- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
OPINION
Aluminium frames are the work of the devil
Mon, May 02, 2022 18:00
116
Aluminium bike stress testing - credit Steve ThomasMine may well have become vaguely lost in the great mist of time, but those distant memories, the harsh realisations and promises that I made to myself many years ago have come trickling back to haunt me in recent months... namely where I said I would never ride another aluminium bike frame.
> 10 of the best British bike brands of the '70s and '80s
First things first: before all the love for this great Coke can-like material comes flooding in down in the comments section, please do note that this is an opinion piece. It's based off my own many decades of experience riding bikes made from everything from bamboo to magnesium, with a whole heap of steel, titanium and aluminium thrown into the mix... oh and of course, some metal matrix too. These are my own groans aches and opinions, and I don't expect everyone to agree!
The pre-AL era
When I started riding and racing bikes in the '70s it was about steel, all about steel. From the forks right through it was all that good old hard stuff. There weren't really any other viable frame material options back then.
Sure enough the different tubing grades and builds did make for very different rides between the various combinations available, and mostly they were of the slightly forgiving kind. Thankfully in recent times there is some form of appreciation for steel coming back, and maybe even those younger riders who’ve never slung a leg over a quality steel horse will one day try one and find out why us old fellas love them so much (or at least some of us still do), even if they have drifted out of vogue.
> Southern Steel: take a trip down memory lane with these classic 20th century bike builders
Material world order
Perhaps I was lucky that I went from riding steel straight to various forms of titanium frames, and then to carbon fibre – lucky as in there were only a few fleeting encounters with the bone shacking and wrist jarring frights without the delights of aluminium bikes. Even then those that I did ride were mostly fat-tubed mountain bikes, where much of that harshness was padded out with big tyres, suspension, cross-laced wheels and slack angles.
I did have a couple of reasonable aluminium road frames back around the turn of the century, but even then I found them to be super harsh on the lower back and my wrists, which were rattled to popping point after years of pre-suspension mountain biking.
Back then, aluminium had become the de rigeur material of choice for frame building, mostly because it was so cheap and easy to get hold of and mass produce in the Far East... and yep, just about all of the major pro road teams did ride aluminium bikes for a while, although their rides were generally tempered a little by carbon forks.
Even so, many of those frames were still very harsh in my opinion, albeit that they were compliantly rigid. For me they were just too rough and not quite ready, although perhaps my opinion would be different had I been groomed on aluminium from the start.
At around about that same time, Cipollini et al were all racing around on those gorgeous, bold Cannondales. Cipo made fat aluminium look like sex on two wheels, and so when I was offered a good price for one as an end of line clear out (by friends with a bike shop) of course I jumped at the chance.
It was a dull and dark blue in colour, and so I managed to get friends in the bike industry to spray it up in bright sparkling green. I built it up with all clean and polished Campagnolo kit, and garnished it with highly polished stem and bars. It did look the dog, even with those eyesore extended rear stays.
It didn’t take long for me to start loathing the harshness of that ride, and then the lower back troubles, shoulder and wrist ache became a regular thing. It was not a bike that I could ride for hours on end, and as much as I loved the looks of that green Hulk-like beast, it just had to go.
For a while I did get through a couple more aluminium frames, things just panned out that way. One was of the same stiff ilk and was promptly sold, the other (a Diamondback) was slightly easier on the spine, but was so flimsy that on its very first outing to Mallorca, the down tube took a huge ding in the bike bag, and so it still lingers in the back of a shed somewhere.
Grand designs?
At that time I wasn’t wholly sure whether that hard ride was partly down to the frame design (the rear stays), or whether it was simply that aluminium really had not gotten much easier on my ageing body, so I decided not to compromise again on an aluminium road bike.
As luck would have it I did get hold of a couple of titanium frames just after this: a Merlin XLC compact road frame, and a Litespeed Blue Ridge 'touring' frame. This duo added a whole new level of plushness to my ride immediately, and one that had most definitely made me a titanium frame fan boy.
