Carbon vs Titanium Gravel Bike

If you didn't feel anything in steel then may not feel in in titanium but only you will know that one after trying it.
Same with cost, up to you whether you feel it is worth it after trying it.

What I can answer though is that it will not be lighter than carbon and to me that matters more especially on a gravel bike with largish, low pressure tyres as feeling any difference on top of that is going to be very marginal to me at least.

I don’t really feel much from steel and have owned everything from budget to bespoke.  but I like the ride of a titanium bike.  I also like the way they sound.  I know that, well, sounds odd, but especially on gravel, the pinging of little bits of stone off the tubes is quite musical.  

Compared to carbon, a nice Ti bike is slower, more flexible but crucially not much heavier.  It still feels zippy and has (thanks to the sound) a bit of that zing.  

There’s a place for both, but carbon is about performance and Ti is about happiness - at least that’s how it feels to me.  I’ve had over 50 bikes and at least 15 Ti bikes and currently own 2 Ti gravel bikes.  

Still hard to justify either of them for me, titanium frames seem to cost around 1k more than an alloy equivalent for very little gain.

A fat carbon frame down tube offers better protection from mud splatter.

I've been gravelling on a titanium bike for around 12 years - albeit originally designed more as a tourer. I like Ti. I currently have 3 Ti bikes in my garage

This year I bought a carbon gravel bike. It feels livelier, lighter  and easier to manoeuvre through twisty rooty trails. No doubt some of that is down to geometry, but I'd have a good think about what type of gravel riding I was looking to do before starting to narrow my choice of frame material. Long days on smoother tracks? Maybe the Ti. Fast blasts on rougher stuff? Maybe the carbon. Of course, there's a lot of overlap and compromise.

I've got a J Guillem Atalaya, it's lovely. I was looking at all sorts of bikes but settled on titanium as you never need to worry about the paint job. I was seriously looking at Fairlight Secan and Shand Stoater, then some Ridley carbon bikes and I just thought that 1 very rough ride or a small tumble would  potentially ruin the beautiful paint job.

It's difficult to say as unless you're comparing completely like for like then any differences could be down to parts other than the frame.

However, the titanium framed bikes I've had a ride on have been very comfortable with an incredibly smooth ride. This was with a less comfortable setup than I was running.

My only bike is a Ti MTB. My only reasons for it are that I like the look of it, the ride feel, the noise when stones ping off it, no need for protective tape and the fact you can make it look shiny and new with ease. All fairly pathetic reasons but they work for me.

I have two ti mtbs a ti road bike and have owned others in the past. I think the feel of the bike depends not just on the materials but also the bike design and tube sizes etc.

One of my mtbs feels quite harsh compared to the other, they are both by reputable bike companies.

Try and get a test ride if you can.

As Bruce says. I have had  a few Ti hardtails over the years, the Turner Nitrous ti is the most comfortable and best geo. Double or triple butted tubing. I had a Travers Russti that felt harsh and was plain gauge and heavy. My Lynskey Sportive is just lovely on the road and is circa 2006.

Steel needs to be double or triple butted mainframe and as Bruce mentioned tube diameter  and wall thickness and geo will determine how comfortable a bike is 

I must say i quit fancy a Richey Outback for a general purpose bike. 

Smooth, you say? Disclaimer: I've never ridden carbon or Ti, but if looking for an alternative to steel or aluminium, has sir considered bamboo?

https://bamboobicycleclub.org/products/gravel-lugged-build-kit

Not even joking. 

A fat carbon frame down tube offers better protection from mud splatter.

This is true the downtube on my Boardman keeps 90% of the muck out of my face. I'd want a crud catcher type thing with skinny tubes.

Is titanium worth the extra cost over carbon?

Will it feel different to carbon?

Is it lighter than carbon?

Depends a huge amount on how much you're paying for either. You can get dead / brittle / heavy / ridiculously stiff carbon frames or you can get super responsive, lightweight, compliant carbon frames. Same with Ti - cheap non-butted Ti vs top-end stuff can be worlds apart.

