I love titanium. It’s magical. You can get weight distributions that feel like bi-metals or monometals with titanium. The Evora for example feels like it’s more from the CLYW “feel” camp, and the CiTizen is more from the Draupnir performance camp. Then you have yoyos that are entirely their own kind of magic like the TiWalker or how the Rook takes what the valor does and turns it up to 11! We are in a Golden Age as Gambit said. In a year and a bit we’ve gone from a handful of titanium yoyos that only collectors had to limitless releases.
I feel like we’ve barely scratched the surface of what’s possible with titanium. That being said, titanium bi-metals like the Anglam TiSS are a mostly terrible idea since the gains you get from adding a steel weight ring over leaving the titanium there are less than a single percent in terms of feel or performance (I say this as an owner of the Anglam TiSS and Anglam Zero).
On top of all that, a titanium yoyo will last as long as your ability to use it. Bearings will die, so will pads and you’ll probably want new axles in decades to come, but the halves will remain with little effort.
Also, don’t foget sparks! There’s a lot to be said for entertaining your friends with some fireworks coming off your dog walking.
Onto bi-metals. I like a lot of bi-metals but I think a lot of companies are missing the point. With Recess and Axis releasing bi-metals that might as well be all aluminium designs because the steel parts are so small while still keeping the weight in the 65/66g range, that’s not taking advantage of the materials you’re using. The Draupnir is well loved because it’s light, big and has a lot of rim weight despite it’s light weight. If you’re going to make a bi-metal, make it a bi-metal. Give it big rims to take advantage of them. Don’t give it tiny rims so you can say it is one when you’ve missed the point entirely. Bi-metals don’t inherently perform better, they only do it if you design them to.
I’ve probably got a lot more thoughts in my head on the subject, but I tried to keep it positive.
Also Gambit. Get your ■■■■■■ Nats so you can try all the Ti you want!
Allow myself to quote… myself: “The SS metal ring is certainly NOT a gimmick. The titanium allows for thin walls because of its strength to weight ratio, but stainless steel is much, much denser than titanium. This allows you to concentrate weight even farther out from the axis of spin.”
Less than a single percent difference seems unlikely considering the density difference of the two metals.
Perhaps I should have been more clear. I was talking about the specific implementations like the Anglam TiSS where they don’t machine the walls as thin as they could be and the steel parts are small when compared to good bi-metals. After spending a lot of time with a lot of different titanium yoyos, the Anglam TiSS is far from the best performing. If you’re going to go to the effort of making a titanium Anglam and a separate TiSS, shouldn’t the TiSS be night and day better? The difference is so stupidly small, it’s not worth it.
There are performance gains to be had with a titanium/stainless steel bi-metal, but we haven’t seen one worth the effort yet.
Well, the walls are advertised to be as thin as possible without sacrificing durability, but maybe you are right.
Also, I totally agree with you about the specific implementation not reaching its potential because the SS rims are on the inside of the cup. I did not realize that until now. Gives you a boost, but maybe not a big boost. If rim-weight is what you’re after, of course.
I somehow feel as if the Tiss Was more about doing it for the sake of it, and not necessarily about top performance. Sucks for the consumer, but I don’t see any other explanation, Mickey certainly knows how to make phenomenal throws.
I think, if one wants to make a bi-metal that doesn’t utilize it fully, then it’s up to them. Maybe they are in it for the looks, maybe they want to have something “fancy” that doesn’t play too aggressive, and I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong. It’s the same with aluminum that is purposely made to have less rim weight, just because you can make the same design out of plastic for lower price doesn’t mean you’re obligated to do that.
Some people wants to spend their money on a car that have the maximum performance vs price possible, but some loves Rolls Royce.
“Pointless” is kinda subjective, heck even for many people, yoyoing itself is pointless.
I hear ya. I sold my Citizen because of its resale value and the fact that my Valor is so good. The weighting of the Valor is just more comfortable for me and it spins for plenty of time. Yay aluminum.
Yeah, my favorite throws are my signature, the Phoenix (obviously), and the YoYoFactory Horizon and Shutter. Other than that, I like some CLYWs, but budget metals are awesome!
I remember I got ridiculed for stating this, but I’ll do it again cause its true.
I prefer titanium for the simple fact that you get the same play (or better) than a regular aluminum yoyo, but you can drop it a bunch doing 5A outside or something without worrying about it getting too damaged.
I had a bsp for yeaaars (still do, just lost the axle…) and I’ve missed doing huge 5A aerials, normally when that would be a death sentence to most metals, the bsp plays like it couldn’t care less about the damage. It’s very difficult to hit a ti so hard that you actually take a chunk out of the metal or bend it.
Now people get mad cause ti’s are crazy expensive, and why would you ever throw care free with something you spent 300 dollars on. I look at it as 300 dollars for a yoyo you pretty much don’t have to worry about damaging.
That being said Ive only owned the ricochet, aurora and bsp. Maybe some of the other ti’s are a little more fragile, something makes me doubt it though.
Ding a bi-metal a bunch and see how it holds up lol
Reiteration: would the weight distribution of a titanium yoyo with the thinnest possible walls and heaviest possible rims be achievable with a 6061 aluminum yoyo with the thinnest walls possible and SS rims?
Duh titanium can have thinner walls. I understand that. I was asking about weight distribution not wall thinness.