Times have moved on, and I’ve shifted continents. Those titanium bikes are still around and almost as sweet as ever but, just about everything from the carbon forks to the groupsets are worn out, and being based in part of Asia where anything but pure race bikes and kit are an issue to find, and where someone six foot tall is considered to be a yeti, it’s hard to get hold of viable alternatives.
I have a couple of carbon road frames around, but they don’t really suit the riding I mostly do these days: hot and rough roads (and gravel), often with climbs that make the Bwylch y Groes seem like a mill pond.
Still shaken, and stirred
This is where the evil aluminium sneaked back into my life, just like that proverbial crazy ex from hell. On a trip to the USA I managed to mail order an aluminium gravel bike of Belgian origin. Before I’d even finished assembling it I knew it was potentially a beast of back-breaking burden, and sure enough I was soon shown to be right.
I did consider selling it almost immediately, as the discomfort was just too much for me; however, there was no way of me getting an alternative, and so I’ve stuck with it... on and off that is.
Just over a year ago I did take a trip to another region with this bike (it was the only fully functioning option at the time), which was when the wrath of the second wave of the pandemic struck, leaving me stranded with nothing but this bike for company ever since.
As much as I’ve swapped out the wheels, widened the tyres and softened the saddle, it just doesn’t cut it for me in the comfort department. Okay it is a gravel bike, but the ride is so harsh that I’ve almost 90% switched to riding it on the roads now.
My back, my ribs, my shoulders and my neck have taken such a pounding in the last year, which takes me right back to the sensation of that early Cannondale. Aluminium truly is the work of Satan Cycles Inc, at least as far as I’m concerned! Sure there are those younger riders out there who can ride on razor blades, and who have never known any different. But, one day, they most probably will.
For me, as I scour and search for ways of turning aluminium into something more rideable, I do have to remind myself not to fall into the trap of buying more of the stuff simply because it’s all I can get hold of. For now I’ll stick mostly to the hard stuff and soften the tyre pressure some more, just until I can find a ride less brutal on my old body...
More Opinion
Latest Comments
- Laz 6 sec ago
hopefully, that will be the last time we see that van in drivable condition
- Nick T 1 hour 16 min ago
Come again chief? The Tarmac in size 56 has a 73.5 degree HTA, the Addict in the same size comes in at 73.4 degrees. In terms of bike fit that's...
- TheBillder 2 hours 58 min ago
My new double glazed wooden framed sash windows are £1600 plus vat per (quite large) window. House built in 1904. The cost includes fitting and...
- galibiervelo 3 hours 14 min ago
We promote #bikefriday You dont need it - go for a spin. Nice bikes and kit are lovely, but not as noice as a dawn spin this friday morning with a...
- David9694 3 hours 17 min ago
Council acting like ‘the Sheriff of Nottingham’ with parking charges...
- David9694 3 hours 21 min ago
Man taken to hospital after vehicle crashes into pub...
- David9694 3 hours 31 min ago
Car flips in Millennium Way, Sheerness, near former Aldi supermarket that reopens as Home Bargains this weekend...
- RoubaixCube 4 hours 27 sec ago
Ive been using the same £2-3 dish brush I bought from wilko, tesco or pound land for as long as I can remember. I dont understand why anyone would...
- S.E. 5 hours 35 min ago
I'm thinking CX tyres...
Add new comment
116 comments
You seem like the type of person who always right
I think two things are being mixed up here; frame flex and absorbtion. Now my secret is I have a two high end aluminium frames (Klein Quantum Race and a Pinarello Prince), two Ti Litespeeds (a Siena 3.2ALV and a Vortex 6.4ALV), a steel Gios, a Colnago C50 and a Factor 02. All have high end carbon bars, stems, and seatposts, and F:zik seats, and interchangeable wheels (3 Campag / 3 Shimano - which is irritatingly suboptimal). My alloy wheels (HED, Kinlin, and OpenPro USTs) are handbuilt, but I have a set of very stiff Shamals and an equally stiff set of (old) Boras, and a set of BlackInc 35s). All the frames are 58cm, apart from the Vortex which is a 57cm, but all are set up to ride as 61cm as I'm 6'4.
