Ok, so I have been talking to Kent Eriksen about a new custom road frame. I really want a light frame, and was dead set on a 6/4 3/2.5 type of ride. But, Kent really prefers to use straight gauge 3/2.5, which is obvioulsy heavier.

I know Kent is the one of the best in the biz, if not the best. I know Carl Strong will build me a 6/4 ride, so I don't fully understand why anyone is so dead set on straight gauge 3/2.5 especially when Reynolds produces 6/4 seamless seat and chainstays now, and dbl butted 3/2.5?

Can anyone enlighten me why I would opt for straight gauge 3/2.5 ti over dbl or tri butted 3/2.5 or seamless 6-4?

Ok, so I have been talking to Kent Eriksen about a new custom road frame. I really want a light frame, and was dead set on a 6/4 3/2.5 type of ride. But, Kent really prefers to use straight gauge 3/2.5, which is obvioulsy heavier.

I know Kent is the one of the best in the biz, if not the best. I know Carl Strong will build me a 6/4 ride, so I don't fully understand why anyone is so dead set on straight gauge 3/2.5 especially when Reynolds produces 6/4 seamless seat and chainstays now, and dbl butted 3/2.5?

Can anyone enlighten me why I would opt for straight gauge 3/2.5 ti over dbl or tri butted 3/2.5 or seamless 6-4?

Because the only real benefit to 6/4 ti is a little less weight. That's all. Moots will produce a bike in either but encourages buyers to go with 3/2.5.

Somewhere, someone said that the availability of 6/4 ti was going to get very tight in the near future, but I don't know if this is just rumor or fact.

Somewhere, someone said that the availability of 6/4 ti was going to get very tight in the near future, but I don't know if this is just rumor or fact.

It's a fact...I am considering the Moots Vamoots in regular 3/2.5 and 6/4 SL. In my emails with Moots, the SL will likely see it's last year in 2007. I'm guessing, price.

M.

Ok, so I have been talking to Kent Eriksen about a new custom road frame. I really want a light frame, and was dead set on a 6/4 3/2.5 type of ride. But, Kent really prefers to use straight gauge 3/2.5, which is obvioulsy heavier.

I know Kent is the one of the best in the biz, if not the best. I know Carl Strong will build me a 6/4 ride, so I don't fully understand why anyone is so dead set on straight gauge 3/2.5 especially when Reynolds produces 6/4 seamless seat and chainstays now, and dbl butted 3/2.5?

Can anyone enlighten me why I would opt for straight gauge 3/2.5 ti over dbl or tri butted 3/2.5 or seamless 6-4?

All builders have their preferences. Kent built an entire company and mystique with 3/2 straight gauge bikes. Both of which have endured despite his departure. Most builders will also build whatever a customer asks for, it's how they stay in business. And some other builders have their preferences that extend to butting, alloy and whatever. Go read Serotta's blurbs and you'll wonder why everyone isn't flocking to butted tubing.

Personally, I'd think you'd want to opt for the more expensive route because it's important to you to think you're buying the very best. Best being the word associated with the most expensive. I build bikes with Record because it makes me feel better than building them with Veloce. I'm not kidding myself that they're any better though.

I have two straight gauge 3/2 bikes and a far fancier butted 3/2 bike. You know what - they weigh and ride the same. The latter was done as a custom and cost the same as the former, which is why I did it. If that builder had said to me "add $800" I probably would've demurred. If he'd said "add $200" I probably would elected to do so.

There is no absolute truth here, buy the one that fits your budget and that you'll be able to live with.

I have talked to 4 very reputable frame builders now, and all have told me that 6-4 is really not worth the cost and is going away. According to 2 of the builders, Reynolds will only sell 6-4 in large quantities. Each of these builders told me to put my money elsewhere.

For me, I think spending the extra $800 or so to get a 6-4 top and down tube can go toward some really nice wheels.

Yea, what Terry said.

The thing that determins how a frame will ride is the tube thickness and diameter. 3/2.5 Ti is plenty strong enough to allow fairly thin tubes without risk of failure so butting is optional. Be careful though, a run of the mil straight gauge Ti frame (typically .9mm) will not ride as nice one spec'ed with thinner tubes (such as a Moots). Of course this has been said for years, it's not about the material, it's about the execution.

Reynolds....due to demand, is only going to be selling 6/4 tubing by the metric ton. That is way more tubing than any builder want to buy at one time. On another note reynolds 6/4 tubing in raw form is far from the straight tubing one would think. It is sent to bike manufacturers quite "curved".

I have talked to 4 very reputable frame builders now, and all have told me that 6-4 is really not worth the cost and is going away. According to 2 of the builders, Reynolds will only sell 6-4 in large quantities. Each of these builders told me to put my money elsewhere.

For me, I think spending the extra $800 or so to get a 6-4 top and down tube can go toward some really nice wheels.

I agree. In my emails with Moots, that's the impression I got. And, other's have posted that Moots actually recommends the 3/2.5 vs the 6/4 because of the cost difference. There's very little weight difference between the regular and SL Vamoots (0.25lbs, as per the weights listed on Moots.com for the 54cm) to go from $2500 to $3300 (extra $800 for 0.25lbs)....like you said, money is better spent on wheels and parts. Also, the "rides" on both are said to be similar, with a slight stiffness edge going to the SL.

M.