood people who will sacrifice fit or durability for ultra-lightweight parts. Be a weightweenie if you want, or be a cheapskate, but don't be both.
> 
> -Walt


A very enlightened one is speaking here, wise grasshoppers would listen.

Walt for President!


----------



## WadePatton (May 10, 1999)

Walt said:


> Some good background reading on the various materials under discussion here (with additional references if you're really into it):
> http://www.anvilbikes.com/?news_ID=16&catID=3
> 
> -Walt


Don ROCKS too!


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

I'm sorry but your logic is flawed. body weight and bike weight are very different things. A bike is dead weight it is a tool that you have to lift turn etc. A pound on a bike is a noticeable difference, a pound on my body isn't.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

DeeEight said:


> If Peyto is currently building frames he's still the best bang for the buck as far as custom canadian frames go.


He's not, and he is currently (or was as of a couple months ago) residing in Connecticut. Otherwise, I'd agree with that. My frame from him is wonderful, even though it wasn't built custom for me.

Last I heard, he was looking to get back into building, but I'm not sure if that's happened or not.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*Huh?*

For, like, bunnyhopping or something, sure. You've gotta lift the bike up. Heavy is harder to lift than light. For, say, riding up a big 1,000 foot climb, not so. You've gotta get every ounce to the top, and whether it's bike or rider is irrelevant, it takes exactly the same amount of energy.

Besides, even a half pound of frame weight is only 2 or 3% of the total bike weight. And most of us aren't riding trials where getting the bike several feet in the air suddenly is a common thing.

-Walt



timms said:


> I'm sorry but your logic is flawed. body weight and bike weight are very different things. A bike is dead weight it is a tool that you have to lift turn etc. A pound on a bike is a noticeable difference, a pound on my body isn't.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Talking perception walt, most don't notice weight on their body changing compared with weight on the bike. How often do you feel burdened by your helmet and cycling shoes or the camelbak?! Distribute the load over your body and you can move more of it comfortably. Bicycles focus the load into more specific areas when it comes to lift it over an obstacle/fallen log, like into your arms and your shoulder (as many use the CX style bike carry). 

But that's perception and that's mental, in reality of physics you're totally on the ball, and a pound overall in static weight makes no difference whether its in the frame, the energy bars you're carrying, etc. Camelbaks became popular mainly with people perceiving the weight coming off the bike (from water bottles and saddle bags) and onto their bodies. Didn't alter the physics of energy spent to move the whole package though.

And as to TreyBiker.... have you ever examined the inside of a bicycle frame that's been exposed to a decade of all year riding including rock salt? I'm betting you haven't. To get the kind of corrosion you've described the ships having you'd need to get the water inside the frame.... which is hard to do given the tiny holes that most frames have (vent holes for welding at tube ends mainly), especially in the volumes needed to cause this magical level of corrosion you and Timms seem to think occurs to break down the aluminium. 

In any case, most Ti frames are lucky to last that long before having a fatigue related failure. Why? NOBODY actually builds a Ti frame to last longer. Companies don't use Ti or Al to make their bikes stronger or more durable than an steel frame, they use the material to make the bikes LIGHTER, trading off the chance to have more strength/lifespan for less weight. Alpinestars is one of the only brands that ever did three basically identical models in three different materials with their Mega series elevated chainstay frames. All were built to the same strength and ride characteristic target, but the Ti and Al models ended up weighing less than the chromoly one. They designed the CrMo one first and then the Ti and Al ones were designed to ride the same way as that one. What resulted for the Ti Mega was a 4 1/4 pound titanium frame. That's HEAVY for a titanium frame, especially of that era (early 90s, when merlins and litespeeds averaged 3.5 pounds in the largest sizes) and it mine still cracked on me 2 years ago. The frame has massively larger diameter tubing for the material which increases the stiffness (the stay tubes are a FULL inch in diameter) and I still cracked the right side chainstay just above the dropout, almost completely around.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Thanks for your advice.



jmoote said:


> You've got a frame that you're happy with aside from the geometry. Now you want to buy an inferior frame that may or may not solve this problem, and your main criteria are weight and price. Ti bikes are not for people with a tight budget in mind - it just doesn't make sense. Ti is nice, but expensive.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

Walt said:


> Honestly, returning to the original post, standover is a pretty minor complaint. When was the last time you straddled your toptube with your feet on the ground while riding? Personally, I've *never* managed to rack myself on the toptube, and I've crashed plenty, trust me. If you are halfway competent at mounting and dismounting, standover is pretty irrelevant. I'd just suck it up and keep riding the bike you have, and save your money for another year to get something sweet from True North or another builder.
> 
> -Walt


The OP HAS been solved, I've decided to do the above.^^^^^

Any further discussion is unnecessary.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

Walt said:


> Vitus and other early aluminum builders used smaller diameter tubes and produced frames that were quite a bit flexier than the steel frames of the time (late 70s or so, I think). They held up ok, but the walls had to be pretty thick to make them durable enough, so aluminum eventually moved to massively oversized tubes, as this is the form in which the weight of a reasonably durable frame is lowest (they'd go bigger diameter and thinner walls if they could, but dents and crumpling would be a HUGE problem). Hence the stiffer ride.
> 
> A quarter of a percent is *nothing*, which is part of why I've never understood people who will sacrifice fit or durability for ultra-lightweight parts. Be a weightweenie if you want, or be a cheapskate, but don't be both.
> 
> -Walt


Geez, I hadn't thought of Vitus in a while. They were flexy and I never have trusted a bonded frame. Especially when that crust would form at the junction of the bonded tube and lug. Inovative frame of its time though.

