# whats the opinion on Titanium frames these days.



## Tajue17 (Mar 31, 2011)

I've been on my butt for a few years and there's a nice litespeed calling my name,,, bike store gentleman says no way carbon is the way to guy now!

I just love the looks of those titanium bikes, I'm oldschool though..


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

The material is irrelevant i.e.; "carbon is the way to "guy" (go) now".

The bike store gentleman probably doesn't have any titanium bikes on the floor which is a big reason why he's advocating what he does have, carbon.

The weight differences are meaningless once you add the rider to the equation.

Stiffness is over rated. Bikes have been plenty stiff enough for decades; you aren't going to get dropped on the next group ride because your frame wasn't stiff enough.

Get a titanium frame if you like the idea of naked ti frames being low maintenance, or you like the look; whatever. Litespeed has a stellar reputation, by the way. You can't go wrong with them.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

It is great stuff. Do it if you want.

Tons of artisan and production houses out there that'll make you a great frameset.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

All I can say is my Ti bike is way better in every way but weight than the carbon wonder bike I replaced with it. And my carbon bike was really highly rated by Tour magazine (which is supposedly objective not fluff).

How much of the reason for that is material or geometry and handling to my specifications and body weight (custom) vs designed for a hypothetical rider (stock) I have no idea but I suspect a lot.

Either way don't listen to bike shop guy. Frame that fits and handles as you want is the way to go. Material is secondary to that.


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

I own a Ti and a carbon bike and both are great rides. As Jay stated, its a lot about fit. However, what I appreciate most about my Ti bike is its durability, it takes a beating and keeps on ticking. Carbon frames can be repaired also but its more of a hassle. Newer carbon endurance frames/designs like the Domane ride as comfortable as Ti and may be a smidgen more efficient-compliant and a little lighter. There are some great bikes out there today and its always fun to shop for a new ride.. Let us know what you end up buying..


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

have both Ti and carbon bikes.

if I had to get rid of one, it wouldn't be the Ti...


----------



## Waspinator (Jul 5, 2013)

I just purchased a Litespeed T1SL disc (which I'll be building up shortly).

Let me tell you that a quality titanium frame is truly a work of art to behold. And in Litespeed's case, this is even more true. This T1SL frame is impressive. I don't think Seven or Lynskey could make one like it. Unlike most titanium manufacturers who use either straight gauge or internally butted round tubes, Litespeed manages to make swaged and tapered tubes in the main triangle that probably add a lot of stiffness. They clearly have a lot of experience working with titanium. Need I say that their welds are also perfect?

Go ahead. Indulge in a titanium frame. I think you'll find it to be worth it.


----------



## mik_git (Jul 27, 2012)

Oh comon, the t1sl is a lovely bike and I hope it gives you years of great service...but my Ti frame has tapered and swaged tubing (well one)...and it's from 1996, that sort of stuff isnt exactly cutting edge...


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

n2deep said:


> I own a Ti and a carbon bike and both are great rides. As Jay stated, its a lot about fit. However, what I appreciate most about my Ti bike is its durability, it takes a beating and keeps on ticking. Carbon frames can be repaired also but its more of a hassle. Newer carbon endurance frames/designs like the Domane ride as comfortable as Ti and may be a smidgen more efficient-compliant and a little lighter. There are some great bikes out there today and its always fun to shop for a new ride.. Let us know what you end up buying..


Repairing carbon is probably consistently easier and cheaper than repairing 3-2.5, and definitely easier/cheaper than 6-4. If I had very specific geometry needs, I would consider titanium, but then again Bastion now exists and they can build me a custom lugged ti/carbon frame exactly how I want it, stiffness/compliance and all.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

ceugene said:


> but then again Bastion *now exists* and they can build me a custom *lugged ti/carbon* frame exactly how I want it, stiffness/compliance and all.


Nothing wrong with that but I'm not sure why you're implying that's some new option. Lugged ti/cabon has been available from other builders for years now.


----------



## Waspinator (Jul 5, 2013)

mik_git said:


> Oh comon, the t1sl is a lovely bike and I hope it gives you years of great service...but my Ti frame has tapered and swaged tubing (well one)...and it's from 1996, that sort of stuff isnt exactly cutting edge...


Most Ti frames use straight tubes. I'm not saying it's new technology (as they've been swaying aluminum tubes for decades now), but manipulating titanium tubing is different and you want a company doing it that has lots of experience working with ti. That's Litespeed and Seven. Maybe Merlin.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Waspinator said:


> Most Ti frames use straight tubes. I'm not saying it's new technology (as they've been swaying aluminum tubes for decades now), but manipulating titanium tubing is different and you want a company doing it that has lots of experience working with ti. That's Litespeed and Seven. Maybe Merlin.


It's not the 90's. Litespeed isn't 'that' Litespeed anymore. It's just the name. Lynsky is all the experience that was litespeed.
Does Merlin makes bike still? That name isn't what it was either. Last I knew they were supplying tubes and fabricating for others.


----------



## mik_git (Jul 27, 2012)

Waspinator said:


> Most Ti frames use straight tubes. I'm not saying it's new technology (as they've been swaying aluminum tubes for decades now), but manipulating titanium tubing is different and you want a company doing it that has lots of experience working with ti. That's Litespeed and Seven. * Maybe Merlin*.


Merlin, you're joking right? Merlin of today, arn't the same as Merlin from before, Same name/company, completely different setup...Competitive cyclist own the name and farm the frame building to someone else, was Form cycles before they went bust,not sure who now.

I'd like a Litespeed, they still do it for me and if I wanted an off the shelf frame, they'd be high on my list, and I think after the last couple of years they've gotten over their terrible rep they had for ages after Lynsky sold the company to ABG (who also used to own Merlin).