I had a Ti MTB for many years - super-light XC race bike which was insanely good on smooth(ish) singletrack and it remained absolutely spotless in all its years of racing and riding.

Main thing with Ti is to look at the warranty because if it cracks (usually on a weld), it'll be a nightmare to fix it, it's usually new frame time. Carbon is (surprisingly) a lot easier to fix.

Oh and FWIW, my current gravel bike is carbon, that's also very nice to ride.

For years I rode a 456Ti, comfortable as hell and lovely to ride,

I tried gravel with an alloy frame, then rode a pal's modern Ti gravel bike - felt dead, so bought a carbon instead and very happy with it.

+1 though, bigger tyres make a bigger difference than anything else.

For years I rode a 456Ti, comfortable as hell and lovely to ride<br /><br />

I had one of those too and it was brilliant. I don’t know how it would feel now as things have moved on but when it came out it I thought it was something special.  When I first rode it after building it i thought what’s the fuss about as it kind of felt OK… until I went for it and rode it hard down on some Afan singletrack. It was when thrashing it that it felt different to the aluminium bikes that I’d had immediately before. Someone will tell be that’s bollox… but that’s how it felt to me. <br /><br />

I've got a sonder colibri ti. It's a nice ride and much better than my alu kinesis before it. I do think the improvement is in the fit and the wheel/tyre combination, not the frame material.

If I can avoid a coating (e.g. paint) then it's a big plus for me. Having coatings fail is irritating. From my time as a tribologist, I tend to think that the ideal material for a  system shouldn't need any coating or surface treatment. It's not always possible to avoid a coating in real-life. But with bike frames, you can. Ti frames don't need painting.

I've got a Reilly Gradient. It feels different to my Defy, it's a smoother ride. It's also a beautiful thing. I've always wanted a Ti bike, bought the Gradient as a 60th birthday present to myself and haven't regretted it for a moment.

Grave bike 1- steel, drop bars, 35c tyres, carbon rims. A repurposed cross race bike 

Gravel bike 2- ti, Jones bars, 50c tyres heavy alloy wheels. A repurposed MTB.

The biggest difference for me is the tyres. The 50c on the second one make it much less jittery to ride.

So if I was shopping for a gravel bike I'd be more worried about the tyres than the frame.

The tyres rubbed in the steel cross frame under effort. It was suddenly terrifying when I put the brakes on and the tyres just couldn't take it.

It the same panaracer gravel kings on both bikes.

Let's say for the sake of argument:

Cheap steel frames are around £400

Expensive steel frames are around £3,000

Cheap carbon frames are about £500

Expensive carbon frames are about £4,000

Cheap titanium frames are about £1,000

Expensive titanium frames are about £8,000

I am sure that somebody will chime in with higher and lower values for any of the above, but the illustration still stands. Cheap anything won't ride as nicely expensive anything. A cheap titanium frame will be entry level in quality, warranty and build, but it will cost as much as a mid priced steel or carbon frame. Rather than comparing price, it is perhaps more relevant to ask for a given price whether a titanium frame will ride as nicely as a steel frame or a carbon frame.

In my experience, there is little to match a really nice titanium frame, but to get a really nice titanium frame, you are surpassing the price of a really nice carbon frame, and significantly surpassing the price of a boutique steel frame.

A good builder can elicit comparable qualities out of any material. Tube selection, butting and build can have a massive impact on the ride quality of metal frames of any variety. Similarly, carbon layup and quality has a massive bearing on the ride of carbon.

Repairability, quality, warranty, support, ride quality etc are highly variable between any material.

If money were no object, titanium wins for me. For £1500 as an example, I would far rather have something really nice in steel or carbon than something low end in titanium.

So, to answer your questions:

Is titanium worth the extra cost over carbon? Yes, but only if you buy a really good one. For the same price, you'll get a nicer carbon frame than a titanium frame.

Will it feel different to carbon? Not necessarily. Titanium doesn't;t inherently offer the 'magic carpet ride' that it is known for. Only a good builder can extract that quality, and indeed, when I was racing seriously I have ridden titanium race bikes that were built stiffer than any carbon frame I have ever ridden. Carbon can also be tuned to deliver the 'magic carpet ride'.

