Aluminum vs Steel. Which is better and why?

[LRice85]

I've been having this discussion with a friend and I want to get eveyones opinion. Why do you think no other manufacturer(excpeet Cannondale) has gone with an Aluminum perimeter frame like Honda?

I think the CR/CRF frame is the best in MX. Maybe not 97-99 but certainly the 2002 frame is basically flawless. Is it becuase there is so much time and trial and error into getting an aluminum frame dialed in? Most people knowing the the 1st generation Honda aluminum frame was not that great would be reluctant to by a 1st generation by another manufacturer?

Or

Is there really not much of an advantage to the CR aluminum frames?


The CR's handle like a dream and will always have a weight advantage as long as they keep up with the "jones" on other weight saving techniques.

I think the permeter design is more important than the fact that it is aluminum. It's just that to use that design of frame you need aluminum to keep the weight down.

What do you guys think?
Larry

 

[IrishEKU]

Weight VS. Expense.

Steel is alot cheaper than Alum.

 

[LRice85]

Irish I agree but not entirely. Yes Steel is cheaper. My questions would be then why does Honda stay with the more expensive aluminum frame if there isn't an advantage to the design.

If that is not true then when wouldn't another manufacturer copy the Honda frame if it is superior? They certainly want to produce the best product possible and wouldn't find a way to make if affordable. If honda can do so can Yamaha, Kawasaki and Suzuki.

Larry

 

[yzeater]

Are you saying that because the al. frame is more expensive Honda is making less profit, or they're cutting costs somewhere else?

 

[LRice85]

YZeater I don't know? I don't even know that it's much more expensive to produce the CR frames?? I don't think they are skimping anywhere else, they certainly seem to have a quality bike and are always on the cutting edge of technology.

Just wondering why no one has copied it. If nobody has copied it becuase it's inferior, why does honda continue to develop it?

Larry

 

[NVR FNSH]

I'd like to know who/how it has been determined that the Honda frame is so good or so bad.... I highly doubt that the average rider could tell a difference between a Honda & a Kawasaki frame if there was a way to do a blind 'taste' test:)

Brian

 

[coop47]

My "theory" - HONDA has found a way to produce the Aluminum Frame for the same or possibly less cost than the steel frame. I don't neccessarily think that it is superior or inferior - just different. I also think that weight has nothing at all to do with it - from each Mfg website - RM 212 lbs., CR 213 lbs., YZ & KX 214 lbs. If the frame was that much lighter - surely the bike as a whole would be noticeably lighter. I think the frame is probably stronger - but - short of Ping's mishap this year in SX and the one time MC broke his YZ - the strength of todays MX frames is a non-issue - they are all plenty strong. Maybe it had something to do with fluctuating steel costs or that sort of thing - but I think IF it were such a superior frame - eveyone would be making one - they all have aluminum framed Sport bikes so they all have the technology if they wanted to use it. I also think that if there were no advantage to it from Hondas perspective - ie cost savings - they would go back to steel.

By the way - I ride an RM and love the heavy, cheap, old design, steel frame. ;)

 

[MXP1MP]

Yamaha has stated on many occasions that they feel they can produce a frame as strong and light as and strong as aluminum in steel. But yet they run an aluminum frame on the works GP YZ450F. Aluminum does cost more to produce part of why the CR's frame has those big cast sections cuts down on costs. Companies like Suzuki & kawasaki are more concerned with surviving right now and I don't feel KTM is big enough to try it on a mass produced level quite yet.

 

[Speedway]

It could also be that Honda may have patented their aluminum frame technology, just a guess

 

[Senior KX Rider]

I doubt that the technology is patented as all the Big Four build their crotch rockets on an aluminum frame

 

[Patman]

Maybe for the same reasons KTM & Cannondale are the only linkless rear suspension designs.
OR why KTM and Cannondale have a hydraulic clutch.
OR why Yamaha uses 5 valve heads on 4T's.
OR why Honda uses an electronic powervalve.
OR why Husaberg has a left side kick starter.
OR why the two V bikes have a forward kick starter.
OR.......

Maybe it's because that's the way the engineers designed them and they have an R&D budget to maintain and since there seems to be minimal difference either way they run with what they have?

Lots of possible reason why. Personally I don't think there is a significant difference either way.

 

[coop47]

I also find it hard to believe that with no measurable advantages (no one has named one yet) that Honda would continue to produce a more expensive frame and yet have the exact same list price as all the other bikes - $5899. Unless they are unlike most companies I know & deal with - they aren't in business to loose money.