Now this is my last word on this as we're simply not going to agree, but there is a fundamental difference in how these bikes ride and the feedback you get from the roads, with the aluminium bikes giving the most feedback from the roads regardless of the wheelsets used - though they swapping them out makes a difference. I concede that modern aluminium frames using different thickness and different shaped tubes depending on their place in the frame could be more compliant and therefore comfortable, but I don't have one.
For those who don't think that frame flex is a thing...there's google. I'm out on this one.
Reading most of the discussion here, there doesn't seem to be much flexibility, nor is it particularly absorbing...
Before you drop that mic, you may want to explain how a bicycle frame has anything at all to do with the vibrations that a rider feels through their hands -- which is a large part of what most people call "feedback". Those vibrations originate at the interface between the tire and the surface being ridden on. From there, the path those vibrations follow as they rise up to the rider is: tire, rim, spoke, hub, bearing, axle, blade, crown, steerer, stem, and finally handlebar. Note in particular that the frame is not in that path. That means that in order for a frame to even be relevant to the discussion of cockpit "feedback", it must efficiently suck those vibrations out of the steerer tube through an interface of grease and bearing-balls.
So go ahead and explain how that occurs.
While you are at it, explain why that phenomenon only occurs in the frame materials, and not in those same materials when they are used to construct wheels, forks, stems, and handlebars -- all of which are made in shapes that are more conducive to deflection, when compared to double-triangle frames.
OK, I'm back
I'm not saying that components (inc tyres) don't have a dampening effect. This is why high end aluminium bikes - like my 1998 Pinarello Prince - come with carbon forks and rear stays, and we swap out the alloy bars and seatposts with carbon equivalents... I think I said in an earlier post that well made wheels have also have a capacity to absorb road vibrations. My Ti and steel bikes have carbon forks - and the Siena has carbon rear-stays.
But if you can accept that carbon components can be 'dampening', why can't you accept that carbon (steel or Ti) frames also possess these qualities? It's a contradiction - and the whole bike-manufacturing industry seems to disagree with you.
No, it's not a contradiction. First of all, as I just explained, the frame's construction is not even relevant to cockpit vibration.
Second, again, virtually all of the other components apart from the frame -- especially the tires -- will act as suspension long before the frame will, because again, the double-triangle design is extremely stout -- as it needs to be to allow a ~20 pound vehicle to carry an order of magnitude more weight.
But it's not just cockpit vibration, vibration also comes through the frame, seatpost, and seat into the lower back too - as many have complained. Look, I accept that frames are stiff and have to be, but badly or cheaply manufactured frames flex - which in the wrong places (BB) not so good, but in the right places (seat stays - because a frame isn't just a single stiff triangle) can add damping. And certain materials are more prone to resonation than others, though the shape and thickness of the tubes will also work for and against dampening road vibrations (meaning a modern aluminium frame may be more comfortable than an old steel one). That said, as carbon / resin is mouldable, well made carbon frames tend to have the best dampening qualities.
Of course, you can enhance these qualities if you invest in high quality tyres and inflate them appropriately. But if you inflate your (Vittoria) tyres to 130 - 140 psi like one of my mates, you can turn any bike into a teeth rattler...
I am breaking the problem down into sections. I think we can all agree by now that frame material is irrelevant to cockpit vibration, as I've explained. That's by-far the largest area of complaint, and we can cross it off our list.
So, moving on to the other 3 points-of-contact, we can consider the pedals, and the saddle. I personally don't think I've heard anyone complain about NVH experienced through a bicycle's pedals, so I am skipping that one, at least for now.
Basically all modern saddles are suspended on two thin rails that are constructed from steel, titanium, carbon fiber, or aluminum, and feature a suspended shell of plastic or carbon fiber, topped by some degree of padding. All of which is arranged in the optimal layout for absorbing energy transferred by the post. Speaking of the post, it is also much better at absorption than the triangles supporting it. As with all of the other components discussed so far, any modern saddle is vastly more compliant than any modern frame. So again, at risk of sounding like Tripper Harrison, the frame material just doesn't matter.
Any frame that flexes as much as you think yours do will be well-nigh unrideable and not last very long, either. Among other issues, a metal frame that flexes as much as you claim is common would work-harden and fracture in hundreds of miles. And for the record, I do own a Niner frame that was exceedingly-poorly manufactured, and that's exactly how its first life went -- until I re-welded it.