But yeah Merlin don't make frames, they just farm out and don't do any manipulation. Seven also only do butting.
But all these smaller companies, just becasue they are smaller or new, doesn't mean they don't have years of experience, quite a few re ex-insert big company here- employees.

But just because Litespeed do funky tubing and others don't/can't and then raving about it like it's amazing, that just reading the catalog blurb and believing it hook line and sinker, just like saying carbon, its the best, very thing else is out of date old schools crapola


----------



## Hellgate64 (Aug 7, 2017)

Ti bikes are awesome. 

Look into Davidson in Seattle. My Ti roadbike is 14 years old, tens of thousands of miles, and performs like new with a fresh SR group and Shamal wheels this year.

Comes in at 16.33 lbs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------



## fast ferd (Jan 30, 2009)

Another owner of Ti ('94 Merlin Extralight) and CF (Cannondale Supersix Evo '15) here.
My Merlin will last forever. Solid beast. As others mentioned, it won't win the weight or stiffness contest, but that hardly affects me on rides. The Cannondale gives me an advantage on climbs, but most of that benefit comes from lighter components. Spec'd equally, the Merlin only gives away about two pounds. Both match each other in ride and handling, although the 'Dale has a substantial advantage in out-of-saddle uphill sprints. (How often do we do that? lol)
So, yeah, if somebody gave me a choice of which bike to keep, it would be the Merlin after a long three seconds of consideration. :idea:


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

mik_git said:


> Oh comon, the t1sl is a lovely bike and I hope it gives you years of great service...but my Ti frame has tapered and swaged tubing (well one)...and it's from 1996, that sort of stuff isnt exactly cutting edge...


You beat me to it -- My 1999 Litespeed Ultimate (built by Litespeed when Lynskey owned it) has tapered, butted cold worked tubes with a bladed 6/4 down tube. Cutting edge stuff ... maybe 20 years ago. The fact is, there haven't really been much new in titanium bikes in a long time. My wife's Lynskey 350 has helix shaped seat stays (try saying that three times real fast). Litespeed isn't doing anything that a number of manufacturers can't do. And most of that stuff probably doesn't make the bike ride any better than just a simple frame made of straight gauge tubes like what seven does. I think their bikes look classy.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

As someone who owns multiple Ti and carbon frames, I can appreciate both. You can't beat Ti for durability and it has a certain level of vibration damping that provides a really great road feel. However, there is only so much manipulation that can be done to it to control stiffness and compliance. 

Where carbon shines is in its ability to be manipulated to produce both lateral stiffness for efficiency and vertical compliance for comfort, all with lower weight than any other material. From a purely performance standpoint, it is unquestionably superior _if it's used to it's full potential._ 

That said, there are some mediocre carbon frames out there that are not much lighter or better performing than Ti or Al. There are also plenty of Ti frames that are nothing special, either. 

If I was forced to choose only one road frameset to last me for the foreseeable future, it would be high-end Ti, more for it's durability than anything else. Fortunately, I don't have that restriction. Currently, I ride carbon on the road and for 'cross/gravel, with a Ti hardtail MTB for the stuff that the 'cross/gravel bike can't handle and where durability is more important than weight. I love the performance of the carbon road bikes and I can't see myself going back to metal. Ti is a consideration for 'cross/gravel, but _for the riding I do_, the increased durability isn't enough to convince me that the weight penalty is worth it. 

The bottom line is that considering that you're looking at a quality Ti frame and perhaps comparable carbon, you're not likely to be unhappy either way. Buy whatever makes you smile the most, then ride the heck out of it.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

Waspinator said:


> I don't think Seven or Lynskey could make one like it. Unlike most titanium manufacturers who use either straight gauge or internally butted round tubes, Litespeed manages to make swaged and tapered tubes in the main triangle that probably add a lot of stiffness.


This may well be what you think, but that doesn't make it true. A little history might be in order: Litespeed was founded by the Lynskey family, and when they sold it, they signed a 5 year non-compete agreement. But Lynskey are the Ti experts, and when those 5 years expired, they re-entered the bike business with all of that expertise intact. You are simply wrong/misinformed.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

Oxtox said:


> have both Ti and carbon bikes.
> 
> if I had to get rid of one, it wouldn't be the Ti...


same here. I have sold alloy, steel and carbon frames but my 10 year old titan frame will be with me for another 20 or more.


----------



## jodybaker (Oct 31, 2007)

I'm riding a carbon Bianchi Oltre road bike and a Ti foundry Overland gravel bike with carbon fork. Very different rides that perform very differently and work well for different things. Geometry is certainly a consideration: the Oltre is aggressive and nimble, the gravel grinder is slacker higher stack height, and easier to handle. 

Geometry aside, though, the Carbon is stiffer feels more efficient, it delivers power and it sure feels faster. Great for long climbs on good pavement and great for short bursts of power. Carbon inspires me to hammer out of the saddle. It's a PR machine. But carbon did not handle my longish, daily commute through a west coast winter and I ended up having to replace the carbon frame with a warranty replacement. So I got the Ti because I needed a bike to handle the daily grind in the rain and slush, potholes etc. The Ti is more compliant, less harsh and handles speed bumps, bad pavement and bad weather. It takes on whatever I throw at it and dirt and black road sludge cleans up easily with a rag. The Ti will last forever and dings and paint scratches don't matter in the long run. It's just patina. But Ti does feel slower, less stiff and does not respond to wattage input like carbon does. But by god it's comfortable and secure and I could ride Ti all day long. 