 

[Jaybird]

I'm curious...just what chrome moly is cheaper than aluminum? :think:

 

[IrishEKU]

Originally posted by Patman
Maybe for the same reasons KTM & Cannondale are the only linkless rear suspension designs.
OR why KTM and Cannondale have a hydraulic clutch.
OR why Yamaha uses 5 valve heads on 4T's.
OR why Honda uses an electronic powervalve.
OR why Husaberg has a left side kick starter.
OR why the two V bikes have a forward kick starter.
OR.......

Maybe it's because that's the way the engineers designed them and they have an R&D budget to maintain and since there seems to be minimal difference either way they run with what they have?

Lots of possible reason why. Personally I don't think there is a significant difference either way.

I also want to add to Pat's post,

Honda also has a car division that uses alotttttttt of aluminum. I am betting all of the waste from the car industry is making it's way to the frames of the bikes. I'm not saying that the frames are bad, it's just that from the Honda, Acura, and what everelse they have their hands in they have the base to produce their perimeter frames from. Suzuki is in the car market too but at a much more limited scale. Kawie is a huge company like Mitsubishi that produces cranes, ships and who knows what else. So I don't think they will be going under anytime soon, besides they just started a whole new product line with Suzuki with the KLR/X's. I think all of them will be around for some time. It's just that Honda is the only one that can use Aluminum frames in their dirt bikes with any cost effectiveness due to their automotive line.

My .02
Phillip

 

[marcusgunby]

I beleive honda could make a steel frame handle well as its the geometry that matters-steel frames can be plenty stiff-witness the 02YZs that many dont like-just as people didnt like the pre 2000Crs.I like the fact Honda went down a different road and stuck to there idea-many companies would have bottled out.Shame they cant seem to get a 125 engine to work as well as the frame.

 

[James]

Aluminum is better because it's purty.

 

[mx547]

yeah, if nothing else, it looks cool.

too bad they jumped on the "pointy" plastic bandwagon.

 

[James]

Ya know what Jay, I was thinking the exact same thing the other day. I kinda like the rounded back fender,shrouds, and side plates on my 00 better than the pointy things on my 02.

 

[LRice85]

Lots of good points... but I do think there is a difference between each frame. Why?? Each bike has different handleing characteristics which in someway is due to the frame. I personally know I guy who has a KX and CR. Hands down the CR handles better (agility wise). The KX has some advantages that his CR doesn't but in cornering there is no comparison.

I don't think we give our riding abilities enough credit. Even though we are not pro's we can feel differences in bike designs. Do we use our bikes to their potential, I know I don't but some bikes feel better than others. Although what feels better is due to personal opinion.

I was just curious why since most of the other KX, YZ and RM frames are similar in design and the CR is so radically different (and seems to work) why none has gone in that direction with their designs.

At least it's a fun topic to debate.
Larry

 

[motomike137]

There are many many factors related to using one over the other. One of the things not mentioned here yet is "packaging". When designing something you usually have a definitive package or space that it needs to fit into. The Aluminum frames currently eat up more of that space because of the size of the cross section needed to attain the strength desired to handle the loads going through them. In a nutshell it is easier to place and design access to all the components that bolt to the frame.

 

[motomike137]

Correction on my last post, I meant to say it is "harder" to package the components of a ALuminum framed bike.

 

[Tod]

It's just that Honda is the only one that can use Aluminum frames in their dirt bikes with any cost effectiveness due to their automotive line.

Kawasaki Heavy Industries also produces alot of aluminum aircraft fuselage components, so intra-company crossover probably is not the reason.

 

[James]

Originally posted by Tod


Kawasaki Heavy Industries also produces alot of aluminum aircraft fuselage components, so intra-company crossover probably is not the reason.

I agree. It isn't like the CR frames are made from cutoff of the auto frames. Besides, if this were the case, then I expect all of the XRs would be aluminum framed also.

 

[Patman]

The KX has a perimeter frame like the CR it's just one's CrMo and one's Al, one's red and one's green.

Honda COULD make the XR line up lighter, they COULD make them water cooled, they COULD do A LOT of things but they don't, why? Because what they have sells, "best" is not always the stiffest, the lightest, or the coolest, sometimes it's what sells and to that person it's therefore "the best".

 

[motometal]

I believe the xr650r has been liquid cooled for a few years now.