12 ms·

What ever happened to scandium bike frames? (2016)

118 points by dfgdghdf 6y ago

peter_d_sherman 6y ago
>"Easton, manufacturer of aluminum bike frame tubes, began using the technology to make lighter, stronger tube sets than anyone else on the market. Scandium works by convincing aluminum molecules to restructure themselves. When aluminum is smelted it hardens into microscopic grains that fit together to make a solid architecture. Scandium makes those grains smaller, among other things, which allows them to fit closer together for a denser, stronger overall structure. Scandium also interrupts melted aluminum crystalizing at a molecular level when the metal cools. This means that the properties of the alloy are less likely to be affected by heat-treatment and welding, so a scandium-infused aluminum alloy is less likely to crack while cooling. This is especially valuable in high-strength aluminum, like 7005 alloy. Traditionally, 7005 alloys make light, strong, forged or CNC machined bicycle components, but can't be welded because they weaken when they melt. By adding scandium to the tube or to the filler between welded tubes, melted 7005 aluminum becomes usable in welded components, like frames. So, at a chemical level, aluminum alloys infused with scandium (less than 0.5% by volume) are stronger and more weldable than scandium-free alloys." PDS: There probably is a whole series of things, as of yet unknown, that can be added to metals and other elements, while they are cooling (or perhaps heating), to imbue them with various interesting properties... Opinion: Modern-day metallurgy and metallurgical sciences, though its knowledge is formidable in this area -- has probably just "scratched the surface" of all that is possible... In other words, experimentation, much more future experimentation -- is required in this area...
- jacquesm 6y ago
  Second your opinion, if you look at the state of the art vs what was considered impossible only a decade ago there is a very large amount of knowledge waiting to be discovered here. I believe you could even generalize that to all of materials science.
- mywacaday 6y ago
  Are there and good resources on an introduction to metallurgy for someone with 0 background in the subject?
- yiyus 6y ago
  > There probably is a whole series of things, as of yet unknown, that can be added to metals and other elements, while they are cooling (or perhaps heating), to imbue them with various interesting properties... We know. The field of materials science is perfectly aware of these effects. We even have a quite good theoretical knowledge to explain almost everything, and some very good models built on that knowledge. I would even say that more research into new alloys is performed by modelling techniques than experimentation nowadays (for sure, this is the case now, with many labs and universities closed because of corona). New alloys are constantly being studied. We perform experiments, we run simulations, we have AI frameworks running thousands of those simulations... However, you have to take into account that the metallurgical industry has a huge inertia. We can make pretty good steel and aluminum alloys at a very cheap cost. The market for new ideas is not easy. You can maybe make some profit from high-end sports or medical equipment, but it is very difficult to make a new alloy profitable at a large industrial level.
  - peter_d_sherman 6y ago
    >"We know." I know you know(!) <g>, but there's an interesting related discussion here about "New Skool Metallurgy/Material Science" vs. "Really Old Skool Metallurgy/Material Science"... New Skool Metallurgy/Material Science -- is what you've alluded to, "we have AI frameworks running thousands of those simulations". Well, there's nothing wrong with that! In fact, if I had the ability to run thousands of metallurgy/material science AI simulations, I probably would! (unless I had a higher need to use the compute power to run simulations in some other area of science or physics, which I currently don't! <g>) So if I had the means and ability to do so, I would probably be doing that! But that's "New Skool Metallurgy/Material Science" Let's talk about "Really Old Skool Metallurgy/Material Science" for a moment... You see, if we want to understand metals, I mean, really understand them (hey, remember that scene about "Transparent Aluminum" in Star Trek IV?), we first want to ask a philosophical question, and that question is, "What is the common denominator between all metals?" ? Is that atoms, protons, neutrons, electrons, ions, or any of the alphabet stew of sub-particles? Well, yes, but, that really doesn't really help our understanding... So, let's ask the question again: "What is the common denominator between all metals?" They're all shiny, they're all heavy (relative to other elements), some of them are really strong? Again, that doesn't really help our understanding... let's try again! Let's use a different kind of reasoning this time! Let's use the most general logic we can find! OK, so here we go again: "What is the common denominator between all metals?" Hmmm, well, let's see... The most general thing we know about metals (with the possible exception of mercury!) is that at room temperature, they're all solid. OK, so that's a good start! It doesn't tell us that much (yet), but it's consistent with logic, so it's a good starting point! So what else, other than metals, are solid? Well, we know that glass is, and we know that water can become solid (ice), just at low temperatures (but this is also true for mercury!) OK, still doesn't tell