Having ridden both, if I could only have one bike, I'd keep the Ti simply because it's more versatile. But I would have to accept the fact that I won't be getting any more PRs on the local roads. 

If you are a PR hunter, go with carbon. If you want comfort and reliability go with Ti. I'd take the carbon on a fondo but I'd take the Ti on a daily commute in winter. I'd want the carbon for sunny rides with a faster group and Ti for all day easy-going family fun rides on trails. 

Much of this is simply about how the bikes feel. If I look at actual the numbers, the Ti is not that far behind.


----------



## Steve B. (Jun 26, 2004)

The builder is crucial

I went to Ti in 2000, as a warranty replacement for a busted Klein. Trek now owned them as well as Lemond and offered me a Victoire. I figured WTH, titanium lasts forever

Except it was a noodle in the bottom bracket. I had to go to Campy shifters, with greater trim ability on the front derailer, to stop the rubbing. I'm a big and heavy guy as BTW

Then I found out that you really need to be good at painting titanium or it'll rub off and Trek/Lemond sucked at painting titanium. After the 2nd (and warranty) paint job flaked off, I opted to get it locally painted, as Trek said no to a second paint. 

Then the crack developed along the down tube next to the right cable stop. And of course Trek said no to a warranty as I had had the bike painted locally. 

Meanwhile I've been thru 2 carbon in 8 years, no issues, ride great, no flex in the b-bracket, no paint flaking. These are not Trek's as BTW.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

Just before TST closed they made me the nicest titanium frame I have ever seen. They had their titanium version of MAX top and down tubes. Squarish at one end ovalised and flared at the other. Those guys had the tooling and know how to form titanium better than anyone. 

Ti is a pain to form and too many smaller builders do not have the means to swage or shape tubing for its maximum potential. There are industrial machines that bend tubes precisely but cost hundreds of thousands for example. 


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

lovin my Lynskey. Got it to solve my problems with my S works tarmac . which was a total noodle when out of the saddle (ok it was 2007 model) . The Lynskey is so stiff in most ways, which seems counterintuitive I know - probably not as stiff as a new SWorks. more stiff as in solid, less plastic-whippy. the dropouts and bridge detailing is beautiful. And I had it custom made with breakaway couplers so it travels as regular luggage not oversize


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

Tajue17 said:


> I've been on my butt for a few years and there's a nice litespeed calling my name,,, bike store gentleman says no way carbon is the way to guy now!
> 
> I just love the looks of those titanium bikes, I'm oldschool though..


Simple. Lots of nice titanium bikes being made today. Weight penalty is minimal and the frames are less prone to scratches and blemishes. If you want anything custom or a bottom bracket that isn't prone to sounding like a cheap wind up toy aka creak this is also a benefit since the space is full of quality custom builders. 

There are good carbon bikes too. I love my Colnago. There are both good and bad Carbon and Titanium bikes being made today. What i object to is this notion that Carbon is the future and Titanium the past. Just examine your requirements and build a bike that meets those requirements.

Side bar comment, if you travel with a bike, Titanium is makes a great deal of sense, since no matter how well you wrap and try to protect your carbon frame scratches etc are almost unavoidable at some point.


----------



## Waspinator (Jul 5, 2013)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> Just before TST closed they made me the nicest titanium frame I have ever seen. They had their titanium version of MAX top and down tubes. Squarish at one end ovalised and flared at the other. Those guys had the tooling and know how to form titanium better than anyone.
> 
> Ti is a pain to form and too many smaller builders do not have the means to swage or shape tubing for its maximum potential. There are industrial machines that bend tubes precisely but cost hundreds of thousands for example. 


That's exactly why I bought a Litespeed T1SL disc. All of these Ti manufacturers can weld titanium. What separates a company like Litespeed is its superior resources and equipment to shape titanium tubes.


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Steve B. said:


> The builder is crucial
> 
> I went to Ti in 2000, as a warranty replacement for a busted Klein. Trek now owned them as well as Lemond and offered me a Victoire. I figured WTH, titanium lasts forever
> 
> ...


The builder is crucial based on what someone said already on this post. Machinery to shape the tubes is the key. 
Old Ti bikes lacked stiffness because there was no tube butting and no tube shaping. 
Back in the early 2000s there was not the butting and improved welding conditions that we have now days. 
Litespeed and lynskey are leading the industry in Ti tubing butting. Just take a look at the T1SL top tube and the pro 29 mountain or the R460 with the helix tubing. By just looking at it you are like WOW. The tubes are heavily modded. Diamond shape, helix shape and triangular shape. And you can't even see the welds along the tubes. Amazing. I Own the lynskey pro29 2016 and The litespeed T1 2015. 
I am seeing a lot of manufacturers doing Ti now. It is emerging again. But the small custom builders don't have the machinery to do what lynskey and litespeed do with the tubing. Therefore the top end stiff racing bike is not available from them. 
My litespeed T1 2015 weights 15.8 lbs with sram red crankset and 16lbs with DA crankset. I'm running etap which is not the lightest and an ultegra chain cassette. 
I think this is light enough for my goals. I can make it lighter by changing the seatpost to carbon but I like my Ti seatpost. I still haven't seen many carbon bikes at that weight in my area for a medium size frame. 
It is also plenty stiff. Carbon level stiff. The BB is where it could be stiffer but the cockpit is rock solid. 
I am done with carbon since I don't see the value on something that breaks after hard use. If you are less than 180lbs ride less than 250 mpweek and don't race, get a carbon bike. If either doesn't apply and you like carbon.it will break eventually. Cracked 3 myself and many of my pro friends go thru them at 2-3 frames per season. Crashes and hard use will take care of it. 
Ti is for the practical person. It is expensive when compared to carbon on a one to one case. But when you are
Going thru 2 cracked frames every other racing season that puts you at a frame per year. Do the math and in 4 seasons you already paid for the 4K Ti frame(T1SL) or the lynskey R460. 
For me it's worth it. I always had a spare frame because it was warranted I was going to use it when I would send the frame for repairs or to the warranty. 






