Benefits

Before one bothers learning how to manage without a stove, it’s a good idea to look at the benefits and consider whether it’ll be worth it.

 

Weight

We’ll start with the obvious. Every thing you carry weighs something. There are many types of stoves, and they can vary dramatically in weight, but the most popular types of stoves will add an additional 200-350 g (7.1 - 12.3 oz) for the stove itself.

Of course, the stove isn’t the only thing necessary for cooking. You’ll also need a pot or pan, likely made of some kind of metal, and you’ll need to carry fuel. Pots and pans can vary a lot in weight, but for our purposes, we’ll assume a relatively light 350 g (12.3 oz).

Fuel makes just as big a difference here. Like everything else, fuel containers vary in size and weight, the type of fuel itself varies in density, and you’ll even be carrying different amounts of fuel during your ride/hike as you use up your fuel or purchase more. One of the most common ways to carry fuel is in a disposable 225 mL (8 fl. oz) container, which itself has an empty weight of 150 g (5.3 oz). For our purposes, we’ll conservatively assume an “average” fuel canister is just under half-full, bringing its weight to 250 g (8.8 oz)

To recap:

• Stove: ~275 g (~9.7 oz)
• Pot: ~350 g (~12.3 oz)
• Fuel: ~250 g (~10.6 oz)
• Total: ~875 g (~1.93 lbs)

Carrying a stove requires you to carry just under 1 kg, or just under 2 lbs. For an efficient hiker/biker, this could represent as much as 10% of their packing weight, possibly more than other heavy-hitting items like pack, sleeping bag, or tent. All because you want your food to be hot instead of lukewarm.

 

Space

Often overlooked, space is arguably as important as weight, if not more so.

Saving space in your pack means hiking with a better-balanced load and means biking with a more streamlined, aerodynamic profile. The folks over at CyclingAbout have done excellent experiments demonstrating the relative importance of weight vs. aerodynamics when cycling (short version: aerodynamics wins, and it’s not close). How you carry your weight is as important as how much weight you carry.

In addition to being sleeker and more balanced, if you save enough space, it’ll save you even more weight! By cutting down on the volume you carry, you can get away with a smaller backpack or with ditching a set of panniers and/or a rack. Your backpack, racks, and panniers are among the heaviest things you carry.

A stove, pot, and fuel canister combine to take up about as much space as a soccer ball. Ditching them will either make your pack considerably more voluminous or will allow you to dramatically cut down on your carrying capacity.

 

Simplicity

Not having to jam as much crud in your pack makes your morning routine shorter, makes it easier to find what you want in the middle of the day, and you’ll get your camp set up faster in the evenings. Not to mention you’re less likely to lose something when there’s less to keep track of.

Uncooked food can’t come out burned or under-cooked. You won’t have to spend extra time, up to three times a day, cooking food instead of simply eating it. You won’t have to find somewhere to buy another fuel canister. You won’t ever have to worry about running out of fuel. If you’re traveling by plane, you won’t have to stop at a store to buy fuel before you start your adventure. Not to mention the smell of hot food is a critter magnet (never cook dinner where you camp).

There’s a certain beauty to the simplicity of hiking/bike touring and the lack of responsibilities. Wake up, eat, hike/bike, eat, sleep. Repeat. No cooking means one less thing to worry about.

 

 

How to do it

If these benefits sounds like they’re worth mostly eating lukewarm/cold food for weeks or months at a time, read on.

 

What to eat

A complete list of good things to eat on the road/trail is enough to merit its own article, but we’ll hit the high points here. Here are a few staples that are worth carrying:

• Oatmeal, Granola, Cereal
• Dried fruit
• Nuts
• Peanut/nut butter
• Tortillas, bagels, English muffins
• Instant potatoes
• Instant rice
• Beans
• Powdered milk
• Powdered peanut butter
• Protein powder
• Carnation, Ovaltine, Nesquik
• Jerky
• Packaged meats (tuna, Spam)
• Cinnamon
• Cajun/creole spice

There’s a common theme here: density. All of these foods pack a lot of energy without taking up much space.

Quite a few of these can be combined in creative ways. Peanut butter + Carnation + cinnamon + tortilla makes for a satisfying snack or lunch. Powdered peanut butter + Carnation + protein powder tastes like a Reese’s milkshake, with more protein and vitamins, but less sugar and fat. Potatoes, rice, beans, and meat can go together in almost any combination.

Adding flavor to your meal goes a longer way than simply warming it up. Spices weigh less than sauces, and a small vial of spice can last months. Nearly every trail food falls into two spice categories: cinnamon and Cajun. If it’s supposed to taste sweet, use cinnamon. Savory, use Cajun.

A lot of things on this list, like oatmeal, rice, and potatoes, are typically cooked. Which brings us to…

 

Cold Soaking

A surprising amount of food doesn’t need to be cooked in order to be prepared. Anything with the word “instant” in the title falls into this category, as well as a few things without the moniker.

Cold soaking, as the name implies, refers to soaking food in cold or lukewarm water. While cold plain oatmeal may not appeal to some, you’d be surprised how good cold oatmeal can taste once you add cinnamon, dried fruit, nuts, and possibly some kind of powder (like Carnation or peanut butter). Not only does adding to a dish make it more interesting, you’ll be getting all your food groups.

When it comes to cold soaking, some instant foods work better than others. In descending order:

1. Instant potatoes: You could almost eat these dry.
2. Oatmeal: Admittedly, it’s better served hot, but the taste and texture is identical to cooked oatmeal.
3. Instant rice: Only loses points because it takes a while to soak, sometimes as much as an hour.
4. Noodles: It can be done, but there are better options. No matter what amount of water you use and how long you let it soak, the texture will always be a little strange.