us much, but so good so far! So, to continue... wait a second now, if mercury can become solid at low temperature -- then can't metals become liquid at high temperatures? Well yes they can! So now if water is a substance which is liquid at specific temperatures, and solid at others, then what is the difference (other than the temperature range at which this happens) between water and metals? ? Well, we might say that metals are typically pure elements, and that water is a chemical compound of two of them (H2O), and that they're completely different, and leave it at that. But let's suppose that we didn't say that. Here's the thing. What do we know about water, when it freezes? We know it turns to ice. And what do we know about ice? We know that it's a crystal. So from this logic chain, and via logic, we finally introduce the $64,000 question: Are all metals -- crystals ? ? Even though they aren't clear like glass is, could they all be... crystals? (With Mercury excepted for the time being?) Hmmm... well, I don't know... but there's something, something here! You see, everything, everything that I have been able to logically deduce about metals -- tells me that all of them, all of them (including mercury, but it's not proven!) -- are in fact crystals !!! Now, let's go for the jugular vein in understanding all of this... We do this by asking the following question (you'll notice the pattern immediately I suspect!) "What do all crystals have in common?" For this one, I'll cut to the chase: All crystals (and there are many, many crystalline patterns (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure)) represent THE SUBDIVISION OF SPACE. More specifically, the subdivision of space by FORCE. In other words, at the lowest level (before we get to atoms or subparticles) there are regions of FORCE -- surrounded by regions of SPACE -- in various different mathematical PATTERNS. PATTERNS OF FORCE IN SPACE Now, you see, modern science ("New Skool") -- while it is starting to understand this -- does not and cannot (yet) understand all of the possibilities (again yet) for those possible patterns. But that's what's going on. You see, if someone were to really study the subject, they'd not only need to understand metallurgy, but also crystallography, 3D math, patterns, etc., etc., a variety of interlapping areas and disciplines... And, even so, they would (as I alluded to before) only have "scratched the surface" -- of what might truly be possible. Also, with respect to profitability... well, yes, everybody needs money to put bread on the table and feed their family, no arguments here! But if someone really was interested in this, they'd experiment with it, that is, "do it for the sake of doing it" rather than trying to make money in the process... that will be me or someone like me in the future, or so I hope... What's the thing that Yoda said? "Do or do not do, there is no try..." Well, in my case now, it's "think about" or "do not think about", since there is no smelting equipment nor simulator available, to me at least! <g> Anyway, wishing you well on your future metallurgical/material science quests!
- jj669 6y ago
  So much with metals is about how the material is processed (forged, extruded, heat treated, etc.). With newer technologies like 3D-printing, because of the very high cooling/freezing rates int he processing, even more Scandium (>0.7%) can be added, and even more strength gained, while still being very ductile (it'll tend to dent rather than cracking when abused). Maybe this will be the 'new Scandium' material to take on the carbon frames. Might need to get cheaper though... https://www.apworks.de/scalmalloy https://www.apworks.de/scalmalloy
baybal2 6y ago
> What ever happened to scandium bike frames? Ex-Union countries ran out of jet fighters to smelt for bicycle frames? As I understand, there nowhere is in the world where Scandium is mined commercially now, and the world is still living off scandium oxide stashed by somebody very lucky right around USSR collapse?
- canada_dry 6y ago
  Canada is home to one the largest uranium mines in the world - Cigar Lake [i]. Wonder what they're doing with this byproduct? [i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_Mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_Mine
- tomglynch 6y ago
  I assume you didn't read the article? The answer is they are still using Scandium but just not branding it that way.
  - wernercd 6y ago
    The article doesn't mention current mining methods (that I remember). Just "There aren't a lot of scandium importers and miners, and the few that exist charge a premium.".
Trias11 6y ago
I think titanium does the job well enough? Can't beat it's quality to price ratio with super exotic scandium.
- denimnerd42 6y ago
  I think scandium alloy is cheaper? I had scandium lacrosse sticks. they were half the price as Ti. And lighter.
  - kart23 6y ago
    the Sc-Ti shafts were nice. iirc, the scandium only alloys were more prone to dents or even bending.
- YawningAngel 6y ago
  Titanium bikes are very rare because for the price you can get very high quality carbon composites, which most people prefer
  - qwertay 6y ago
    I think the usual argument is that Ti lasts longer but carbon lasts for ages if you don't crash it and the people willing to spend $10k on a bike usually welcome the chance to buy a new one every 5-10 years anyway.
    - ogre_codes 6y ago