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

You've made some pretty sweeping statements that need to be prefaced with "If you are racing...". Much of what you is simply not true otherwise.

The truth is that for a non-racer who's not likely to be crashing and damaging equipment, carbon fiber frames will last indefinitely. It really doesn't matter what you weigh (within reason) or how much you ride, as carbon fiber does not fatigue in normal use. It is also readily repairable, though like Ti, it needs to be done by a specialist to insure reliable results. 

My own carbon road frames are 7 years old and I know people who are still riding carbon frames that were built in the '90's. I fully expect that my frames will last as long as the Ti frames I rode prior to getting them, which I used for 13 seasons. My first carbon 'cross bike is still going strong after 7 years (one of which was under former pro Ted King, who I bought it from), despite several crashes. 

Carbon frames that are properly engineered for their intended use are neither fragile nor disposable, contrary to your assertions.


----------



## Keezx (Jun 6, 2017)

What shape....round is good enough for me.
My China XACD made custom frame costet me 800 bucks incl. bank+shipping and was by far the cheapest option for a custom made frame, why should I get alu or steel when I can get titanium for less?
It's not the stiffest, nor the lightest but I love it, would'nt like to trade it for ANY carbon stuff.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

Sure, if you're not looking for state-of-the-art frames, there are a lot of relatively inexpensive, good quality Ti frames out there. Kinesis builds Ti frames for several brands, some which are available consumer direct. For example, my Ti hardtail is a Kinesis-built Motobecane from BikesDirect.com. Frankly, all a hardtail needs is to have the proper geometry for good handling, good alignment, quality construction and be stiff and durable, so an expensive frame wouldn't make much difference for bouncing around in the woods. If I was looking for a road frame, I'd be more picky, as the nuances of the ride and handling are much more evident on the road. Still, if I was in the market for a more utilitarian bike, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a road frame from one of the consumer-direct brands and save a bundle.


----------



## Keezx (Jun 6, 2017)

Completely agree, maybe with 1 remark: painted frames always start to look a bit shabby after a couple of years while titanium frames can look brand new after 5 years with an occasional wipe with a wet cloth.
Nice for users like who don't care much about maintaining paint like me.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

Bnystrom said:


> Sure, if you're not looking for state-of-the-art frames, there are a lot of relatively inexpensive, good quality Ti frames out there. Kinesis builds Ti frames for several brands, some which are available consumer direct. For example, my Ti hardtail is a Kinesis-built Motobecane from BikesDirect.com. Frankly, all a hardtail needs is to have the proper geometry for good handling, good alignment, quality construction and be stiff and durable, so an expensive frame wouldn't make much difference for bouncing around in the woods. If I was looking for a road frame, I'd be more picky, as the nuances of the ride and handling are much more evident on the road. Still, if I was in the market for a more utilitarian bike, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a road frame from one of the consumer-direct brands and save a bundle.


actually Lynskey seems to be in such a state they are dumping their state of the art frames at perplexingly low prices, from time to time. some on eBay, some specific models on their website etc.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

my view is these should be life-time frames and the extra money a properly done Seven , Firefly or Mossaic amortized over say a five, ten or fifteen year time horizon is minimal. Too often when we attempt to save money, we wind up regretting it and buying the same thing twice. A cycling friend went Bikes Direct Ti, he said the frame was OK, but over time as his cycling improved and his speeds accelerated he found the shortcomings harder and harder to deal with and wound up buying a new frame. He kept the bike all of two years.



Bnystrom said:


> Sure, if you're not looking for state-of-the-art frames, there are a lot of relatively inexpensive, good quality Ti frames out there. Kinesis builds Ti frames for several brands, some which are available consumer direct. For example, my Ti hardtail is a Kinesis-built Motobecane from BikesDirect.com. Frankly, all a hardtail needs is to have the proper geometry for good handling, good alignment, quality construction and be stiff and durable, so an expensive frame wouldn't make much difference for bouncing around in the woods. If I was looking for a road frame, I'd be more picky, as the nuances of the ride and handling are much more evident on the road. Still, if I was in the market for a more utilitarian bike, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a road frame from one of the consumer-direct brands and save a bundle.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

That all sounds fine on paper, but the truth is that beginner riders don't know what they need, how much they're going to ride or what they're going to end up doing. Their position changes as they progress as well, so buying an expensive custom frame right out of the gate may end up being an expensive mistake. You need to get some significant miles under your wheels before a custom bike makes sense.

In many cases, a custom bike _never_ really makes _economic _sense, since most people fit fine on stock size frames. There is enough variation between manufacturers sizing that the majority of riders can find an ideal fit. I have rather out-of-the norm proportions (long arms and legs, short torso for my height), but I still find stock bikes that fit me fine. I know what frame dimensions I need and can tell if a bike will fit by looking at the numbers. From a quality and engineering standpoint, frames from the larger Ti vendors are every bit as good as from custom builders and they have tube forming capabilities that the custom builders can only dream about. 

With custom frames, you're often paying for _exclusivity _more than anything else. To me, that's a waste of money, but to some people it matters. 

If you really have unusual proportions, have physical limitations, are really heavy or light for your height or have very specific needs/desires for your bike, _then _custom is the best way to get what you need. 