Since these staples form the basis of many popular packaged instant meals (Backpacker Pantry, Mountain House, Knorr Sides, Hamburger Helper), you can prepare any of them without a stove. But of course, you don’t have to buy them! Get some instant rice, throw in some beans, tuna, or jerky, add Cajun spice, and you’ve got yourself a meal.

 

How to cold soak

For the most part, it’s easily done. Put food and water in a container and let it soak!

For your container, a screw-top plasticware, between 0.5 and 1 L, is the best option. A decent one will be cheap, lightweight, durable, microwave-safe, and leakproof. Not only does this allow you to carelessly stuff a soaking meal in your pack, letting it soak for hours without a second thought, but such a food bowl also doubles as a backup water bottle.

Different foods need soaking for different amounts of time. Instant potatoes and oatmeal are truly instant, whereas rice and noodles take longer. Some foods need more water than you might expect (potatoes), and some less (oatmeal). The good news is even if you make a mistake, the food isn’t ruined. You can either drink or pour out excess water. If you didn’t use enough water, add more! If food isn’t done soaking yet, wait longer. If you think your food soaked for too long, most likely, you’re simply a picky camper.

Since your food is likely to be soaking for an hour or two (it’s almost impossible to leave it soaking for too long), one trick is to leave it in a mesh pocket or lash it to your pack. In either case, leave it directly exposed to sunlight. If you’re using a clear container, your food will be warm after being in the sun all day. Depending where you are (like the desert), you might even need to blow on it!

In some circumstances, like a cold rainy day, this obviously won’t work. Sadly, the days when you’ll most want hot food are the days your food will be coldest. Similarly, it’s impossible to make a hot breakfast by this method, but there’s a workaround: sleep with it. While this will only make your oatmeal as warm as the inside of your sleeping bag (about room temperature), it’s an improvement over near-freezing.

Worth noting: We only recommend this method if reasonable precautions are taken to keep your sleeping bag and tent odor-free. Your bowl’s lid should be sealed tightly, then placed inside another sealable container, ideally an odor-proof container. Depending on the wildlife in the area, this may still be inadvisable or dangerous. We absolutely do not recommend this method in bear country.

 

 

Breaking the pattern

The above list of suggested stoveless foods is only a starting point; there are lots of foods that pack well, provide good nutrition, and importantly, hit the spot. A longer list will be coming in a future article about how to cook (or not!) on the road/trail. A savvy hiker/biker may manage to go several weeks without a stove and only eat the exact same meal a few times. Mixing it up makes trail food more exciting, but at some point, you’ll be craving a hot meal.

Luckily, this isn’t hard! You’ll visit a town every few days to buy groceries anyway, so you should be able to get a hot meal equally often. Obvious choices include fast food, cafes, and restaurants, but many grocery stores and gas stations sell ready-to-eat hot meals, often of surprisingly good quality (of course, everything tastes good after enough hiking and biking). A trip to the grocery store is also a good time to indulge in foods that don’t pack well, like dairy, fresh fruit, cold beverages, and baked goods.

If you stay in a hostel, there’s a good chance you’ll have access to a kitchen. Buy something you know how to cook and make it! Even better, make a little extra and eat the leftovers for breakfast. If you want to make friends, make a lot extra and share.

The wild card here is MREs. Not a cost-effective option, nor widely available, they could still be a fun change of pace every once in a while. We feel like we could write an entire article on MREs alone.

And finally, if you’re lucky, you might run across some trail magic or get taken in by a friendly stranger. Obviously, you can’t count on this, but some of the best meals you’ll ever eat are the ones you’ll get for free.

 

Paper Journals
It wasn’t long ago that keeping a journal meant carrying a physical journal. While there are more high-tech solutions available, there’s something to be said for putting pen to paper. A lot of people choose to go hiking/biking in order to “unplug” and keep their screens put away as much as possible. Paper journals also have the advantage of unlimited battery life. Unfortunately, paper journals can’t get wet, but the same can be said for almost any other means of keeping a journal.

For the more artistically inclined, paper journals can do double-duty as a sketchbook, or even a scrapbook! It's also a lot easier to jot down notes in different formats, like a list or a timeline. And finally, there's something about being able to pick up your notebook, the same one you carried with you on the trail, that brings back memories much better than staring at a text document on a screen.

 

Smartphones
In the interest of saving weight, many hikers and bikers now choose to keep a journal on their smartphone. This is an elegant solution; you were probably going to bring a smartphone anyway, why not make use of it? For most people, typing with your thumbs is marginally faster than writing on paper, which means keeping your journal up-to-date won’t take us as much of your time. As speech-to-text technology continues to improve, even more time can be saved. It’s even possible to dictate journal entries while hiking/biking, then use only a small amount of free time to edit for autocorrect mistakes.

The most obvious downside to keeping a journal on an electronic device is the battery drain. It can be difficult to keep electronic devices charged while in the bush, and using a device for an additional daily purpose, especially one where the screen is always on, will only make this problem worse. In order to save battery, try turning the screen’s brightness all the way down, use an app with a dark color scheme, or if possible, change the color scheme within your app of choice.

 

Online Journals
Whether you're keeping your journal on paper or in an electronic device, many people like to publish their journals online. Doing so generally boils down to three choices: create your own website, post on social media, or use one of many free blog sites. Of course, there's no reason you can't do two of these, or even all three!

As far as which blog site to pick, there are almost too many options to count. Some are specifically made for hikers and bikers, and a few platforms manage to combine some social media elements with a simple online journal. If you're interested in connecting to other hikers and bikers and reading their journals, you might give one of these sites a try.