      I'm not sure the argument that Ti lasts longer is really valid anymore. I have 2 carbon mountain bikes that I've put thousands of miles on. Both are about 7 years old at this point. Early carbon as a bit fragile, but newer carbon seems pretty damned solid. Even if you do break them, they are repairable. My wife broke the frame on her bike not long ago and she wound up getting it repaired. It was surprisingly affordable and the fix is likely stronger than the original.
      - 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
vondur 6y ago
I remember seeing Rocky Mountain bikes in the early 2000s that were made with Scandium. Didn’t see any other MTB bikes with Scandium.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Kona Kula 2-9 was scandium.
TwoBit 6y ago
Carbon dominates the higher end of bike frames so much that most people don't care about scandium-based frames. Is there scandium in my aluminum cranks, brakes, or stem?
ogre_codes 6y ago
This article is a bit off mark I think. The high end of the bike market is dominated by carbon fiber. The market for high end aluminum/ scandium is disappearing as the price of carbon fiber has come down over the years. It's very hard to find a high end bike which isn't carbon, heck even the mid-range is carbon mostly now. There are a few brands which stick to aluminum, ti, and steel, mostly boutique brands. One of my favorite bikes is a scandium single-speed, I still have the frame out in storage. It's a Kona Kula. Been thinking about rebuilding it lately.
- Cockbrand 6y ago
  There'll always be a spot in my heart for Kona bikes. They always had those really nice looking paint jobs, and quite a few of their bikes seemed goofy or weird at first, but then made a lot of sense.
- mpol 6y ago
  Yes, carbon has taken over the highend market. And not only because it is cheaper, but it also can be more comfortable, while a scandium bike might be more harsh. You could argue that aluminium/scandium is not the right material for a road bike. For road racing there is no point in scandium anymore, carbon frames are made lighter, stiffer and more comfortable. The Scott Scandium from 2000 was below 1kg, the Scott CR1 from 2006 was even lighter in carbon, and more comfortable. For tourists using road bikes, most people who pay for a highend bicycle will also have that be seen, with carbon, just like the professionals. There is no demand anymore for highend aluminium/scandium frames. Then the really light scandium frames were well know for cracking, like the Scott Scandium. They were made to be raced and used for a few seasons. I doubt many have survived. I would love to have a bicycle like that, I think the Scott Scandium is beautiful, but I also know I will probably not like it much for riding.
  - notauser 6y ago
    Aluminium or Titanium frames make the best travel bikes. - Unlike steel, they don't rust. - Unlike carbon, they can cope with rough treatment (for example when loaded into the hold on a plane). They are less likely to be damaged, and the damage is more likely to lead to a gradual failure. Titanium is reputed to be better but modern Aluminium frames are pretty light, pretty comfortable, and vastly cheaper. I have an aluminium bike that I use whenever my trip involves a train ride or a flight.
supernova87a 6y ago
I can almost assuredly tell you one thing -- the x% weight savings of whatever material that costs $1000+ more is not the limiting factor preventing your or my average out-of-shape body from achieving its fullest right now. We could only wish that buying some special material would make us go appreciably faster.
- bennyelv 6y ago
  The strangest question that I always get asked about my (quite fancy) bike is: "Is it fast?" Well that depends what engine you put on it sir...
  - andreareina 6y ago
    Which isn't to say that the bike doesn't make a large difference. I just replaced a bike with an all-steel frame and garbage drivetrain with one with an alloy/carbon plus shimano 105s, and the difference is absolutely remarkable.
    - jacquesm 6y ago
      The difference to your wallet is probably a lot larger than the difference to your waistline :)
      - Cockbrand 6y ago
        There's also usually a quite noticeable difference in sheer fun, and that's what cycling is mainly about. More money can buy a lot more fun.
      - andreareina 6y ago
        Given that I'm hoping the difference to my waistline to be 0, that should be trivially true ;) But the hit to my wallet wasn't as bad as it could have been, in general I'm a big fan of buying second-hand. Local bike shop gets to charge me for fixing the previous owner's lack of upkeep, I get a lot more bike than I'd otherwise get for the same money. Not to mention that new bikes are hard to come by these days.
yiyus 6y ago
> Scandium makes those grains smaller, among other things, which allows them to fit closer together for a denser, stronger overall structure. This is not how grain size strengthening works. With smaller grains, there are more grain boundaries. These boundaries present an obstacle to the movement of dislocations, increasing the resistance to deformation. Density is not affected by grain size, larger grains do not have any gaps between them.
Keres 6y ago
you can still buy them if you know where to look https://www.kinesisbikes.co.uk/Catalogue/Models/Racelight/RTD https://www.kinesisbikes.co.uk/Catalogue/Models/Racelight/RT...
car 6y ago
Too bad it’s toxic, otherwise Beryllium bike frames would be amazing. Since it’s number four in the periodic table and therefore very light, it has been used to make the James Webb space telescope mirrors [1]. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/jwst_mirror.html https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/jwst_mirror....