The prices that Bikes Direct charges are about what you'd pay for the groupo, wheels and finishing kit from other companies, so the frames are nearly free. It actually makes good economic sense to start out with one of their top-end bikes with a nice component package, with the intent of purchasing a higher quality frame once you know what you need/want, then transferring the component group. Sell the old frameset cheap, or keep it around in case you need it as a temporary crash replacement or build it up as second bike. You really don's lose anything that way. If it turns out that you don't ride as much as you thought you would or you don't need anything better, you're not out a lot of money for a custom frame.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

Bnystrom said:


> That all sounds fine on paper, but the truth is that beginner riders don't know what they need, how much they're going to ride or what they're going to end up doing. Their position changes as they progress as well, so buying an expensive custom frame right out of the gate may end up being an expensive mistake. You need to get some significant miles under your wheels before a custom bike makes sense.
> 
> In many cases, a custom bike _never_ really makes _economic _sense, since most people fit fine on stock size frames. There is enough variation between manufacturers sizing that the majority of riders can find an ideal fit. I have rather out-of-the norm proportions (long arms and legs, short torso for my height), but I still find stock bikes that fit me fine. I know what frame dimensions I need and can tell if a bike will fit by looking at the numbers. From a quality and engineering standpoint, frames from the larger Ti vendors are every bit as good as from custom builders and they have tube forming capabilities that the custom builders can only dream about.
> 
> ...


With a Seven or a Firefly, custom is pretty much a freebie since that's how they do them. You're not really paying extra. I can agree that not everyone needs custom and my C-59 is a great example, but if I was doing a new Ti bike it would be custom and that might mean keeping the cables exposed or kept inside the frame, building in a pump peg, or simply matching the C-59 geometry. Why not?


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Bnystrom said:


> That all sounds fine on paper, but the truth is that beginner riders don't know what they need, how much they're going to ride or what they're going to end up doing. Their position changes as they progress as well, so buying an expensive custom frame right out of the gate may end up being an expensive mistake. You need to get some significant miles under your wheels before a custom bike makes sense.
> 
> In many cases, a custom bike _never_ really makes _economic _sense, since most people fit fine on stock size frames. There is enough variation between manufacturers sizing that the majority of riders can find an ideal fit. I have rather out-of-the norm proportions (long arms and legs, short torso for my height), but I still find stock bikes that fit me fine. I know what frame dimensions I need and can tell if a bike will fit by looking at the numbers. From a quality and engineering standpoint, frames from the larger Ti vendors are every bit as good as from custom builders and they have tube forming capabilities that the custom builders can only dream about.
> 
> ...


I agree that going cheap is a good idea for a beginner so they can learn what they really want before going all-in. But the thread is about Ti and getting a cheap Ti frame is still expensive compared to alloy or sometimes steel. So your point here is kind of out of context in a thread about ti frames. 

Also, there is a heck of a lot more than size to a custom frame. Yes, most normal people can fit a stock frame no problem. But when you factor in handling characteristics, body weight if +- average and how that impacts tube selection thus ride, tire clearance, brake type, internal vs external routing, rack & fender mounts or not, BB type, and color, it can be hard for the person who knows exactly what they want to find it off the shelf without compromise.

Economic sense or not getting exactly what you want has value that some people find worth paying for. We're talking about cycling as a hobby here for fun, if it were just about economic sense then finding a different hobby would be the way to go.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

Yep, if we're talking beginner frame, that pretty much rules out Ti, might as well go aluminum or entry level carbon at that point.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

Sure, if the pricing is similar and the other features are the same, what the heck. However, I wonder if they can truly compete on an engineering level with Lightspeed and Lynskey, who have much greater capabilities to form tubes. In terms of welding quality, there's no difference among the top builders, regardless of size. 

Seven really doesn't impress me; they just seem like horribly overpriced, pedestrian-looking 3/2.5 frames. The frames with Ti lugs with round carbon tubes are nothing special, either. They seem to be the quintessential "dentist's bike", catering primarily to wealthy people for whom exclusivity and perceived "status" are the prime considerations. Considering that you could have a nicely appointed _complete bike_ from Lynskey or Lightspeed for the same price as a Seven frameset, I just don't see the value. If you need a custom frame, there are alternatives that offer much better value.

With Firefly, "custom" may be included, but their prices are still rather high (though better than Seven), especially when you get into adding options, so unless you really need the custom build, I don't see a lot of value there. I have to admit that I really like the finish options on Firefly frames, though I wonder how they hold up long term. Regular brushed Ti may not be particularly pretty, but you can maintain it forever with nothing more than a Scotchbrite pad, and I'm a "form follows function" kind of guy.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

Bnystrom said:


> Sure, if the pricing is similar and the other features are the same, what the heck. However, I wonder if they can truly compete on an engineering level with Lightspeed and Lynskey, who have much greater capabilities to form tubes. In terms of welding quality, there's no difference among the top builders, regardless of size.
> 
> Seven really doesn't impress me; they just seem like horribly overpriced, pedestrian-looking 3/2.5 frames. The frames with Ti lugs with round carbon tubes are nothing special, either. They seem to be the quintessential "dentist's bike", catering primarily to wealthy people for whom exclusivity and perceived "status" are the prime considerations. Considering that you could have a nicely appointed _complete bike_ from Lynskey or Lightspeed for the same price as a Seven frameset, I just don't see the value. If you need a custom frame, there are alternatives that offer much better value.
> 
> With Firefly, "custom" may be included, but their prices are still rather high (though better than Seven), especially when you get into adding options, so unless you really need the custom build, I don't see a lot of value there. I have to admit that I really like the finish options on Firefly frames, though I wonder how they hold up long term. Regular brushed Ti may not be particularly pretty, but you can maintain it forever with nothing more than a Scotchbrite pad, and I'm a "form follows function" kind of guy.


