# Any Ti in the Peloton?



## TyboTy (Feb 27, 2006)

Just wondering why I have never noticed any Titanium frames being ridden professionally?

Is CF that much lighter/stronger? Do the teams not really care about long-lasting frames? Is Ti not all it's cracked up to be?

It seems like most of the club riders I have known eventually upgrade to a Ti bike for touring and club rides, and the occasional race. Watup?


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

TyboTy said:


> Just wondering why I have never noticed any Titanium frames being ridden professionally?
> 
> Is CF that much lighter/stronger? Do the teams not really care about long-lasting frames? Is Ti not all it's cracked up to be?
> 
> It seems like most of the club riders I have known eventually upgrade to a Ti bike for touring and club rides, and the occasional race. Watup?


Isn't Magnus Backstedt's ride Ti? 

I think that's it... ti for touring and clubs and occasional race. Not... the highest level of racing.

And long lasting frames? Are you joking me? Many of those guys can't even ride the same bike all season (tt bikes aside). Why worry about longevity if your sponsors are giving you new bikes just becuase they're not sure about the color?


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

no that i really know, but i think ti is much more expensive than cf. and when you get new, advanced designed frames all the time, why waste money on a longer lasting frame when you wont be using it for it's full life?


----------



## triscuit (Sep 13, 2004)

Ti is more flexy than cf, which means some power transfer is lost between the rider and road through bike flex. Some bike mag did a comparison of ti, steel, cf and aluminum, measuring stiffness and lightness in the past six months. CF won. But ti is considered a lot more comfortable because that flex eats up road vibration better than CF. At least that is my understanding. I ride steel with a carbon fork on the road.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

triscuit said:


> Ti is more flexy than cf, which means some power transfer is lost between the rider and road through bike flex. Some bike mag did a comparison of ti, steel, cf and aluminum, measuring stiffness and lightness in the past six months. CF won. But ti is considered a lot more comfortable because that flex eats up road vibration better than CF. At least that is my understanding. I ride steel with a carbon fork on the road.


Where does this stuff come from????? And stated like they are facts. - TF


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*I think*

the entire TdF Peloton is on CF except for Liquigas / Bianchi who are riding Al and Al/CF bikes. Magnus has custom Ti rides built for the classics,he may have the same for the tour. He said they build out of straight Ti tubes so that the material provides the comfort. Other materials can be made comfortable by design (bends and curves) but Maggie breaks them at these points.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

*???*



triscuit said:


> Ti is more flexy than cf, which means some power transfer is lost between the rider and road through bike flex. Some bike mag did a comparison of ti, steel, cf and aluminum, measuring stiffness and lightness in the past six months. CF won. But ti is considered a lot more comfortable because that flex eats up road vibration better than CF. At least that is my understanding. I ride steel with a carbon fork on the road.


It's not the material but the design and construction. There are some Ti frames(some Litespeed models by my own experience) that I can't flex but there are a hell of alot CF that I can almost snap. My test is to put a bike on a trainer and standing up and peddling and watching how much they flex. Your proposition is incorrect.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*wtf*



triscuit said:


> Ti is more flexy than cf, which means some power transfer is lost between the rider and road through bike flex. Some bike mag did a comparison of ti, steel, cf and aluminum, measuring stiffness and lightness in the past six months. CF won. But ti is considered a lot more comfortable because that flex eats up road vibration better than CF. At least that is my understanding. I ride steel with a carbon fork on the road.


There are over 16 grades of commercial Ti out there. Last I checked, more than 5 have been used in bikes.

As to vib absorption, have you ebver heard of wheels? As they are in constant contact with the roads surface, its a safe bet to give them a gander as well.


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

Can't find anything more recent...



http://bicirace.com/product/2006/BianchiVisit.html said:


> Or imagine the stress that the big titanium frame of Backstedt went through in the 2004 Paris-Roubaix before he crossed the line in victory.


http://bicirace.com/product/2006/BianchiVisit.html


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

TyboTy said:


> Just wondering why I have never noticed any Titanium frames being ridden professionally?
> 
> Is CF that much lighter/stronger? Do the teams not really care about long-lasting frames? Is Ti not all it's cracked up to be?
> 
> It seems like most of the club riders I have known eventually upgrade to a Ti bike for touring and club rides, and the occasional race. Watup?


Everyone wants a light bike. To get a Ti frame into the realm of upper end carbon frames weight wise it ends up being extremely noodly. That plus race sponsorship is about selling product and Carbon is it right now for high end race bikes. Race on Sunday sell on Monday.


----------



## Keeping up with Junior (Feb 27, 2003)

*Bicycling Magazine*



TurboTurtle said:


> Where does this stuff come from????? And stated like they are facts. - TF


Where else but Bicycling Magazine, the National Enquirer of two wheeled information. Didn't B.M. have a fashion article last spring on rock star cyling clothes? Can't wait for the issue with the pics of aliens riding a bike.


----------



## sirthx (Dec 23, 2005)

dagger said:


> It's not the material but the design and construction. There are some Ti frames(some Litespeed models by my own experience) that I can't flex but there are a hell of alot CF that I can almost snap. My test is to put a bike on a trainer and standing up and peddling and watching how much they flex. Your proposition is incorrect.