It should come as no surprise that you won’t have a data connection at all times while on a long-distance hiking/biking trip. If you’re specifically keeping an online journal, that leaves you with a few options (in progressively worse order):

1. Write your journals in an app that allows you to save them offline, then copy-paste/upload them later.
2. Wait until you have a connection, then write your journals all at once.
3. Write in a paper journal most of the time, then re-type them later.

Option #1 works best for most people, except for those who prefer to avoid using electronics as much as possible.

Option #2 has the downside of frequently causing you to get days or possibly weeks behind in your journals. By the time you finally get a chance to catch up, you may have forgotten quite a bit, or you simply might not feel like it anymore. This also requires you to write your journals in marathon sessions, which few people would want to do mid-adventure. When you take the luxury of a zero day, you want to enjoy it, not spend half the day on something you “have” to do.

Option #3 works, but requires you to write all your journals twice. This might be OK if you wanted to keep electronics use to a minimum and you don’t mind re-typing all your journals after it’s over. Speaking from experience, it’s difficult to motivate yourself to work on your journals after it’s over.

 

Video Journals
Of course, not all journals are composed of the written word. A few hikers/bikers prefer to keep a voice recording of their adventure (there’s an app for that), and now that carrying a video camera is incredibly easy (smartphones again!), keeping a video journal is an increasingly common and attractive option.

Once again, a chief downside is battery drain, and with video, storage comes into the mix. Recording video uses both a lot of battery and a lot of hard drive space. Those who plan to keep an extensive video journal will likely need to bring extra storage, though SD cards are awfully lightweight and small.

While taking a video is about as easy as pushing a button, turning your raw footage into something watchable will take many hours of “post-production”, likely after the adventure is over (some folks manage to do this mid-adventure!). This may not be an ordeal if you were only planning on making a five-minute highlight video, but if video is your primary means of documenting the voyage, make sure editing video is something you already enjoy before putting all your eggs in that basket.

In addition to simply using a smartphone, there are lots of options for taking video, and which one you choose depends on how you view the tradeoff between video quality and the need to carry more stuff. Some cameras are specifically dedicated to filming outdoor adventures and can be mounted to a pack, handlebar, bike helmet, or almost anything imagineable, leaving your hands free for hiking/biking. Nowadays, some people even use a drone to film themselves!

All this and we haven’t even talked about photography. We’ll save that for another article, along with a more detailed discussion of videography.

 

Pros

Shifting
On most bikes, a grip shift is used. This may not seem like a big deal, but it’s nice to wear mittens without shifting getting any more difficult.

Since the chain doesn’t need to hop gear-to-gear, it’s nearly impossible to miss a shift, and gear changes happen almost instantly. Also, say goodbye to dropped chains.

A Rohloff allows you to shift even when the bike is entirely stopped. In fact, shifting is a little smoother if you’re either pedaling lightly or not at all, so you eventually get in the habit of backing off your pedal stroke for half a second while you shift. This may not seem like a big deal, but it’s hard to understate how convenient it is to be able to shift down after you’ve come to a complete stop. I find myself doing this at least once or twice per ride, usually after some kind of sudden or unexpected stop. When your bike is fully loaded for touring, it sucks having to start off in the wrong gear, especially on an uphill or in a busy intersection.

The Rohloff has 14 gears, each roughly 13.6% higher than the previous one, for a total range of 526%. That means the highest gear ratio is 5.26 times greater than the lowest gear ratio. For comparison, that provides about the same range as a mountain bike, with more gears and a smaller step size than modern 1x11 mountain bike drivetrains. Exactly what are your highest and lowest gear ratios is determined by the relative size of your front and rear cogs.

For touring purposes, the range of gearing is more than enough, the spacing between gears is a reasonable size, and the convenience of shifting at any time is more valuable than you might think.

 

Maintenance
Perhaps the greatest advantage of a Rohloff drivetrain is the lack of needed maintenance.

A Rohloff can be used with a belt drive, eliminating the need to keep your chain clean and lubricated, as well as the need to replace your chain after stretching. A belt drive will eventually break and (obviously) need replacement, but in that time, you’d likely go through 3-4 chains. Unless your tour involves crossing multiple continents, a new belt will easily last start-to-finish with no maintenance whatsoever. Even if you decide to carry a spare belt, they’re lightweight, flexible, and easy to stash in your panniers.

Even if you’re using a chain, the low maintenance of a Rohloff is still a draw. With no derailleurs, there are fewer delicate components and moving parts that might break. Derailleur hangers, in particular, can bend after taking a strong hit, wreaking havoc on your shifting. A Rohloff drivetrain doesn’t require a derailleur hanger, and you can’t bend one when you don’t have one. The hub itself is the only moving part in the drivetrain, and the Rohloff Speedhub has an incredible track record of never breaking down.

Even your shifting cables will last an extraordinarily long time before breaking, but we’ll revisit that topic later (unfortunately).

 

Wheels
An often-overlooked benefit to a Rohloff hub is the effect it has on your rear wheel.

Most rear wheels are dished, meaning the spokes are asymmetrical when looking straight down the rim. This is to make room for the cassette on one side of the rear hub. Generally, a wheel will be stronger if the spokes are able to flare outwards. That’s possible on one side of a dished wheel, but not on the drive side. As a result, wheelbuilders take the strength where they can get it on the non-drive side, but there’s no way around the fact that a dished wheel isn’t as strong as a symmetrical one.

To make matters worse, a rear wheel needs to be stronger. On most bikes, roughly two-thirds of a rider’s weight will be on the rear wheel, vs. one-third on the front. Most touring setups follow roughly the same proportions: smaller panniers up front, larger ones on the rear, and possibly an extra duffel bag or tent on top of the rear rack. The rear wheel is also the drive wheel, adding torsional forces into the mix.