But I do agree with a lot of what you're saying that diameter of the tube is the major predictor of how the frame will respond to rider input. The message I was trying to get across was that to make an aluminum frame competitive with other materials, it really needs to be a larger diameter tube than Ti or steel therefore making a aluminum frame stiffer by default.

The 2 most favorite frames I've swore never to sell are my steel SS (circa 1991), and my Ti road bike, (Circa 1996). Both have ovalized tubing in the right spots (the only straight tubes on both are the seatstays) to increase stiffness where needed without compromising the ride quality. I want this again on a modern frame (being suspension corrected for the rare instances I would want front suspension, and disk brakes). I've also found a Ti builder that is really involved in how he draws and shapes the tubing of many various diameters to determine what will benifit the rider's needs. And he stays away from butting which is another thread in its own.



PVD said:


> If TI is so good, how come the fastest guys only ride AL or Carbon?


If you're refering to pro riders, they ride what they get paid to ride. PERIOD. And you would be amazed of what something is and what it "apears" to be at the pro level. Oh, and the last time I checked, the fastest XC guy in North America latley is riding Litespeed, which I believe is Titanium.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

*It's the rider*

Jeez, Ryan Trebon would kick my ass if he was on a wooden bike. As long as the bike doesn't stop working, almost any old thing will work for modern XC racing. Of course, "modern XC racing" means a cyclocross bike could handle most of the terrain. What was it that Kabush used at the last NORBA - like <300g 1.4" tires? Ridiculous.

As an aside, I have a UCI elite XC license (the actual pee-in-a-cup kind, though thanks to my intense mediocrity I've never been asked to) and I can tell you that 95% of the "pros" out there, like myself, buy their own bikes. They might not pay full retail, but they pay for them, and nobody tells them what to ride. The fanciest bikes, by far, are always found in the Master's Sport classes - if you want to see loads of titanium and XTR, that's the place to look - 45 year old accountants will buy anything. A lot of the experts and pros ride 4 or 5 year old bikes that are scrounged together, mostly because they're all dirt poor, because they spend all their time riding instead of working.

So yes, you can certainly be a champion on a ti bike. Or steel, carbon, aluminum, bamboo, whatever.

-W



Treybiker said:


> If you're refering to pro riders, they ride what they get paid to ride. PERIOD. And you would be amazed of what something is and what it "apears" to be at the pro level. Oh, and the last time I checked, the fastest XC guy in North America latley is riding Litespeed, which I believe is Titanium.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

Ahh, another night owl.

Well, I guess I was only thinking about the factory sponsored riders. And yes, I agree. If your fast, your fast. And I know exactly what you mean about what class of racers have the nicest bikes. I never went pro, but but competed for around a decade or so, and the beginer classes always had the nicest bikes, and the expert classes were on anything as long as it stilled rolled. My first win on the road (crit) was on a 15 year old Raligh that was so tall that I had the seatpost almost bottomed out, it had one front chainring which was a red anodized bmx 46t on sugino cranks, and a Sante' rear der. The guy on the DeRosa that came in 2nd wouldnt even look at me, (which was a nice compliment). The bike I want will have some poser value, and I don't mind spending a little money on it. I don't work to make money, I work so I can spend it on what I want (after paying for what I need). Everybody wants to have the best of something (in their eyes), and for me, its a hand made bike built exactly like I want it. And I'll at one time be the guy on the Deroas when some 18 year old passes me on a climb. He just better hope he can decend.


----------



## thaphillips (Sep 1, 2007)

Walt said:


> Cheap ti is cheap ti. No way around it. Same with steel, or aluminum, or whatever. For my money, I would *never* buy a custom ti frame from anyone but a master builder like Carl Strong or James Bleakley (or one of many others). Great people you can feel proud to support who are absolute masters of what they do. You pay more, yes, but you don't have to have that niggling feeling at the back of your mind, wondering if you *really* got a bike that fits and rides right, or wondering if they'll stand behind their product if something goes wrong.
> 
> Honestly, returning to the original post, standover is a pretty minor complaint. When was the last time you straddled your toptube with your feet on the ground while riding? Personally, I've *never* managed to rack myself on the toptube, and I've crashed plenty, trust me. If you are halfway competent at mounting and dismounting, standover is pretty irrelevant. I'd just suck it up and keep riding the bike you have, and save your money for another year to get something sweet from True North or another builder.
> 
> -Walt


Carl Strong built a bike for me. I am very happy with the quality of the frame.


----------