118 points by dfgdghdf 6y ago

>"Easton, manufacturer of aluminum bike frame tubes, began using the technology to make lighter, stronger tube sets than anyone else on the market. Scandium works by convincing aluminum molecules to restructure themselves. When aluminum is smelted it hardens into microscopic grains that fit together to make a solid architecture. Scandium makes those grains smaller, among other things, which allows them to fit closer together for a denser, stronger overall structure. Scandium also interrupts melted aluminum crystalizing at a molecular level when the metal cools. This means that the properties of the alloy are less likely to be affected by heat-treatment and welding, so a scandium-infused aluminum alloy is less likely to crack while cooling. This is especially valuable in high-strength aluminum, like 7005 alloy. Traditionally, 7005 alloys make light, strong, forged or CNC machined bicycle components, but can't be welded because they weaken when they melt. By adding scandium to the tube or to the filler between welded tubes, melted 7005 aluminum becomes usable in welded components, like frames. So, at a chemical level, aluminum alloys infused with scandium (less than 0.5% by volume) are stronger and more weldable than scandium-free alloys." PDS: There probably is a whole series of things, as of yet unknown, that can be added to metals and other elements, while they are cooling (or perhaps heating), to imbue them with various interesting properties... Opinion: Modern-day metallurgy and metallurgical sciences, though its knowledge is formidable in this area -- has probably just "scratched the surface" of all that is possible... In other words, experimentation, much more future experimentation -- is required in this area...