That's a first. The only thing they don't do is anodizing. They're quick, professional an d have one of the largest databases of fits anywhere. High quality outfit, maybe one of the best. But they are large and don't interact with the customer in the same way a three man shop would. Lots of smaller Ti builders use them for all or part of their own process


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Bnystrom said:


> Sure, if the pricing is similar and the other features are the same, what the heck. However, I wonder if they can truly compete on an engineering level with Lightspeed and Lynskey, who have much greater capabilities to form tubes. In terms of welding quality, there's no difference among the top builders, regardless of size.
> 
> Seven really doesn't impress me; they just seem like horribly overpriced, pedestrian-looking 3/2.5 frames. The frames with Ti lugs with round carbon tubes are nothing special, either. They seem to be the quintessential "dentist's bike", catering primarily to wealthy people for whom exclusivity and perceived "status" are the prime considerations. Considering that you could have a nicely appointed _complete bike_ from Lynskey or Lightspeed for the same price as a Seven frameset, I just don't see the value. If you need a custom frame, there are alternatives that offer much better value.
> 
> With Firefly, "custom" may be included, but their prices are still rather high (though better than Seven), especially when you get into adding options, so unless you really need the custom build, I don't see a lot of value there. I have to admit that I really like the finish options on Firefly frames, though I wonder how they hold up long term. Regular brushed Ti may not be particularly pretty, but you can maintain it forever with nothing more than a Scotchbrite pad, and I'm a "form follows function" kind of guy.


yeah, $4,000 for a stock size gimmick tubing frame make a ton of sense compared to Seven or FF.

And if you're going to comment on price perhaps you should learn what they are first. Seven is actually quite a bit cheaper than similar frames from other makers. For example the Axiom SL which is in the category of FF's road frame is about $600 cheaper. Yet you say it's more expensive. Let's not let any facts get in the way of internet BS slinging though.
And cheaper than lightspeed. But if a gimmick top tube and no choice on geo and features is worth $400 to you then by all means......


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

https://www.sevencycles.com/bikes/bike-detail.php?model=axiom-sl
https://www.sevencycles.com/pricing/pricing.php?model=axiom-sl


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Trek_5200 said:


> https://www.sevencycles.com/bikes/bike-detail.php?model=axiom-sl
> https://www.sevencycles.com/pricing/pricing.php?model=axiom-sl


Do they list frame price there? I didn't see it. It was $3600 last I know which was last November. $4,000 to $4,200 is the going rate for like quality from most others.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

I've never shopped Seven. _ I wasn't aware you could buy simply a frame. Not saying you cannot, just never seen it advertised._


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Trek_5200 said:


> I've never shopped Seven. _ I wasn't aware you could buy simply a frame. Not saying you cannot, just never seen it advertised._


They definitely sell just frame.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

Trek_5200 said:


> But they are large and don't interact with the customer in the same way a* three man shop* would.


That's two men too many. I like knowing the guy I had a face to face chat with was the guy who selected, cut, mitred and welded all the tubes on my bike. He than finished the frame and put it in a box to send to me. He gave me exactly what I asked for.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

Jay Strongbow said:


> Do they list frame price there? I didn't see it. It was $3600 last I know which was last November. $4,000 to $4,200 is the going rate for like quality from most others.


My mistake, I just saw "Prices starting at $5880" and assumed that's what they're asking for a frameset.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

Jay Strongbow said:


> I agree that going cheap is a good idea for a beginner so they can learn what they really want before going all-in. But the thread is about Ti and getting a cheap Ti frame is still expensive compared to alloy or sometimes steel. So your point here is kind of out of context in a thread about ti frames.


Fair enough. 



> Also, there is a heck of a lot more than size to a custom frame. Yes, most normal people can fit a stock frame no problem. But when you factor in handling characteristics, body weight if +- average and how that impacts tube selection thus ride, tire clearance, brake type, internal vs external routing, rack & fender mounts or not, BB type, and color, it can be hard for the person who knows exactly what they want to find it off the shelf without compromise.


I said that above, if you go back and read it. 



> Economic sense or not getting exactly what you want has value that some people find worth paying for. We're talking about cycling as a hobby here for fun, if it were just about economic sense then finding a different hobby would be the way to go.


I'm talking about economic sense within the context of buying a bike, as in getting the best value for your money. The assumption is that everyone here wants to be a cyclist and that the decision in question is what to buy, not whether to ride or not.


----------



## Hiro11 (Dec 18, 2010)

Big caveat, here are things I don't personally care about / don't like:
1. Weight below 1.5Kg for a frame
2. Extreme stiffness for racing (Ti frames can be plenty stiff, but I weigh 150 lbs and don't sprint for crit wins)
3. Aero styling/sculpting
4. Internal cabling
5. Cool integrated brakes, non-round seatposts, integrated stem/bars/spacers/steerer

Things I do like:
1. Reliability and lack of stress about bike parts
2. Simplicity: external cabling, standardized parts, threaded BBs etc.

With that in mind, the *pros of Ti as I see it:*
1. If they're made properly, Ti frames are almost as tough (toughness = resistance to dings/denting/snapping) as steel frames but a fair bit lighter. Ti is tougher than aluminum or carbon in most cases. If a bike with a Ti frame falls over, you can feel confident that nothing will happen. 
2. Won't rust or corrode, ever.
3. Understated unpainted aesthetics. Scratches (it's hard to scratch Ti) on brushed finishes can be fixed with ScotchBrite.
4. Easier to work on for a home mechanic than carbon as threaded BBs are more likely and the material is more resistant to clamping forces.