To make up for the weakness of a dished wheel, the additional weight, and the torsion due to the driving force of the bike, most wheelsets are built with more spokes on the rear wheel. Even then, the rear wheel is much more likely to experience some kind of failure than the front wheel. In addition, this results in the wheels having a total of three spoke lengths between them: front, rear drive side, rear non-drive side. A prudent touring cyclist will carry at least one each of these spokes, perhaps two.

A Rohloff system has no rear cassette, and therefore, the rear wheel can be laced symmetrically like a front wheel. This makes for a much stronger wheel and reduces the amount of lengths of spokes in use. Chances are the front and rear will still have different spoke lengths, since the hub flanges will likely be different sizes, but that’s still one less thing to keep track of.

I’ve toured over 30,000 km using 32 spokes on both front and rear, and not once has a wheel even gone out of true. While good rims, good spokes, and a skilled mechanic were all key contributors to that, I’m fairly certain the rear wheel’s symmetry, thanks to the Rohloff hub, was equally important.

Cons

Weight
A Rohloff hub is heavy. Exactly how heavy depends on the model, but roughly 1.8 kg (4.0 lbs) is typical. Mind you, that’s only for the hub; including the shifter, brake levers, belt drive, and front and rear cogs would bring the total to roughly 2.4 kg (5.3 lbs). By comparison, a Shimano 105 drivetrain has a total weight of 1.5 kg (3.3 lbs), comparing all the equivalent parts (leaving out crank arms, bottom bracket, and cables). That’s an additional 0.9 kg (2.0 lbs) on the bike.

People spend a lot of money to reduce the weight of their bike by 100 grams, and this component alone adds nearly ten times that. While touring bikes aren’t lightweight to begin with, an entire kg is enough to notice.

The additional weight gets added almost exclusively to one place: the rear hub. In some cases, this may not matter, but most touring bikes are already too tail-heavy, and the Rohloff only makes that problem worse.

 

Efficiency
There are varying reports on this, but the general consensus is a Rohloff hub is, on average, less mechanically efficient than a traditional chain-and-derailleur system. Rohloff claims their drivetrain is more efficient, but most third-party tests seem to indicate it’s less.

The difference is somewhat minor; the total energy loss is generally estimated to be an additional 1% compared to a traditional drivetrain. Considering each gear is 13.6% higher than the gear below it, that makes a difference of less than 10% compared to being one gear slower. That said, if some especially long days were 1% easier, you’d notice.

The Rohloff hub’s zero-maintenance properties probably mitigate this difference, perhaps to the point of being more efficient in the field, while still being less efficient in the lab. In a traditional drivetrain, chains can stretch and rust, derailleurs can get caked in mud, and a poorly-tuned bike may have the chain rubbing on the derailleur, or the derailleur may be holding the chain somewhat in between gears. None of this is an issue for a Rohloff hub, which performs nearly the same in all conditions.

All that said, after riding both systems, a traditional system feels like there’s less energy loss when I’m stomping on the pedals. It’s also strange how quickly the rear wheel slows to a stop when you spin it on a workstand. Rohloff claims this isn’t an issue when the hub is under load, but I have my doubts.

 

Maintenance
Rohloff hubs don’t need maintenance often, but when they do, good luck!

Nearly any service needed is going to require you to take your bike to a shop. And not just any shop, either. From my experience, only about half of all bike shops will even attempt to work on a Rohloff hub, and even then, they might have only one guy who knows how. Don’t expect a quick turnaround when your Rohloff hub needs maintenance.

Due to a shoddy job building the bike (long story), my shifting cable snapped after an unusually short 3,000 km of riding. After trying for 20 minutes, I couldn’t even figure out how to remove the old cable. Fortunately, I was just outside a mid-sized town and managed to hitchhike to a bike shop. The mechanic there tried installing a new cable for an hour, then told me to come back the next day. He was eventually able to install the new cable correctly, and it lasted over 20,000 km.

Replacing a cable while on tour is a major hassle, but if you start your tour with a new cable (installed by a competent mechanic), you can complete all but the very longest of tours with peace of mind and without even carrying a spare.

Rohloff hubs also need their oil changed every so often. Rohloff recommends doing this every 5,000 km, or once a year minimum. I’ve gone 30,000 km and three years between changes without experiencing a problem, but the shifting and pedaling felt a lot better after the oil change. Like replacing a cable, this is something you won’t want to do on tour, but if you get the maintenance done beforehand and start your tour fresh, there should be no problems.

 

Compatibility
The Rohloff hub is obviously a specialty item, but nearly everything used with it - shifter, belt, front and rear cogs, disc rotor - are also specialty items. If you’re ever in need of a new rotor, you can’t simply get a new six-bolt rotor and stick it on. You’ll have to special order a Rohloff-compatible one.

I’ve only had to replace two of these: the belt and the rear cog. The cog had to be done by a shop, but the belt I replaced myself while on tour. It’s easier than installing a new chain and requires no tools.

Not only are most of the parts on your bike going to be specialty items, the same is true of the frame itself. With no derailleur, belt tension has to be achieved through other means. Most commonly, this is done with either slider dropouts (see above) or an eccentric bottom bracket (see below), both of which will add even more to the additional weight caused by the Rohloff hub. If you want a bike with a Rohloff hub, you’ll have to start with a frame that’s compatible. Most aren’t.

