Just read a blurb in Mountain Bike mag about Titus coming out with a titanium and carbon combo frame....has this been done yet? Anyone knows how light that might actually be?
peace,
gp
peace,
gp
Titus Ti/Carbon Frame????
- Thread starter GoatPiper
- Start date
Don't know many details, but they apparently had one at Sea Otter. The pics I saw looked very impressive.
Don't know about other mountain bikes, but, Litespeed is doing ti/carbon in road bikes. I believe the carbon is limited to the chainstay area though.
In mountain bikes Cannondale had their Raven carbon/aluminum and of course Trek has their OCLV stuff. No ti there though.
FWIW, I don't like the idea of carbon frame parts on a mountain bike. Carbon is just too susceptible to damage. Once the skin is damaged you are asking for catastrophic failure when you least expect it. If you limit your rides to a cruise down the local park or bike trail and like to stop off for an espresso they look pretty slick though. Especially if you wear team colors doing it
Seriously though, if I'm paying for the bike I prefer something with some longevity.
In mountain bikes Cannondale had their Raven carbon/aluminum and of course Trek has their OCLV stuff. No ti there though.
FWIW, I don't like the idea of carbon frame parts on a mountain bike. Carbon is just too susceptible to damage. Once the skin is damaged you are asking for catastrophic failure when you least expect it. If you limit your rides to a cruise down the local park or bike trail and like to stop off for an espresso they look pretty slick though. Especially if you wear team colors doing it
Seriously though, if I'm paying for the bike I prefer something with some longevity.
the frame isn't any sort of metal main frame, then a carbon rear, this is an entire new technology. they are using thinner, way thinner titanium tubing then using a honeycomb shaped piece of carbon fiber that they are inlaying into the tubing. now supposedly they will be able to fine tune the ride of the bike by putting in thicker pieces of carbon or butting the tubing a specific way in that part of the bike to get the ride that is wanted. the technology in itself sounds interesting but i don't think it will be such an improvement as titus is hyping it up to be.
I spoke to the Titus/Maxm people at Sea Otter and asked them a couple questions about the 'exogrid' stuff. I'll get to the juicy stuff where I asked about resistance to damage. In all the testing they've done, the carbon fiber section of the downtube has withstood much more damage than a comparable lightweight xc race frame. All of the carbon fiber they use is either in the middle of the downtube or seattube and there's plenty carbon inside whereas an aluminum frame would be butted like mad in that same spot. My main point is that if the carbon fiber fails on that bike, then an aluminum frame would have already buckled.
reflux,
Aluminum isn't susceptible to the same failure mechanisms as carbon fiber. Chipped paint on a metal frame is nothing as long as corrosion susceptibility is addressed if necessary. A chip in a typical carbon layup could result in substantial weakening of the frame and catastrophic failure in general.
If those issues are addressed that's good. It sounds as though the layup of the carbon is rather substantial compared to other company's methods.
Aluminum isn't susceptible to the same failure mechanisms as carbon fiber. Chipped paint on a metal frame is nothing as long as corrosion susceptibility is addressed if necessary. A chip in a typical carbon layup could result in substantial weakening of the frame and catastrophic failure in general.
If those issues are addressed that's good. It sounds as though the layup of the carbon is rather substantial compared to other company's methods.
But you're not comparing apples to apples. A chip in the paint on a carbon frame is no different than a chip in the paint on a metal one. It has NO effect on the strength. What you should be talking about is notch effect. In which case you're right, if a notch severes some of the fibers in the matrix is does significantly reduce the strength of that weave layer, and CAN propogate further depending on the lay-up. However, aluminum is similarly effected by stress risers, and is significantly LESS notch resistant than any epoxies I know of.
Basically, with modern decent carbon construction, anything that would cause a failure of the carbon would CRUSH a metal tube even close to the same weight. Check out the crush/notch resistance on Easton's carbon handlebars for reference.
Carbon is still more susceptible to faulty manufacture though, but if titus got around that, it could be a great frame.
Ohio,
Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say. In essence, I was comparing a paint chip in a metal frame to a gash in the carbon - not paint on a carbon frame.
I would be concerned with sharp objects striking a carbon frame since the fibers could be severed. It is difficult for me to imagine that a sharp edged object/rock that would slice carbon fiber could cause damage to a metal frame other than cosmetic damage.
Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say. In essence, I was comparing a paint chip in a metal frame to a gash in the carbon - not paint on a carbon frame.
I would be concerned with sharp objects striking a carbon frame since the fibers could be severed. It is difficult for me to imagine that a sharp edged object/rock that would slice carbon fiber could cause damage to a metal frame other than cosmetic damage.
FWIW, I don't like the idea of carbon frame parts on a mountain bike. Carbon is just too susceptible to damage. Once the skin is damaged you are asking for catastrophic failure when you least expect it.
Not necesarily. Carbon ski poles are pretty damn tough now. I've been using some carbon Life-Link poles for the last 3 or 4 seasons. And they are extremely hacked up by ski edges. The wifes been using Swix carbon ski poles too for even longer. So carbon can be done right and be tough. Put enough armor on the skin and it can be strong.
Not necesarily. Carbon ski poles are pretty damn tough now. I've been using some carbon Life-Link poles for the last 3 or 4 seasons. And they are extremely hacked up by ski edges. The wifes been using Swix carbon ski poles too for even longer. So carbon can be done right and be tough. Put enough armor on the skin and it can be strong.
part of the problem with carbon fiber on mountain bikes is that manufacturers didn't know much about it when they first started using it. i'm sure we all remember what happened to the first oclv frames from trek, they failed miserably. what about the first carbon fiber handlebars? they couldn't withstand one crash without snapping. today's carbon fiber is much stronger and failure resistant because the technology supporting it is that much better. when was the last time you saw a broken easton monkeylite handlebar? if so, how many bones did the guy break?
Well, on one bike my crank arms are carbon as is the handlebar. Came that way on the bike. It isn't my first choice of material and I won't be buying a bike frame from it. I did consider one of those OCLV frames when they first came out a few years ago, though. The next bike is a Seven Sola. You can have my share of carbon fiber frames.
Although I am fixated and obsessive about lightening stuff, I have to agree with the large number of people that as of yet carbon fibre is NOT an ideal meduim in which to build a MTB.
the real problem lies in the way carbon/carbon-composites handle certain types of stresses.
In tensile loads they are EXTREMELY strong, yet in compressive loads they are quite weak.
These restrictions can be designed around, but as of yet, I don't believe that most manufacturers have spent the considerable resources required to sufficiently analyze the structural requirements of the MTB. Sure they probably extensively utilize computational stress analysis, but I have yet to see a realistic test rig to be employed in the design of MTB frames.
This lacking of baseline requirements results in a "shot in the dark" method of design, as the engineers are only postulating what real stresses occur.
Yes, they are probably very NEAR accurate, but when using composite materials you have to be better than near.
I know and have learned this from work in open wheel racing, where composites are now the rule.
As far as impact resistance, that is VERY easily overcome, there are a number of different urethane based coatings available that would make that almost a non-issue.
Quality composite frames will come, it is only a matter of time, but I don't think they are here yet. The current designs are not offering such a significant weight savings as to warrant the increase in cost.
I would like to see manufacturers start looking towards exotic aluminum alloys that offer MUCH better flexibility and reduced man. costs.
A set of AlbuMet cranks, or some frames built of Aluminum/lithium alloys, which are far lighter and stronger than conventional aluminum frames would be an easy step up for a high line manufacturer.
the real problem lies in the way carbon/carbon-composites handle certain types of stresses.
In tensile loads they are EXTREMELY strong, yet in compressive loads they are quite weak.
These restrictions can be designed around, but as of yet, I don't believe that most manufacturers have spent the considerable resources required to sufficiently analyze the structural requirements of the MTB. Sure they probably extensively utilize computational stress analysis, but I have yet to see a realistic test rig to be employed in the design of MTB frames.
This lacking of baseline requirements results in a "shot in the dark" method of design, as the engineers are only postulating what real stresses occur.
Yes, they are probably very NEAR accurate, but when using composite materials you have to be better than near.
I know and have learned this from work in open wheel racing, where composites are now the rule.
As far as impact resistance, that is VERY easily overcome, there are a number of different urethane based coatings available that would make that almost a non-issue.
Quality composite frames will come, it is only a matter of time, but I don't think they are here yet. The current designs are not offering such a significant weight savings as to warrant the increase in cost.
I would like to see manufacturers start looking towards exotic aluminum alloys that offer MUCH better flexibility and reduced man. costs.