*Drawbacks to Ti in my opinion:*
1. It's hard to find good, inexpensive options. There are a lot of great carbon, steel and aluminum options these days that are cheaper.

With the above, YMMV. For my uses, Ti and steel are the best materials. The cliche is that a Ti frame is a "forever frame", in my experience that's accurate.

Side ntoe: I believe Motobecane's Ti frames are made by ORA engineering, not Kinesis as stated above.


----------



## ceugene (Jun 20, 2015)

Ti plus anodic metals and moisture will definitely cause visible galvanic corrosion. Uncoated Ti will also still oxidize slightly on the surface, which isn't a bad thing.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

Hiro11 said:


> Side ntoe: I believe Motobecane's Ti frames are made by ORA engineering, not Kinesis as stated above.


Perhaps some are or were, but my Ti hardtail MTB has a Kinesis sticker on it and IIRC, my aluminum fat bike frame does, too. Perhaps their road frames are made elsewhere, or if you've heard this recently, perhaps they've changed suppliers. My bikes are both a couple of years old.

BTW, you're forgetting one very important option for finding the bike you want, *the used market*. "Forever frames" are often available used in great condition and as you pointed out, the surface finish can be quickly and easily restored to make it look like new.

One more quick point, a really light Ti frame is likely to have some flex to it, so don't automatically reject those models when searching.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

ceugene said:


> Ti plus anodic metals and moisture will definitely cause visible galvanic corrosion.


I've never seen a hint of corrosion on a 3/2.5 or 6/4 Ti frame with either carbon fiber, steel or aluminum seatposts, bolts and what have you. I haven't heard of it happening with CP Ti, but I have no personal experience with it. The only caveat I'm aware of is that using a Ti seatpost and frame made of the same alloy can result in galling. 



> Uncoated Ti will also still oxidize slightly on the surface, which isn't a bad thing.


With 3/2.5 and 6/4 frames, all I've ever seen is a _very _slight dulling of the surface. You don't even notice it unless you brush the surface with Scotchbrite and even then, it's barely noticeable. I do recall that CP frames like the old Teledyne Titan had a distinctly gray cast to them, but I haven't seen any modern CP frames. Perhaps no one uses it anymore, since the other alloys are superior for bicycle applications.


----------



## Waspinator (Jul 5, 2013)

Bnystrom said:


> Perhaps some are or were, but my Ti hardtail MTB has a Kinesis sticker on it and IIRC, my aluminum fat bike frame does, too. Perhaps their road frames are made elsewhere, or if you've heard this recently, perhaps they've changed suppliers. My bikes are both a couple of years old.
> 
> BTW, you're forgetting one very important option for finding the bike you want, *the used market*. "Forever frames" are often available used in great condition and as you pointed out, the surface finish can be quickly and easily restored to make it look like new.
> 
> One more quick point, a really light Ti frame is likely to have some flex to it, so don't automatically reject those models when searching.


A really light titanium frame is likely to have some flex if it's not built to be stiff, or if the rider is too heavy.


----------



## Tajue17 (Mar 31, 2011)

awesome,,, thanks everyone for the reading on the Titanium's.


----------



## charlitin (Oct 2, 2011)

Tajue17 said:


> awesome,,, thanks everyone for the reading on the Titanium's.


So did you get one? What did you get?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## '02 nrs (Mar 11, 2004)

*ti 1974;*

solid to this day,teledyne Titan.


----------



## mtnbikerva1 (Jan 30, 2009)

Peter P. said:


> The material is irrelevant i.e.; "carbon is the way to "guy" (go) now".
> 
> The bike store gentleman probably doesn't have any titanium bikes on the floor which is a big reason why he's advocating what he does have, carbon.
> The weight differences are meaningless once you add the rider to the equation.
> ...


I have seen some very bad Litespeed comments. Has management at Litespeed changed for the better, and offer customer service and stand behind their product now?


----------



## mik_git (Jul 27, 2012)

mtnbikerva1 said:


> I have seen some very bad Litespeed comments. Has management at Litespeed changed for the better, and offer customer service and stand behind their product now?


From what I understand, origianl owner (lynsky ithink) sold litespeed to american bike group, who also at the/over time owned quinaroo, merlin and tomac and they were doing waaay too much stuff (building mars rovers etc) and things went to poo pretty quick, but now they've unloaded merlin and tomac and seem to be doing a much better job just concentrating on litespeed and quinaroo and not much else. So don't quote me, could be wrong but they seem to have improved a lot over the last say 5 years.


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

mik_git said:


> From what I understand, origianl owner (lynsky ithink) sold litespeed to american bike group, who also at the/over time owned quinaroo, merlin and tomac and they were doing waaay too much stuff (building mars rovers etc) and things went to poo pretty quick, but now they've unloaded merlin and tomac and seem to be doing a much better job just concentrating on litespeed and quinaroo and not much else. So don't quote me, could be wrong but they seem to have improved a lot over the last say 5 years.


Lynskey sold LS to the American Bicycle Group and signed a do not compete agreement, which forbade him from getting into the bicycle business for a number of years. That agreement lapsed and he got back in. I would suspect that the people working at LS probably stayed on and still make a quality product. As far as standing behind what they make, I've read of some complaints. Of course you read complaints about Trek, Specialized, etc. 

There's at least a half dozen titanium bike manufacturers I'd chose over Litespeed, but if you find a good deal on one, or there's a dealer in your town that you like and sells LS, go for it.