 

Price
Rohloff hubs aren’t cheap, usually running about $1,300. You can buy a perfectly good touring bike for less. Considering that’s $1,300 being spent to make your bike heavier, possibly less efficient, and in some ways more difficult to maintain, it’s worth asking whether or not it’s worth the money.

 

Verdict

I love my Rohloff hub and the bike it’s on. Valeria was built with the goal of being a bike that would last a lifetime with minimal, if any, upgrades made along the way. Five years later, we’re still on schedule, and she remains my favorite bike to ride, even if she’s not my fastest.

If I were to start over from scratch, I’d probably stick to a traditional drivetrain. Rohloff hubs are awfully expensive, and for my money, $1,300 needs to be an upgrade with no drawbacks.

Whether or not a Rohloff drivetrain is right for you is something you’ll have to decide for yourself. If money’s not an issue and you like the idea of a zero-maintenance bike, both in terms of a drivetrain and a stronger rear wheel, a Rohloff hub is an excellent choice. If you like widespread compatibility and you spend frugally, maybe not.

 

Steel

Pros: strong, easy to repair, compliant, cheap
Cons: heavy, limited range of tube shaping

First, a clarification: we’ll be talking about chromoly steel. Hi-ten (high-tensile) steel is a cheaper material used on the kinds of bikes you find at discount stores. If care enough about your bike to read an article comparing frame material, don’t get this.

Compared to hi-ten steel, chromoly is much stronger, which allows frame builders to use less of it and still make a frame of considerable strength. Hi-ten steel isn’t much heavier by volume, but frames made from hi-ten steel are heavier due to needing more material to achieve the same strength, and even then, chromoly frames are typically stronger.

Of the four materials examined here, steel has the longest history and is still in widespread use. For many applications, chief among them touring, cyclists prefer steel to any other material due to its high strength, ease of repair, smooth ride quality, and low price point.

However, steel (even chromoly) is the heaviest frame material, isn’t particularly stiff, and has limitations on the ability to shape tubing to give different qualities to different parts of the frame. Butted tubing refers to tubing that has a different thickness inside the tube at different points (the outer diameter will typically remain constant), which can make the frame more flexible, whereas straight gauge tubing will be stiffer, but beyond that, steel has few options when it comes to changing the ride quality.

That said, the ride quality of a steel frame is usually considered one of its advantages, especially for long-distance touring. Steel is strong-but-flexible material, which gives it the ability to soak up vibrations on rougher surfaces. The result is a ride that’s frequently describes as plush, smooth, and comfortable. This isn’t great if you’re trying to win a race, but if you are, you’re probably not riding a heavy steel frame anyway.

 

Aluminum

Pros: Lightweight, stiff, relatively inexpensive
Cons: Harsh ride, limited durability

Aluminum first started becoming popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Previously, almost all bikes were made of steel. Aluminum frames offered the advantage of being lighter than steel frames by about a pound.

While aluminum has a higher strength-to-weight ratio than steel, it has a lower strength-to-volume ratio, which means more aluminum must be used to make a frame as strong as steel. In addition, aluminum frames will generally use much larger tubing to make the frame stiffer and prevent the softer metal from bending.

In the end, aluminum frames are generally stiffer than steel ones. This is great if you’re trying to win a sprint, but many cyclists find the stiffness of an aluminum frame “harsh”, as opposed to the plush, smooth ride steel provides.

Despite high stiffness, aluminum has low strength and no fatigue limit, meaning the strength of the frame begins to slowly deteriorate the moment it bears any weight. While a quality aluminum frame can last a decade or more, the ride quality will change over time, and an aluminum frame is unlikely to last a lifetime. This also makes aluminum frames an unlikely choice for bikes that will carry heavy loads, but some manufacturers have made burly aluminum frames that hold up well for touring.

Aluminum remains a popular choice for both road and mountain bike riding due to its light weight, stiffness, and relatively low expense. It may not be the best choice for all-day comfort, life-long longevity, or especially heavy loads, though some aluminum frames are built with these goals in mind.

 

Carbon Fiber

Pros: lightest weight, aerodynamic, customizable for different uses
Cons: expensive, impossible to repair

The material most often used by professional cyclists, carbon fiber is renowned for its especially light weight and, in many cases, aerodynamic profile. As opposed to other materials, carbon fiber is (surprise!) a fibrous material, made from weaving microscopic fibers into a material that’s both stronger and stiffer than steel.

In addition to these properties, carbon fibers can be woven into different patterns that promote either stiffness or compliability, as desired, in different parts of the frame, and even in different directions (eg. stiff torsionally, but flexible laterally). The strength and stiffness of a carbon tube is determined not only by the architectural shape of the tube, but by the weave pattern of the fibers on a microscopic level. As such, carbon tubes can be made into almost any shape imaginable without sacrificing strength, allowing for the frame to be made into especially aerodynamic shapes, if desired.

Due to the customizability of carbon fiber, down to the microscopic level, carbon frames can be made as strong, stiff, or compliant as desired. While steel is typically the strongest material, a carbon frame can be made equally strong. Similarly, a carbon frame can be made as stiff as, or stiffer than, an aluminum frame. Most often, carbon frames attempt to strike a balance between lightweight, strength, stiffness, compliance, and aerodynamics, but frames that specialize in one of these fields are also common.

Carbon fiber is an expensive material, and while it can be made very strong, it’s difficult to fully repair. While many manufacturers advise against it, a cracked carbon frame can be repaired, but you’ll have to mail it to a specialty repair shop, costing you heavily both in terms of money and time.

 

Titanium

Pros:  Strength, smooth ride, light weight, no weaknesses
Cons:  Expensive!

Sometimes considered the crème de la crème of frame materials, titanium has almost no drawbacks.