I don't have anything to compare them too, but I agree with your method of testing flex. I've had two CF frames, my current frame being an 06 Roubaix Pro, which is the latest carbon Specialized makes but obviously a step down from the S-Works, but when I plug into a trainer and stand up, I can flex that dude pretty good! So while in the trainer I make a conscious effort to stay as straight as possible.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

*Nice bike*



sirthx said:


> my current frame being an 06 Roubaix Pro, which is the latest carbon Specialized .


Rides great...and I would like an S-works too.


----------



## chbarr (Dec 30, 2002)

Cruzer2424 said:


> I think that's it... ti for touring and clubs and occasional race. Not... the highest level of racing.


IIRC, Lance Armstrong would disagree with you--he's got the rainbow stripes to prove it (Litespeed bike in Eddy M. colors). For that matter, Webcor was riding Ti/carbon Lemonds year before last.

I suspect it is two factors: who is able to sponsor a pro team, and what is in vogue. 

Sponsoring a team is a major commitment in terms of equipment--each rider has three rigs (two regular, one TT) for the tour. Twenty seven bikes just for the tour crew. The only titanium builder I can think of that might be able to put up the bucks and the frames might be Litespeed. Most of the other Ti builders I can think of are relatively small shops--sponsoring teams might just be beyond them at the pro level. 

I think carbon happens to be the more in-vogue frame material. Companies who want to sell bikes put what might sell under their riders.


----------



## sirthx (Dec 23, 2005)

chbarr said:


> IIRC, Lance Armstrong would disagree with you--he's got the rainbow stripes to prove it (Litespeed bike in Eddy M. colors). For that matter, Webcor was riding Ti/carbon Lemonds year before last.
> 
> I suspect it is two factors: who is able to sponsor a pro team, and what is in vogue.
> 
> ...


Yeah, remember Lance rode a Litespeed for his 1st win in the 1999 Tour.


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

chbarr said:


> IIRC, Lance Armstrong would disagree with you--he's got the rainbow stripes to prove it (Litespeed bike in Eddy M. colors). For that matter, Webcor was riding Ti/carbon Lemonds year before last.
> 
> I suspect it is two factors: who is able to sponsor a pro team, and what is in vogue.
> 
> ...



Well. Saying lance rode Ti 7...9 years ago whatever is like saying that old tour riders rode steel 30 years ago. 

I saw a British team on Litespeeds last year. I can't remember what team it was...

Also KGSN rode Ti Serottas last year before they switched to Merckx. 


My point: Who knows.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

Cruzer2424 said:


> Well. Saying lance rode Ti 7...9 years ago whatever is like saying that old tour riders rode steel 30 years ago.
> 
> I saw a British team on Litespeeds last year. I can't remember what team it was...
> 
> ...


Recycling.co.uk team. Rob Hayles, Evan Oliphant, Chris newton, etc. They are on Pinarello this year.


----------



## MaestroXC (Sep 15, 2005)

sirthx said:


> Yeah, remember Lance rode a Litespeed for his 1st win in the 1999 Tour.


A Litespeed Blade time trial bike. His regular road bike was a Trek.


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

OnTheRivet said:


> Recycling.co.uk team. Rob Hayles, Evan Oliphant, Chris newton, etc. They are on Pinarello this year.



wow. That's impressive.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

Cruzer2424 said:


> wow. That's impressive.


Thanks to Cycling.tv 
Actually the UK racing is very watchable, some really cool courses.


----------



## The The (Sep 9, 2002)

There were teams on Litespeed during the 2002 World Cup season that I know of. I recall seeing them in the TdF. I can't quite recall if they made an appearance beyond that date.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

The The said:


> There were teams on Litespeed during the 2002 World Cup season that I know of. I recall seeing them in the TdF. I can't quite recall if they made an appearance beyond that date.


Lotto. The year before they rode GT's. The year after they merged with Domo and rode Merckx.


----------



## Armchair Spaceman (Jun 21, 2003)

*Lance rode Ti Caloi*

Pretty sure I've seen early pics of Lance racing on a ti caloi (built by litespeed), but that was probably around a decade ago.


----------



## sirthx (Dec 23, 2005)

MaestroXC said:


> A Litespeed Blade time trial bike. His regular road bike was a Trek.


You sure about that?? I understood he was very disappointed in the Trek road bike so they gave him a Litespeed and they covered it in Trek logos.


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

atpjunkie said:


> the entire TdF Peloton is on CF except for Liquigas / Bianchi who are riding Al and Al/CF bikes. Magnus has custom Ti rides built for the classics,he may have the same for the tour. He said they build out of straight Ti tubes so that the material provides the comfort. Other materials can be made comfortable by design (bends and curves) but Maggie breaks them at these points.



There was an article in Cyclesport a few months ago on Backstedt's Ti bike. Since he kept breaking the alu bianchis, they built him the straight tube Ti for the 2004 paris-roubaix, which he won. He said he used that frame for 04,05, and was still using the same one as they went to press for the article, I think feb 2006. Impressive durability for a frame under a 90kg rider.