jacquesm 6y ago
Second your opinion, if you look at the state of the art vs what was considered impossible only a decade ago there is a very large amount of knowledge waiting to be discovered here. I believe you could even generalize that to all of materials science.
mywacaday 6y ago
Are there and good resources on an introduction to metallurgy for someone with 0 background in the subject?
yiyus 6y ago
> There probably is a whole series of things, as of yet unknown, that can be added to metals and other elements, while they are cooling (or perhaps heating), to imbue them with various interesting properties... We know. The field of materials science is perfectly aware of these effects. We even have a quite good theoretical knowledge to explain almost everything, and some very good models built on that knowledge. I would even say that more research into new alloys is performed by modelling techniques than experimentation nowadays (for sure, this is the case now, with many labs and universities closed because of corona). New alloys are constantly being studied. We perform experiments, we run simulations, we have AI frameworks running thousands of those simulations... However, you have to take into account that the metallurgical industry has a huge inertia. We can make pretty good steel and aluminum alloys at a very cheap cost. The market for new ideas is not easy. You can maybe make some profit from high-end sports or medical equipment, but it is very difficult to make a new alloy profitable at a large industrial level.
- peter_d_sherman 6y ago
  >"We know." I know you know(!) <g>, but there's an interesting related discussion here about "New Skool Metallurgy/Material Science" vs. "Really Old Skool Metallurgy/Material Science"... New Skool Metallurgy/Material Science -- is what you've alluded to, "we have AI frameworks running thousands of those simulations". Well, there's nothing wrong with that! In fact, if I had the ability to run thousands of metallurgy/material science AI simulations, I probably would! (unless I had a higher need to use the compute power to run simulations in some other area of science or physics, which I currently don't! <g>) So if I had the means and ability to do so, I would probably be doing that! But that's "New Skool Metallurgy/Material Science" Let's talk about "Really Old Skool Metallurgy/Material Science" for a moment... You see, if we want to understand metals, I mean, really understand them (hey, remember that scene about "Transparent Aluminum" in Star Trek IV?), we first want to ask a philosophical question, and that question is, "What is the common denominator between all metals?" ? Is that atoms, protons, neutrons, electrons, ions, or any of the alphabet stew of sub-particles? Well, yes, but, that really doesn't really help our understanding... So, let's ask the question again: "What is the common denominator between all metals?" They're all shiny, they're all heavy (relative to other elements), some of them are really strong? Again, that doesn't really help our understanding... let's try again! Let's use a different kind of reasoning this time! Let's use the most general logic we can find! OK, so here we go again: "What is the common denominator between all metals?" Hmmm, well, let's see... The most general thing we know about metals (with the possible exception of mercury!) is that at room temperature, they're all solid. OK, so that's a good start! It doesn't tell us that much (yet), but it's consistent with logic, so it's a good starting point! So what else, other than metals, are solid? Well, we know that glass is, and we know that water can become solid (ice), just at low temperatures (but this is also true for mercury!) OK, still doesn't tell us much, but so good so far! So, to continue... wait a second now, if mercury can become solid at low temperature -- then can't metals become liquid at high temperatures? Well yes they can! So now if water is a substance which is liquid at specific temperatures, and solid at others, then what is the difference (other than the temperature range at which this happens) between water and metals? ? Well, we might say that metals are typically pure elements, and that water is a chemical compound of two of them (H2O), and that they're completely different, and leave it at that. But let's suppose that we didn't say that. Here's the thing. What do we know about water, when it freezes? We know it turns to ice. And what do we know about ice? We know that it's a crystal. So from this logic chain, and via logic, we finally introduce the $64,000 question: Are all metals -- crystals ? ? Even though they aren't clear like glass is, could they all be... crystals? (With Mercury excepted for the time being?) Hmmm... well, I don't know... but there's something, something here! You see, everything, everything that I have been able to logically deduce about metals -- tells me that all of them, all of them (including mercury, but it's not proven!) -- are in fact crystals !!! Now, let's go for the jugular vein in understanding all of this... We do this by asking the following question (you'll notice the pattern immediately I suspect!) "What do all crystals have in common?" For this one, I'll cut to the chase: All crystals (and there are many, many crystalline patterns (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure)) represent THE SUBDIVISION OF SPACE. More specifically, the subdivision of space by FORCE. In other words, at the lowest level (before we get to atoms or subparticles) there are regions of FORCE -- surrounded by regions of SPACE -- in various different mathematical PATTERNS. PATTERNS OF FORCE IN SPACE Now, you see, modern science ("New Skool") -- while it is starting to understand this -- does not and cannot (yet) understand all of the possibilities (again yet) for those possible patterns. But that's what's going on. You see, if someone were to really study the subject, they'd not only need to understand metallurgy, but also crystallography, 3D math, patterns, etc., etc., a variety of interlapping areas and disciplines... And, even so, they would (as I alluded to before) only have "scratched the surface" -- of what might truly be possible. Also, with respect to profitability... well, yes, everybody needs money to put bread on the table and feed their family, no arguments here! But if someone really was interested in this, they'd experiment with it, that is, "do it for the sake of doing it" rather than trying to make money in the process... that will be me or someone like me in the future, or so I hope... What's the thing that Yoda said? "Do or do not do, there is no try..." Well, in my case now, it's "think about" or "do not think about", since there is no smelting equipment nor simulator available, to me at least! <g> Anyway, wishing you well on your future metallurgical/material science quests!
jj669 6y ago
So much with metals is about how the material is processed (forged, extruded, heat treated, etc.). With newer technologies like 3D-printing, because of the very high cooling/freezing rates int he processing, even more Scandium (>0.7%) can be added, and even more strength gained, while still being very ductile (it'll tend to dent rather than cracking when abused). Maybe this will be the 'new Scandium' material to take on the carbon frames. Might need to get cheaper though... https://www.apworks.de/scalmalloy https://www.apworks.de/scalmalloy