Professional racing cyclists don’t use titanium, since carbon fiber can be made lighter and more aerodynamic, and therefore faster. Titanium isn’t far behind in any category though, and has all the strength and reliability of steel. A quality titanium frame will last a lifetime without ever feeling outdated.

While titanium can’t be customized for specific applications like carbon fiber, it’s common to see butted tubing (like steel) or oversize tubing (like aluminum) used to give the frame specific properties for specific purposes. However, titanium’s greatest advantage is its lack of disadvantages. A titanium frame is versatile enough to win a criterium, then strap on 80 pounds of gear and ride from coast-to-coast.

All this comes at a price: Titanium frames aren’t cheap! Only a select few manufacturers make titanium frames at all, and essentially every bike with a titanium frame will be high-end or custom.

Ratings

OK, so carbon is light, steel is strong, but how much lighter and stronger are they? Let’s take a quantitative approach.

For our purposes, we’ll grade every frame material on a 0-10 scale based on criteria: strength, weight, stiffness/compliance, aerodynamics, and reparability. In each category, the best material will get a 10 (even if it’s still not perfect). Every other material will get a score proportionately accurate to a 10.

For example, if steel is the strongest and titanium is 90% as strong, steel will get a score of 10 and titanium a 9. If carbon is the lightest and steel weighs twice as much, carbon will get a 10 and steel will get a 5.

While no two frames are identical, we’re assuming a “typical” frame of middling quality for each material. Let the throwdown begin!

Strength

First, a clarification: strength and stiffness are two different properties. Stiffness means how much force it takes to bend a material at all, even if it returns to its normal shape. Strength means how much effort it takes to bend a material permanently.

In particular, steel is known for high strength, but low stiffness, meaning it can be easily flexed, but it’s hard to permanently bend. Aluminum, by contrast, is the opposite. It’s hard to bend at all, but once you do, it often stays bent.

Strength is the property that’ll most determine the longevity of your bike. If you want to keep your bike a long time, invest in a strong frame. Strength is also important to people who intend to carry a heavy load on their bike, whether that’s camping gear for a long trip, or simply themselves.

It’s worth noting that there are two main types of strength - impact and fatigue. A material with a high fatigue strength will stand up to lots of “ordinary” use before failing, while high impact strength means a bike can take stronger catastrophic damage before failure. These aren’t always correlated; for example, carbon has a high fatigue limit but lower impact strength, while aluminum has reasonably high impact strength but essentially no fatigue limit.

These scores are a subjective attempt to combine both types of strength. A frame of any material can be beefed up until it’s stronger than a typical frame of any other material. Take these scores as a general rule, not an unbreakable law.

Steel: 10
Titanium: 9
Carbon: 7
Aluminum: 5

 

Weight

This one’s fairly straightforward. How much does it weigh?

Like all of these categories, we’re going with a “typical” median value. Some steel frames can be surprisingly light, and other frames might be made bulkier than normal, whether for the purpose of improving strength, or perhaps simply in the hands of a less skilled frame builder.

The frame of a bike is only a small portion of its weight, and while one material might be twice as heavy as another, it’ll still only add 1-2 kg, maximum, to the weight of the bike. Steel frames, the heaviest material, weigh less than twice as much as comparably strong carbon frames.

It’s also common to see the main frame and the fork of a bike made out of two different materials. In particular, the fork of many bikes is carbon, regardless of the material of the rest of the frame.

Carbon: 10
Aluminum: 8
Titanium: 8
Steel: 6

 

Stiffness/Compliance

Stiffness and compliance are inverses of one another, like light and heavy, hot and cold. Stiffness is great if you’re trying to win a sprint, but compliance is much better for all-day comfort.

Aluminum and some carbon frames are stiff enough to minimize any energy loss in the transfer from pedals to tires, but are so poor at damping vibration you could probably tell if a coin under your tire was heads or tails. Steel, titanium, and some carbon frames are excellent at flexing, just barely, under stress and can soak up all the micro-bumps on a rough stretch of pavement, but the tradeoff is energy loss when hammering on the pedals.

For that reason, our score here is a subjective one. Which frame material is the best of both worlds? Because of its high adaptability, carbon can be made stiff where it counts (like the down tube and chain stays), but compliant where it matters most (like the seat tube and seat stays). Other materials can attempt to do the same by changing the diameter, shape, or butting (progressive thickness) of the tubes, but there’s only so much you can do with a continuous material like metal.

Since this is primarily a site for touring bikes, we’re favoring compliance over stiffness, but we’re giving the highest ratings to the materials that allow for the most fine-tuning.

Carbon: 10
Titanium: 9
Steel: 8
Aluminum: 6

 

Aerodynamics

Increasingly, it’s understood that aerodynamics is a bigger factor than weight when it comes to the speed and efficiency of a bike. Similar to weight, the frame itself is a small factor in the total aerodynamic profile of a bike; the rider plays a much bigger role. In the case of touring bikes, the size and placement of panniers also plays a much bigger role in aerodynamics than the frame itself.

Carbon is the winner here, since it can be easily molded into different shapes without greatly sacrificing strength. Since titanium and aluminum can make up for lower strength by adding more material without adding too much weight, they come in ahead of steel.

Carbon: 10
Titanium: 8
Aluminum: 7
Steel: 6

 

Reparability

Frame failures are rare, but they can happen, usually as a result of a crash. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure (see Strength), but it’s nice to know that if something happens to your bike, you can get it fixed and continue on your way.

Steel is by far the easiest to repair. Almost any mechanic with a welding torch can get a steel frame back to rideable quality. Titanium and aluminum need more specialized tools to weld, and you’ll likely need to send your bike to a specialty mechanic, but it can be done.