----------



## BelgianHammer (Apr 10, 2012)

Don't know if this helps or not, but I've owned a Habanero Ti racing bike for some 11 years now....and I cannot tell the difference between it and a bespoke Seven that is/was supposed to be the cream de la creme of Ti. And the Haby is/was 1/5 the price of the Seven. Imho, you find someone that makes a quality and/or who has a quality Ti bike made, and stands behind their stuff, you go for it. Try to take reviews you read on the Web with a grain of salt.....very few who love their bike get on the Web and gush about it. But those who have problems with any type of bike? The Internet becomes their vocal hunting and cursing ground.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

mtnbikerva1 said:


> I have seen some very bad Litespeed comments. Has management at Litespeed changed for the better, and offer customer service and stand behind their product now?


Litespeed made some *very light* Ti frames for a few years (even with a stipulated weight limit IIRC)....which, surprise surprise, suffered bad longevity. Hence the ranting on the internet.


I think by now they learned their lesson.


Only thing about LS...they used friggin pressfit BBs. Yuck.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Someone commented that "it's not like 2007". You're right, it's not. Very few are doing as much with Titanium as was done earlier because the metal is so expensive and hard to work with. I have a late 90's Litespeed Classic that is truly an example of the cliche', "They don't make em' like they used to". Every tube except the BB shell and head tube are tapered and butted and the whole thing is polished like a mirror. It'd be a $10k frame if they tried to make it the same way today.

Helix tube shapes are a dumb gimmick. It does nothing but make the tube funny looking. Look for examples of this shape in other high performance engineering structures. You won't find it. 


"That's two men too many. I like knowing the guy I had a face to face chat with was the guy who selected, cut, mitred and welded all the tubes on my bike. He than finished the frame and put it in a box to send to me. He gave me exactly what I asked for. "

That ^ is grossly underestimating the value of trained, experienced engineers with the resources to test and prove their work, which is what the larger brands offer.




BCSaltchucker said:


> actually Lynskey seems to be in such a state they are dumping their state of the art frames at perplexingly low prices, from time to time. some on eBay, some specific models on their website etc.


And there's that...


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

davidka said:


> Someone commented that "it's not like 2007". You're right, it's not. Very few are doing as much with Titanium as was done earlier because the metal is so expensive and hard to work with. I have a late 90's Litespeed Classic that is truly an example of the cliche', "They don't make em' like they used to". Every tube except the BB shell and head tube are tapered and butted and the whole thing is polished like a mirror. It'd be a $10k frame if they tried to make it the same way today.


That's a pretty gross exaggeration. My '98 Vortex has considerably more manipulation of the tubes than a Classic and it's done on 6/4 Ti, which is much harder to work. Even with that, there's no way that a comparable frame would be anywhere near $10 today. Maybe $5-6K.



> Helix tube shapes are a dumb gimmick. It does nothing but make the tube funny looking. Look for examples of this shape in other high performance engineering structures. You won't find it.


Here's just one of many examples you can find with a quick Google search:
View attachment 322964


How that relates to bicycle frames is anyone's guess.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

The late 90’s Vortex actually has far less tube manipulation than a Classic of that era. A couple of ovalized tubes, but not much else. Great frame, but because it was 6/4, they couldn’t do as much with the material. Later frames with more shapely tubes were rolled & seam welded from sheet. The Classic, Ultimate and Some of the others had seamless, cold worked, full length tapers (think like Serotta’s Colorado steel, but Ti). That is simply no longer done on that scale. Later versions gradually lost the more expensive tubes and details like welded on F/D hangar and seat binder bosses in favor of cheaper clamps.

Moots have round tube frames @ $4,500. There are plenty of other simple build ti frames in that price range. Lynskey charges $1,000 for the polish upgrade...


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Bnystrom said:


> That's a pretty gross exaggeration. My '98 Vortex has considerably more manipulation of the tubes than a Classic and it's done on 6/4 Ti, which is much harder to work. Even with that, there's no way that a comparable frame would be anywhere near $10 today. Maybe $5-6K.


Your Vortex has considerably less tube manipulation than a Classic from the same year, because they could not do the same processes on a 6/4. There is some ovalizing of the top and down tubes. The Classic has cold worked tubes with full length tapers throughout the entire frame. 

Moots sells round tube frames for $4,500. If the had the means (and the willing customers), a full tapered, polished (a $1k option @ Lynskey) would cost every bit of $10k.


----------



## mtnbikerva1 (Jan 30, 2009)

davidka said:


> Your Vortex has considerably less tube manipulation than a Classic from the same year, because they could not do the same processes on a 6/4. There is some ovalizing of the top and down tubes. The Classic has cold worked tubes with full length tapers throughout the entire frame.
> 
> Moots sells round tube frames for $4,500. If the had the means (and the willing customers), a full tapered, polished (a $1k option @ Lynskey) would cost every bit of $10k.


Every tube on my Vortex is manipulated.


----------



## Bnystrom (Oct 27, 2007)

mtnbikerva1 said:


> Every tube on my Vortex is manipulated.


All of the important tubes on my are, too. The only exceptions are the head tube, bottom bracket, brake bridge and chainstay bridge, which don't need or benefit from manipulation. Every other tube is either ovalized or curved.


----------



## mtnbikerva1 (Jan 30, 2009)

My top tube is diamond shaped. Seat tube is 10 sided...


----------



## ruckus (Apr 1, 2014)

mtnbikerva1 said:


> My top tube is diamond shaped. Seat tube is 10 sided...


WHY?!?!?!?

Why would you have diamond shaped top tube and 10 sided seat tube?

WHY!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Forget it, there is no amount of web links you can provide that could possibly convince me diamond shaped top tube with 10 sided seat tube is a good idea.


----------