Your previous claim that every frame flexes a visible amount with half a rider's weight on one pedal remains dead-wrong. The weight required to visibly flex a frame exceeds the capacity of the tires and wheels.
The "Drouet" referred to there is Professor Jean-Marc Drouet -- an engineer and head of VÉLUS, a research group at the University of Sherbrooke in Canada that has been studying ride quality for over a decade -- and that puts all too fine a point on this frame damping nonsense.
The basic frame triangle is of course not a triangle but a quadrilateral with the head tube providing the short side, the frame is part of the system and therefore affects vibration of the head tube and consequently to some extent that experienced by the hands.
I am less interested in the frame debate than in the question do you have a partner and if so how did you get that lot past him/her?
It's a collection that pre-dates the missus by about 15 years apart from the Factor which was a lockdown treat. But she's a tolerant soul. And I can't throw stuff away, especially stuff that has Zen - and I've done a fair amount of suffering on all of them - especially the Siena.
I bought the Klein in 96, upgraded the groupset and wheels then realised I was only a frame away from a second bike - the Gios....did the same, bought the Litespeed. Got a decent bonus, bought the Colnago and the Vortex. Then got nostalgic and bought the Pinarello off eBay because Jan Ullrich had one! It'll end up being repainted in Telekom colours and will then become art, which my wife doesn't mind.
Just like my other half who lets me have three in a one-bed flat, she sounds a keeper!
Divorce would lead to a loss of half my bikes, and I won't get to keep the good ones I can tell you. They'd be on eBay in a flash!
We're in an apartment too in Canary Wharf, and I keep the one I'm riding in the spare room, the Factor in a bag under the bed in the spare room, and the rest and wheels hanging in what is basically a large storage cupboard. Not ideal. I'm working on leaving the capital and I aspire to a garage!
Divorce meant I could turn the back room of my 3 bed semi into a centrally heated bike workshop. No more shivering in the garage or losing tiny parts in the garden. If I had patio doors it would be a motorbike workshop too!
I'm with Dominic Schultz on this: "i find this article to be a non informed rant."
My 1983 Gitane (steel) is more compliant than my 2003 CAAD4 (alu), about the same as my CAAD9 (alu), maybe a bit harsher than my 2009 CAAD10 (alu) and certainly less compliant than my 2019 SuperSix Evo HM (carbon).
So, maybe my 39-year old steel bike is more compliant than my 18-year old aluminium bike, but my newer alu bikes are at least as comfortable, and I've never found any of them so uncomfortable I couldn't ride them any further. It's always my muscles that stop me. And lack of coffee.
You can move a frame's vertical/bump feel from "CAAD4" to "Tarmac" with about 10psi in tire pressure. There is no reason for an aluminum frame to be uncomfortable on average surfaces.
Is the this new helmet debate ?
As others have noted, this article is shockingly uninformed -- possibly to the point of being satire.
I will personally bet the author $100 that he cannot reliably distinguish a frame's material in a double-blind test on 30+mm wide tires running their normal pressures. I feel extremely confident he couldn't do it on any tires, but I'm willing to bet that on fairly typical modern tires, it is impossible to differentiate between frame materials based on riding.
Maybe enough people will kick in a few pounds or whatever currency and road.cc will be motivated to perform such a double-blind test.
Nope, sorry, disagree. Three bikes I owned were made of Aluminium - a 2005 Specialized Allez, a Cannondale CAADX (a bit older than new, with the double chainring Sora groupset and cable discs as opposed to fancy GRX) and a 2021 Giant Contend SL2. The Allez came with 23mm tires but felt substantially different when I rode it on 25mm tubeless tires. The CAADX felt outstanding when I fitted 38mm WTB tubeless tires on, as did the Giant when I fitted.....you guessed it, supple and slightly wider tubeless tires.
Through this non-experiment I can at least conclude that having a certain frame material is not a death knell when it comes to ride quality - I know there are material differences but I suspect these are rendered all but intangible with better quality tires.