A metal frame is more likely to bend, rather than break entirely. And that means it can be bent back. A frame that’s been noticeably bent should be replaced, but bending the frame back into place might be good enough to ride on for a few days. The lower the fatigue limit (like aluminum), the less safe this is, and the more likely the frame is to bend again. Primarily for that reason, we’re ranking titanium slightly ahead of aluminum, even though they’re equally difficult to permanently fix.

Carbon, by contrast, doesn’t bend; it cracks. More familiarity with the material has resulted in carbon frames getting much stronger over the past several years, but there’s no changing the fact that once a carbon frame cracks, it shouldn’t be ridden until fixed. Also, while a cracked frame can be repaired, carbon remains effectively irreparable in the field.

We're cutting all the scores in half for this one. While it's important, it's something that rarely, if ever, comes up.

Steel: 5
Titanium: 3
Aluminum: 2
Carbon: 1

 

Final Score

Carbon: 38
Titanium: 37
Steel: 35
Aluminum: 28

Of course, these scores aren’t meant to be taken too seriously. Half of the categories were fairly subjective, and one rider might consider one category much more important than another, whereas we gave equal weight to most categories. There’s no bike, nor frame material, that’s best for everyone.

We also didn't take cost into account for the purpose of this score system. It shouldn't be surprising to see the most expensive materials at the top, but it's worth pointing out the most expensive wasn't the winner, and the cheapest material scored nearly as high as anything else.

Considering the slant we at PackJournal have for touring, it may be surprising to see carbon scoring highest. Again, we threw out cost as a factor, and that alone would most likely move steel to first place on the list. “Steel is real” still rings true, and often gives you the best bang for your buck.

That said, carbon utility bikes have come a long way. Once thought of as delicate and only suitable for barely supporting a 60 kg professional cyclist, there are now carbon frames capable of standing up to all the punishment of a ‘round-the-world tour. Throw in all the other benefits that come with a carbon frame, and it proves to be one of the best materials available, provided it’s optimized for its intended use. There aren’t many complete touring bikes with carbon frames on the market, but it’s a growing trend. Some of the best touring bikes available are carbon frames, and it’ll be exciting to see what the future holds for this material.

Unsurprisingly, titanium scores highly, but one might expect titanium to be the runaway winner. Jack of all trades, master of none, titanium’s greatest advantage is its lack of disadvantages, but its greatest disadvantage is its lack of advantages. For any specific purpose, there’s always something better, but for all purposes, it’s hard to beat titanium (except for the price).

Aluminum, while low on our list, shouldn’t be thrown out entirely. Worth saying again, how a frame is made matters as much as, or more than, its material. Aluminum is still an especially popular material for mountain bikes, where the cushion provided by suspension and wide tires essentially mitigates aluminum’s greatest weakness: its “harsh” ride and low fatigue limit. On a mountain bike, the suspension and tires will take the punishment instead of the frame.

In conclusion, think about what’s the most important quality for your bike to have. Speed? Unbreakable strength? Comfort? Longevity? What’s your budget? Answering those questions will help you pick a frame material that’s best for you.

 

Two years ago, I had the idea to ride a bike across a couple continents. I already had a perfectly good touring bike, but I decided it would be worth it to get one where I could start from scratch, selecting each part of the bike for maximum reliability, ease of repair, and availability. In no way was I interested in a flashy bike with all the latest trendy components. The idea was this would be a life-long bike that would never need replacing.

After some research, the choice was narrowed down to two bikes. A local shop was a dealer of both, so without intending to make a purchase, I went in to ask their advice. They heavily favored one, and they were so convincing, I placed an order! The deciding factors were a lot more control over how the bike turned out, and it was a lot cheaper than expected. Only one thing - they wanted a $1,000 deposit. No problem, that would come out of the price later anyway. I paid up.

The bike was due to arrive on April 11. I decided to start my tour in mid-May and bought a plane ticket for May 13, giving me a month with Valeria (I'd already named her!) before I left, both to get used to her and to make sure everything was working.

Valeria was completed five weeks late. Yes, after the flight. During that time, the bike shop made zero phone calls, neither to the customer or the manufacturer. The extreme tardiness was in no small part due to the bike shop's negligence, including:

• Placing the order two weeks late after failing to schedule around an employee traveling to a conference.
• Failing to maintain any communication with the manufacturer.
• Waiting until the frame arrived (late) before ordering necessary parts.
• Failing to have said last-minute parts shipped overnight.
• Not checking if all needs parts arrived with the frame, setting off yet another round of ordering parts and waiting.
• Once all parts arrived, waiting an extra day or two to begin assembling the bike.

When I arrived to pick up Valeria, there were a few surprises:

• The tires weren't what I ordered.
• The tubes weren't what I ordered.
• The stem was the wrong size. When I asked why it wasn't 100 mm, I was assured that it was, even though the size was printed on it.
• The saddle wasn't what I ordered.
• The lights weren't what I ordered.
• The headset spacers weren't what I ordered. When I'd originally been talked into ordering expensive ones, and now that the order had been changed, the same person told me they were a waste of money.
• The brakes weren't even the same type of brakes that I'd ordered.
• The price had increased by over $3,000. You can buy three perfectly good touring bikes for that much. Better, in fact, because they would have more reliable components.

There were also a few parts I'd never had a chance to specify, the seatpost for example, due to the lack of communication with the shop. So I got whatever they decided I was getting.

I asked why so much of the order was changed, and they said they weren't able to get the correct parts. They added, "I didn't think you would come in to pick up the bike." In short, they pulled a fast one in the interest of making a sale. Rather than let the customer get them somewhere else, they decided to change their order without telling them.

