Titanium or carbon?

[Adventurer]

For a bikepacking / touring bike what would you choose and why. (Forgetting the price differences though)

Carbon or titanium

[Mark E]

Personally I'd go for ti as I'm put off carbon by the potential for luggage straps abrading the frame. However, lots of people use carbon bikes so this is probably less of an issue in reality than it is in my head!

[Asposium]

titanium.

have two titanium bikes (both Litespeed), they are the most comfortable thing I have ridden for long distance.
there is a misconception that a titanium frame is VERY expensive, this is not necessarily the case, especially when compared against some high end carbon frames

[whitestone]

Only ridden titanium bikes on the road when hiring in Majorca, my main road bike is carbon fibre. If I was buying now I'd get titanium. It may be nostalgia or false memories but the ti frames I've ridden felt more like the classic steel bike (Reynolds 531 tubing) but without the weight penalty.

[ScotRoutes]

Based on little logic, Ti.

I just like it. I like the unpainted lustre of it. Any Ti frame I've had has been extremely comfy (I currently still have my 2nd and 5th, the 1st is out on loan). And yes, there's the abrasion thing too.

[mountainbaker]

I can only reiterate others' views. I love Ti, I've had 4 Ti frames, and 1 Carbon. Ti wins for comfort, looks, longevity, everything really.

No paint to scratch.
It's not plastic.

[Richard G]

As much as I like my carbon fibre bike... for a dedicated bikepacking bike, Titanium makes more sense.

[GregMay]

I own both - of essentially a very similar bike.

I prefer the carbon one for racing. I prefer the Ti one for touring. Both have markings from bags. Put bags on, ride enough, and in varying weather, you're going to mark your frame. Accept it, move on, enjoy the tool for what it is. Not riding bikes because you're precious about damaging them is akin to buying a Leica and keeping it in a box. Utterly pointless.

I'd sell the Carbon one before the Ti one - only reason being that I spent my honeymoon on the TI bike and it has some emotional value compared to the Tour Divide bike which was the appropriate tool for the job at hand.

Oddly, in answer to your original question - I'd go steel. I've three steel bikes, none of which I will sell. All wonderful in their own ways.

[johnnystorm]

I'd take a good example of any material over a crap frame made from something else.

Aesthetics to the fore for Ti. Trendy carbon frames, even in good nick will look outdated eventually. Paint and stickers are fragile and also of their time. Shiny/Brushed/frame bag rubbed Ti will always look ok.

[AlasdairMc]

... markings from bags.

I think the difference for me has been that Ti marking adds a nice patina to the frame and shows you've used it well, whereas on a painted frame you're removing paint (and possibly exposing the frame to rust if steel). I've got marks on carbon forks from straps and brake hoses, so much so that you can feel an indentation. No such issue on Ti.

Also, you can polish Ti back to its original finish if you're precious about it.

[jameso]

Neither : ) I'd go for steel.

Carbon isn't a great material to go on jeep roofracks or be ridden with confidence after an accident among the rocks. Bag straps rubs aren't an issue as the top layer/s are cosmetic and you can use helitape, but that general lack of toughness sort of durability puts me off.
Ti .. nice but I just can't trust to not crack mid-ride and too much time, money and daydreaming goes into big trips to have a weld failure let me down. It's unlikely but I've broken a couple of them and the weight difference to steel isn't worth worring about, esp not comparing with a stiff-enough Ti frame. I simply trust steel more.

If not steel due to weight, then I'd go for aluminium. It's cheap, lighter and tough enough and the 'uncomfy' thing is largely myth these days.

Edit to add, I'd go carbon if I wanted an all-out race bike.

[GregMay]

As above, what James said.

[ZeroDarkBivi]

I think Jameso's assessment is spot-on, as usual.

Having had plastic, alu and ti frames, I think alloy is the best option if running full suss, as it simply isn't that much heavier than CF, and better value. If it is a HT race bike, I'd still go for carbon, and a basic unbranded frame is still quite inexpensive. For a proper tourer to take on distant adventures, I'd be inclined to go for steel; a custom build probably costs similar amount to tI, but easier to mend in developed world locations.

[Blag]

TIT

[JohnClimber]

Another vote for Titanium over plastic

[pistonbroke]

Ti all the way for me as well. I have 2 which I built myself, a Litespeed road bike and a Van Nicholas 29er. Neither frame cost more than £500 new due to being in the right place at the right time. The VN recently cracked around the down tube but they were brilliant, sending me a new frame to Spain on the basis of a couple of e mailed photos. Strangely though, between Mrs PB and myself, we have 7 carbon bikes ranging from her TT bike with carbon aero wheels to my On One Lurcher which I love for rattling around the local trails on. Horses for courses I suppose.

[Pirahna]

I was a new frame last year, couldn't find anything in Ti at a sensible price so I bought a new carbon Stumpjumper frame for £600, put plenty of tape on exposed areas and it's been as good as gold. The oldest carbon frame I have is a Scott CR1 from 2002. It's been carted across Europe on roof bars, tow bar racks and in vans. It's been crashed and ridden many thousands of miles and it hasn't broken. I've also got a Niner Air 9 RDO which has had similar treatment to the Scott and that hasn't broken either. Wifey has a carbon Specialized Fate thats been raced, bikepacked and used for everything mountain bike related, it's been crashed and fallen off more time than any bike has a right to be and it's still in one piece.