----------



## botto (Jul 22, 2005)

sirthx said:


> You sure about that?? I understood he was very disappointed in the Trek road bike so they gave him a Litespeed and they covered it in Trek logos.


You're mistaken.


----------



## sirthx (Dec 23, 2005)

botto said:


> You're mistaken.


Wow, who could argue with that? That's a lot of facts and information you've just thrown at me.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

sirthx said:


> Wow, who could argue with that? That's a lot of facts and information you've just thrown at me.


Classic. Hehehehehe.:thumbsup:


----------



## botto (Jul 22, 2005)

:Yawn: 










'98 ruta del sud and '98 vuelta

above are pics on what is obviously NOT a rebadged litespeed road bike (hint for the eedgits: look at the BB)

below IS a rebadged litespeed Blade, used in the '98 Vuelta










1999 he continued to ride the litespeed in TTs and the Trek in RRs

progress! Trek manages to get some paint on the Blade 










Look here! We have LA doing some recon in the Alpes for the '99 TdF. 

Hmmmm... that _sure looks_ like a Trek to me  










and at the '99 Tour. Wow, maybe you are right .. NOT!










that enough facts for you sirthx, or do you need to be schooled some more?


----------



## tube_ee (Aug 25, 2003)

Not many, at least not in the ProTour. Not because of any real deficinecies with the material, as its a fantastic choice for building bicycles, but because the bike sponsors are pushing carbon right now. If some of the new, ultra-light, ultras-trong steels become the hot new thing, youll see pros on steel. Pros ride what theyre paid to ride, which is whatever the bike sposors want to sell.

And frame flex doesnt enter into it, as nobody has ever been able to prove that pedalling energy is wasted in bending your frame. You're talking milliwatts, if that, and you gtet most of that back on the next pedal stroke anyway. Assuming it doesnt affect handling, stiffness is simply not a factor in bicycle performance.

--Shannon


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 2001)

tube_ee said:


> Not many, at least not in the ProTour. Not because of any real deficinecies with the material, as its a fantastic choice for building bicycles, but because the bike sponsors are pushing carbon right now. If some of the new, ultra-light, ultras-trong steels become the hot new thing, youll see pros on steel. Pros ride what theyre paid to ride, which is whatever the bike sposors want to sell.
> 
> --Shannon


Marketing and selling is definitely a factor why carbon fiber is pervasive today.

I might also suggest that other factors play a role as well. Such as carbon fiber is easier to manufacture, research and configure, build lighter and more aero. 

In the end, racing is about winning and manufacturers will gravitate towards bikes that help them win.

francois


----------



## lancerracer (Nov 22, 2004)

This is off topic, but what crank was lance using in the pic were he was "reconing" the alpes?


----------



## botto (Jul 22, 2005)

lancerracer said:


> This is off topic, but what crank was lance using in the pic were he was "reconing" the alpes?


http://www.srm.de/usa/index.html


----------



## sirthx (Dec 23, 2005)

botto said:


> :Yawn:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes please! School me some more. How about some info on the gas-turbine engine??  Dude, relax a little. As I mentioned, just saying what I heard. You didn't need to go through the archives and pull out the pics, (although I do dig seeing them and having the history lesson) simple explanation would have been sufficient. Seriously though, I do like knowing now the real deal so the effort is appreciated even if you just wanted to give me a beat-down.


----------



## chbarr (Dec 30, 2002)

Most of my searching has shown two things:

For his world championship, it was a Litespeed Ultimate (now called the Classic). 

In 1999, he was on a Litespeed Blade for the time trials, but stock Trek for the rest. Eventually, Trek brought the TT machine in-house.


----------



## lancerracer (Nov 22, 2004)

Thanks...I thought they were srm, I just wasnt sure that srm was around then...


----------



## botto (Jul 22, 2005)

lancerracer said:


> Thanks...I thought they were srm, I just wasnt sure that srm was around then...


been around long enough that Greg LeMond used them when he was with Gan.


----------



## wzq622 (Aug 3, 2004)

a little pro Brit team named Recycling.uk.com races on Lightspeeds


----------



## triscuit (Sep 13, 2004)

dagger said:


> It's not the material but the design and construction. There are some Ti frames(some Litespeed models by my own experience) that I can't flex but there are a hell of alot CF that I can almost snap. My test is to put a bike on a trainer and standing up and peddling and watching how much they flex. Your proposition is incorrect.


Not my proposition. It was in Bicycling (can't get them to stop sending it! but good bathroom reading), VeloNews or CycleSport America. I don't care enough about this issue to try to find out which, but if you care enough, it was one of those mags in the last 6 months. They tested a bunch of different bikes, inc. steel, carbon, aluminum and ti and found the ti bike was the most flexy (or the steel, can't remember, but the steel was a lot heavier), though it was also the lightest weight. Maybe it was the design of the bike they tested. Since I am not riding in the tour de france I don't really care. I was just sharing what I had read based on the article in that magazine. I do know my BF loves his litespeed and can accelerate quite well, but it flexes more than his old alum bike and less than his old steel. Wow, people on this forum are pretty obnoxious.


----------