I got them to replace the brakes (with wrong ones again, more on that later), then headed straight from the store the airport for my second flight, rescheduled a week after the one I'd missed. Had I even a couple days, I would've refused the sale. Getting a bike from another shop, online, Craigslist, a garage sale, anything would've been a better experience.

For that matter, if I'd been told, "It's going to come in five weeks late, $3,000 over budget, half the parts won't be what you asked for, and you'll visit several bike shops for maintenance within the first month after the sloppy work we do putting it together," I would've cancelled the order, even if I had to eat the $1,000 deposit. That's probably exactly why they make you pay one. They know they're likely to screw up, or intend to screw you over, and now they've got you.

I felt that the shop should have to make up for their tardiness, and also that the bike came in wrong. At a rate of $10/hour, that came to more than the bike was worth. At $60/hour (the rate most shops, including this one, charge for labor), they would owe a small house. At a hospital's hourly rate, you could probably put Google out of business. Asking for a free bike is a lot, but I think most people would agree with the following:

• A customer's time is as valuable as the shop's.
• No one should have to pay for something that isn't what they asked for.
• I should've been in Alaska a week already.
• It was too late to start all over somewhere else. The bike was needed now.
• The bike shop was a large part of why I was late for my tour.
• The bike shop's sneaky dealing was the reason I only learned about the incorrect parts a week after my tour was supposed to start.
• A $3,000 price hike, with no warning, is ridiculous.

In short, a bike was needed now and I shouldn't have to pay for this one. Both of these things were the fault of the shop. They should be the ones to take the hit.

After 20 minutes of haggling, I received a 28% discount. I'm curious what they would've done if a customer simply didn't have the extra amount they wanted to charge. Or what if the bike was for a week-long tour that couldn't be rescheduled, and by finishing the bike five weeks late, they had caused the customer to miss it entirely?

Here's how the same situation plays out in a restaurant:
"Sorry your meal took so long, you didn't get what you ordered, the food wasn't cooked properly, the waiter was dishonest to you, and you were overcharged. I also understand you missed the movie you'd already bought tickets for. Your meal is on us tonight, and here's a coupon for next time. Would you also like a round of drinks, or maybe dessert?"

As I mentioned, the brakes were wrong a second time. Instead of the well-known, reliable ones I asked for, I got something visually similar from the same brand. Just like always, I wasn't told. I only noticed in the Andes, when the brake pads wore out. Not a single inhabitant of South America had even seen or heard of these brakes before. The Andes is a bad place to not have brakes, so I bought new ones.

I also had to replace a lot of the parts I didn't ask for, and even a few that I did.

• A dynamo hub that didn't produce a charge: $400
• A headlight that didn't light up, or at least didn't work with the dynamo: $200
• A taillight that didn't work under any circumstances: $30
• A USB port that didn't have enough power to charge anything: $200
• A front rack that couldn't hold up to 25% of its weight limit: $400
• Brakes that were sold to me under false pretenses: $120

It would've been great if I could've returned these right away, but getting the bike late prevented that from happening. Again, something that would've worked out differently if the shop had been on time. Two years later, now returned from my voyage, I went to the bike shop to return these items. Since I'd already had to replace them all while on tour, the intent was a refund, not an exchange.

Here's what happens when you spend $20 at Target:
"I used this a few times, and I don't like it."
Or...
"I changed my mind; I don't want it anymore."
"Sounds like you're not 100% satisfied! Here's your money back. Thanks for shopping at Target! Is there anything else we can do to help you?"

This is what happens when you spend $1,000+ in this bike shop:
"None of these parts worked the way they're supposed to, and you sold me the wrong brakes."
"Tough shit!"

Buying everything online is cheaper, faster, more convenient, and no one changes your order without permission. And if your order is delayed, you get an email! When you spend extra and take the time to visit a specialty store, you should expect a level of customer service at least on par with Target. And when you buy an item that costs five times what a perfectly good one costs, it should come with the reassurance that in the rare event that it doesn't work, you get your money back.

Part of the problem is Bike Mart primarily caters to recreational riders, people who want to have a bike that's a few grams lighter for their weekend group rides, not people who use their bikes. You'll talk to someone who did a few amateur races in college and watches the Tour de France, not someone who's replaced a broken spoke in the pouring rain or tried to find a replacement part in a third-world country. There's more money in selling the latest, most expensive high-tech gear, which will become obsolete once next year's model is out, rather than selling something that's always worked and always will.

When I first got Valeria, a reader of my blog emailed Bike Mart and asked what caused the five week delay and all the mistakes with the order. After receiving the 28% discount, I wrote to the guy explaining that Bike Mart had done something about it. I went ahead and forwarded the email to the shop, so they'd see that I appreciated the gesture, in an attempt to bury the hatchet. This is what I received in response:
"Love your math 5200 is 28per of 10000" (note: the original price was $7,200 and was reduced to $5,200) "Hope you can ride better
Good luck. you will need it
Sent from my iPhone"

For a moment, let's forget that he was challenging the math ability of a calculus teacher who scored 800 on the math GRE.
Instead, let's focus on who wrote this - the owner of the store. The highest employee possible. He skipped over the word "original" next to the word "price," he's yet to discover what punctuation is, and he insults his customers, even after they do him a favor by placating other customers for him. Because it was the owner of the store, there's no way to spin this into "Not representative of the values held by Bike Mart." Quite the opposite, in fact. Dishonesty, lack of communication, sloppy work, extreme tardiness, and contempt for the customers is what Bike Mart is all about. You heard it from the top.

The owner's name is Jim Hoyt and his email address is jhoyt@bikemart.com.