Aluminum bikes

File: 2bd328d3c169ca1a075aafc09b74cb52.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

it lacks the gimmick qualities of steel and carbon.
looots of steel frames are bespoke nowadays giving it an elite sentimental value, whereas carbon frames are undeniably lighter and stiffer.
aluminum definitely holds its own place as a much cheaper/replaceable alternative to carbon without significant drawbacks.

New is cool. Old is cool. Slightly less new is the epitome of uncool.

I wouldn't say aluminum itself is uncool, but straight walled oversized tubing is very uncool because it reminds people of walmart BSOs, which are usually aluminum these days. Better alu bikes will have more complex shapes and those are pretty neutral on the uncool <---> cool spectrum

It's uncool because it' cheap. Learn 2 conspicuous consumption.

>>1055353
it's mostly associated with cheaper bikes, but there's still good aluminium out there, like Mason cycles makes most of their frames from aluminium, also because compared to carbon or steel, it's fairly harsh, and stiff.

But it's still commonly recommended to go for a bike with higher spec'd parts on an aluminium frame than lower end on a carbon frame.

>>1055422
>also because compared to carbon or steel, it's fairly harsh, and stiff

This is a bad meme. It entirely depends on tubing on geometry. A steel expedition touring bike is stiffer than any aluminum bike. Hydroformed 6061 alloy frames feel pretty soft.

>>1055353

Aluminium is a bitch to weld. At this point it's cheaper to lay up carbon.

>>1055429
Not yet. It's going to take a few more years.

>>1055427
>Hydroformed 6061 alloy frames feel pretty soft.
No

>>1055427
>shitposting this badly

>>1055353
Two months ago I bought an alu bike and I find it pretty sexy. I personally don't like too much the looks of carbon enought to think it's cooler than alu, I'm kinda hipster on that matter and I prefer the looks of lugged steel over fancy aero garbon.

>>1055496
I'd be find with carbon if one could easily find carbon frames that take racks and fenders at an acceptable price.

I bought an aluminum bike. I could have gotten a steel bike, or a carbon bike, but I chose aluminum. Not because I selected the material for it's properties, but because the bike that I rode and enjoyed the qualities of most just-so-happened to be made of aluminum.
Fuck off ITT if that's not the way you buy bikes

>>1055427
I agree
6061 is soft and sloppy
7005 is unforgiving laterally
Aluminium-scandium is resonant and overy ligid
2024 parts feel grainy and unsupportive
7075 is racist and ignorant

>>1055511
Nah. The material in itself isn't the reason by itself. It's just that while 7005 has better tensile strength than 6061 it's costlier to shape and will typically be used in frames with straightish tubing which will be stiffer. 6061 isn't exactly softer than 7005 but is easy and cheap to shape into non-straight tubing with a bit more spring so is a preferred choice for heavily hydroformed frames.

There are some good discussions about all that here (not bike specific though):

http://www.millerwelds.com/resources/communities/mboard/forum

>>1055511

I've been thinking about this.
I don't know shit about metallurgy.
how high are the chances that we will get something like 8007, that's better in every aspekt ?

File: 14712468_1236947329708823_4833160747276283957_o.png (612KB, 1008x1008px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 1008x1008px

They are pretty cool I think and cheaper than carbon

File: 12764864_1042601389143419_3570310995842723329_o.jpg (384KB, 1008x1008px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 1008x1008px

>>1055795

>>1055795
>>1055796
Well not those two particularly

>>1055795

You can get a Chibon frame fork for $300. I bet that's cheaper than most alloy frames.