Is it lighter than carbon? Generally not.

I’m very light at 59kg so that might be why I didn’t notice any difference with steel? At that weight you might be better off with a really lightweight handbuilt steel frame where the builder has chosen the right tube set just for you rather than something off the peg. You might be disappointed by a cheap ti frame which might not be as forgiving as its reputation might indicate.

In the end, test ride a few and don't be swayed by the value for money equation on paper.

This is quite a good watch:

i lusted after a titanium bike for years, but could never find one i liked. then i saw a photo of a ti fargo....... bingo, it was the one for me.

so i bought one as a retirement present, going the whole hog, with a top spec build including a rohloff.

first 2 years were fantastic, 10000 miles on it with no problems. then the hub leaked, sorted by a ace bikeshop. then the rear rim split the whole way round, again sorted. then the big one, when cleaning the bike i found a crack in the rear dropout. again the bike shop where super helpful. new frame and rebuild within a month.

then my liking for the bike changed, and it started in my head, i was scared to ride the bike. i had not ridden the bike on anything really rough, apart from some lakes/dales easier stuff. but i was all of a sudden scared to ride the bike offroad, worrying that i might snap the replacement. also, all of a sudden,i was scared to leave the bike outside whilst in a cafe, or in a pub, and when away touring. got to the stage where i chose my far far cheaper tourer for all rides. i was shit scared to ride the fargo incase it broke or was stolen.

owning a bike and being scared to use it is not a good thing in my mind.   so after 2 and half years it was sold.

and i made a promise to myself, that i would never own a expensive bike again, far too much worry for my weak mind, and to be honest the ride quality and feel was not really any better than my 2 far far cheaper bikes. possibly because as a 20 stone+ ride, you dont get the same feel from a frame obviously, but my industrial german fatbike, and my 725 hefty tourer, are just as comfy and ride the same has the £5k ti fargo build was.    so for a bloke who has spunked more money on bikes, than pretty much anyone on this forum, gas pipe and industrial grade alloy will be my future.

So to sum up - you need to ride the options you have available and make a decision based on how they feel to you. That is probably not going to be possible so just buy the one you think looks nicest! For me that would be Titanium as Carbon looks like the painted plastic that it is (current owner of carbon frame)

Also bear in mind the 'bike for life' myth. I have ridden Sevens and Moots for years and have never had one crack, so it's not about longevity. It's mainly about passing standards and geometry.

My 'bike for life' 2002 Merlin had 26 inch wheels, a 1 inch headset, v brakes, 135mm quick release axles, a 150mm stem, steep angles and a 27.2 seat post. My 'bike for life' 2013 Seven gravel disc bike had a 1, 1/8 non tapered headset, IS brake mounts and 135mm quick release axles. That's only 10 years ago FFS and it was cutting edge at the time! Now try to find decent forks and in some cases parts for any of those!

In reality, unless you are really into vintage bikes or the bike has some sentimental value, the usable lifetime of a bike is usually governed by technology and standards. Go for whatever you think rides the best and don't worry about material.

At that weight you might be better off with a really lightweight handbuilt steel frame where the builder has chosen the right tube set just for you rather than something off the peg. You might be disappointed by a cheap ti frame which might not be as forgiving as its reputation might indicate.

OP, this ^ is solid advice. ime stiffer and lighter isn't necessarily a nicer bike to ride. It depends how you ride and what you like or want from a bike.

I didn’t like steel; just found it heavy and didn’t notice any of the claimed comfort characteristics at all.

Sounds like you rode steel bikes that were too stiff or just not very good frames. I've sold custom Ti road frames after getting a 953 equivalent and I wouldn't swap my fairly recent 'old school' custom steel frameset for anything Ti or carbon, so steel can equal Ti for ride feel at least. To be close to equalling the weight you'd need to go 953 but I don't worry about the added weight of a good crmo or 853 level frame over the alternatives - the ride is great and the durability is excellent.

