Lightest mainstream aluminum frames

[mythical]

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=136640


This thread is about weight yet nobody mentions numbers. Around the turn of the century, I built my first road bike. It was a ‘01 Giant TCR Limited frame that weighed only 1080 grams (with hanger plus bearings cups), the same one Once team used in the Tour de France but in a different color. The fork weighed a disappointing 400 grams though, and the frame was a noodle. Contemporary aluminum frame designs have made such a progress and in my view offer more bang-per-buck than many carbon framesets.

Cannondale claims a 1098 gram for a 56cm CAAD12 frame in non-disc version with a 280 gram fork for the higher spec models. This fork is essentially the same as used on the new SuperSix Evo Hi-Mod. The frameset probably costs about 25% of its carbon brother.



Trek specifies a 1050 gram frame weight for their Émonda ALR frame in 56cm with an E2 fork claimed to weigh 358 grams, also the same as on the higher end carbon model. Too bad they don't make them with a H1 geometry for more flexible riders.



Why no mention of the Specialized Allez DSW SL with D‘Aluisio Smart Weld technology? Specialized claims a 1050 gram frame weight and about 360 fork weight, the same fork used with their Tarmac. One thing that turns me off are the ugly headset cups. If Specialized tout such an advance in technology, why did they fail to integrate chamfered headset bearing seats into the head tube? Probably to do with the odd sized 1-3/8-inch lower bearing.



And then there is the Sprint version, said to weigh the same, that doesn't has no possibility for a front derailleur (yet). All with great potential but somehow Specialized seems to drop the ball here too. No sign of a front derailleur compatible version yet...



Kinesis Aithein frameset with BB86 is said to weigh 1200 grams in 56cm and comes with a 330 gram carbon 1.5-inch tapered fork.



That said, these frames are boat anchors compared to the frames that were made more than a decade or so ago. Giant then had a TCR production frame that weighed something like 870 grams in size M. If I remember correctly, it was Jalabert who rode it in the Giro and/or Tour and his bike weighed something like 5.5kg. In 2003, Peter Teschner built a 735 gram frame from Deda U2 tubes. John Cobb did something similar with Javelin Bikes. These were quite fragile from what I remember. Given the fatigue limit of aluminum, I don't think that many of these frames are still around.

[Stolichnaya]

Surprised no one mentioned the Canyon Ultimate AL SLX.
This looks quite worthy of some more research.
Frame in size M is touted the be below 1200 gms.

[mythical]

That was just off the top of my head. Also, Mackers actually did mention Canyon and that he owns one.

I took a CAAD12 out for a spin a couple of times this past week, to see if I liked disc brakes and I didn't think it was any more comfortable than my TCR SL or my Canyon F8.

Canyon has the new Ultimate AL SLX out but I didn't think it was not worth the mention if it's not widely available. They claim 1220 grams for the frame and 295 grams for the fork. Also, Canyon uses a 1-1/4-inch fork steerer, which isn't for everyone due to a lack of choice of stem. As of yet, no prices have been published for the frameset.



I would've mentioned some other lesser known brands but they don't exactly qualify as mainstream.

[vejnemojnen]

I'm always surprised at the weight of end-of 20th century scandium-alloy frames.

By the way, Stevens&De Rosa also has sc frames available currently, and I'd also add in Bianchi Freccia as well, as their new revivAL for Al. Storck offers a quite reasonable frame, personally I'd not worry about 100-200 grams in the frame, if I know that little extra means a durable-more abuse proof material.

And some older Principia frames can also be as light as 1.2kg with sub-400 gr forks. But those frames were very stiff-probably not very suitable for rougher rides.

http://www.derosanews.com/italian/DEROS ... Verde.html

[ultyguy]

Yeah I think the biggest difference these days for a lot of the best AL is that the weight is back down but the stiffness is much higher than before. Both TCR SLR and Storck Visioner rank as some of their absolutely stiffest frames in terms of pedaling efficiency.
http://www.twowheelscycles.com/giant/Wi ... stData.pdf

[mariovalentim]

Rose Xeon RS have a claimed weight of less than 1000gr and a fork of 310gr

http://www.rosebikes.com/products/bikes ... s/xeon-rs/

[rpenmanparker]

Thanks all. That's what I'm talkin' about.

[Devon]

The Emoda builds up pretty heavy, from what I've heard. CAAD is going to be the winner always in this, if you want off-the-shelf mainstream.

Lots of love for the Aithein here, like! If you're in the UK also check out the Bowman Palace. The Canyon is also a very good option.

Overall I would go for:

All-rounder: CAAD12 / Bowman Palace
Crits & short races: CAAD12 / Aithein
Endurance: Emonda / Canyon (based on geometry)

Edit: For reference, my XXXXXXL Aithein would come in at around UCI limit with race wheels. This is with no major weenie work, just sticking on some light off-the-shelf kit and running a mid-range groupset.

[Multebear]

Real world weight of my size 56 Caad 10, 2013 with external rear brake cable, including seat post clamp and derailleur hanger. I find it a harsh ride. Can't ride it for several days in a row without issues with my back. I have no issues with my Evo HM whatsoever.

[rpenmanparker]

Wow, that CAAD 10 is surprisingly (and disappointingly) heavy. That is far above what is promised, no?

[darnellrm]

I'm pretty sure that you can buy lower end carbon frames now that are lighter, cheaper, stronger, and offer a better ride than any of these top flight aluminum models. Just sayin ... why?

[vejnemojnen]

True, few months ago similar was also mentioned in a tour magazine test.


http://www.tour-magazin.de/raeder/rennr ... 36997.html

[Devon]

I'm pretty sure that you can buy lower end carbon frames now that are lighter, cheaper, stronger, and offer a better ride than any of these top flight aluminum models. Just sayin ... why?

The answer to that is in your post, they're low end. They have a poor ride, crap build quality, minimal compliance and crack as soon as you show them a hard ride.

If you want a bike for crits, amateur road racing, training or just general use, there is no need for carbon. You'll get a much better quality frame on a budget if you chose aluminium. It's like buying a top-spec Volkswagen, or a base spec Mercedes. Which would be the better car overall?

[vejnemojnen]

Certainly, 10 years ago cheap carbon meant dull ride. But budget CF frames came a long way since then.

IMHO, todays cheapo frames (like Felt F7, Wilier GTR, or similar breeds) offer great value, if comfort is paramount.

[Devon]

I'd say something like the CAAD would be a far better bike than a low-end Willier or Felt etc. Consider that it has all the research from the Supersix put into it's geometry, paired with cutting-edge materials and heavy development. A lower-end carbon bike is a basic design smashed out to flog to inexperienced riders who think that carbon is the be-all and end-all. No doubt they will come with either a Sora or Tiagra groupset too

From my own experience, having owned a Scott CR1 and a BMC SLR02, my aluminium Kinesis is a much more interesting bike to ride. Yeah, the BMC was like riding a pillow; but if you're looking into Aluminium frames, comfort isn't a priority anyway. And really, I've experienced no discomfort on mine to date, and I still don't know what this mythical road buzz is all about. Just get good tyres

The only difference between my current Aluminium frame and my previous mid-end carbon models is it hasn't spontaneously fallen apart like the other two.