I guess most people know that a diamond bike frame is a very stiff construct and does not flex anywhere near as much as a tire, stem, handlebar, seatpost, seat, handlebar tape or the cycling kit you wear. its almost negligable if you ride a "stiff" or a "comfortable" frame because for a centimeter of flex in your tires and seatpost, the frame will do a fraction of a millimeter at best. this does even become less relevant with wieder tires and lower pressures the industry goes these days.
i find this article to be a non informed rant.
however, i can definitely feel a difference in "jaringness" between different bikes, even when putting the same wheels and saddles on them, regardless of frame material. and i am very sure this down to the geometry. for example, even a centimeter less stack high and 1° saddle tilt will move considerably more weight onto your hands and on the bars. of course that will transmit more vibrations into your upper body and might lead to hand and shoulder pain or numbness. you can even try this out on your own bike by changing the stem.
this alone will make more difference than there is between the plushest titanium frame and harshest aluminium one.
It's not so much about flex, Dominic, but the ability of the material to withstand / distribute vibration and resonance...
I agree that you can do with with components too - by mixing a material with a limited ability to deal with vibration (an aluminium frame, for example) with materials better suited (carbon seatpost, bars, stems, etc) and decent wheels / wider, better quality tyres.
This exactly - it's not about the frame flexing more about dampening the vibration.
That's what I said in an earlier post
that the producer knows what they are doing is more important than the material of the frame. and bike design has long been fooled by the concept stiffer is better. today fatter tyres tend to compensate for this.
also for comfort more important than the frame itself are seat post, stem/handlebars, and above all the front fork. modern bladed straight forks tend to be too stiff regardless of material.
i own a pinarello monviso from 1997, alu frame, steel front curved fork, super stiff atlanta wheels using 23 or 25 mm tyres.
that alu bike is extremely comfortable.
Never ridden alu or plastic, only steel.. 'nuff said.
I had a Orbea Scandium bike, that think rode like my tires were made of bricks! Over exaggeration of course, but I had to somehow communicate the difference, and the difference was big, not subtle. It was the worse riding bike I had ever owned or been on. Then the thing developed a crack on the top of the headtube that radiated about an inch from under the headset down, Orbea refused to honor their warranty after only about 9,000 miles and year of owning it; their excuse, fatigue, I guess so because the bike sure did fatigue me!
Yes, frame material does make a difference as much as geometry does. The most comfortable road bike I own is a Titanium Lynskey, it's like the Cadillac of bikes in the way it rides compared to others. Again some exaggeration to make a point, but the ride quality difference between the Ti bike and my others is again noticable. And the TI bike has stiffer aero wheels then my other bikes, same size tires, even the same exact tires that another of my bikes has on it, same psi too.
I'm not the only person who has felt differences in different frame material.
I've been riding road bikes for about 10 years now. I started out on an entry level Specialized Allez (stolen, so I can't say if I'd still find it comfy a decade on), and still ride a Canyon Ultimate AL and Mason Definition. Maybe I've just been lucky in my choices, or maybe I don't know what I'm missing, but I can ride those over audax distances without too much complaint, and I've never felt the need to 'graduate' from aluminium to carbon on comfort grounds. My most recent is an all steel Fairlight Faran which does feel plusher, but not really a fair comparison as it's rolling on 38s. I also very much enjoyed a holiday romance with a titanium Van Nicholas hire bike on Majorca, but what wouldn't feel good on those roads?
10 Reasons Why Aluminium Sucks, number 5 will shock you.
All my bikes for the last 20+ years have been aluminium. If money was no object, sure, I'd be buying carbon or titanium. But I don't think it makes enough of a difference to be worth the extra money.
I, too, think this blanket condemnation of aluminium frames is nonsense. I have mentioned this before, but I did up my elder daughter's Uni Halford's very cheap alu bike for my younger daughter. I found I could ride the bike myself despite the very short stem, because there was a long seat pillar. I found it was little different in ride quality, on the notoriously rubbish North Lancashire roads, to my steel and Merlin titanium bikes. I would now have no hesitation in buying one of these mid-range alu bikes with these new technology formed tubes
I hate articles like this. It just adds to the cycling snobbery that there is within the community.
Pages