baybal2 6y ago

> What ever happened to scandium bike frames? Ex-Union countries ran out of jet fighters to smelt for bicycle frames? As I understand, there nowhere is in the world where Scandium is mined commercially now, and the world is still living off scandium oxide stashed by somebody very lucky right around USSR collapse?

canada_dry 6y ago
Canada is home to one the largest uranium mines in the world - Cigar Lake [i]. Wonder what they're doing with this byproduct? [i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_Mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigar_Lake_Mine
tomglynch 6y ago
I assume you didn't read the article? The answer is they are still using Scandium but just not branding it that way.
- wernercd 6y ago
  The article doesn't mention current mining methods (that I remember). Just "There aren't a lot of scandium importers and miners, and the few that exist charge a premium.".

Trias11 6y ago

I think titanium does the job well enough? Can't beat it's quality to price ratio with super exotic scandium.

denimnerd42 6y ago
I think scandium alloy is cheaper? I had scandium lacrosse sticks. they were half the price as Ti. And lighter.
- kart23 6y ago
  the Sc-Ti shafts were nice. iirc, the scandium only alloys were more prone to dents or even bending.
YawningAngel 6y ago
Titanium bikes are very rare because for the price you can get very high quality carbon composites, which most people prefer
- qwertay 6y ago
  I think the usual argument is that Ti lasts longer but carbon lasts for ages if you don't crash it and the people willing to spend $10k on a bike usually welcome the chance to buy a new one every 5-10 years anyway.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    I'm not sure the argument that Ti lasts longer is really valid anymore. I have 2 carbon mountain bikes that I've put thousands of miles on. Both are about 7 years old at this point. Early carbon as a bit fragile, but newer carbon seems pretty damned solid. Even if you do break them, they are repairable. My wife broke the frame on her bike not long ago and she wound up getting it repaired. It was surprisingly affordable and the fix is likely stronger than the original.
    - 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

vondur 6y ago

I remember seeing Rocky Mountain bikes in the early 2000s that were made with Scandium. Didn’t see any other MTB bikes with Scandium.

ogre_codes 6y ago
Kona Kula 2-9 was scandium.