A set of AlbuMet cranks, or some frames built of Aluminum/lithium alloys, which are far lighter and stronger than conventional aluminum frames would be an easy step up for a high line manufacturer.
Don't tease unless you mean it!!!
I am stuck in the aviation feild right now, but I will soon be free and then I plan on R&Ding some like products.
starting with cranksets and wheel hubs.
(I am in the Military, and if you invent or develop ANYTHING while you are under contract they OWN it outright..sucks)
but if you are making some products def. let me know, I have friends in MTB product distribution in Canada.
Titus had one ot their new road frames at the Fruita Fat tire festival:
The Ti tubing was on display with and w/o the carbon inserts. It looks like they plasma-cut the top, down and seatubes with a bunch of little diamond shaped holes and the Titus logo, then bond CF to the inside of the Ti tubing. The result is CF filling in all of the holes and looking pretty damn sweet. The person I talked to said that the number of holes they cut into the frame is dependant on the size of the frame and the rider's weight. The rear triangle stays Ti - only tubing.
They had a 54cm road frame there "on sale" for $3800 and it was very light. I see it as the next bike for the cyclist that has everything.
The Ti tubing was on display with and w/o the carbon inserts. It looks like they plasma-cut the top, down and seatubes with a bunch of little diamond shaped holes and the Titus logo, then bond CF to the inside of the Ti tubing. The result is CF filling in all of the holes and looking pretty damn sweet. The person I talked to said that the number of holes they cut into the frame is dependant on the size of the frame and the rider's weight. The rear triangle stays Ti - only tubing.
They had a 54cm road frame there "on sale" for $3800 and it was very light. I see it as the next bike for the cyclist that has everything.
you have me curious, I am not too far from Boston myself, maybe I could swing by and see what you are up to??
I have a surpirising amount of knowledge concerning metalurgy, and specifically certain aluminum alloys..
yeah, and WHO do you work for??
I have a surpirising amount of knowledge concerning metalurgy, and specifically certain aluminum alloys..
yeah, and WHO do you work for??
Well, my day-job is economic consulting, but as far as the bike stuff is concerned
I work for myself. Just started up as Interlink Technologies/Stir Cycles.
My partner was a Materials Engineer at L&M, so he's got that part pretty well covered. I deal with the Mechanical/Design side.
I'd be happy to meet up in Boston for a ride or to talk shop, but all I have down here is a laptop and SolidWorks, and I'm not ready to release drawings yet. The prototypes are likely going to be built in New Hampshire, which is where my partner is right now.
Believe me, as soon as I actually have something worth showing, I definitely will. I just don't want to make claims that I can't yet support.
I work for myself. Just started up as Interlink Technologies/Stir Cycles.
My partner was a Materials Engineer at L&M, so he's got that part pretty well covered. I deal with the Mechanical/Design side.
I'd be happy to meet up in Boston for a ride or to talk shop, but all I have down here is a laptop and SolidWorks, and I'm not ready to release drawings yet. The prototypes are likely going to be built in New Hampshire, which is where my partner is right now.
Believe me, as soon as I actually have something worth showing, I definitely will. I just don't want to make claims that I can't yet support.
I was actually being facetious, I was sure that you already had that end covered.
I myself do R&D work for the Airforce
But I am interested in what approaches you may have taken, I myself have "secretly" been developing some components, not a frame though. (the secret thing is to prevent the loss of my work to the Canadian govt.).
Like you I have long felt that the bicycle industry has been desperately trying to make technological leaps and bounds, instead of steps and in doing so have to often fallen.
I am glad to see that I am not the only one in this opinion.
The greatest flaw of some manufacturers is to try to haphazardly apply technologies from other arenas, without fully understanding their viability and impact.
Everyone wants to be far too "revoloutionary".
I wish you great success in your endeavours.
I myself do R&D work for the Airforce
But I am interested in what approaches you may have taken, I myself have "secretly" been developing some components, not a frame though. (the secret thing is to prevent the loss of my work to the Canadian govt.).
Like you I have long felt that the bicycle industry has been desperately trying to make technological leaps and bounds, instead of steps and in doing so have to often fallen.
I am glad to see that I am not the only one in this opinion.
The greatest flaw of some manufacturers is to try to haphazardly apply technologies from other arenas, without fully understanding their viability and impact.
Everyone wants to be far too "revoloutionary".
I wish you great success in your endeavours.