I recently took delivery of a Ribble CGR Ti- it’s a beautiful bike to ride and covers multiple disciplines including gravel and road.
Ribble have a very helpful comparison at the following link which shows the exact frame set weights of the equivalent geometry in Ti (1810g), alloy (1680g), steel (2300g) and carbon (1150g):
https://www.ribblecycles.co.uk/components/frames-forks/frames/gravel-bike-framesets/
I also have a lightweight carbon bike - the frame weight is 798g which is a full Kg lighter than my new Ti frame.
There will be a lot of differing views on this but my opinion, based on my direct comparison, is that emphasis on frame weight (and bike weight generally) is overplayed. There’s not much difference in my speed riding a bike that’s at least one Kg heavier. I also find the ride quality better.
For gravel Ti is more durable in my opinion which is helpful if you’re likely to drop the bike on choppier surfaces.
Just to give another perspective on weight, Greg Lemond won the 1990 Tour de France on a steel bike that weighed 9.1 Kg at an average speed of 38.3Kph. In 2020 Tadej Pogacar won the same race on a carbon bike weighing 6.8Kg at an average speed of 39.9Kph. Both riders were / are considered generational talents, almost identical in height, weight and BMI, and the race was over almost exactly the same distance.
Pogacar was also benefiting from every tech advance of the previous 30 years (aero, electronic bar shifters etc) but his ave speed was only 4% higher when Lemond’s bike was 25% heavier.
I think go for what feels best to you, regardless of the weight.
Images of both my bikes attached.