TwoBit 6y ago

Carbon dominates the higher end of bike frames so much that most people don't care about scandium-based frames. Is there scandium in my aluminum cranks, brakes, or stem?

ogre_codes 6y ago

This article is a bit off mark I think. The high end of the bike market is dominated by carbon fiber. The market for high end aluminum/ scandium is disappearing as the price of carbon fiber has come down over the years. It's very hard to find a high end bike which isn't carbon, heck even the mid-range is carbon mostly now. There are a few brands which stick to aluminum, ti, and steel, mostly boutique brands. One of my favorite bikes is a scandium single-speed, I still have the frame out in storage. It's a Kona Kula. Been thinking about rebuilding it lately.

Cockbrand 6y ago
There'll always be a spot in my heart for Kona bikes. They always had those really nice looking paint jobs, and quite a few of their bikes seemed goofy or weird at first, but then made a lot of sense.
mpol 6y ago
Yes, carbon has taken over the highend market. And not only because it is cheaper, but it also can be more comfortable, while a scandium bike might be more harsh. You could argue that aluminium/scandium is not the right material for a road bike. For road racing there is no point in scandium anymore, carbon frames are made lighter, stiffer and more comfortable. The Scott Scandium from 2000 was below 1kg, the Scott CR1 from 2006 was even lighter in carbon, and more comfortable. For tourists using road bikes, most people who pay for a highend bicycle will also have that be seen, with carbon, just like the professionals. There is no demand anymore for highend aluminium/scandium frames. Then the really light scandium frames were well know for cracking, like the Scott Scandium. They were made to be raced and used for a few seasons. I doubt many have survived. I would love to have a bicycle like that, I think the Scott Scandium is beautiful, but I also know I will probably not like it much for riding.
- notauser 6y ago
  Aluminium or Titanium frames make the best travel bikes. - Unlike steel, they don't rust. - Unlike carbon, they can cope with rough treatment (for example when loaded into the hold on a plane). They are less likely to be damaged, and the damage is more likely to lead to a gradual failure. Titanium is reputed to be better but modern Aluminium frames are pretty light, pretty comfortable, and vastly cheaper. I have an aluminium bike that I use whenever my trip involves a train ride or a flight.

supernova87a 6y ago

I can almost assuredly tell you one thing -- the x% weight savings of whatever material that costs $1000+ more is not the limiting factor preventing your or my average out-of-shape body from achieving its fullest right now. We could only wish that buying some special material would make us go appreciably faster.

bennyelv 6y ago
The strangest question that I always get asked about my (quite fancy) bike is: "Is it fast?" Well that depends what engine you put on it sir...
- andreareina 6y ago
  Which isn't to say that the bike doesn't make a large difference. I just replaced a bike with an all-steel frame and garbage drivetrain with one with an alloy/carbon plus shimano 105s, and the difference is absolutely remarkable.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    The difference to your wallet is probably a lot larger than the difference to your waistline :)
    - Cockbrand 6y ago
      There's also usually a quite noticeable difference in sheer fun, and that's what cycling is mainly about. More money can buy a lot more fun.
    - andreareina 6y ago
      Given that I'm hoping the difference to my waistline to be 0, that should be trivially true ;) But the hit to my wallet wasn't as bad as it could have been, in general I'm a big fan of buying second-hand. Local bike shop gets to charge me for fixing the previous owner's lack of upkeep, I get a lot more bike than I'd otherwise get for the same money. Not to mention that new bikes are hard to come by these days.

yiyus 6y ago

> Scandium makes those grains smaller, among other things, which allows them to fit closer together for a denser, stronger overall structure. This is not how grain size strengthening works. With smaller grains, there are more grain boundaries. These boundaries present an obstacle to the movement of dislocations, increasing the resistance to deformation. Density is not affected by grain size, larger grains do not have any gaps between them.

Keres 6y ago

you can still buy them if you know where to look https://www.kinesisbikes.co.uk/Catalogue/Models/Racelight/RTD https://www.kinesisbikes.co.uk/Catalogue/Models/Racelight/RT...

car 6y ago

Too bad it’s toxic, otherwise Beryllium bike frames would be amazing. Since it’s number four in the periodic table and therefore very light, it has been used to make the James Webb space telescope mirrors [1]. [1] https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/jwst_mirror.html https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/jwst_mirror....