On the 'tyres make more difference' point - yes they will for vertical deflection over bumps but a great frame is one that's not 100% rigid in torsion, one that has a bit of give when you push it. How hard you need to push it and how much give is good is subjective. It's where a bit of ride spring and feel comes from anyway. But it's tricky to get right for mass production bikes (or for bikes that get ridden loaded up eg gravel bikes) so brands tend to prefer to claim ultimate stiffness as an advantage, it's easier.

At that weight you might be better off with a really lightweight handbuilt steel frame where the builder has chosen the right tube set just for you rather than something off the peg. You might be disappointed by a cheap ti frame which might not be as forgiving as its reputation might indicate.

This.

The aforementioned 456Ti's were never "cheap", just good value and at 80kg I was never going to over-stress a frame.

A pal had a custom steel gravel frame made during Covid, incredible light and capable - he's 6'5" and even my XL grave bike is far too little.  It does look a little odd with a headtube the best part of a foot, but he needs the stack,

For folk outside of the standard, and at <60kg I'd include the OP in this, it'd be worth looking at a custom as it can be made to suit your weight rather than worrying about the need to survive a roly-poly - so should have plenty of engineered 'flex'.

I had a cheap, light and very stiff carbon CX frame on 40mm tubeless Schwalbe All Roads with a stiff alloy seat post and bars - handled and felt great on or off road. Tried it on the not ideal combo of cheap road wheels and 28mm Conti Gatorskins and it was horrible on the road, transferring every surface imperfection to me via the contact points, there was one particular long descent on a regular loop which was painful to ride.. Definitely a case of the tyres were providing all the comfort...

Bought a better carbon gravel frame, d-fuse carbon seat post, 25mm internal width carbon wheels and 40mm tubeless and it is in a completely different league - I picked up a set of road wheels running on 30mm tubeless Pro Ones on 19mm internal width carbon rims, it feels supple and surprisingly comfortable on the road. You can feel the seat post flexing and there is no road buzz. It copes well with crappy tarmac surfaces, the better wheels and tyres also probably contribute.

Off road, the way I ride it and where I ride it, it is still all day comfy but it is harder to tell if its the tyres/wheels or the frame doing the work.

My mid 90s aluminium framed commuter/tourer has the frame compliance of concrete but is fine on chunky 40mm tyres with its upright position and at leisurely loaded speeds...

So in my limited experience, there's been a step change between cheap and mid level frames on road, less discernible off road and I guess its just incremental differences, riding conditions and personal preferences from there on....

Generally I think carbon is the smarter choice; cheaper, lighter, more repairable, easier to tune compliance. Ti bikes feel "special" though, I've just bought another one.

My ‘bike for life’ 2013 Seven gravel disc bike had a 1, 1/8 non tapered headset, IS brake mounts and 135mm quick release axles. That’s only 10 years ago FFS and it was cutting edge at the time! Now try to find decent forks and in some cases parts for any of those!

That don’t sound too bad to me. It’s not like there isn’t anything you can’t buy for it. I have a bike with disc brakes and QR but it hardly feels a big deal. New brakes is a PITA but do able. I think a new fork just needs the correct headset??

I think a new fork just needs the correct headset??

Tapered steerers aren't fitting in a 1 1/8 straight steerer, no matter which headset.

There are still some options, but not many.

Any recommendations for a custom 953 frame builder? 

Any recommendations for a custom 953 frame builder<br /><br />

Saffron frameworks. Matthew has won many, many awards for a good reason. <br /><br />

https://www.saffronframeworks.com/

Riding along after my post I realised I’d confused headset sizes

My ‘bike for life’ 2013 Seven gravel disc bike had a 1, 1/8 non tapered headset, IS brake mounts and 135mm quick release axles. That’s only 10 years ago FFS and it was cutting edge at the time! Now try to find decent forks and in some cases parts for any of those!

Right now I'd see that as a bargain S/H option and get a light steel fork made for it. IS mounts are perfect for BB7 road brakes. I know, all a bit low tech for some but it'd be a great winter / gravel bike.

Sounds like carbon is the better option for me. Not looking to spend loads on tbis bike so it will likely be a mid spec build.

Not all Ti is created equally as has been said . I Demo'd a Litespeed years ago , it was so harsh built for one thing out and out racing . Yet they also made my Cove Hummer and that has definitely got that Ti " feel" in comparison, there were times I thought I had a flat back tyre ! Hard to explain really.

Yet my 2012 Kona Raijin made by Lynsey is somewhere between the two. As has been said the whole bike for life leaves you in danger of being unable to get decent forks , wheels etc , the reason why I never bought a Curtis back when 26" was the only game in town.

Does anyone have solid information on which of those choices, Ti or carbon, has the lesser overall environmental impact?

It's already clear that steel is the least harmful across its lifespan and that aluminium is also quite a bit better than carbon but I don't know where To fits into the range.

My ‘bike for life’ 2013 Seven gravel disc bike had a 1, 1/8 non tapered headset, IS brake mounts and 135mm quick release axles. That’s only 10 years ago FFS and it was cutting edge at the time! Now try to find decent forks and in some cases parts for any of those!

Right now I’d see that as a bargain S/H option and get a light steel fork made for it. IS mounts are perfect for BB7 road brakes. I know, all a bit low tech for some but it’d be a great winter / gravel bike.

There are also a number of straight steerer carbon forks around -- Ritchey, Soma, Whiskey

Richey swears by straight steerers.  No doubt Jameso could tell us whether that is SB or marketing BS. I tend to believe the former.

Titanium will have the lowest lifecycle cost of any frame material.  It’s mined, smelted, ingotted and eventually rolled and drawn in the similar ways to steel and aluminium but requires additional shielding gas in all stages of manufacture (thus higher impact) BUT it also has the greatest value, thus will always be recycled/repaired/resold.  Carbon isn’t even in the same book, never mind the same page.

The cheap vs expensive is also quite true.  My Litespeed T5G rides MUCH better than my PlanetX Tempest v4 on the exact same wheels and tyres.

I'd argue that a Ti frame is greener than a steel frame due to the lack of paint. Looking at automotive sector, paint shop processes are responsible for a large amount of the factory CO2 emissions ( https://www.toyota-europe.com/news/2023/our-journey-to-a-zero-co2-paint-shop). Mazda have published heavily on this topic too.

Ride is geometry, stiffness is tube diameter, weight is material. If you want a stiff light bike, go carbon or alloy  if you want a more compliant bike, go steel. Light and compliant? Go titanium. Have all of the above including same bike in two materials. But I like titanium. And it cleans easily. My gravel bike is sub 8 kilos and rides beautifully. But that’s the nice geometry too.

Going back to the OP, what do you want to feel from a ride?

Direct or dampened ride?

I've had a few different road and gravel bikes. Carbon always tends to feel stiff and direct to me.

Currently, my gravel bike is a Sonder Camino Ti. Fitted with a Redshift stem, Canyon S14 VCLS seat post, Brooks Cambium C13 carbon railed, carved saddle and Zipp carbon wheels on Pirelli Cinturato M 45mm tyres. It feels fast, direct and plush and is beautiful to ride for any distance. How much of that is down to the frame, I don't know.

My point is that the finishing kit is as important or unimportant as the frame material. Buy the frame that excites you most. I went for titanium because I'd never had one before and wanted to strap bags to it without worrying about the finish. External cable routing and BSA BB were also important to me for maintenance too.

Sounds like carbon is the better option for me. Not looking to spend loads on tbis bike so it will likely be a mid spec build.

For a Gravel bike on a budget I'd have a Aluminium frame TBH, cheaper than carbon, lighter than Ti, spend the difference in budget on wheels/drive/brakes/finishing kit.

Contrary to popular belief composites can take some abuse and also be repaired relatively easily if necessary, but for a bike that is likely to be dropped at some point, covered in gritty mud and have rubbing bag straps lashed to it, I'd choose good old cheapy aluminium, the weight penalty is probably about 500g which you'll easily offset with parts, plus you won't cry so much over a dented al frame Vs a holed composite one.